From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 1 12:16:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29907;
Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:05:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 12:05:07 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 12:01:13 -0800
From: Jones Beene
Subject: Fire from Ice : Rapid Sublimation as a possible free energy source
To: vortex
Message-id: <009101c281e1$6e8aa580$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008E_01C2819E.5FF1E760"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"vz9JI2.0.CJ7.ovjmz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48209
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_008E_01C2819E.5FF1E760
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greetings,
In an upcoming issue of Infinite Energy, an English colleague, Frank =
Grimer, will be explaining his theoretical ideas regarding =
"beta-aether", i.e. what we yanks might call the ZPF, and his belief =
after years of work in structural engineering that much of what we =
consider to be the inherent strength of materials is in fact the result =
of what can best be described as "pressure" which is *external* to the =
material . He has interesting proof.
As a practical implementation of these ideas, it may be possible to =
extract so-called "free energy" from this beta-aether in rather unique =
ways, though this prospect is still little more than a wild idea propped =
up by a crude experiment. The key factor to this method of coalescing =
ZPF nano-pressure into heat may be found in the application of "triaxial =
tension" to a candidate material.=20
This required kind of balanced tension does not necessarily need to be =
applied with external force, as is traditionally done, and in fact might =
be more efficiently and elegantly applied with a vacuum!
This work and the theory behind it is directly related to, and may even =
better explain, both sonofusion and cavitation. In both cases, I see =
little evidence of real D+D fusion but lots of evidence for =
supra-chemical reactions, i.e. reactions that go beyond valence =
electrons and may even employ k-shell electron interactions (these are =
sometimes referred to as ballotechnic reactions - and have unfortunately =
been cloaked in secrecy because of the military implications). K-shell =
interactions may be instigated when Casimir-type pressures accelerate =
valence electrons, or some other virtual or real particle, into the =
innermost orbitals of adjoining atoms.
After some brainstorming, we have recently pinpointed one unusual way in =
which we might be able to apply a balanced "triaxial tension" in such a =
way as to create repeatable coherence of ZP field energy, or beta-aether =
pressure, in the real world. Preliminary experiments have just gotten =
underway. Here is a draft of the modus operandi:
Rapid Sublimation of Ice
Can the rapid sublimation of water ice into steam be incorporated into =
the mechanics of a source of free energy extraction in a device that =
attempts to cohere the energy of the vacuum, the beta-aether or ZPE?
Perhaps it can, as there exists in nature a robust source of untapped =
pressure at the nanoscale level, the Casimir and the Van der Waals =
forces being other names for the phenomenon.
Under certain circumstances, this nanoscale pressure may be adequate to =
accelerate the heating of a solid such as water ice so that it =
sublimates very quickly with cavitation effects. In the process, it =
might be possible to capture
ZPE "free energy" in the form of heat and convert that heating effect =
into mechanical energy by means of a resultant high-ratio expansion of a =
solid into a gas to drive a piston or turbine, or to capture an EM pulse =
from such a micro-explosion.
Water Ice explosions (due to applied pressure) have been reported in =
scientific literature accompanied by bursts of EM radiation extending =
into the x-ray range of energies. Is this possible from normal =
fracturing dynamics, or is it evidence of a ZPE anomaly? Structural =
tension testing of materials sometimes produces soft x-rays as well. BTW =
the most apparent energy spectrum for radiation from these, as well as =
certain other LENR and CF effects, is up into the "soft" x-ray energy =
range - that is, in the 10s of keV, exactly what one expects to find =
from k-shell interactions and Auger cascades.
The precise mechanics of such a putative k-shell interaction could be =
the result of Casimir-type pressures at nanometer dimensions acting on =
valence electrons or else on some form of virtual particles in such a =
way as to accelerate the particles into inner orbitals - following which =
an Auger cascade creates further EM radiation that is eventually =
down-converted into heat. The Pope Cavitation Kinetic Furnace, if it was =
ever OU at all, may have unwittingly exploited this mechanism - but in a =
brute force, rather than an elegant way.
Water is unique in that upon turning from a liquid to a solid, it =
expands rather than contracts. The resultant solid may then be =
immediately self-stressed into "triaxial tension" but probably not in a =
planar form. In a 3-D sphere of optimum dimensions, the beta-aether ZPE =
pressure which holds the ice crystal together and gives it compressive =
strength, is increased. The effect might be intensified when ice is =
formed around a nanoscale vacuum chamber - a buckeyball, or fullerene. =
In its hexagonal "snowflake" configuration, ice is less likely to feel =
triaxial tension but many kinds of stiff templates such as fullerenes or =
certain zeolites or other nanoparticles of dimensions less than 50 nm =
are candidates.=20
Also, consider the implications of "Dry Ice Blasting." Dry ice blasting =
is similar to sand blasting, but solid carbon dioxide (CO2) is =
accelerated in a pressurized air stream to impact a surface. One unique =
aspect of using dry ice particles is that the particles sublimate =
(vaporize) upon impact with the surface. The gas expands to *eight =
hundred times the volume of the solid* in a few milliseconds in what is =
effectively a "micro-explosion" at the point of impact. This is not =
evidence of OU or ZPE coherence. It is mentioned only because it points =
towards a methodology for converting small amounts of heat into usable =
energy at even extremely low overall temperatures.
But to prove that this theory is anything more than just theoretical =
tinkering, we need to demonstrate with controlled experiments and =
independent replication that such a "triaxial tension" imparted to a =
nanostructure will induce OU heating and that one way this can be =
efficiently accomplished is by the rapid freezing and vacuum stressing, =
resulting in rapid sublimation of a transducer medium .
Possible transducers for the effect may exist in water alone and in a =
number of water-based fuels, such as an aqueous fullerene solution - =
that is, C-60 dissolved in H2O - a colloidal structure formed by water =
surface tension around a C-60 molecule resulting in an approximate =
formula C60(H2O)80, a structure that is explained and pictured here =
(with some details on its manufacture):
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/buckmin.html
More appealing, however, would be the ability to inject chilled water =
without any additive into a mist of the exact needed nano-dimensions, =
and this is within the realm of possibility using precision mechanical =
components. But that prospect is far into the future.
A simple non-precision experiment is currently being run by an =
associate, using only a polycarbonate vacuum chamber with feedthroughs =
for pressure gauge and thermocouple and an elastomer valve. More =
sophisticated work with data-logging and a mechanical fuel injector is =
in the planning stage. A modest vacuum is all that is necessary - =
accomplished even by using a manual pump. A few cubic centimeters of a =
candidate fuel is prepared and placed in a glue-type syringe. Since =
anomalous effects occur when using water alone (for reasons that will be =
guessed at below) water cannot be used as a control but one can use =
other liquids such as alcohol for a control. The syringe is chilled to =
around 35 degrees F. and injected into the vacuum.=20
Significant heating and pressure effects have been observed even with =
water but more so with water-based colloids. Lack of consistency between =
shots, probably caused by too slow an injection rate and clogging is a =
problem. Further details will be published if and when some degree of =
repeatability is achieved and an optimum fuel is identified, but it is =
hoped that the basic outline of this work will encourage interested =
experimenters to approach the theory creatively from different angles =
and viewpoints.
BTW an induction coil placed next to the chamber will detect an EM pulse =
from the shot, but unfortunately, a decent soft x-ray signal has not yet =
been identified.
Excuse the long-winded discourse, but as you can see, it is pretty far =
out there on the fringe...and all very new - so experimental validation =
is needed as a number of alternative and/or complementary dynamics may =
be going on simultaneously.=20
Such as the following:
Ortho-hydrogen and Para-hydrogen and Spin Isomerism in H2O Ice =
Sublimation
Many molecules coexist as nuclear spin isomers. Hydrogen molecules =
consist of two hydrogen atoms connected by a covalent bond, each =
hydrogen atom containing one proton. Each proton has a field associated =
with it, caused by its spin. The protons can be thought of as spinning =
in either the same or opposite directions. H2 molecules that spin in the =
same direction are called orthohydrogen and when the spin is opposite, =
we have parahydrogen. Until recently, hydrogen has been the only =
molecule whose spin modifications were extensively studied and whose =
property variations were being implemented for practical use. The uses =
were once limited mostly to laboratory experiments but now a number of =
patents for electrochemical power sources are claiming to benefit from =
spin conversion.
Like hydrogen, a water molecule also has two alternative spin =
orientations, based on its paired hydrogen atoms and their nuclear spins =
(oxygen having 0 spin). The equilibrium ratio of the ortho to para =
densities (O-P ratio) at ambient temperature is about 3:1 for water and =
also for H2. The O-P ratio can be measured from the far-infrared =
spectra.=20
Orthohydrogen is unstable at low temperatures, and changes to the more =
stable parahydrogen over time, liberating heat. At room temperature and =
above, ordinary hydrogen is 75 percent orthohydrogen and 25 percent =
parahydrogen. At 77.4 K (temperature of liquid nitrogen used for =
cooling) the hydrogen mixture at equilibrium is 52 percent orthohydrogen =
and 48 percent parahydrogen. At the boiling point of liquid hydrogen, =
20.3 K, the equilibrium composition is 99.8 percent parahydrogen. When =
gaseous hydrogen is liquefied, it will slowly and spontaneously seek =
equilibrium, with orthohydrogen changing to parahydrogen. At 20.3 K, the =
conversion releases more heat (532 joules per gram) than is required to =
vaporize the liquid (453 joules per gram), so that liquefied normal =
hydrogen evaporates completely on conversion to parahydrogen-even in a =
perfectly insulated container.
Since orthohydrogen molecules make up 75% of "normal" hydrogen at room
temperature, it will considerably complicate the job of storing liquid
hydrogen, but unfortunately these observations offer little conceivable =
way to=20
produce energy based on spin conversion in hydrogen because - just =
getting to the lower ground spin state (with hydrogen) is too energy =
intensive (at least it is on earth but maybe not on Jupiter's moon =
Europa ; -}
But the situation for spin energy conversion may be different for water =
isomers, and in fact "nature" (or the creator, depending one's =
metaphysics) may have already endowed some species with the ability to =
use this technique. Para-water can be preferentially adsorbed by organic =
materials due to its non-rotation ground state Ortho-para conversion =
catalysts based on organic chemicals are also possible. The O-P =
utilization procedure is quite straightforward and may occur in nature - =
in soil, atmosphere and living organisms at the extremes of =
habitability, but that is another story. The very small amount of energy =
available in spin isomer conversion may be multiplied by various factors =
unique to water, though this is yet to be proven.
Like ortho and para hydrogen, the water counterparts have different =
magnetic and physical properties. For example, the spin isomers are =
characterized by slightly different values of specific heat, boiling =
point, heat of vapor formation, and so forth. The possible absence of =
the magnetic moment in para water implies its insensitivity to a =
magnetic field, which could form the basis of an easy means for its =
separation into an enriched fuel medium, as well as an alternative =
method for direct electrical conversion, that is, if it can be coaxed =
into prompt conversion back to a predominantly ortho state with its =
magnetic moment (it is normally a slow process). This is one direction =
where real potential for a practical free energy device lies.
The water molecule is shaped like an isosceles triangle, with a bond =
angle of
104.5 degrees at the oxygen nucleus. The H-O-H bond angle is smaller =
than that predicted by its tetrahedral electronic geometry (which would =
be 109.5 degrees). The weak Coulombic characteristics of the bonding of =
hydrogen atoms to the weakly electronegative oxygen atom result in both =
ionized and covalent states that simultaneously maintain the integrity =
of water, along with the beta-aether. Water is the only molecule that =
possess all of these unusual physical characteristics.
So all of these known factors that make water unique - its spin =
isomerism, its
prestressed dipolar geometry, its expansion on freezing, and its =
differing
values of heat of vapor formation and magnetic susceptibility, when =
combined with lesser known factors such as the nanoscale beta-aether, =
casimir-like pressures, offer some hint at what might be behind any =
anomaly found in the rapid sublimation of ice.
But the rapid sublimation of ice is a complex phenomenon and you will =
find few if any references to it, or to spin isomer conversion in water, =
prior to the year 2000, so there are few experts to guide the way.
Regards,
Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C2819E.5FF1E760
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greetings,
In an upcoming issue of Infinite Energy, an English =
colleague,=20
Frank Grimer, will be explaining his theoretical ideas regarding =
"beta-aether",=20
i.e. what we yanks might call the ZPF, and his belief after years of =
work in=20
structural engineering that much of what we consider to be the inherent =
strength=20
of materials is in fact the result of what can best be described as =
"pressure"=20
which is *external* to the material . He has interesting =
proof.
As a=20
practical implementation of these ideas, it may be possible to extract =
so-called=20
"free energy" from this beta-aether in rather unique ways, though this =
prospect=20
is still little more than a wild idea propped up by a crude =
experiment. The=20
key factor to this method of coalescing ZPF nano-pressure into heat may =
be found=20
in the application of "triaxial tension" to a candidate material.
This required kind of balanced tension does not necessarily need to =
be=20
applied with external force, as is traditionally done, and in fact might =
be more=20
efficiently and elegantly applied with a vacuum!
This work and =
the theory=20
behind it is directly related to, and may even better explain, both =
sonofusion and cavitation. In both cases, I see little evidence of real =
D+D=20
fusion but lots of evidence for supra-chemical reactions, i.e.=20
reactions that go beyond valence electrons and may even employ =
k-shell=20
electron interactions (these are sometimes referred to as ballotechnic =
reactions=20
- and have unfortunately been cloaked in secrecy because of the military =
implications). K-shell interactions may be instigated when Casimir-type=20
pressures accelerate valence electrons, or some other virtual or real=20
particle, into the innermost orbitals of adjoining =
atoms.
After some=20
brainstorming, we have recently pinpointed one unusual way in which we =
might be=20
able to apply a balanced "triaxial tension" in such a way as to create=20
repeatable coherence of ZP field energy, or beta-aether =
pressure, in the=20
real world. Preliminary experiments have just gotten underway. Here is a =
draft=20
of the modus operandi:
Rapid Sublimation of Ice
Can the =
rapid=20
sublimation of water ice into steam be incorporated into the mechanics =
of a=20
source of free energy extraction in a device that attempts to cohere the =
energy=20
of the vacuum, the beta-aether or ZPE?
Perhaps it can, as there =
exists in=20
nature a robust source of untapped pressure at the nanoscale level, the =
Casimir=20
and the Van der Waals forces being other names for the =
phenomenon.
Under=20
certain circumstances, this nanoscale pressure may be adequate to =
accelerate the=20
heating of a solid such as water ice so that it sublimates very quickly =
with=20
cavitation effects. In the process, it might be possible to =
capture
ZPE "free=20
energy" in the form of heat and convert that heating effect into =
mechanical=20
energy by means of a resultant high-ratio expansion of a solid into a =
gas to=20
drive a piston or turbine, or to capture an EM pulse from such a=20
micro-explosion.
Water Ice explosions (due to applied pressure) =
have been=20
reported in scientific literature accompanied by bursts of EM radiation=20
extending into the x-ray range of energies. Is this possible from normal =
fracturing dynamics, or is it evidence of a ZPE anomaly? Structural =
tension=20
testing of materials sometimes produces soft x-rays as well. BTW =
the most=20
apparent energy spectrum for radiation from these, as well as =
certain other=20
LENR and CF effects, is up into the "soft" x-ray energy range - that is, =
in the=20
10s of keV, exactly what one expects to find from k-shell interactions =
and Auger=20
cascades.
The precise mechanics of such a putative k-shell =
interaction=20
could be the result of Casimir-type pressures at nanometer dimensions =
acting on=20
valence electrons or else on some form of virtual particles in such a =
way as to=20
accelerate the particles into inner orbitals - following which an =
Auger=20
cascade creates further EM radiation that is eventually down-converted =
into=20
heat. The Pope Cavitation Kinetic Furnace, if it was ever OU at all, may =
have=20
unwittingly exploited this mechanism - but in a brute force, rather than =
an=20
elegant way.
Water is unique in that upon turning from a liquid =
to a=20
solid, it expands rather than contracts. The resultant solid may =
then be=20
immediately self-stressed into "triaxial tension" but probably not in a =
planar=20
form. In a 3-D sphere of optimum dimensions, the beta-aether ZPE =
pressure which=20
holds the ice crystal together and gives it compressive strength, is =
increased.=20
The effect might be intensified when ice is formed around a nanoscale =
vacuum=20
chamber - a buckeyball, or fullerene. In its hexagonal =
"snowflake"=20
configuration, ice is less likely to feel triaxial tension but many =
kinds=20
of stiff templates such as fullerenes or certain zeolites or other =
nanoparticles=20
of dimensions less than 50 nm are candidates.
Also, consider the implications of "Dry Ice Blasting." Dry ice =
blasting=20
is similar to sand blasting, but solid carbon dioxide (CO2) is =
accelerated in a=20
pressurized air stream to impact a surface. One unique aspect of using =
dry ice=20
particles is that the particles sublimate (vaporize) upon impact with =
the=20
surface. The gas expands to *eight hundred times the volume of the =
solid* in a=20
few milliseconds in what is effectively a "micro-explosion" at the point =
of=20
impact. This is not evidence of OU or ZPE coherence. It is =
mentioned only=20
because it points towards a methodology for converting small amounts of =
heat=20
into usable energy at even extremely low overall =
temperatures.
But to=20
prove that this theory is anything more than just theoretical tinkering, =
we need=20
to demonstrate with controlled experiments and independent replication =
that such=20
a "triaxial tension" imparted to a nanostructure will induce OU =
heating =20
and that one way this can be efficiently accomplished is by the rapid =
freezing=20
and vacuum stressing, resulting in rapid sublimation of a transducer =
medium=20
.
Possible transducers for the effect may exist in water alone =
and in a=20
number of water-based fuels, such as an aqueous fullerene solution - =
that is,=20
C-60 dissolved in H2O - a colloidal structure formed by water surface =
tension=20
around a C-60 molecule resulting in an approximate formula C60(H2O)80, a =
structure that is explained and pictured here (with some details on its=20
manufacture):
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/wat=
er/buckmin.html
More appealing, however, would be the ability to inject =
chilled water=20
without any additive into a mist of the exact needed nano-dimensions, =
and this=20
is within the realm of possibility using precision mechanical =
components. But=20
that prospect is far into the future.
A simple non-precision =
experiment=20
is currently being run by an associate, using only a polycarbonate =
vacuum=20
chamber with feedthroughs for pressure gauge and thermocouple and an =
elastomer=20
valve. More sophisticated work with data-logging and a mechanical fuel =
injector=20
is in the planning stage. A modest vacuum is all that is necessary -=20
accomplished even by using a manual pump. A few cubic centimeters of a =
candidate=20
fuel is prepared and placed in a glue-type syringe. Since anomalous =
effects=20
occur when using water alone (for reasons that will be guessed at below) =
water=20
cannot be used as a control but one can use other liquids such as =
alcohol for a=20
control. The syringe is chilled to around 35 degrees F. and =
injected into=20
the vacuum.
Significant heating and pressure effects have been observed even =
with water=20
but more so with water-based colloids. Lack of consistency between =
shots,=20
probably caused by too slow an injection rate and clogging is a problem. =
Further=20
details will be published if and when some degree of repeatability is =
achieved=20
and an optimum fuel is identified, but it is hoped that the basic =
outline of=20
this work will encourage interested experimenters to =
approach the=20
theory creatively from different angles and viewpoints.
BTW an induction coil placed next to the chamber will detect an EM =
pulse=20
from the shot, but unfortunately, a decent soft x-ray signal has not yet =
been=20
identified.
Excuse the long-winded discourse, but as you can see, it is =
pretty far=20
out there on the fringe...and all very new - so experimental =
validation is=20
needed as a number of alternative and/or complementary dynamics may be =
going on=20
simultaneously.
Such as the following:
Ortho-hydrogen and =
Para-hydrogen and=20
Spin Isomerism in H2O Ice Sublimation
Many molecules coexist as =
nuclear=20
spin isomers. Hydrogen molecules consist of two hydrogen atoms connected =
by a=20
covalent bond, each hydrogen atom containing one proton. Each proton has =
a field=20
associated with it, caused by its spin. The protons can be thought =
of as=20
spinning in either the same or opposite directions. H2 molecules that =
spin in=20
the same direction are called orthohydrogen and when the spin is =
opposite, we=20
have parahydrogen. Until recently, hydrogen has been the only molecule =
whose=20
spin modifications were extensively studied and whose property =
variations=20
were being implemented for practical use. The uses were once limited =
mostly to=20
laboratory experiments but now a number of patents for electrochemical =
power=20
sources are claiming to benefit from spin conversion.
Like =
hydrogen, a=20
water molecule also has two alternative spin orientations, based on its =
paired=20
hydrogen atoms and their nuclear spins (oxygen having 0 spin). The =
equilibrium ratio of the ortho to para densities (O-P ratio) at ambient=20
temperature is about 3:1 for water and also for H2. The O-P ratio can be =
measured from the far-infrared spectra.
Orthohydrogen is unstable at low temperatures, and changes to =
the more=20
stable parahydrogen over time, liberating heat. At room =
temperature and=20
above, ordinary hydrogen is 75 percent orthohydrogen and 25 percent=20
parahydrogen. At 77.4 K (temperature of liquid nitrogen used for =
cooling) the=20
hydrogen mixture at equilibrium is 52 percent orthohydrogen and 48 =
percent=20
parahydrogen. At the boiling point of liquid hydrogen, 20.3 K, the =
equilibrium=20
composition is 99.8 percent parahydrogen. When gaseous hydrogen is =
liquefied, it will slowly and spontaneously seek equilibrium, with =
orthohydrogen=20
changing to parahydrogen. At 20.3 K, the conversion releases more heat =
(532=20
joules per gram) than is required to vaporize the liquid (453 joules per =
gram),=20
so that liquefied normal hydrogen evaporates completely on conversion to =
parahydrogen-even in a perfectly insulated container.
Since =
orthohydrogen=20
molecules make up 75% of "normal" hydrogen at room
temperature, it =
will=20
considerably complicate the job of storing liquid
hydrogen, but =
unfortunately=20
these observations offer little conceivable way to
produce =
energy based=20
on spin conversion in hydrogen because - just getting to the lower =
ground spin=20
state (with hydrogen) is too energy intensive (at least it is on earth =
but maybe=20
not on Jupiter's moon Europa ; -}
But the situation for spin =
energy=20
conversion may be different for water isomers, and in fact "nature" (or =
the=20
creator, depending one's metaphysics) may have already endowed some =
species with=20
the ability to use this technique. Para-water can be preferentially =
adsorbed by=20
organic materials due to its non-rotation ground state Ortho-para=20
conversion catalysts based on organic chemicals are also possible. The =
O-P=20
utilization procedure is quite straightforward and may occur in nature - =
in=20
soil, atmosphere and living organisms at the extremes of habitability, =
but that=20
is another story. The very small amount of energy available in spin =
isomer=20
conversion may be multiplied by various factors unique to water, though =
this is=20
yet to be proven.
Like ortho and para hydrogen, the water =
counterparts=20
have different magnetic and physical properties. For example, the spin =
isomers=20
are characterized by slightly different values of specific heat, boiling =
point,=20
heat of vapor formation, and so forth. The possible absence of the =
magnetic=20
moment in para water implies its insensitivity to a magnetic field, =
which could=20
form the basis of an easy means for its separation into an =
enriched=20
fuel medium, as well as an alternative method for direct electrical =
conversion,=20
that is, if it can be coaxed into prompt conversion back to a =
predominantly=20
ortho state with its magnetic moment (it is normally a slow =
process). This=20
is one direction where real potential for a practical free energy device =
lies.
The water molecule is shaped like an isosceles triangle, =
with a=20
bond angle of
104.5 degrees at the oxygen nucleus. The H-O-H bond =
angle is=20
smaller than that predicted by its tetrahedral electronic geometry =
(which would=20
be 109.5 degrees). The weak Coulombic characteristics of the bonding of =
hydrogen=20
atoms to the weakly electronegative oxygen atom result in both ionized =
and=20
covalent states that simultaneously maintain the integrity of water, =
along with=20
the beta-aether. Water is the only molecule that possess all of these =
unusual=20
physical characteristics.
So all of these known factors that make water unique - its spin =
isomerism, its
prestressed dipolar geometry, its expansion on =
freezing, and=20
its differing
values of heat of vapor formation and magnetic =
susceptibility,=20
when combined with lesser known factors such as the nanoscale =
beta-aether,=20
casimir-like pressures, offer some hint at what might be behind any =
anomaly=20
found in the rapid sublimation of ice.
But the rapid sublimation of ice is a complex phenomenon and you =
will find=20
few if any references to it, or to spin isomer conversion in=20
water, prior to the year 2000, so there are few experts to guide =
the=20
way.
Regards,
Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C2819E.5FF1E760--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 1 18:32:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA26938;
Fri, 1 Nov 2002 18:32:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 18:32:04 -0800
Message-ID: <3DC338F1.C4A9367D ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 18:31:13 -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]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"-wEFu2.0.qa6.Zapmz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48210
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
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 15:37:03 -0500
From: "What's New"
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New"
WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 01 Nov 02 Washington, DC
1. IBM TIME BOMB: ADVERTISING GIMMICK OR QUARK-GLUON PLASMA CHIP?
Of course, I saw at once that the full-page ad for a time machine
in Tuesday's New York Times was a spoof. But I looked up at the
TV and there was Fritz Mondale, running for the US Senate from
Minnesota. Whoa! Is this possible? My only time machine is the
WN archives, so I typed in "teleportation" and was taken back to
1996. An ad in Scientific American said: "IBM scientists have
discovered a way to make an object disintegrate in one place and
reappear intact in another" (WN 26 Jan 96). So how are people
supposed to distinguish what is real and what is just advertising
hype? I looked for other big ads that are too preposterous to
believe. I came up with "Vitamin O" (WN 27 Nov 98), perpetual
motion (WN 5 Nov 99), and Yogic flying (WN 28 Sep 01). These are
at least as preposterous as time machines, but they weren't mere
gimmicks. They were intended to defraud a gullible public.
2. HERBAL HYPE: CBS NEWS DOES AN ACCURATE TAKE ON SUPPLEMENTS.
Sales of herbal medications have soared since passage of the 1994
Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act, which allows natural
supplements to be marketed without proof of safety, efficacy or
purity. The media, riding the wave of popularity of alternative
treatments, seemed to reinforce the supplement-lobby hype. But
since the NIH Center of Complementary and Alternative Medicine
began rigorous testing of supplements, the media has discovered
what the responsible medical community has been saying all along:
this stuff is untested, impure and often harmful (WN 23 Aug 02}.
The shift was evident on Monday's CBS Evening News with Dan
Rather, which spent almost 4 minutes on the dangers of
supplements. That's a long time by network news standards.
3. SCUD DEFENSE: BUILD THEM NOW; MAYBE WE CAN TEST THEM LATER.
During the Gulf war, the military failed to destroy a single
mobile Scud missile. Concerns about the vulnerability of U.S.
troops to Iraqi Scud missiles in a new conflict led Congress to
approve funding for increased production of the advanced Patriot
missile, known as the PAC-3. Moreover, the Pentagon would like
to shift money from other missile programs to further accelerate
production. The only problem is that the PAC-3s don't seem to
work either, having fared badly in tests between February and May
(WN 17 May 02). There are proposed fixes, but they haven't been
tested at all. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld nonetheless is
leaning toward increasing PAC-3 production, in the hope that the
planned fixes will work if we ever get around to testing them.
If we don't get around to testing, what's the problem?
4. ELECTION PREDICTION: PHYSICS WILL HOLD ITS MARGIN IN CONGRESS.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY.
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or
the American Physical Society, but they should be.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as:
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 2 15:48:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA21090;
Sat, 2 Nov 2002 15:46:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 15:46:14 -0800
Message-ID: <3DC46396.8268FC61 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 01:45:26 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex
Subject: Proper power measurements
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5iukz2.0.S95.5F6nz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48211
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Hello,
(It would be better if somebody fw it free energy forum)
There are sometimes excess energy claims, and experimenters failed to measure directly the energy transfers. Sometimes it is true that there is no energy output which can be directed to a measurement system but sometime there is. I think there is no excuse for not using some basic power measurement equipment. They are cheap at second hand. For example an HP 3400A true RMS voltmeter is selling for $100 or less. See http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1782171652
In this circumstance, I think most of excess energy claims where no proper measurement equipment is utilized can be safely discarded.
Regards,
hamdi ucar
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 3 05:46:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA11905;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 05:45:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 05:45:21 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <18f.109b0388.2af68206 aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 08:43:34 EST
Subject: The Photon Belt & Photonic Energy Shielding Technologies Research & Development!
To: aelewis provide.net, newsonline@bbc.co.uk, drboylan@sbcglobal.net,
thebishop usadatanet.net, mediator@mint.ocn.ne.jp, prj@mail.msen.com,
reader guardian.co.uk, Roundtable7@yahoogroups.com,
riverwaves7 hotmail.com, economicaffairs@parliament.uk,
vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com, tom@rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_18f.109b0388.2af68206_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"HKeCI.0.sv2.mXInz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48212
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_18f.109b0388.2af68206_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Photon Belt & Photonic Energy Shielding Technologies Research &
Development!
Since the photon belt may increase by 2012, to such a high energy degree,
that conventional electrical and computer technologies may not work well, we
need to develop shielding technologies to be placed around critical
electrical and computer technologies and in residences.
I am working on special types of wall plasters, cement, paint, and paper,
which interconnects to form a complete electrical circuit, which has some
metal foil and magnetic film on the back of it, and electrical wires, to make
a faraday cage and energy holographic force field, which may be used to
create privacy in the home and potentially block out or out filter harmful
emfs, energy waves and even photons.
It may be possible to mix, small monopole quartz crystals with antiproton
subatomic bonded particles, as the Russians have developed, magnetic ceramic
particles, and liquid metallic conductive particles into a plaster, cement,
or spray paint, to be used to cover all of the walls of the interior of a
house, to create a magnetic, electrical faraday cage force field shields
around a room or house to filter out harmful sound, radio waves, and cosmic
photon energies. The walls would then have to be insulated on both sides with
a plastic paint or plastic linoleum or foam and wires would have to be
connected to the conductive paint or cement, and hooked up to a computer to
monitor and project the proper alternative energies and frequencies into the
walls to shield and filter out harmful radiation's. The typical energy
frequencies, that may be used to block out harmful frequencies are the
reverse image of the harmful frequency and holographic energy pattern. Also
several small holographic antennas may be placed in a room and hooked up to a
computer and image projector, to project and create healthy holographic
energies in a room, that match the healthy holographic energies patterns of
the energies in cells, natural environmental healthy energies, and happy
youthful energies and feelings of the human body. I will do some research on
projector, image to wave, and holographic technologies to understand how to
do this.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_18f.109b0388.2af68206_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Photon Belt & Photonic Energy Shielding Technologies Research & Development!
Since the photon belt may increase by 2012, to such a high energy degree, that conventional electrical and computer technologies may not work well, we need to develop shielding technologies to be placed around critical electrical and computer technologies and in residences.
I am working on special types of wall plasters, cement, paint, and paper, which interconnects to form a complete electrical circuit, which has some metal foil and magnetic film on the back of it, and electrical wires, to make a faraday cage and energy holographic force field, which may be used to create privacy in the home and potentially block out or out filter harmful emfs, energy waves and even photons.
It may be possible to mix, small monopole quartz crystals with antiproton subatomic bonded particles, as the Russians have developed, magnetic ceramic particles, and liquid metallic conductive particles into a plaster, cement, or spray paint, to be used to cover all of the walls of the interior of a house, to create a magnetic, electrical faraday cage force field shields around a room or house to filter out harmful sound, radio waves, and cosmic photon energies. The walls would then have to be insulated on both sides with a plastic paint or plastic linoleum or foam and wires would have to be connected to the conductive paint or cement, and hooked up to a computer to monitor and project the proper alternative energies and frequencies into the walls to shield and filter out harmful radiation's. The typical energy frequencies, that may be used to block out harmful frequencies are the reverse image of the harmful frequency and holographic energy pattern. Also several small holographic antennas may be placed in a room and hooked up to a computer and image projector, to project and create healthy holographic energies in a room, that match the healthy holographic energies patterns of the energies in cells, natural environmental healthy energies, and happy youthful energies and feelings of the human body. I will do some research on projector, image to wave, and holographic technologies to understand how to do this.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_18f.109b0388.2af68206_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 3 08:08:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27999;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 08:07:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 08:07:02 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <75.152ae73.2af6a362 aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 11:05:54 EST
Subject: Research & Development of non-polarised emf and non-emf energy technologies
To: prj mail.msen.com, riverwaves7@hotmail.com, Roundtable7@yahoogroups.com,
drboylan sbcglobal.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
CC: tom rhfweb.com, ConexTom@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_75.152ae73.2af6a362_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"j_pDs1.0.Pr6.bcKnz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48213
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_75.152ae73.2af6a362_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
[Renewable Alternative Energies=20=
=A9 ] at http://www.rhfweb.com/rae.html
Research & Development of non-polarised emf and non-emf energy technologies=20
Non-Polarised Non-EMF Fiber optic & light pulse, gravitonic, photonic,=20
sound, &=20
cold positive nonpolarized magnetic Telsa energy power, chips,=20
computer, battery, communication and device technologies, to
replace EMF Polarised technologies.
Consider light, photonic, and sound polarization & monopole=20
technologies, such as antiproton monopole chemistry for crystals,=20
batteries, communication, and device technologies.
=20
I will be doing research on the above technologies, and I may hire=20
consultants to brief me on the state of the art of such technologies, to=20
consider funding these technologies at universities and with the above=20
company to produces such products which may be needed around 2012, due to th=
e=20
photon belt.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
[Renewable Alternative Energies=20=
=A9 ]
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_75.152ae73.2af6a362_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
[Renewable Alternative Energies=20=
=A9 ] at http://www.rhfweb.com/rae.html
Research & Development of non-polarised emf and non-emf energy technolog=
ies
Non-Polarised Non-EMF Fiber optic & light pulse, gravitonic, photoni=
c, sound, &
cold positive nonpolarized magnetic Telsa energy power, chips,
computer, battery, communication and device technologies, to
replace EMF Polarised technologies.
Consider light, photonic, and sound pol=
arization & monopole technologies, such as antiproton monopole ch=
emistry for crystals, batteries, communication, and device technologi=
es.
I will be doing research on the above technologies, and I may hire consultan=
ts to brief me on the state of the art of such technologies, to consider fun=
ding these technologies at universities and with the above company to produc=
es such products which may be needed around 2012, due to the photon belt.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron=
[Renewable Alternative Energies=20=
=A9 ]
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_75.152ae73.2af6a362_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 3 09:09:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16730;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 09:08:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 09:08:35 -0800
Message-ID: <001101c2835b$9d18b560$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter"
To: "vortex-L"
Subject: Some updates on radioactive fungi, etc.
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 12:08:20 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"eNH5h2.0._44.IWLnz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48214
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Greetings all,
Just a short note to let you that a couple of new items were posted by my
son recently on Dr. Sam Faile's web page. Topic is the on-going
experimentation with uranium and thorium doped fungal cultures, still trying
to pin down the rising and falling of count rates. I have several tubs
going right now, although from time to time the locals that must share my
office area bring out the pitch forks and torches, and I have to kill things
off with ye old bottle o' bleach.
http://www.geocities.com/spfaile/fungipics.html
In a few days (hopefully) I will announce a new paper up on the Avalon site
re: the latest on minor transient weight alterations in quartz crystals
accelerated along the optical axis.
A couple of weeks ago, some of you were following my quandry with the
magnetic di-pole responsiveness of the quartz optical axis. After much
stewing and staring and replicating, I concluded that I was seeing some weak
electrostatic attraction to my hand / magnets due to charges left on the
crystal surface. So that one goes away for now. Thanks to all who shared
ideas, though. That is how this works.
Best,
NR
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 3 21:27:01 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA22056;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:25:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:25:46 -0800
Message-ID: <3DC604DC.72AC8E verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 07:25:48 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex
Subject: Force on an Asymmetric Capacitor (physics/0211001)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"AaI7h1.0.XO5.QJWnz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48215
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0211001
Hi,
Please somebody Fw it to corresponding forums.
hamdi ucar
From: Thomas B. Bahder
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:15:53 GMT (680kb)
Force on an Asymmetric Capacitor
Authors: Thomas B. Bahder, Chris Fazi
Comments: 25 pages
Subj-class: History of Physics; General Physics
When a high voltage (~30 kV) is applied to a capacitor whose
electrodes have different physical dimensions, the capacitor
experiences a net force toward the smaller electrode (Biefeld-Brown
effect). We have verified this effect by building four capacitors of
different shapes. The effect may have applications to vehicle
propulsion and dielectric pumps. We review the history of this effect
briefly through the history of patents by Thomas Townsend Brown. At
present, the physical basis for the Biefeld-Brown effect is not
understood. The order of magnitude of the net force on the
asymmetric capacitor is estimated assuming two different
mechanisms of charge conduction between its electrodes: ballistic
ionic wind and ionic drift. The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at
least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of
the observed force on the capacitor. The ionic drift transport
assumption leads to the correct order of magnitude for the force,
however, it is difficult to see how ionic drift enters into the theory.
Finally, we present a detailed thermodynamic treatment of the net
force on an asymmetric capacitor. In the future, to understand this
effect, a detailed theoretical model must be constructed that takes
into account plasma effects: ionization of gas (or air) in the high
electric field region, charge transport, and resulting dynamic forces
on the electrodes. The next series of experiments should determine
whether the effect occurs in vacuum, and a careful study should be
carried out to determine the dependence of the observed force on
gas pressure, gas species and applied voltage.
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 3 23:05:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA19498;
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:04:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:04:24 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <001101c2835b$9d18b560$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
References: <001101c2835b$9d18b560$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:02:45 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde
Subject: Re: Some updates on radioactive fungi, etc.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA19443
Resent-Message-ID: <"sW15M2.0.Tm4.tlXnz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48216
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
>From the text under picture 3 from the link given below:
>> However following the formation of the crenulated mat, a decomposition began to occur with a foul smelling slime overtaking the fungus.
Foul smelling slime probably = bacteria.
There's been a lot interest lately in the amazing microbes discovered in the last few years which live in tough environments and eat metals, poisonous chemicals and so forth. Then there's the hints of biological transmutations mentioned from time to time here and elsewhere. (Any regular Vortexian can see where I'm going here...) More conventionally, people are testing the new bugs against diseases, and have had some hits. But finding a bug that likes eating radioactive material and in the process remediates it would be pretty cool, and not likely to be something 'conventional' researchers would think to look for. There *are* germs deep in the earth that seem to enjoy the heat and radioactivity down there. I haven't read that any are known to use the radioactive materials directly as a food/energy source, but you never know - this subject is on the edge. I wouldn't think it's too wild of a notion to consider.
Glad to hear about your experiments, and even more glad I don't share an office with you!
- Rick Monteverde,
Honolulu Hawaii
>Greetings all,
>
>Just a short note to let you that a couple of new items were posted by my
>son recently on Dr. Sam Faile's web page. Topic is the on-going
>experimentation with uranium and thorium doped fungal cultures, still trying
>to pin down the rising and falling of count rates. I have several tubs
>going right now, although from time to time the locals that must share my
>office area bring out the pitch forks and torches, and I have to kill things
>off with ye old bottle o' bleach.
>
>http://www.geocities.com/spfaile/fungipics.html
>
>In a few days (hopefully) I will announce a new paper up on the Avalon site
>re: the latest on minor transient weight alterations in quartz crystals
>accelerated along the optical axis.
>
>A couple of weeks ago, some of you were following my quandry with the
>magnetic di-pole responsiveness of the quartz optical axis. After much
>stewing and staring and replicating, I concluded that I was seeing some weak
>electrostatic attraction to my hand / magnets due to charges left on the
>crystal surface. So that one goes away for now. Thanks to all who shared
>ideas, though. That is how this works.
>
>Best,
>
>NR
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 4 11:22:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06952;
Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:20:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:20:30 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Nov 2002 19:20:15 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021104141916.02c7a1f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 14:20:21 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Italian CF site
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"GzWtM1.0.Yi1.-Xinz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48217
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Nice photos of equipment:
http://www.frascati.enea.it/nhe/
I guess "nhe" stands for New Hydrogen Energy.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 00:26:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA15860;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 00:24:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 00:24:41 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <12e.1a792545.2af8da08 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 03:23:36 EST
Subject: The Conspiracy to repress the truth about physics!
To: aelewis provide.net, drboylan@sbcglobal.net, thebishop@usadatanet.net,
mediator mint.ocn.ne.jp, prj@mail.msen.com, riverwaves7@hotmail.com,
vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com, tom@rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_12e.1a792545.2af8da08_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"RlStF2.0.gt3.81unz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48218
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
--part1_12e.1a792545.2af8da08_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
http://www.neuronet.pitt.edu/~meno/physics/physics.html
http://www.aetherpress.com/physics.htm
The pursuit of truth is open to everyone, so, how many generations of those
"children" will ignore it? I am hoping that some of them will change their
mind, and do something useful instead.However, there is no indication for an
improvement of the situation, as lately someone at Cornell set up a web-site,
where anyone who does not agree with them is listed as a crank. This just
confirms that they are incapable of comprehending real physics, as everybody
knowledgeable in fluid mechanics can check my equations and concepts for
validity. Thus, it is becoming quite clear who the real cranks are.
Therefore, by providing further exposure to my theory, they are failing not
only in physics, but even in their slander campaign. So, I thank them for the
service.
However, as is evident from the following excerpt of his talk at the Leiden
University in 1920, Einstein had by then completely reversed his position on
the ether. "... Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general
theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense,
therefore, there exists an ether. Acccording to the general theory of
relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not
only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence
for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore
any space-time intervals in the physical sense. ..."Furthermore, the
existence of the 2.7 K cosmic radiation, discovered in 1965 by A.A. Penzias
and R.W. Wilson, clearly points to an absolute inertial frame of
reference.Thus, while Einstein himself already acknowledged the blunder in
1920 by saying: "...space without ether is unthinkable...", 80 years later,
the students are paying tuition to be told that ether does not exist. Who,
then, are the cranks that should be listed?
Newton's view on the future of physics.
In his book on optics, Newton, the honest and frank genius from the farm,
also expresses his views regarding the direction in which physics should
proceed.To tell us that every Species of Things is endow'd with an occult
specifick Quality by which it acts and produces manifest Effects, is to tell
us nothing: But to derive two or three general Principles of Motion from
Phenomena, and afterwards to tell us how the Properties and Actions of all
corporeal Things follow from those manifest Principles, would be a very great
step in Philosophy, though the Causes of those Principles were not yet
discover'd: And therefore I scruple not to propose the Principles of Motion
above-mention'd, they being of very general Extent, and leave their Causes to
be found out.This appears to me like a very sensible advice. Furthermore,
Ockham told us that the simplest adequate explanation of a phenomenon is most
likely to be correct. The ancient thinkers in Greece, and the Orient, also
gave us some good hints.We now also know that energy and momentum are
conserved in all natural phenomena, so, it is sensible to ask what energy
might be.Thus, considering all the extant ancient wisdom, and current
experimental knowledge, I am attempting to account for the observed natural
phenomena by means of the simplest possible model. So far I have succeeded to
explain the photon quantitatively, and all the rest of the known physical
phenomena qualitatively, without invoking any "occult" principles.The energy,
in all manifested forms, I attribute to the motion of very minute, actual
fundamental particles, that I call GYRONS. These gyrons, in perpetual motion,
comprise a fluid, called the AETHER. The average speed of the gyrons in the
space that is called the VACUUM, corresponds to the speed of light. In the
vacuum, the gyrons move in a random fashion, and therefore, no specific
physical properties are observed in it.However, when the gyrons move in
certain organized patterns, then we observe the manifestation of what we call
MATTER and WAVES. It turns out that, in order to generate all the observed
phenomena, the gyrons cannot be tightly packed in space, and therefore, the
aether fluid is technically a gas.Next, the question arises: what must be the
form and size of the gyrons to impart all the necessary properties to the
aether?Considering the relationships between the form of the particles
comprising a fluid, and the observed properties of the fluid, as expressed by
fluid dynamics equations, I opted for the following form of the gyron:The
arrows indicate the motion of the gyron, its translational and rotational
velocities. These velocities remain constant as long as the gyron does not
collide with another gyron. At the instant of collision, the velocities of
both particles change, depending on their speed, as well as their mutual
orientations and locations of the point of impact on the two colliding
gyrons. Formally we say that the linear and angular momenta remain conserved
in the collision. One must assume this, otherwise, the universe would
eventually grind itself to a halt.How far the gyrons move, before colliding,
depends on their size, their mutual orientation, their velocities (both,
translational, and angular), as well as on their number in a given volume of
the void (their numeric volume density). In the following sketch is depicted
the travel path of a gyron, showing how it sweeps out a volume segment
between collisions.In a short time dt, the gyron sweeps out a segment of the
volume dV, expressed by the following vector formula.It turns out that this
expression is related to what we call the charge, as well as the mass of a
material particle, such as an electron. To derive the complete properties of
the anisotropic aether gas from the motion of individual gyrons, is an
extremely difficult mathematical problem that I was not able to solve yet.
Here is a great challenge for a gifted mathematician. The connection between
the motion of individual gyrons, and the description of the fluid properties
in terms of fields, is termed kinetics. The picture below shows a few gyrons,
comprising the aether, as they move through the void space.The variations in
size are intended to indicate a perspective view; but the actual gyrons are
assumed to be all identical in size and form. They must also be much slimmer
in shape than indicated in this picture.Clearly, a legitimate question is:
what is the nature of the material that these things are made out of? And,
here again, the best I can do is to quote Newton.All these things being
consider'd, it seems probable to me, that God in the Beginning form'd Matter
in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable Particles, of such Sizes and
Figures, and with such other Properties, and such Proportion to Space, as
most conduced to the End for which he form'd them; and that these primitive
Particles being Solids, are incomparably harder than any porous Bodies
compounded of them; even so very hard, as never to wear or break in pieces;
no ordinary Power being able to divide what God himself made one in the first
Creation.Ultimately, to account for our existence, some material substance
must be postulated. To what agent one attributes this deed is a personal
choice that goes beyond the realm of physics. In any case, the purpose of
physics is to describe the mechanism of our universe in all its details in
the simplest possible way; then, according to Ockham, we may assume that our
description is correct.On the scale of the gyron, physics is beyond
experimentation, all must be deduced from a hypothesis. According to my
model, there are no continuous physical fields in nature. The gyron
collisions are instantaneous events, described by the Dirac delta functions.
This is mathematically and physically legitimate. A gyron collision can be
considered as the limit of an elastic collision, in the manner shown in the
following phase diagram, depicting a central collision. For the
mathematically oriented readers, this means that at this level of
description, physics is purely Newtonian with an Euclidean space, and
Galilean invariance.The aether must be an anisotropic fluid because,
otherwise, it could not manifest all the necessary physical properties to
account for the observed physical reality. Failure to realize this was
probably the major reason why the aether theories, expounded during the
previous centuries, could not succeed. Clearly, since the gyrons, being the
matter from which everything else is made, cannot be confined in anything, no
direct experimentation is possible to determine their essence and behavior.
Therefore, all knowledge about them must be computed mathematically (inferred
backwards) from the behavior of the aether.Due to the enormous number of
gyrons involved, possibly on the order of 10^90 in each cubic centimeter of
space, dealing with individual gyrons, is out of question. Consequently, one
must resort to statistical methods, that in turn lead to the velocity-, and
other, field representations of the aether. However, it must also be
understood that, mathematically, as is well appreciated in ordinary fluid
mechanics, this is only an approximation. A specific field variable
represents the mean value in its neighborhood, with a statistical
uncertainty. In the case of the aether fluid, this corresponds to the
Heisenberg uncertainty (+/-)[h/4Pi]. Thus, the price we pay for manageability
of the problem, is uncertainty.The undisturbed aether, that we call vacuum,
is unobservable. Only such dynamic disturbances as waves and vortices become
observable. What we perceive as the physical reality is the dynamics of these
vortices and waves in the aether. Specifically, the material particles, such
as electrons, correspond to the aether vortices, while electromagnetic
radiation, and deBroglie, or matter, waves, correspond to the two possible
types of aether waves.The following graph depicts a feasible model for the
electron. The flow pattern of gyrons in this particular vortex, represented
by the stream lines, can generate all the necessary force fields associated
with the electron. The two charge polarities are produced by the right-, and
left-handed vortices, while gravity is due to gyron drift towards these
dynamic structures.Consequently, if electrons are vortices, then electron
physics can neither be represented by particle mechanics, nor by wave
mechanics; instead, vortex mechanics becomes applicable, and, so far, this
has not been pursued. Thus, it is due to the complexity of this problem that
such empirical theories as quantum wave mechanics and relativity
emerged.Since electrons, being vortices, do not behave like the actual
fundamental particles (the gyrons), from which they are generated, the
concept of non-Newtonian physics was introduced. The mechanics of individual
gyrons, however, is Newtonian. It happens that the quantum mechanical
probability density corresponds to the numerical gyron density, but this
scalar field is not adequate to describe the aether fluid, the velocity
vector field is also necessary. Quaternion vector fields may turn out to be a
suitable representation for this type of vortex mechanics.Using these ideas,
and employing dependable experimental data in conjunction with known fluid
dynamics concepts, I was able to derive some promising results, both,
qualitative, and quantitative. The details can be found in the following
publications:Frank M. Meno, Phys. Essays 4, 94 (1991).Ibid. 7, 450 (1994).
Ibid. 8, 245 (1995).
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_12e.1a792545.2af8da08_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
http://www.neuronet.pitt.edu/~meno/physics/physics.html
http://www.aetherpress.com/physics.htm
The pursuit of truth is open to everyone, so, how many generations of those "children" will ignore it? I am hoping that some of them will change their mind, and do something useful instead.However, there is no indication for an improvement of the situation, as lately someone at Cornell set up a web-site, where anyone who does not agree with them is listed as a crank. This just confirms that they are incapable of comprehending real physics, as everybody knowledgeable in fluid mechanics can check my equations and concepts for validity. Thus, it is becoming quite clear who the real cranks are. Therefore, by providing further exposure to my theory, they are failing not only in physics, but even in their slander campaign. So, I thank them for the service.
However, as is evident from the following excerpt of his talk at the Leiden University in 1920, Einstein had by then completely reversed his position on the ether. "... Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. Acccording to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. ..."Furthermore, the existence of the 2.7 K cosmic radiation, discovered in 1965 by A.A. Penzias and R.W. Wilson, clearly points to an absolute inertial frame of reference.Thus, while Einstein himself already acknowledged the blunder in 1920 by saying: "...space without ether is unthinkable...", 80 years later, the students are paying tuition to be told that ether does not exist. Who, then, are the cranks that should be listed?
Newton's view on the future of physics.
In his book on optics, Newton, the honest and frank genius from the farm, also expresses his views regarding the direction in which physics should proceed.To tell us that every Species of Things is endow'd with an occult specifick Quality by which it acts and produces manifest Effects, is to tell us nothing: But to derive two or three general Principles of Motion from Phenomena, and afterwards to tell us how the Properties and Actions of all corporeal Things follow from those manifest Principles, would be a very great step in Philosophy, though the Causes of those Principles were not yet discover'd: And therefore I scruple not to propose the Principles of Motion above-mention'd, they being of very general Extent, and leave their Causes to be found out.This appears to me like a very sensible advice. Furthermore, Ockham told us that the simplest adequate explanation of a phenomenon is most likely to be correct. The ancient thinkers in Greece, and the Orient, also gave us some good hints.We now also know that energy and momentum are conserved in all natural phenomena, so, it is sensible to ask what energy might be.Thus, considering all the extant ancient wisdom, and current experimental knowledge, I am attempting to account for the observed natural phenomena by means of the simplest possible model. So far I have succeeded to explain the photon quantitatively, and all the rest of the known physical phenomena qualitatively, without invoking any "occult" principles.The energy, in all manifested forms, I attribute to the motion of very minute, actual fundamental particles, that I call GYRONS. These gyrons, in perpetual motion, comprise a fluid, called the AETHER. The average speed of the gyrons in the space that is called the VACUUM, corresponds to the speed of light. In the vacuum, the gyrons move in a random fashion, and therefore, no specific physical properties are observed in it.However, when the gyrons move in certain organized patterns, then we observe the manifestation of what we call MATTER and WAVES. It turns out that, in order to generate all the observed phenomena, the gyrons cannot be tightly packed in space, and therefore, the aether fluid is technically a gas.Next, the question arises: what must be the form and size of the gyrons to impart all the necessary properties to the aether?Considering the relationships between the form of the particles comprising a fluid, and the observed properties of the fluid, as expressed by fluid dynamics equations, I opted for the following form of the gyron:
The arrows indicate the motion of the gyron, its translational and rotational velocities. These velocities remain constant as long as the gyron does not collide with another gyron. At the instant of collision, the velocities of both particles change, depending on their speed, as well as their mutual orientations and locations of the point of impact on the two colliding gyrons. Formally we say that the linear and angular momenta remain conserved in the collision. One must assume this, otherwise, the universe would eventually grind itself to a halt.How far the gyrons move, before colliding, depends on their size, their mutual orientation, their velocities (both, translational, and angular), as well as on their number in a given volume of the void (their numeric volume density). In the following sketch is depicted the travel path of a gyron, showing how it sweeps out a volume segment between collisions.
In a short time dt, the gyron sweeps out a segment of the volume dV, expressed by the following vector formula.
It turns out that this expression is related to what we call the charge, as well as the mass of a material particle, such as an electron. To derive the complete properties of the anisotropic aether gas from the motion of individual gyrons, is an extremely difficult mathematical problem that I was not able to solve yet. Here is a great challenge for a gifted mathematician. The connection between the motion of individual gyrons, and the description of the fluid properties in terms of fields, is termed kinetics. The picture below shows a few gyrons, comprising the aether, as they move through the void space.
The variations in size are intended to indicate a perspective view; but the actual gyrons are assumed to be all identical in size and form. They must also be much slimmer in shape than indicated in this picture.Clearly, a legitimate question is: what is the nature of the material that these things are made out of? And, here again, the best I can do is to quote Newton.All these things being consider'd, it seems probable to me, that God in the Beginning form'd Matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable Particles, of such Sizes and Figures, and with such other Properties, and such Proportion to Space, as most conduced to the End for which he form'd them; and that these primitive Particles being Solids, are incomparably harder than any porous Bodies compounded of them; even so very hard, as never to wear or break in pieces; no ordinary Power being able to divide what God himself made one in the first Creation.Ultimately, to account for our existence, some material substance must be postulated. To what agent one attributes this deed is a personal choice that goes beyond the realm of physics. In any case, the purpose of physics is to describe the mechanism of our universe in all its details in the simplest possible way; then, according to Ockham, we may assume that our description is correct.On the scale of the gyron, physics is beyond experimentation, all must be deduced from a hypothesis. According to my model, there are no continuous physical fields in nature. The gyron collisions are instantaneous events, described by the Dirac delta functions. This is mathematically and physically legitimate. A gyron collision can be considered as the limit of an elastic collision, in the manner shown in the following phase diagram, depicting a central collision. For the mathematically oriented readers, this means that at this level of description, physics is purely Newtonian with an Euclidean space, and Galilean invariance.
The aether must be an anisotropic fluid because, otherwise, it could not manifest all the necessary physical properties to account for the observed physical reality. Failure to realize this was probably the major reason why the aether theories, expounded during the previous centuries, could not succeed. Clearly, since the gyrons, being the matter from which everything else is made, cannot be confined in anything, no direct experimentation is possible to determine their essence and behavior. Therefore, all knowledge about them must be computed mathematically (inferred backwards) from the behavior of the aether.Due to the enormous number of gyrons involved, possibly on the order of 10^90 in each cubic centimeter of space, dealing with individual gyrons, is out of question. Consequently, one must resort to statistical methods, that in turn lead to the velocity-, and other, field representations of the aether. However, it must also be understood that, mathematically, as is well appreciated in ordinary fluid mechanics, this is only an approximation. A specific field variable represents the mean value in its neighborhood, with a statistical uncertainty. In the case of the aether fluid, this corresponds to the Heisenberg uncertainty (+/-)[h/4Pi]. Thus, the price we pay for manageability of the problem, is uncertainty.The undisturbed aether, that we call vacuum, is unobservable. Only such dynamic disturbances as waves and vortices become observable. What we perceive as the physical reality is the dynamics of these vortices and waves in the aether. Specifically, the material particles, such as electrons, correspond to the aether vortices, while electromagnetic radiation, and deBroglie, or matter, waves, correspond to the two possible types of aether waves.The following graph depicts a feasible model for the electron. The flow pattern of gyrons in this particular vortex, represented by the stream lines, can generate all the necessary force fields associated with the electron. The two charge polarities are produced by the right-, and left-handed vortices, while gravity is due to gyron drift towards these dynamic structures.
Consequently, if electrons are vortices, then electron physics can neither be represented by particle mechanics, nor by wave mechanics; instead, vortex mechanics becomes applicable, and, so far, this has not been pursued. Thus, it is due to the complexity of this problem that such empirical theories as quantum wave mechanics and relativity emerged.Since electrons, being vortices, do not behave like the actual fundamental particles (the gyrons), from which they are generated, the concept of non-Newtonian physics was introduced. The mechanics of individual gyrons, however, is Newtonian. It happens that the quantum mechanical probability density corresponds to the numerical gyron density, but this scalar field is not adequate to describe the aether fluid, the velocity vector field is also necessary. Quaternion vector fields may turn out to be a suitable representation for this type of vortex mechanics.Using these ideas, and employing dependable experimental data in conjunction with known fluid dynamics concepts, I was able to derive some promising results, both, qualitative, and quantitative. The details can be found in the following publications:Frank M. Meno, Phys. Essays 4, 94 (1991).Ibid. 7, 450 (1994).Ibid. 8, 245 (1995).
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_12e.1a792545.2af8da08_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 02:00:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA14426;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 01:59:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 01:59:20 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <145.1f732a9.2af8f007 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 04:57:27 EST
Subject: How all cultures on Earth can have succeed in the upcomming Photon Age.
To: aelewis provide.net, newsonline@bbc.co.uk, areilamerican@webtv.net,
DEACH topica.com, drboylan@sbcglobal.net, thebishop@usadatanet.net,
mediator mint.ocn.ne.jp, prj@mail.msen.com, reader@guardian.co.uk,
Roundtable7 yahoogroups.com, riverwaves7@hotmail.com,
economicaffairs parliament.uk, vortex-l@eskimo.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com, tom@rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_145.1f732a9.2af8f007_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"t53KZ3.0.JX3.uPvnz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48219
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_145.1f732a9.2af8f007_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
How all cultures on Earth can succeed in the upcoming Photon Age.
I believe that all cultures on Earth should be able to adapt to and survive
the photon age, by simply doing one of the following:
1. For cultures that cannot adapt to photons with natural genes, it may
possible to insert new chromosomes into their genes, which may be achieved
with modern genetic splicing technologies, and simple injection by medical
equipment of the new repaired cell and genetic information into the blood
stream, as present medical technologies permit, to add new chromosomes for
patients with flawed genes. Eventually the rest of the cells will pick up
the new genes and chromosomes by cell division.
2. E.T.' and present Earth societies have force field technologies, which can
project force fields into the Atmosphere of Earth to preserve the ionosphere,
and to filter out harmful photons and radiation's, so that all Earth cultures
may survive, and the other Earth cultures that may want to transcend to the
photon belt cultures, may be allowed to do this also, with certain windows on
Earth for photons to pass through. And all cultures may also be allowed to
use space travel to relocated to other star systems and planets, where they
may live also.
3. Some Earth cultures may also live in the inner Earth, and in domed cities
on the surface of the Earth to filter out harmful photons, and cosmic
energies.
4. New photonic and fiber optic solar light technologies not based on EMF or
electrical-magnetic polarized technologies which may not work well with
photons may be developed and mass produced within the next 10 to 20 years,
quite easily, so that pure photonic solar cars, and solar home technologies
may be used to get power from photons or other cosmic energies, without the
need of any EMF technologies.
We only may need to get the general public, the secret powers, and
governments of Earth, the solar system, and universe, to work together in a
positive and peaceful manner, so that all cultures may have a win win
scenario. There is a win-win scenario for all cultures on Earth, the solar
system and Universe, but we need to get these cultures to believe in this,
and promote these ideas, so that they may occur.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_145.1f732a9.2af8f007_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
How all cultures on Earth can succeed in the upcoming Photon Age.
I believe that all cultures on Earth should be able to adapt to and survive the photon age, by simply doing one of the following:
1. For cultures that cannot adapt to photons with natural genes, it may possible to insert new chromosomes into their genes, which may be achieved with modern genetic splicing technologies, and simple injection by medical equipment of the new repaired cell and genetic information into the blood stream, as present medical technologies permit, to add new chromosomes for patients with flawed genes. Eventually the rest of the cells will pick up the new genes and chromosomes by cell division.
2. E.T.' and present Earth societies have force field technologies, which can project force fields into the Atmosphere of Earth to preserve the ionosphere, and to filter out harmful photons and radiation's, so that all Earth cultures may survive, and the other Earth cultures that may want to transcend to the photon belt cultures, may be allowed to do this also, with certain windows on Earth for photons to pass through. And all cultures may also be allowed to use space travel to relocated to other star systems and planets, where they may live also.
3. Some Earth cultures may also live in the inner Earth, and in domed cities on the surface of the Earth to filter out harmful photons, and cosmic energies.
4. New photonic and fiber optic solar light technologies not based on EMF or electrical-magnetic polarized technologies which may not work well with photons may be developed and mass produced within the next 10 to 20 years, quite easily, so that pure photonic solar cars, and solar home technologies may be used to get power from photons or other cosmic energies, without the need of any EMF technologies.
We only may need to get the general public, the secret powers, and governments of Earth, the solar system, and universe, to work together in a positive and peaceful manner, so that all cultures may have a win win scenario. There is a win-win scenario for all cultures on Earth, the solar system and Universe, but we need to get these cultures to believe in this, and promote these ideas, so that they may occur.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_145.1f732a9.2af8f007_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 14:11:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21460;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 14:09:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 14:09:29 -0800
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 14:05:36 -0800
From: Jones Beene
Subject: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
To: vortex
Message-id: <001f01c28517$78957d00$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01C284D4.6A16AF80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"THzza2.0.6F5.O64oz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48220
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_001C_01C284D4.6A16AF80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There is an IMPRESSIVE new pdf doc at:
http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/finalpres.pdf
NASA INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED CONCEPTS PHASE I FINAL PRESENTATION =
ATLANTA, GA, OCTOBER 25, 2002
Done by Dr.Marchese et al. at Rowan Engineering College in Joysee
WOW!
This is not yet proof positive, but if you read between the lines, this =
report says volumes...check out the Balmer line broadening... looks like =
it won't be long before Bob Parks and others will be dining on =
crow....big time.=20
Also, water bath calorimetry - p.9 Is this OU?=20
" For a forward microwave power of 70 W and reflected power of 16 W" =
[does this mean a net 54 W?], control gas plasmas consistently transfer =
< 40 W into the water while H2/catalyst mixtures transfer 55 to 62W...."
These guys were NOT even supposed to be looking for a positive energy =
balance at this early stage of a very low budget study.=20
Sounds a lot like how a conservative university experimenter PhD would =
"gently" suggest a most surprising energy anomaly to a bunch of rocket =
scientists!
Regards,
Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C284D4.6A16AF80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
WOW!
This is not yet proof positive, but if you read between the=20
lines, this report says volumes...check out the Balmer line =
broadening...=20
looks like it won't be long before Bob Parks and others will be dining =
on=20
crow....big time.
Also, water bath calorimetry - p.9 Is this OU?
" For a forward microwave power of 70 W and =
reflected=20
power of 16 W" [does this mean a net 54 W?], control gas =
plasmas=20
consistently transfer < 40 W into the water while H2/catalyst mixtures =
transfer 55 to=20
62W...."
These guys were NOT even supposed to be looking for a positive =
energy=20
balance at this early stage of a very low budget study.
Sounds a lot like how a conservative university experimenter=20
PhD would "gently" suggest a most surprising energy anomaly to =
a bunch=20
of rocket scientists!
Regards,
Jones =
Beene
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C284D4.6A16AF80--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 18:19:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01295;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 18:17:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 18:17:47 -0800
Message-ID: <005201c28553$bad50e60$4d58ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <001f01c28517$78957d00$0a016ea8 cpq>
Subject: Re: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 21:16:14 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004F_01C28510.9257E540"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"QoXmC1.0.8K.Al7oz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48221
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_004F_01C28510.9257E540
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This link should get careful study by vortex members. Most of the =
equipment shown is at the BLP laboratories, where work was done by Rowan =
students with the help of BLP staff. Note carefully that evidence for =
anomalous energy production in mixtures of hydrogen and certain noble =
gases was seen before Mills' work, but Mills is the first to give a =
coherent explanation from his CQM theory. There are a number of very =
strongly OU experiments in the papers posted on the BLP website. There =
are serious engineering problems in extracting the energy efficiently =
enough to close the loop so that only water is needed as fuel for =
indefinite energy production.=20
What are most important here are that a) NASA thinks enough of the =
potential to sponsor a $75,000 preliminary study by Rowan University, =
and that b) confirmation of many BLP claims is published as Rowan work. =
Views of the laboratory will show the extensive work that BLP has done =
in mounting experiments.=20
Mike Carrell
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Jones Beene=20
To: vortex=20
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:05 PM
Subject: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
There is an IMPRESSIVE new pdf doc at:
http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/finalpres.pdf
NASA INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED CONCEPTS PHASE I FINAL PRESENTATION =
ATLANTA, GA, OCTOBER 25, 2002
Done by Dr.Marchese et al. at Rowan Engineering College in Joysee
WOW!
This is not yet proof positive, but if you read between the lines, =
this report says volumes...check out the Balmer line broadening... looks =
like it won't be long before Bob Parks and others will be dining on =
crow....big time.=20
Also, water bath calorimetry - p.9 Is this OU?=20
" For a forward microwave power of 70 W and reflected power of 16 W" =
[does this mean a net 54 W?], control gas plasmas consistently transfer =
< 40 W into the water while H2/catalyst mixtures transfer 55 to 62W...."
These guys were NOT even supposed to be looking for a positive energy =
balance at this early stage of a very low budget study.=20
Sounds a lot like how a conservative university experimenter PhD would =
"gently" suggest a most surprising energy anomaly to a bunch of rocket =
scientists!
Regards,
Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C28510.9257E540
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This link should get careful study =
by vortex=20
members. Most of the equipment shown is at the BLP laboratories, where =
work was=20
done by Rowan students with the help of BLP staff. Note carefully that =
evidence=20
for anomalous energy production in mixtures of hydrogen and certain =
noble gases=20
was seen before Mills' work, but Mills is the first to give a coherent=20
explanation from his CQM theory. There are a number of very strongly OU=20
experiments in the papers posted on the BLP website. There are serious=20
engineering problems in extracting the energy efficiently enough to =
close the=20
loop so that only water is needed as fuel for indefinite energy =
production.=20
What are most important here are =
that a) NASA=20
thinks enough of the potential to sponsor a $75,000 preliminary study by =
Rowan=20
University, and that b) confirmation of many BLP claims is published as =
Rowan=20
work. Views of the laboratory will show the extensive work that BLP has =
done in=20
mounting experiments.
Mike Carrell
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, =
2002 2:05=20
PM
Subject: New independent =
confirmation of=20
Mills' hydrino for NASA?
WOW!
This is not yet proof positive, but if you read between the=20
lines, this report says volumes...check out the Balmer line =
broadening...=20
looks like it won't be long before Bob Parks and others will be dining =
on=20
crow....big time.
Also, water bath calorimetry - p.9 Is this OU?
" For a forward microwave power of 70 W =
and=20
reflected power of 16 W" [does this mean a net 54 W?], =
control gas=20
plasmas consistently transfer < 40 W into the water while =
H2/catalyst mixtures =
transfer 55=20
to 62W...."
These guys were NOT even supposed to be looking for a =
positive=20
energy balance at this early stage of a very low budget study.
Sounds a lot like how a conservative university experimenter =
PhD would "gently" suggest a most surprising energy anomaly =
to a=20
bunch of rocket scientists!
Regards,
Jones=20
Beene
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C28510.9257E540--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 20:45:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09502;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 20:44:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 20:44:12 -0800
Message-ID: <3DC89E2F.92D26482 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 06:44:31 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex
Subject: Why plasma appears in the mw oven
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"mE_-D2.0.JK2.Ru9oz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48222
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Hi,
I put small Al foil piece (i.e. 1" x 1", folded a bit) in a glass container and put it inside my mw oven.
When I turned power on, first arcing start on foil, then orange/white plasma develop It look look a fire ball in 1-4 cm diameter (varied on each experiment), and rise slowly or gain some height.
Plasma is sustained as long as mw is on, but I need to turn off because it heat the container and burn the plastic sheet of piece that a cover the container.
Total duration is about 10-20 seconds. Plasma is also noisy and modulated with 50 HZ main power frequency.
I just repeated this experience, and saw the plasma distinctly separate from the al foil at the bottom and elevate of 10cm above. I observed also the al foil is partially burned and a strong metallic odor is present in the container. Plasma can not pass trough this sheet without opening a burned hole
Anybody familiar with such an experiment please explain what happening there.
hamdixzzzzzzz
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 5 22:01:01 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA20782;
Tue, 5 Nov 2002 21:59:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 21:59:51 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <1bd.134b1dd6.2afa0992 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 00:58:42 EST
Subject: Re: Why plasma appears in the mw oven
To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex-l@eskimo.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1bd.134b1dd6.2afa0992_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"s6ibr.0.V45.M_Aoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48223
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
--part1_1bd.134b1dd6.2afa0992_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/5/2002 11:44:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes:
> Anybody familiar with such an experiment please explain what happening there
I believe the interfering scalar microwaves, created cold fusion subnuclear
light explosions in the metal to create the cold and hot light plasma.
Thanks for the idea, I have been looking for a new photonic battery or energy
source.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_1bd.134b1dd6.2afa0992_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/5/2002 11:44:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes:
Anybody familiar with such an experiment please explain what happening there
I believe the interfering scalar microwaves, created cold fusion subnuclear light explosions in the metal to create the cold and hot light plasma. Thanks for the idea, I have been looking for a new photonic battery or energy source.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_1bd.134b1dd6.2afa0992_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 6 10:14:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09290;
Wed, 6 Nov 2002 10:11:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 10:11:50 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <87.23a60e9c.2afab523 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:10:43 EST
Subject: Monopole Quantum Positive Cold Electron Photonic Energy Device
To: aelewis provide.net, thebishop@usadatanet.net, drboylan@sbcglobal.net,
mediator mint.ocn.ne.jp, prj@mail.msen.com, riverwaves7@hotmail.com,
vortex-l eskimo.com, Roundtable7@yahoogroups.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com, tom@rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_87.23a60e9c.2afab523_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"1elpm2.0.0H2.bjLoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48224
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_87.23a60e9c.2afab523_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Monopole Quantum Positive Cold Electron Photonic Energy Device
Metal or Crystal cone to collect photonic light, water, or air<> Converter
(To convert the Hydrogen ions in Water H2, Oxygen ions in Air 02 and Water,
and Photonic light wave ions in Cosmic or Solar light E into positive
particle electron ions to be used for energy or stored as energy ) <>two
holographic wave oscillators(To be used to generate scalar waves to create
cold implosion fusion energy pockets in piece of metal or palladium) to
create high amounts of energy <> Metal/Pallidum <> laser crystal to amplify,
channel, and organized the ions into a powerful energy beam which may be used
to do work to run a motor<> a positive electron energy crank or positive
electron battery to store positive electrons, to get the device running,
which is later recharged by local ions or the metal or palladium fusion<> and
fiber optic or cold electrical positive electron circuits and processing
chips through out the device<> chamber to store unused chemical byproducts
such as water, air, or plasma residue, to be reused later.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_87.23a60e9c.2afab523_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Monopole Quantum Positive Cold Electron Photonic Energy Device
Metal or Crystal cone to collect photonic light, water, or air<> Converter (To convert the Hydrogen ions in Water H2, Oxygen ions in Air 02 and Water, and Photonic light wave ions in Cosmic or Solar light E into positive particle electron ions to be used for energy or stored as energy ) <>two holographic wave oscillators(To be used to generate scalar waves to create cold implosion fusion energy pockets in piece of metal or palladium) to create high amounts of energy <> Metal/Pallidum <> laser crystal to amplify, channel, and organized the ions into a powerful energy beam which may be used to do work to run a motor<> a positive electron energy crank or positive electron battery to store positive electrons, to get the device running, which is later recharged by local ions or the metal or palladium fusion<> and fiber optic or cold electrical positive electron circuits and processing chips through out the device<> chamber to store unused chemical byproducts such as water, air, or plasma residue, to be reused later.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_87.23a60e9c.2afab523_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 6 13:02:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12565;
Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:00:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:00:46 -0800
X-Sent: 6 Nov 2002 21:00:30 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021106155240.02c2b5b8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 16:00:15 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
In-Reply-To: <005201c28553$bad50e60$4d58ccd1 asus>
References: <001f01c28517$78957d00$0a016ea8 cpq>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"DvYUr.0.C43.zBOoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48225
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
This site contains viewgraphs. (I guess they are Powerpoint slides in
modern terminology.) Anyway, the descriptions are kind of telegraphic.
(Reaching back to a 19th century term.)
Mike:
Can you summarize or perhaps simplify some key sections of these
viewgraphs? Tell us what the people from Rowan did. How was it independent
of, and different from, what the BLP people did? Can you address Beene's
question: does p. 9 indicate OU performance?
The presentation was in Atlanta. I wish I had known it was happening. A
lecture or paper would make these viewgraphs easier to understand.
Maybe we can contact the authors, but I would like to understand the
presentation better before trying that.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 6 13:35:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30823;
Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:33:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:33:39 -0800
Message-ID: <3DC98ACA.406E0DDE verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 23:34:02 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
References: <001f01c28517$78957d00$0a016ea8 cpq> <5.1.0.14.2.20021106155240.02c2b5b8@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ndjRz2.0.WX7.pgOoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48226
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Their web pages say the final results will be published at December 1.
Usually, such things never happens, considering positive report of excess energy.
hamdi ucar
Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> This site contains viewgraphs. (I guess they are Powerpoint slides in
> modern terminology.) Anyway, the descriptions are kind of telegraphic.
> (Reaching back to a 19th century term.)
>
> Mike:
>
> Can you summarize or perhaps simplify some key sections of these
> viewgraphs? Tell us what the people from Rowan did. How was it independent
> of, and different from, what the BLP people did? Can you address Beene's
> question: does p. 9 indicate OU performance?
>
> The presentation was in Atlanta. I wish I had known it was happening. A
> lecture or paper would make these viewgraphs easier to understand.
>
> Maybe we can contact the authors, but I would like to understand the
> presentation better before trying that.
>
> - Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 6 19:43:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA04809;
Wed, 6 Nov 2002 19:41:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 19:41:55 -0800
Message-ID: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <001f01c28517$78957d00$0a016ea8 cpq> <5.1.0.14.2.20021106155240.02c2b5b8@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: New independent confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 22:40:18 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ic7vN1.0.3B1.24Uoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48227
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed said:
> This site contains viewgraphs. (I guess they are Powerpoint slides in
> modern terminology.) Anyway, the descriptions are kind of telegraphic.
> (Reaching back to a 19th century term.)
>
> Mike:
>
> Can you summarize or perhaps simplify some key sections of these
> viewgraphs? Tell us what the people from Rowan did. How was it independent
> of, and different from, what the BLP people did? Can you address Beene's
> question: does p. 9 indicate OU performance?
>
> The presentation was in Atlanta. I wish I had known it was happening. A
> lecture or paper would make these viewgraphs easier to understand.
>
> Maybe we can contact the authors, but I would like to understand the
> presentation better before trying that.
In response to Jed's request, and for the benefit of vortexians who have not
been closely following Mills' work (I have), I will try to add some
perspective to the view graphs. They begin with a background of Mills' work.
The third chart titled "Background" is a very important rebuttal to skeptics
who claim that nobody has duplicated the BLP phenomena. The chart is based
on papers recently posted at BLP. It says that when hydrogen is present with
certain noble gases in ionizing discharges (three types), unexpected
spectrograms are seen, sometimes unexplainably bright. Hydrogen emission in
the visible range has a very strong line called the 'alpha' line. Normally,
this line is quite sharp as seen under normal conditions, but in these
instances, the line is significantly broadened. This is attributed to
Doppler shift in the radiation of fast moving hydrogen atoms, indicating
that the plasma is very energetic and very hot. It is a signature of energy
release.
If you measure the relative intensity of lines in the hydrogen spectrum,
they normally bear a predictable relation to each other, the "Boltzmann"
distribution. In these discharges, the distribution is skewed, with more
energy going to wavelengths associated with "excited" states of the atoms th
an to "ground states". This is a precondition for laser action.
Note that these conditions were seen by earlier investigators, before Mills,
but the explanations were convoluted and unsatisfactory.
The fourth "Background" chart lists papers at the BLP website discussing
these phenomena as seen in the course of BLP's experimental program. Many of
the experiments have been done using a quartz tube, a half-inch in diameter,
extending through an "Evanson" cavity coupled to a microwave power
generator. This is standard lab gear for using microwaves to ionize gases
for spectroscopic examination of various kinds. In an number of the
experiments, pure gases are introduced at a controlled flow rate through the
cavity and are pumped out past the cavity. The pressure is quite low, 1 Torr
or less, and the flow rate is about 5 standard cubic centimeters per minute
(sccm). It is important to note that the excited plasma conditions persist
over five cm downstream from the Evanson cavity itself, as can be seen in
several of the photos.
The study objective (chart 4) was to determine whether these BLP reactions
could be the basis for a microthruster design. A limitation to deep space
exploration is the specific impulse of the thruster. Preliminary estimates
by Marchese said: "Preliminary calculations suggest that a BlackLight
Rocket (BLR) engine can achieve performance several orders of magnitude
greater than chemical rocket propulsion (e.g. I_sp > 10,000 s)." There are
no theoretical limits on how much thrust can be produced, as there are with
ion drives.
There are two possibilities: using a BLP reactor to heat a propellant gas,
or to expel the plasma itself through a jet nozzle.
The presentation proceeds with a review and evaluation of experimental data.
The data shown are consistent with results posted in papers on the BLP
website, but there are interesting differences. It is not clear whether
Marchese et. al. are summarizing data given by BLP, or whether they
witnessed experimental runs staged by BLP for their benefit. .
Chart 5 shows typical line broadening data as seen in Mills experiments,
along with an image of the cell in operation. What is dramatically
significant in this case is that the gas in the cell is ***water vapor***.
The pressure, maintained by vacuum pumps, is low enough that water
vaporizes. Microwaves ionize the oxygen to the O++ state, which meets the
criterion as a BLP catalyst, converting hydrogen atoms to hydrinos of
various states of shrinkage, and releasing energy.
Chart 6 is an illustration of what is meant by "population inversion". Note
that the data are for water vapor.
Chart 7 shows apparatus and spectra in the Vacuum Ultra Violet range. It is
from this radiation that the corporate name "Black Light Power" comes. The
wavelength is so short that all materials are opaque to it, so to see it at
all the plasma emits the light through a pinhole in a chamber connected to a
vacuum pump and shines with grazing incidence on a spectrometer grating in a
vacuum chamber. Two features are important about the graphs. The gases in
the microwave cavity are helium with about 2 % hydrogen. Ionized helium is a
BLP catalyst. Very strong heat generation is observed with no possible
combustion, He being chemically inert.
The red curve shows a series of peaks. Such series are unusual, and are
associated with "vibrational" modes -- an electron is oscillating between a
bound and free state in many modes. Mills provides calculation based on
properties of hydrinos which can interact with free electrons, which closely
match the series of wavelengths given. He presents this as objective proof
of the existence of hydrinos.
More recently, and separate from this study, Mills has condensed a gas
from a microwave cell in a liquid nitrogen trap and characterized it by
a number of techniques. It matches no known substance, but is consistent
with a hydrino liquid.
Chart 8 shows one of several methods of calorimetry used to measure the heat
output of microwave plasmas. Basically, the Evanson cavity is made water
tight and the whole apparatus submerged into a water bath, with the rate of
temperature rise taken as a measure of heat output. In the illustration the
cavity is filled with krypton, which is not a BLP catalyst, and run with a
measured power input. Water vapor is used next, with a significantly steeper
heating rate.
The data in this particular run do not support *system* OU, for more energy
goes into the microwave generator than comes out of the cell. The generator
is dumping 70 watts into the cavity and 16 watts are reflected back (these
are readings available from meters on the generator. Ideally the cavity is
tuned to minimize reflected power. So one can say that 54 watts are
dissipated in the cavity to ionize the gas in the cell and heat the metal of
the cavity itself due to various losses. With krypton gas (and other noble
gases not BLP catalysts), about 40 watts is transferred to heat the water
bath. With water vapor, ~63 watts is transferred, so one can see a 63/54
watt OU ratio.
In other papers with the microwave cell and using a H-He+ (2% H) mixture,
300 W thermal output power (the cell temperature reached 900 C) was measured
with 30 W microwave input using one method of calorimetry; in another
experiment, using Calvet calorimetry, 60 W were measured for in a input
power of 22 W. Using the water bath calorimeter, 30 W heat output was
measured for an input microwave power of 8.1 W.
This, and other methods used by Mills are not the very refined methods used
with CF experiments where often the excess heat signal is a fraction of a
watt. In these experiments the power densities are very much higher. In one
experiment, the H-He+ reaction had to be stopped before the quartz tube was
melted.
Details of these experiments are in papers posted on the BLP website. The
point to be taken home is clear evidence that dramatic energy releases are
seen in experiments predicted by BLP catalyst rules. One can quibble with
the refinement of the calorimetry, but the effects are so huge that it is
like quibbling about a house burning down or the sun rising in the morning.
Chart 9 states in brief summary the theoretical core of Mills' work. It
leads to what I have called "Mills Rules" which point to states of atoms
which are BLP catalysts and those which are not. The success rate of these
rules is simply staggering. One can quibble ad nauseum about Mills' theory,
but the success of Mills Rules compels respectful attention.
Chart 10 indicates the basis for a thruster using the excited plasma.
Chart 11 shows two conceptual designs for BLP thrusters in comparison with
other proposals.
Charts 12-16 show the evolution of a thruster design based on an H2/Ne
reactor with DC excitation. The cross section of the apparatus is similar to
that used in other BLP experiments with glow discharges. This is the
beginning of Rowan's direct contribution to the project.
Charts 18 & 19 show steps in developing a nozzle at the end of a microwave
plasma cell.
The remainder of the charts show preparation for future work in a Phase 2
contract. I am told that a more complete report will be published in
December.
It's evident that Marchese had the wholehearted cooperation of BLP and
access to their advice, labs and equipment to do this work. For those who
think that 'nothing is going on' at BLP, they need only to look carefully at
the pictures, which show carefully built and expensive equipment used in
BLP's research work. The plasmas seen are very hot indeed.
Salient points from recent postings include:
Hydrinos are very real. They have distinctive signatures in emitted spectra
where "Mills Rules" apply and are not present where Mills Rules do not
apply. Hydrino gas liquefies at liquid N2 temperature (actual boiling point
still being determined).
Powerful BLP reactions are seen between H and some ionized noble gases (He,
Ar, Ne) but not others.
Powerful BLP reactions can used water vapor as fuel with microwave
ionization of O. Powerful hydrogen lasers operating at wavelengths from the
UV to IR are possibilities.
Direct extraction of electrical energy from the plasma has been demonstrated
on a small scale. BLP is very quiet about techniques for scale up, which may
have formidable engineering problems. Discussions of applications in the
Company Description indicate commercial viability without necessarily
"closing the loop" so a system runs indefinitely exclusively on water input.
The point is that BLP processes can extract much more energy from hydrogen
than any competition. Therefore it doesn't have to be "self sustaining" to
be competitive, or to be "real".
I hope this commentary is helpful to vortexians in understanding the Rowan
BlackLight Power Rocket Engine. I will field questions as they may arise.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 07:32:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18212;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:29:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:29:52 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Podkletnov anti-grav in Slate
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:33:43 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
Cc: Tim Ventura ,
Eugene Podkletnov
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021018135106.03f3a440 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <3DB164F0.340170F9@verisoft.com.tr>
In-Reply-To: <3DB164F0.340170F9 verisoft.com.tr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200211071033.43830.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA18169
Resent-Message-ID: <"Qv-CP3.0.PS4.mReoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48228
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
On Saturday 19 October 2002 09:58, hamdi ucar wrote:
> Dear Jed and all,
>
> Podkletnov does not advertising his work (except a "mistake" at 1995). It is
easy to dismiss it after 7 years. Podkletnov's work does not take attention
of scientific communities, no significant papers so far is published
investigation the phenomenon or on conditions leading to phenomenon. This is
important.
>
> Interest to Podkletnov work comes mainly from industrial or military sectors
so far but not from scientific communities. I understand that Podkletnov is
not cooperative on replication on his experiment by other parties, but one
should not accuse a scientist for his policy on use his discovery on non
scientific purposes. "non scientific" Term used here is correct IMO, because
NASA for example did not released their findings on recent moon eclipse
anomaly, and there would be more examples where NASA not satisfy scientific
requirements. Either Boeing is working routinely on classified projects and
obviously can not disclose their scientific findings. They are not scientific
institutions.
>
> On the other hand papers released by Podkletnov and Modanese appears having
sufficient information and details for scientific investigation of the effect
if not, for total replication of his experiments. So I think Podkletnov
satisfy completely scientific criteria and his scientific responsibility.
>
> In this circumstance it is hard to understand why people express their
negative opinions on Podkletnov work even without an occasion.
>
>
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Good summary. See:
> >
> > http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2072733
> >
> > - JR
>
> Regards,
>
> hamdi ucar
>
>
>you have that one right. Years ago, a scientist named Davis who worked
out of a college in Florida postulated a theory generally called 'Davis
Mechanics'. It was published once in a magazine and then promptly sank
out of sight. That was in 1972. Some years back the main gun on the
Abrams tank was referred to cryptically as a 'Davis' Gun. The same principle
would apply as Davis mechanics referred to another term that should
be in the force equation that refers to the effects of relative change of
acceleration. It is also the principle of nail guns. Too many coincidences
to be 'just a guy named Davis'.
Yakov
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 09:34:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA20117;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 09:31:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 09:31:30 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Nov 2002 17:31:21 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107122658.03266c28 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 12:31:22 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Help correct Google
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-yDds1.0.3w4.mDgoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48229
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
This is a strange request, but I would appreciate it if several people
would click here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=iccf10
. . . and select the 4th item on the list "ICCF10"
DO NOT select the first item on the list.
Google lists by popularity, and the first item has an incorrect, out of
date URL. (Don't click it to see what I mean!) I asked the author to fix it
but he did not. It will not take many people to shift the popularity vote
to the fourth item. The same person clicking over and over again does not
do the job. Goggle has programmed that not to work because people promote
their own sites by doing it with a robot.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 09:52:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA31294;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 09:51:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 09:51:04 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCAA81E.C8A7FCFB verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 19:51:26 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Help correct Google
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107122658.03266c28 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"P4FVk1.0.pe7.8Wgoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48230
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
The problem here is not related to popularity but the search keyword, IMO.
If one search "ICCF-10" instead of "ICCF10" on Google, correct site come first.
Regards,
hamdi ucar
Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> This is a strange request, but I would appreciate it if several people
> would click here:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=iccf10
>
> . . . and select the 4th item on the list "ICCF10"
>
> DO NOT select the first item on the list.
>
> Google lists by popularity, and the first item has an incorrect, out of
> date URL. (Don't click it to see what I mean!) I asked the author to fix it
> but he did not. It will not take many people to shift the popularity vote
> to the fourth item. The same person clicking over and over again does not
> do the job. Goggle has programmed that not to work because people promote
> their own sites by doing it with a robot.
>
> - Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 10:18:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13056;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:16:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:16:57 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Nov 2002 18:16:49 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107130331.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:12:07 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Help correct Google
In-Reply-To: <3DCAA81E.C8A7FCFB verisoft.com.tr>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107122658.03266c28 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"I-jx_1.0.vB3.Pugoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48231
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
hamdi ucar wrote:
>The problem here is not related to popularity but the search keyword, IMO.
>
>If one search "ICCF-10" instead of "ICCF10" on Google, correct site come
>first.
Yes, but if many people search for "ICCF10" and select item 4, that will
also work correctly. (That is, it will push #4 to position #1.)
The Googlebot visited LENR-CANR.org the other day, showing up 129 times
strangely enough. It inflated our visitor count. I do not think it
downloaded the papers, since some of them had zero access counts that day.
Maybe it comes in once for each HTML file? I doubt we are linked by 129
other sites.
I forgot to upload a dreadful paper by Jones paper from Accountability in
Research. I just uploaded it today, along with good stuff from Cellucci and
Cisbani.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 10:57:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01306;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:52:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:52:57 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Nov 2002 18:52:39 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107135108.0330e310 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:52:35 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Gozzi paper too
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"45qUF2.0.8K.8Qhoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48232
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Also I just uploaded a paper by Gozzi, similar to Cellucci, but with more
detail and more figures. About x-rays, to which more attention should be
paid, I think.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 12:04:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07027;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:01:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:01:53 -0800
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:02:34 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer
To: Mike Carrell
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
In-Reply-To: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"g1o5J1.0.jj1.mQioz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48233
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Dear Vo.,
A brief note on line width. In part of the comment of posted
papers a hydrogen and inert gas mixture plasma exhibited spectral line
width broadening.
Unless one knows the specifics of the plasma and the experimental
set up it is possible line width broadening being equated with "extra"
energy may be a leap at a conclusion.
In moderate to strong magnetic fields the spectral line broadening
can also be exhibited. An example where this may occur in plasma is found
as a result of magnetic fields caused by current flow in both DC, AC and
all the way to and through microwave driven and Inductively coupled
plasmas.
Not to toss a wrench in the data, per se, the point is one should
be aware of and have access to all of the experimental set up details so
one may first cast out all known effects, then such artifact as can be
determined and THEN one may theorize line broadening is the result of
"XXX" effect of property.
Is cannot be stressed to frequently in view of many "Quantum
Theory" based "explanations" of various effects:
Quantum Theory is Therory, mathematical theory that permits one to
predict the behavior of SOME atomic and sub atomic particles in SOME
cases, SOME of the time IF one adheres to certain specific mathematic
parameters and rules and guidelines. Quantum Theory is NOT physical law
or rule. It IS useful, but it is NOT the do all end all be all.
JH
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 12:17:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA13921;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:14:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:14:05 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Nov 2002 20:14:00 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107151229.03305f50 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 15:14:02 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: ICCF10.org is off line
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"7H59t1.0.MP3.Ccioz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48234
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
ICCF10 dropped off line for some reason. I hope the ISP clears up the
problem. The "correct Google" procedure I mentioned will produce a "cannot
find server" message.
It was there this morning!
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 15:05:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA01875;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:04:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:04:04 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Nov 2002 23:04:00 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 18:03:50 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
In-Reply-To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"JUrT7.0.DT.Z5loz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48235
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
John Schnurer wrote:
> A brief note on line width. In part of the comment of posted
>papers a hydrogen and inert gas mixture plasma exhibited spectral line
>width broadening.
> Unless one knows the specifics of the plasma and the experimental
>set up it is possible line width broadening being equated with "extra"
>energy may be a leap at a conclusion.
In that case the calorimetry described in Fig. 9 is critical. It is
sketchy, and a lot can go wrong with calorimetry. It reminds me a little of
the techniques Mills used years ago at Thermacore. They were not bad, but
the scale was large and the technique was crude, making it difficult to judge.
I have been staring at the graph in Fig. 9 for some time, which is
puzzling. Why did they start at two different temperatures? Perhaps there
is a good reason . . . The second curve, for H2O goes from 23 to 25 deg C.
It is obviously steeper, and if anything it should flatten out a little as
the temperature rises, so that does indicate excess heat. But I hope they
have a lot more data where that came from.
I do not understand the caption either. It says they immersed the Evenson
cavity and plasma tube in the water bath. Those most be the two gadgets
placed on top of the bath for the photo. If they are both immersed, this
sentence in the caption does not compute:
"For a forward microwave power of 70 W and reflected power of 16 W, control
gas plasma is consistently transfer less than 40 watts into the water while
H2/catalysts mixtures transfer 55 to 62 W."
How can you tell what goes forward and what is reflected? Everything is in
the same bath.
I am not arguing with the technique. It is a good idea to immerse
everything. Trouble will arise when you must make assumptions about
microwave generator efficiency, or when you have to measure some fraction
of the input power separately -- in two stages. Roger Stringham got into
trouble with his ultrasound generators because he was forced to measure
power in two stages. He thought there was excess heat, but improved
calorimetry performed by Mallove et al. showed that Stringham probably did
not accurately measure how much electricity converts into ultrasound.
That sentence seems to imply they break out or estimate the "forward power"
somehow. In that case, the excess is an extrapolation which would make me
nervous.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 15:29:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16932;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:27:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:27:44 -0800
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 15:23:49 -0800
From: Jones Beene
Subject: Re: Gozzi paper too
To: vortex
Message-id: <004701c286b4$bae377e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107135108.0330e310 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"OGHXM2.0.U84.mRloz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48236
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
From: "Jed Rothwell"
> Also I just uploaded a paper by Gozzi, similar to Cellucci, but with more
> detail and more figures. About x-rays, to which more attention should be
> paid, I think.
Amen. Too few studies have emphasized x-rays, but his one goes right to the
heart of the matter. The Italians seem to have discovered a "silver bullet."
This is another extraordinary paper because, like the Naval China Lake work, the
evidence that is presented here for reactions other than normal chemical
reactions (i.e. nuclear or supra-chemical) is almost unassailable. When x-rays
are present, most of the skeptics with their alternative explanations for helium
and excess heat (like contamination) begin to sound very foolish indeed.
As the author carefully states his case (slightly reworded) "Can a simple
chemical process like the loading of deuterium into the Pd lattice, whose energy
is 0.1 eV per cm3, produce X-ray emission or other nuclear products at ten of
keV or some MeV?
The answer is, based on the chemistry we know, NO!
But the explanation is hard to find anywhere in our current knowledge of
physics."
Right on.
Unfortunately, the further explanation by the Gozzi group for the precise avenue
for the findings IMO does not seem to represent the most probably scenario -
that is, for the eventual ~89 keV photons, which should be regarded as proof or
something non-chemical. They state:
"A working hypothesis to find an explanation for this, could be found on the
following
nuclear process:
46Pd105 + alpha > 48Cd109 100%,EC,453d
48Cd109 > 47Ag109m [88.03keV} >47Ag109
where the stable isotope 105 of Pd (natural abundance22.33%) captures the alphas
produced by the d,d fusion, generating the Cd isotope 109.
Note: In contrast to the findings of Storms et al. they find little evidence of
fusion within the Pd lattice and seem to be content to accept that it can occur
externally in the electrolyte or right on the interface but not necessarily
interior - and do not even mention the possibility that the alphas could come
from alpha decay following neutron capture.
This 109 nuclide that they have identified is unstable and by electron capture
transforms with a halftime of 453 days in the metastable isotope [i.e. isomer]
109 of Silver. But problem #1 is that this half-life is too long.
The second problem, huge problem (insurmountable really) for this particular
explanation is that the cross-section of 105Pd for alphas is extremely low.
However there are a number of alternative scenarios that may accomplish the same
thing and , even though not without controversy of their own, but the
alternative dynamics should be considered since we must accept that 109 Ag
isomer is a likely step because of the unusual x-ray.
There is a 108Pd isotope that is ~12% natural abundance, AND it has a very high
cross section for neutrons of moderate energy AND it would give you the same 109
Ag isotope on beta decay.
Getting to 109 Ag is a key to this puzzle but how you get there is the problem,
and also one needs to ask if the necessary metastable isomer stage is always
seen. Gozzi probably balked at 109 Ag via 108 Pd because he isn't seeing many
free neutrons, but there's an elegant way to explain that too : tunneling.
Where would the neutron come from specifically? There are three overlapping
possibilities and they highlight a major problem of CF dynamics, because these
explanations aren't well known or widely accepted either. One involves neutron
"stripping," one involves deuteron tunneling and the last involves deuteron
(deuterino) shrinkage.
I wish/hope Gozzi et al. will have the opportunity to firm up the finding in the
future by being able to test the various isotopes in question again against this
experiment, using this one as the control. If a cathode enriched in 108 Pd
performed better than one enriched in 105, then the answer about the precise
mechanics would be clearer.
Unfortunately getting hold of such isotopes would probably be very expensive.
And even so, it would only explain this unique setup.
The Naval lab results, however similar in outward appearance, are very different
in some aspects and have very different dynamics, especially the x-ray
signature, which is at ~21 keV and likely is a k-shell interaction.
Cold fusion is beginning to look like a patchwork quilt with numerous different
panels that can interlock, such that the end result, excess heat, is often the
only thing they really have in common.
Regards,
Jones Beene
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 17:01:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02642;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:59:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:59:45 -0800
Message-ID: <20021108005912.80258.qmail web40401.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:59:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Iz5oC.0.Bf.0omoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48237
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell infinite-energy.com> wrote:
> John Schnurer wrote:
>
> In that case the calorimetry described in Fig. 9 is critical. It is
> sketchy, and a lot can go wrong with calorimetry. It reminds me a
> little of
> the techniques Mills used years ago at Thermacore. They were not
bad,
> but
> the scale was large and the technique was crude, making it difficult
to
> judge.
>
Yes it can be tricky. Many times I will choose a more 'crude' method
because it is trusted. New does not always mean better or even good.
=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 7 20:42:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA05266;
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 20:40:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 20:40:56 -0800
Message-ID: <005101c286fa$0f727320$dd4eccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 23:40:02 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"c5myM3.0.8I1.O1qoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48238
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed wrote:
> John Schnurer wrote:
>
> > A brief note on line width. In part of the comment of posted
> >papers a hydrogen and inert gas mixture plasma exhibited spectral line
> >width broadening.
> > Unless one knows the specifics of the plasma and the
experimental
> >set up it is possible line width broadening being equated with "extra"
> >energy may be a leap at a conclusion.
>
> In that case the calorimetry described in Fig. 9 is critical.
No, it's not, Jed, in the context. John raised his point to show that one
has to look at the whole picture, and my response to the point is that one
has to look at the whole picture. Look at the paper "Plasma Power Source
Based on a Catalytic Reaction of atomic Hydrogen Measured by Water Bath
Calorimetry" on the BLP website. There you will find details and another run
using H/Kr as a control and H-He+ as the active reaction. While you are at
it, also look at "New Power Source from Fractional Quatum energy Levels of
Atomic Hydrogen that Surpasses Internal Combustion" and "Plasma Power Source
Based on a Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen".
You will see that all papers deal with several methods of calorimetry
applied to the H-He+ reaction using the Evanson cavity. This reaction is so
improbable (He getting energy from H?) and so powerful that Mills used five
different methods of calorimetry to estimate the energy output. When you
realize that the primary energy is deep UV radiation, you can begin to
understand the problem of energy extraction.
Now you've had many years in the trenches with calorimetry and none of these
setups would be impressive were Mills dealing with fractions of a watt of OU
energy. It's more like trying to measure the energy of a burning house. You
have to recalibrate yourself.
The water vapor reaction was disclosed after the above cited papers were
released, so the Rowan experiments used water vapor in the submerged cell
instead of the H-He mixture, giving somewhat different results.
The only important issue is that H with catalysts does something different
than H without catalysts.
It is
> sketchy, and a lot can go wrong with calorimetry. It reminds me a little
of
> the techniques Mills used years ago at Thermacore. They were not bad, but
> the scale was large and the technique was crude, making it difficult to
judge.
The scale is so large that the crudenss of the method is not an issue.
>
> I have been staring at the graph in Fig. 9 for some time, which is
> puzzling. Why did they start at two different temperatures? Perhaps there
> is a good reason . . . The second curve, for H2O goes from 23 to 25 deg C.
> It is obviously steeper, and if anything it should flatten out a little as
> the temperature rises, so that does indicate excess heat. But I hope they
> have a lot more data where that came from.
See the papers I have referenced above. Don't get bogged down in the details
beyond seeing that everything is described, etc. Look at the setup
schematics and the thermal data. Don't bother with the spectra.
>
> I do not understand the caption either. It says they immersed the Evenson
> cavity and plasma tube in the water bath. Those most be the two gadgets
> placed on top of the bath for the photo.
This is the drive for the stirrer. The cavity is submerged and not visible.
If they are both immersed, this
> sentence in the caption does not compute:
>
> "For a forward microwave power of 70 W and reflected power of 16 W,
control
> gas plasma is consistently transfer less than 40 watts into the water
while
> H2/catalysts mixtures transfer 55 to 62 W."
>
> How can you tell what goes forward and what is reflected? Everything is in
> the same bath.
You are unfamiliar with microwave technology. The Evanson cavity and the
connecting cable form a resonant circuit with the generator inside the box.
The generator frequency is fixed. The cavity must be "tuned" for optimum
power transfer, but this is not always possible, so some of the energy put
out is "reflected" back into the generator. It is equivalent to "reactive
power" in utility systems. The generator box has circuits to measure the
reflected power and one tunes the system to minimize it. Having done the
best you can, you had a way of estimating the power actually dissipated in
the load.
>
> I am not arguing with the technique. It is a good idea to immerse
> everything. Trouble will arise when you must make assumptions about
> microwave generator efficiency, or when you have to measure some fraction
> of the input power separately -- in two stages.
See above.
Roger Stringham got into
> trouble with his ultrasound generators because he was forced to measure
> power in two stages. He thought there was excess heat, but improved
> calorimetry performed by Mallove et al. showed that Stringham probably did
> not accurately measure how much electricity converts into ultrasound.
>
> That sentence seems to imply they break out or estimate the "forward
power"
> somehow. In that case, the excess is an extrapolation which would make me
> nervous.
See above and don't be nervous. Excess heat in a CF sense is not the issue
here. Far more significant physically is the Balmer line broadening and
Mills has taken pains to demonstrated that the effect is real and not an
artifact. It is a direct measure of the temperature of hydrogen atoms
undergoing the BLP catalyst reaction. The implied temperature is >> 10,000 C
in a rarefied gas.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 06:19:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA27008;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:16:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:16:25 -0800
Message-ID: <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:15:26 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"MRty_1.0.wb6.vSyoz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48239
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed wrote:
> In that case the calorimetry described in Fig. 9 is critical. It is
> sketchy, and a lot can go wrong with calorimetry. It reminds me a little
of
> the techniques Mills used years ago at Thermacore. They were not bad, but
> the scale was large and the technique was crude, making it difficult to
judge.
>
> I have been staring at the graph in Fig. 9 for some time, which is
> puzzling. Why did they start at two different temperatures? Perhaps there
> is a good reason . . . The second curve, for H2O goes from 23 to 25 deg C.
> It is obviously steeper, and if anything it should flatten out a little as
> the temperature rises, so that does indicate excess heat. But I hope they
> have a lot more data where that came from.
There is an easy explanation,which I had overlooked. The experiment
consists of running a quartz or glass tube through an Evanson Cavity,
waterproofing the assembly, and dunking it in a water bath. Gas still flows
into the tube from the outside and the outflow is into a vacuum pump. There
are lots of heat paths in and out, unlike calorimetry associated with CF
experiments.
A baseline is established by first flowing Kr, which ionizes and produces
heat, but is not a BLP catalyst. This calibrates the system, heating up the
water meanwhile. Then water vapor is admitted, which does undergo a BLP
reaction. There is a short time for the gases to change over, then the
temperature rise continues at a higher slope due to the energy released by
the water vapor reaction.
One could ask for a standard Joule heater, a calibrated resistor, but the
point here is not absolute calorimetry but clear demonstration that with the
same apparatus and nothing changed but the gas mixtures, something
significant happens with water vapor.
No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 08:35:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA17747;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:32:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:32:48 -0800
X-Sent: 8 Nov 2002 16:32:37 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108112207.02cca6a0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 11:32:36 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Hysterical machine translation Re: workshop TESMI
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"0htSf.0.DL4.lS-oz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48240
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
There will be a CF conference in Italy on Dec. 6 - 7. I will post
information about it here and at LENR-CANR later. Anyway, I just received a
message about it in Italian, as follows:
>Oggetto: workshop TESMI
>
>Cari colleghi, finalmente siamo riusciti ad organizzare un incontro
>scientifico sugli aspetti speriemtali dei metalli caricati con idrogeno.
>Tutte le informazioni le troverete nel file allegato e per quelle mancanti
>potete contattare il sottoscritto o la segreteria scientifica.
The machine translation utility here:
http://babel.altavista.com/tr
rendered this as:
"Beloveds connect, finally are resolutions to organize a scientific
encounter on the speriemtali aspects of the metals load to you with
hydrogen. All the information you will find to them in the rows attached
and for those lacking you can contact the undersigned or the scientific
secretariat."
That is almost as bad as their Japanese - English translations.
Here is a sentence from http://www.frascati.enea.it/nhe/. Babblefish did
better, mainly because it threw in the towel and did not try to translate
"calorimetric" or "electrolytic."
"misure calorimetriche per verificare la produzione di eccesso di calore in
celle elettrolitiche in acqua "pesante" (D2O) con catodi di Palladio"
"calorimetriche measures in order to verify the production of excess of
heat in elettrolitiche cells in "heavy" water (D2O) with Palladium cathodes."
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 10:40:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25178;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:36:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:36:57 -0800
X-Sent: 8 Nov 2002 18:36:48 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108133650.02c77e98 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 13:36:53 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Workshop TESMI
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 KAA25113
Resent-Message-ID: <"pFd2-1.0.K96.8H0pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48241
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
The Italians sent me an announcement in Italian, in an image file. I have
noticed that several of their web sites are image files instead of text.
Anyway, See:
http://lenr-canr.org/Features.htm#WorkshopTESMI
http://lenr-canr.org/TESMI.htm
Announcement
Workshop TESMI Tecniche ed Esperimenti in Sistemi Metallo-Idrogeno
Lecce, Italy, December 6 2, 2002
Twenty researchers are expected to attend from the INFN; ENEA; Pirelli; ST
Semiconductors; Univ. Bologna, Siena, Cagliari, Lecce and elsewhere.
See attached announcement (in Italian).
Local organizer:
Prof. Vincenzo Nassisi
Dipartimento di Fisica
Università di Lecce
Via per Arnesano C.P. 193
73100 LECCE-Italy
Tel. +39 0832 320495/482
Fax +39 0832 320484/505
Email: vincenzo.nassisi le.infn.it
http://www.fisica.unile.it/EleApp/
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 12:49:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10199;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 12:46:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 12:46:37 -0800
X-Sent: 8 Nov 2002 20:46:26 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108140051.02cbb5c8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 15:12:13 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
In-Reply-To: <005101c286fa$0f727320$dd4eccd1 asus>
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
<5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
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 MAA10093
Resent-Message-ID: <"XZEi01.0.8V2.jA2pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48242
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Mike Carrell wrote:
>The scale is so large that the crudenss of the method is not an issue.
That's what Stringham thought, but he was wrong.
On the calorimetry side, they claim 1 watt accuracy, which is a modest &
believable. They seem to be getting 16 ~ 22 watts excess. That is a large
enough multiple to give confidence in the output. Input power is the only
open question.
>You are unfamiliar with microwave technology. The Evanson cavity and the
>connecting cable form a resonant circuit with the generator inside the
>box. The generator frequency is fixed. The cavity must be "tuned" for
>optimum power transfer, but this is not always possible, so some of the
>energy put out is "reflected" back into the generator. It is equivalent to
>"reactive power" in utility systems.
It sounds like the power factor correction with an AC motor. I hope they
measure it right.
Does anyone know how this is measured? How difficult is it? Can the
fraction of reflected power be influenced by the choice of gas in the
reaction chamber?
For this to be a mistake, they would inputting 85 watts electricity, 55 W
are reflected back, but they think 77 W is coming back instead. (See the
numbers at the end of this message.)
It does not matter how many different calorimeter types they use (Seebeck,
flow, a bomb calorimeter). If every test configuration depends on the same
input correction, using the same instrument, they have effectively done
only one kind of calorimetry. They are in the same position as Mizuno with
glow discharge. All methods of measuring output agree, but the only likely
source of error is on the input side anyway. Mizuno spent ~$16,000 for a
meter, which works right as far as anyone can tell.
>Far more significant physically is the Balmer line broadening and
>Mills has taken pains to demonstrated that the effect is real and not an
>artifact.
I cannot judge that. John Schnurer seems to think there may be room for
error there. Perhaps he needs to look at it more closely.
The gadget need not be self sustaining to prove that it works, but some
aspects of the calorimetry should make people nervous, even though 22 watts
excess seems huge. It is not so huge when you start to talk about an open
system with gas flowing through and "lots of heat paths in and out."
This paper, mentioned by Carrell:
http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/technical/WaterBathThermCalor.pdf
. . . describes more or less conventional calorimetry with a calibration by
joule heater in 45 liters (!) of distilled water. It says:
"The heat capacity was determined for several input powers, 30, 40, and 50
W ± 0.01 W, and was found to be independent of input power over this power
range within ± 0.05%." (p. 6)
±0.01 W input power I can believe, but ±0.05% is ridiculous, even for a
calibration with a joule heater. That would make it better than McKubre's
calorimeter, which is rated at ±0.1 (ICCF-2, p. 442). On the same page they
claim the accuracy with the live plasma gadget is 1%. The excess is roughly
20 to 24% of total input power (forward and reactive), about the same as
McKubre on a usual day when excess was being generated. Power levels are
about an order of magnitude greater: Mills, 85 watts in, 107 out (p. 3,
Fig. 11); McKubre, 10 watts in, 11 or 12 watts out (p. 440, 441).
There is not much discussion of the calorimetry in the Mills paper. Fig. 10
shows a highly massaged heating slope. It takes 100 minutes for the water
to heat up 1 deg. That's slow! But the speed does not matter, because they
compute heat output from the slope, not the final, steady state
temperature. After 120 minutes it reaches a final temperature and the
experiment has to stop. Fig. 11 shows a comparison of Kr (control) and
H2+He gas (a mixture), similar to the Marchese graph, but the excess looks
more dramatic:
"The microwave input power was determined to be 8.1 ± 1 W. A
helium-hydrogen (90/10%) mixture was run at identical microwave input power
readings as the control, and the excess power was determined to be 21.9 ± 1
W from the T (t) response."
If the 8.1 W is right, and it isn't accidentally 30.0 W forward, it is
remarkable. This paper does not describe input power measurement.
Perhaps they should dunk the whole power supply in the bath too. It can
handle 85 watts.
I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of these
people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it seems
insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive. Suppose I had a gadget like
this, and I was convinced it was outputting 20 watt excess -- even with 85
watts input. I would push aside the "forward" and "reflected" power issue
by immersing the whole kit-and-caboodle. Then I would manufacture 100,000
of things and sell them at cost or give them away, and convince every
person on earth it is real. A few years later I would be richer than Bill
Gates and Saddam Hussein combined, and the only person in history to win
three Nobel prizes in one year. What more can a person want? Why piddle
around with a 2-bit $75,000 NASA study? Who gives a damn about spectral
lines?!? Demonstrate 20 watts of useful power and Wall Street would give
you a $1 billion for 1%. You would have 50,000 research projects underway
simultaneously at every major corporation and university on earth.
I expect Mills does not want that -- or he thinks he does not. The leading
role in the research would be snatched out of his hands. He would be left
behind, just as the Wright brothers were after they went public in 1908,
and Shockley was after 1958. Pioneers seldom bring discoveries to fruition.
They have the wrong temperament. Many CF researchers and OU fringe
researchers want more than anything to dominate the research themselves,
even if it means they will go to their graves without recognition and the
discovery will be lost.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 13:52:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18347;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:50:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:50:28 -0800
Message-ID: <20021108214949.44638.qmail web40414.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:49:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108140051.02cbb5c8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"sly043.0.XU4.Z63pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48244
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--- Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Does anyone know how this is measured? How difficult is it? Can the
> fraction of reflected power be influenced by the choice of gas in the
> reaction chamber?
>
There are several measurement methods. All of them require some good
math after the measurement to determine the actual reflected power 'along
a given vector'. Also this is altered by the shape of the reflecting
surface. Iregular shapes can scatter or concentrate reflected energy.
(like pointing a LASER at a wad of foil.) one must there be sure the
target surface is reular or measure all of the reflected energy. It is
very much like LASER lite.
Also if the medium is water the water must be absolutely pure. ANY
inpurities will allow microwave adsorption.
It is possible that this process was not documented in the presentation
because it can be quite complex.
Is there evidance of fusion products in the exaust?
=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 13:56:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17000;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:47:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:47:49 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCC31E5.3979B556 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 13:51:33 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW Friday, 08 Nov 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"CnmnD3.0.W94.543pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48243
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 Friday, 08 Nov 02
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:52:13 -0500
From: "What's New"
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New"
WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 08 Nov 02 Washington,
DC
1. CLIMATE CHANGE: ABOUT THAT BEACH-FRONT PROPERTY YOU BOUGHT...
Unlike previous climate talks, the talks in New Delhi, which ended
last
Friday,
addressed ways of coping with a warmer world in addition to emission
controls (WN 25
Oct 02). Both are needed. No matter what we do to limit emissions,
climate change
models predict continued warming for maybe 100 years from gases we've
already put in
the atmosphere. So what became of the Climate Change Vulnerability and
Resilience
Program, introduced by Rep. J.C. Watts, Jr. (WN 14 Jun 02)? It had
seemed like a
sure thing: the Oklahoma congressman was chair of the powerful House
Republican
Conference, and because the bill didn't call for increased regulation,
it
attracted industry
backers. But a month later, Watts announced he was not running for
reelection. His
phone stopped ringing, and his bill disappeared from the agenda.
Emissions must
eventually be cut, of course, and the Bush Administration is pursuing a
program of
"voluntary reductions" by industry. But meanwhile, you might want to
think about
moving the sump pump from the basement to the first floor.
2. IRRADIATED MEAT: RISK PERCEPTION AND THE AMERICAN HAMBURGER.
Several grocery chains are gambling that consumers, spooked by recent
outbreaks of
illness and death from E.coli and listeria bacteria, may at last be
ready
to try irradiated
ground beef. Past attempts to introduce consumers to irradiated foods
fell victim to the
exaggerated fear of anything "atomic," but the two largest meat recalls
in
history may
have changed that. The supermarket experiment will test whether the
very
real risk of
bacterial contamination can overcome the public's irrational fear of
radiation.
3. NASA: BOOK WILL CLAIM AMERICAN ASTRONAUTS LANDED ON THE
MOON. While half the population is convinced Earth is being visited by
space aliens
who have mastered faster-than light travel, others are equally convinced
that we
humans never even made it as far as the moon. The problem, if it is a
problem, got a
lot worse after the Fox television network aired "Conspiracy Theory: Did
We Land on
the Moon?" last year. Maybe it was put together by the same people who
fabricated
"Alien Autopsy" (WN 11 Dec 98). NASA revealed its incredibly thin skin,
hiring
aeronautics engineer James Oberg to write a monograph that will say we
really did land
on the moon. Well that should settle it. What a headline it will make:
"NASA Finds
Astronauts Landed on the Moon in 1969."
4. THE SNIPERS: THE THIN VENEER OF CIVILIZATION. Six states and the
District
of Columbia have been locked in an appalling struggle over which would
get
to carry out
the executions. The referee was Attorney General John Ashcroft.
Virginia
won the
honor hands down. Not only has Virginia conducted more executions than
any
other
state except Texas, it has an impressive record of trying teenagers as
adults.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY.
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or
the American Physical Society, but they should be.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as:
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 14:25:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03099;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:23:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:23:48 -0800
X-Sent: 8 Nov 2002 22:23:43 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108163646.02c77e98 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 16:57:05 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: LENR-CANR.org stats
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"I_8wd1.0.Lm.qb3pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48245
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
LENR-CANR was forced to change names and ISPs three times, wandering around
the Internet like the Flying Dutchman. It has now settled in Earthlink for
a month. Between Oct. 8, 2002 and Sept. 7, 2002 it received:
2,105 visits, 70 per day average
2,488 Acrobat files were downloaded from the library
687 MB of data were transferred
The weekly total of papers downloaded has been trending upward from ~400
the first two weeks, 566 last week, to 696 over the past 7 days (Friday
through Thursday). There are more papers to choose from than there were
initially.
In most other fields these numbers would be considered modest, but in cold
fusion I doubt this many papers have been distributed over the past six
years. I expect many of the copies people have downloaded are being passed
around. I hope that researchers continue to send me papers, photographs and
other material, so that we can attract more readers.
There are now over 90 papers in the library. Two or three are negative,
written by well-known flakes. A few others are neutral. We welcome all
contributions but I doubt the "skeptics" have anything more to say. Even on
sci.physics.fusion they are absent these days. They have either lost
interest or dropped dead. Either development is welcome. Cold fusion is not
likely to make progress until the irrational, hysterical opposition to it
dissipates.
For years I have urged people to read the literature. Unfortunately, many
people have not been able to read it, because the ICCF proceedings are out
of print and journal papers are difficult to get. I am pleased that I
finally have the opportunity to help bring the literature to the readers. I
have often urged the "skeptics" to read the literature, but of course they
never did and they never will. Several people, including me, have literally
placed papers in Robert Parks' hands, but he refuses to take them. As
Schiller said, "Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain."
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 15:21:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA30114;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 15:17:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 15:17:59 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 10:17:20 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus>
In-Reply-To: <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1 asus>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 PAA30064
Resent-Message-ID: <"HZolD2.0.RM7.cO4pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48246
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, 8 Nov 2002 09:15:26 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
>water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
>
>Mike Carrell
>
Note that Stanley Meyer was also using water vapour and microwaves.
He just didn't know where the energy was coming from.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 18:05:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA15748;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:02:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:02:48 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021108173655.019edf60 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 18:01:09 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek
Subject: Re: LENR-CANR.org stats
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021108163646.02c77e98 mail.DIRECTVInternet.co
m>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=====================_27589942==.ALT"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ikYug1.0.ur3.8p6pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48248
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
--=====================_27589942==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Jed:
Congratulations on your successful efforts with
www.lenr-canr.org . The Internet is an
amazingly powerful tool which can be used to accomplish great and highly
leveraged achievements. At present, a single person now has the same
capacity to reach what previously only the largest multinational media
corporations could. THIS is power! I am hopeful that your site, as well
as mine at
www.coldfusioninfo.com,
will facilitate broad dissemination of this vital information and attract
the people and resources necessary to expedite the energy revolution.
Best Regards,
Steve Krivit
--=====================_27589942==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Jed:
Congratulations on your successful efforts with
www.lenr-canr.org .
The Internet is an amazingly powerful tool which can be used to
accomplish great and highly leveraged achievements. At present, a
single person now has the same capacity to reach what previously only the
largest multinational media corporations could. THIS is
power! I am hopeful that your site, as well as mine at
www.coldfusioninfo.com,
will facilitate broad dissemination of this vital information and attract
the people and resources necessary to expedite the energy
revolution.
Best Regards,
Steve Krivit
--=====================_27589942==.ALT--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 18:05:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14195;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 17:58:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 17:58:34 -0800
Message-ID: <005c01c287ac$89f2a360$3f5bccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021108140051.02cbb5c8@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 20:55:14 -0800
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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"IDaaI2.0.jT3.9l6pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48247
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Jed wrote:
> Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> >The scale is so large that the crudenss of the method is not an issue.
>
> That's what Stringham thought, but he was wrong.
With due credit to Stringham, he is not Mills & Co.
>
> On the calorimetry side, they claim 1 watt accuracy, which is a modest &
> believable. They seem to be getting 16 ~ 22 watts excess. That is a large
> enough multiple to give confidence in the output. Input power is the only
> open question.
>
>
> >You are unfamiliar with microwave technology. The Evanson cavity and the
> >connecting cable form a resonant circuit with the generator inside the
> >box. The generator frequency is fixed. The cavity must be "tuned" for
> >optimum power transfer, but this is not always possible, so some of the
> >energy put out is "reflected" back into the generator. It is equivalent
to
> >"reactive power" in utility systems.
>
> It sounds like the power factor correction with an AC motor. I hope they
> measure it right.
Jed is a great advocate of using standard laboratory equipment, which is
exactly what BLP is doing. They are not wasting a penny on non-standard
stuff if they can help it, and so far as I can tell, what they buy is first
class. The Evanson cavity and the associated microwave generator are
standard lab stuff and the measurement of direct and reflected power is
built into the instrument and displayed on meters on the front the of the
box. The "reflected power" is in fact reactive, out-of-phase power,
corresponding to power factor in a motor, etc.
>
> Does anyone know how this is measured? How difficult is it? Can the
> fraction of reflected power be influenced by the choice of gas in the
> reaction chamber?
See above. The absorbed power might well be a function of the gas in the
cell as well as other factors. That is why you subtract reflected power
from output power. The resistance of the wire in the cable, the cable's
dissipation, resistance of the metal in the cavity walls, presence of
anything dissipative of microwave energy in the field of the device, all
will show up as absorbed power not delivered to the gas in question. The
apparatus was initially designed just as "lamp" -- an exciter of ionizable
gases so that their emission spectrum could be read. It was not intended as
an element in a calorimetry experiment, so Mills is doing the best he can.
>
> For this to be a mistake, they would inputting 85 watts electricity, 55 W
> are reflected back, but they think 77 W is coming back instead. (See the
> numbers at the end of this message.)
>
> It does not matter how many different calorimeter types they use (Seebeck,
> flow, a bomb calorimeter). If every test configuration depends on the same
> input correction, using the same instrument, they have effectively done
> only one kind of calorimetry. They are in the same position as Mizuno with
> glow discharge. All methods of measuring output agree, but the only likely
> source of error is on the input side anyway. Mizuno spent ~$16,000 for a
> meter, which works right as far as anyone can tell.
Only if you focus only on what you understand, which is calorimetry. Jed is
saying that he suspects the measurement of microwave excitation power, which
he does not understand, therefore all measurements which use this instrument
are suspect. He is not seeing the presence of controls in every experiment
performed that I have cited.
>
> >Far more significant physically is the Balmer line broadening and
> >Mills has taken pains to demonstrated that the effect is real and not an
> >artifact.
>
> I cannot judge that. John Schnurer seems to think there may be room for
> error there. Perhaps he needs to look at it more closely.
Jed has not been paying close enough attention to what John said. I will
quote from some sidebar correspondence:
---------------------------------
MC to JS:
And with due respect to John's acumen, and to forestall a rain of quibbles
about Mills' Hydrogen Blamer line width observations, one should look at the
whole context of Mills' voluminous papers. Therein you will find papers
devoted to possible mechanisms of line width broadening, including the Stark
effect, and various methods of excitation, including capacitative coupling,
inductive coupling, RF coupling and thermal excitation. The broadening is
still there, systematically ruling out other known causes of line
broadening, leaving only Doppler shift from very hot atoms.
You will have to do some honest homework, guys, before throwing darts at
this work. Mills has been thorough. Homework means actually reading the
papers and understanding what was done.
JS to MC:
Dear Mike,
I only brought up the point because I support what you are
saying.... one has to have the whole story to make a call.
JH
----------------------------------
>
> The gadget need not be self sustaining to prove that it works, but some
> aspects of the calorimetry should make people nervous, even though 22
watts
> excess seems huge. It is not so huge when you start to talk about an open
> system with gas flowing through and "lots of heat paths in and out."
>
> This paper, mentioned by Carrell:
>
> http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/technical/WaterBathThermCalor.pdf
>
> . . . describes more or less conventional calorimetry with a calibration
by
> joule heater in 45 liters (!) of distilled water. It says:
>
> "The heat capacity was determined for several input powers, 30, 40, and 50
> W ± 0.01 W, and was found to be independent of input power over this power
> range within ± 0.05%." (p. 6)
>
> ±0.01 W input power I can believe, but ±0.05% is ridiculous, even for a
> calibration with a joule heater. That would make it better than McKubre's
> calorimeter, which is rated at ±0.1 (ICCF-2, p. 442). On the same page
they
> claim the accuracy with the live plasma gadget is 1%. The excess is
roughly
> 20 to 24% of total input power (forward and reactive), about the same as
> McKubre on a usual day when excess was being generated. Power levels are
> about an order of magnitude greater: Mills, 85 watts in, 107 out (p. 3,
> Fig. 11); McKubre, 10 watts in, 11 or 12 watts out (p. 440, 441).
>
> There is not much discussion of the calorimetry in the Mills paper. Fig.
10
> shows a highly massaged heating slope. It takes 100 minutes for the water
> to heat up 1 deg. That's slow! But the speed does not matter, because they
> compute heat output from the slope, not the final, steady state
> temperature. After 120 minutes it reaches a final temperature and the
> experiment has to stop. Fig. 11 shows a comparison of Kr (control) and
> H2+He gas (a mixture), similar to the Marchese graph, but the excess looks
> more dramatic:
>
> "The microwave input power was determined to be 8.1 ± 1 W. A
> helium-hydrogen (90/10%) mixture was run at identical microwave input
power
> readings as the control, and the excess power was determined to be 21.9 ±
1
> W from the T (t) response."
>
> If the 8.1 W is right, and it isn't accidentally 30.0 W forward, it is
> remarkable. This paper does not describe input power measurement.
Input power to the generator is irrelevant. The microwave generator is
obviously a piece of lab gear and what matters is the indications of the
output meters. Jed's "accidentally 30.0 W forward" is irrelevant. He is
sounding like a skeptic, which is what he is so far as Mills is concerned.
>
> Perhaps they should dunk the whole power supply in the bath too. It can
> handle 85 watts.
And why in the world would they do that? What does that prove? Jed is
continuing to demonstrate that he does not understand what Mills is doing,
which has been his position all along.
>
> I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of these
> people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it seems
> insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive.
This shows where Jed stands so far as objective evaluation and looking at
the whole picture is concerned.
>Why piddle around with a 2-bit $75,000 NASA study?
What Jed has missed is that the study was solicited by Rowan University and
awarded to Rowan. BLP provided facilities and advice in the line of their
policy of soliciting partnerships. I assume that Rowan paid BLP a fee for
consulting services and use of facilities. Like the $6000 initially awarded
to the Manhattan Project, I could see significant investment by NASA in BLP
technology.
>Who gives a damn about spectral
> lines?!? Demonstrate 20 watts of useful power and Wall Street would give
> you a $1 billion for 1%. You would have 50,000 research projects underway
> simultaneously at every major corporation and university on earth.
Mills welcomes collaborators and has hired a guy to look for partners. The
business plan, available on the website, shows concepts for water heaters of
all scales, micropower generation, etc. He is looking for $100 million to
support an aggressive development and advertising campaign for BLP "Greater
Than Fire" (TM). He has not been shy about publication or presentations,
including the ACS and EPA.
What Jed's rhetoric missies is the inertia of the marketplace. BLP heaters
will have low installation costs and very low or no fuel costs. But it's new
technology and many customers will be more concerned about support,
reliability, features and name brand than some savings on a fuel bill. A
major name brand partner can supply all this, not a card table on the
sidewalk. Mills is positioned as a license laboratory, not a development
and production shop. He would go broke quick.
With LENR it is now only slowly becoming apparent that much of the previous
work was focused on the wrong paradigm but the right one hasn't been found,
the one that enables manufacture of reliable active cathodes. Until that
happens you lose money on every one but make it up in volume. Mills'
demonstrations are very impressive, but the bridge to an interface with the
commercial world is as yet very shaky. One doesn't understand this until the
phenomenon and its characteristics are understood. Mills is not telling all
he knows.
What Jed has pointedly overlooked in the papers I have cited is the presence
of controls in every experiment whether calorimetry is the issue or not.
Only very specific elements are BLP catalysts. Chemically similar elements
that don't meet the BLP criteria don't react. So for example an experiment
using microwave excitation is run with H alone, He alone, and then with H-He
and the energy release is spectacular. Or the experiment might be run with H
and Kr, not a catalyst, and nothing happens. This is black/white, on/off can
cannot be ignored.
Since Jed has not, I will quote here numbers from the H-He experiment. A gas
mixture 98% He and 2% h is flowed through a quartz tube passing through the
Evanson cavity. A thermocouple is mounted coaxially with the quartz tube in
the middle of the cavity. With He only the microwave power is 60 watts the
probe measures a rise to 200 C after power on in about 90 sec. With the H-He
mixture and 30 watts applied, the thermocouple rises to 900 C in the same
interval. Measurement of the decay rate of the thermocouple temperature with
He only and H-He gives a measure of the heat capacity of the system. The
power output was calculated as 300 W with an excitation power of 30 W. The
heat released was 160 times that which would be obtained by burning the
amount of hydrogen used. The power density was calculated at 30 MW per cubic
meter. The microwave power was on for only 90 seconds to prevent the quartz
tube from melting.
The is a house-burning-down effect. You can't miss it. In terms of overall
energy balance, the energy to produce the hydrogen gas and helium gas in lab
tanks was not included, nor the power to run the microwave generator, nor
the turbomolecular pump and assorted instruments. "Closing the loop" so all
the support facilities are operated by generated energy with water as fuel
is a bit far off at the moment, but not impossible. No householder or
partner is going to pony up money until solutions to some of the problems
are visible.
A continuous flow of H and He were used in the lab tests to maintain
standard conditions. Obviously this isn't viable for many products. He is a
somewhat rare gas, but it is a catalyst, not consumed in principle. H is the
fuel and has to be supplied as conversions to hydrinos proceeds. Exactly
what happens and how you control it is very much BLP's proprietary
information and I'm not sure how much of it they have under control yet.
With water vapor as fuel, the situation changes considerably. But there are
engineering problems there as well.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 18:16:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA21239;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:15:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:15:33 -0800
Message-ID: <007201c287ae$eb802ba0$3f5bccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <20021108214949.44638.qmail web40414.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 21:14:39 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"R4_WW3.0.iB5.4_6pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48250
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Charles Ford wrote:
> --- Jed Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know how this is measured? How difficult is it? Can the
> > fraction of reflected power be influenced by the choice of gas in the
> > reaction chamber?
> >
>
> There are several measurement methods. All of them require some good
> math after the measurement to determine the actual reflected power 'along
> a given vector'. Also this is altered by the shape of the reflecting
> surface. Iregular shapes can scatter or concentrate reflected energy.
> (like pointing a LASER at a wad of foil.) one must there be sure the
> target surface is reular or measure all of the reflected energy. It is
> very much like LASER lite.
>
> Also if the medium is water the water must be absolutely pure. ANY
> inpurities will allow microwave adsorption.
>
> It is possible that this process was not documented in the presentation
> because it can be quite complex.
All this is very much off the track. As I have explained in other posts, the
Evanson cavity and the associated lab equipment are standard stuff for the
purpose at hand and the forward and reflected power are indicated by meters
on the front panel. End of story. In a theoretical and general sense one can
get very involved with EM propagation and interfaces, but such are totally
irrelevant to the experiments at hand.
>
> Is there evidance of fusion products in the exaust?
No, no, no. The BLP reaction is a form of chemistry, involving electrons in
orbits. It is not and never was claimed to be a nuclear process. The energy
densities are above the normal chemical realm but less than the nuclear
realm.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 8 18:17:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA21213;
Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:15:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:15:32 -0800
Message-ID: <007101c287ae$ead0b1c0$3f5bccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 21:07:10 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"3TlTm2.0.KB5.3_6pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48249
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Robin wrote:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from
ionized
> >water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
> >
> >Mike Carrell
> >
> Note that Stanley Meyer was also using water vapour and microwaves.
> He just didn't know where the energy was coming from.
Good point. To this I will add the Graneau's remarkable experiments with
underwater arcs, which produce substantial anomalous energy. I have alerted
Mills to the Graneau's work and Peter Graneau to Mills' work.
Underwater arcs have attracted the attention of a number of experimenters.
Regards,
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 08:04:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32043;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:01:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:01:08 -0800
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <1a0.b8aef92.2afe8ada aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 10:59:22 EST
Subject: How to Program Photons with the Mind & with Scalar Radio Waves!
To: aelewis provide.net, newsonline@bbc.co.uk, drboylan@sbcglobal.net,
DEACH topica.com, thebishop@usadatanet.net, mediator@mint.ocn.ne.jp,
prj mail.msen.com, reader@guardian.co.uk, Roundtable7@yahoogroups.com,
riverwaves7 hotmail.com, economicaffairs@parliament.uk,
vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: ConexTom aol.com, tom@rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1a0.b8aef92.2afe8ada_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 180
Resent-Message-ID: <"Dxnn71.0.bq7.35Jpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48251
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_1a0.b8aef92.2afe8ada_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
How to Program Photons with the Mind & with Scalar Radio Waves!
A photon which is a wave of light is composed of a wave of electrons. Each
potential electron position in the wave may be programed to be in a certain
position on the wave, and in a certain spin state up or down to represent
information states true or false and 1 or 0 in binary computer language or
quantum computer. The human mind uses a small set of the light frequencies
called the aura and spirit to store information in neural networks of neurons
in the brain, fibers, liquids, and genes of the body. And these patterns of
light frequencies stored in the human body, represent the beliefs that each
person and group of person holds, to organize photons and electrons around
them to form their body and environment.
With meditation any person can focus on the electrons and photons around
their body, local, and global environment, to cause the electrons and
photons, to organize themselves into a small quantum computer using photon
waves for memory and photon states for a processor with a programed photon
pattern similar to the thought patterns in the mind that matches the
meditational belief patterns to run a small energy to matter transfer and
manipulation photonic device. This small spiritual and mental meditational
channeling of a few million photons from energy around the body, to make a
photonic computer, program and energy to matter transfer device may appear
invisible as dark super light or as a small burst of light or misty infrared
light cloud which can barely be seen or heard by the human eye and mind.
An example of a meditational session to make the above photon computer and
energy transfer device levitate an object or cause the clouds to move or rain
may be as follows:
A person sits in a meditational position or moves in symmetric and geometric
Tai Chi movements in a comfortable pattern that allows the photon energies
around the persons body to flow freely and connect with the energies of the
mind and spirit. The person then gradually focuses the mind and spirit, to
relax, and think about geometric forms in color in the mind to begin to
collect photons around them into organized patterns sometimes called "Chi" in
martial arts. Then the person may fine tune the image of the rough geometric
shapes in the mind, into detailed ideas and images of objects around them in
their environment, such as a piece of wood or a cloud in the sky. Then the
person meditates or channels photons to connect their mind to the piece of
wood or cloud with a photonic wave communication path. Then the person may
focus on the resonant frequencies of a piece of wood or cloud, and organize
the photons in the air to create a sound pattern or resonant pattern similar
to wind that matches the cloud or stick center of gravity, to cancel out the
natural center gravity, to cause the stick to levitate or the cloud to move
in a new direction. Also the person may think about the frequencies and
energy patterns that may cause the cloud to rain or create lightening, which
are around 500Khz, and communicate with photons to organize the photons
around the cloud to rain make lightening. Depending on the skills of person,
it may take longer than others to focus and collect enough photons to channel
them into a photonic computer, communication wave, and energy manipulation
pattern to change an object in the environment.
All of the above natural spiritual photonic programs, can also be captured,
and simulated with scalar interferometric radio or cellular waves from
satellites, and Gwen radio towers, and programed with computers instead of
the human mind to achieve the above same effects of levitating a piece of
wood or causing the clouds to rain.
It is possible for the scalar cellular phone waves used in ordinary cellular
phones, and in Echelon surveillance programs, to create programed photonic
holographs around any object or person in an environment, to capture or jam
the natural spiritual photonic beliefs and programmed patterns of any object
or person, and change them to match an artificial object or image of that
person in a computer database, to control the persons thoughts, beliefs, and
cellular growth with subliminal sound waves, and cellular phone waves used in
ordinary TV media.
A person may have to imagine in their mind a force field around their body,
to program the photons around their body, to jam the artificial cellular
phone waves from mind control projects, Gwen submarine radio towers, and
Echelon surveillance satellites. I myself have a photonic program that I
meditate on daily to create several natural photonic force fields around my
body. One force field captures all incoming harmful photons like an energy
well and channels them to power and create the other force fields to filter
out the harmful photons that do not match my belief patterns of my body,
spirit, and environment.
Then I also imagine in my mind a photonic geometric grid around my body in
the colors and detailed images, which matches the true form of my body and
spirit to encourage the photonic energies, to highlight the proper genetic
alleles in each cell and gene, to form the shape of the cell growth. I also
imagine photonic force field grids around may home, city, state, nation,
planet, solar system, and universe, through all possible timelines. I have
been doing these above meditational photonic programs for about 2 years now.
I have been able to jam out some of the Echelon surveillance mind control
cellular radio waves around my body, but not most of them. It may take up to
10 years of mediation to even jam out 30 to 50 percent of the mind control
cellular radio waves, which is not enough to counter the other 50 percent of
the mind control radio waves, which works 24 hours a day, to change the
beliefs and forms of the body and local environment. Every person may need
to have their own small portable mechanical scalar wave sensor, power source,
computer, and generator, to generate a force field strong enough to block out
or filter out all echelon satellite surveillance and Gwen tower cellular
radio waves.
Even if the all of the electromagnetic devices on Earth are shut down due to
the photon belt, this may not stop the mind control projects and echelon
surveillance satellites from targeting citizens with holograph and scalar
waves, since these devices may use positive monopole scalar electronics which
have been hardened to radiation such as photons. The beliefs of all of the
citizens on Earth, form a natural neural network, which can also program
photons naturally, to counter the mind control projects, and more photons may
enhance the natural beliefs to counter mind control projects even more so.
However, many of the citizens on Earth may all be divided and fighting over
their own personal and often selfish clannish or cultural goals, which then
may cancel each other out. And this is why many of the mind control
projects on Earth encourage conflicts between genders, races, religious and
political beliefs, and cultures, to keep the belief patterns of Earth
divided, so that they cannot counter the mind control projects belief
patterns in the popular media, and in the subliminal radio waves messages
from the Echelon satellites and Gwen radio towers.
If certain individuals such as celebrities, business men, and world leaders
become popular and may unit many people into a fashion or movement, that
could counter the mind control projects media, then those individuals may be
repressed by the mind control projects even more so, by means of false
negative double speak media, and pitting everyone against that person which
happens to many of our very successful world leaders today and historical
icons in the Past, in the popular media.
In most of my emails and businesses I have been encouraging the use of
science and technology to defend the powerless or the ordinary citizen
against the powerful or government and underworld organizations. I still
believe that the ordinary citizen needs technology, to defend themselves from
the government and secret underworld organizations which will always have
technology. Most of the popular religious trends encourage citizens to give
up technology, and let a belief such a God or a photon belt, to save them
from the corrupt governments and secret societies. And I have explained
above the photon belt may not weaken the governments or secret societies use
of technology but actually strengthen it, since primarily the ordinary
citizen will lose their use of technology to defend themselves from the
government, and underworld. Also the ordinary citizen will lose their basic
legal rights, since if the photon belt jams electrical devices, then the
governments may declare martial law and a state of emergency.
I have been advocating with my companies, the knowledge and means of
developing new photonic energy sources, devices and force fields for each
citizen and town, which the governments already have. And I have been
advocating political trends which allow all citizens from all cultures to
communicate and make agreements with E.T's to allow them to relocate to other
planets physically and spiritually, if they want to based on their spiritual
goals. Most governments do not want citizens to have the above spiritual
freedoms and technologies, and I have also been advocating that the
government should change their politics to defend local citizens rather than
to repress citizens, and that the government should become republican to
decentralize and minimize the government. I am just one citizen like
everyone else, and any one can also repress me or take over my companies as
well. I have filed cases in federal court posted at at Federal Case to be
filed in Federal Court in November, 2002 and at
http://www.rhfweb.com/nsagovcase.html and placed safeguards into my company
trust statements posted at [Company quality and ethical procedureal rules]
and at
http://www.rhfweb.com/erules.html to prevent takeovers and infiltration, but
this may not be enough. If I cannot achieve the above goals then each
citizens who believes in the goals, must also work to achieve them as I have
explained in these emails.
If the photon belt occurs in 10 to 20 years, then we may have time to develop
the above technologies and political goals. Also if friendly E.T.'s can be
contacted they may be able to give us, or ordinary citizens on Earth, the
above technologies, political avenues, and information very quickly, to
allows us to achieve similar goals as I have mentioned above, for all
cultures on Earth.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_1a0.b8aef92.2afe8ada_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
How to Program Photons with the Mind & with Scalar Radio Waves!
A photon which is a wave of light is composed of a wave of electrons. Each potential electron position in the wave may be programed to be in a certain position on the wave, and in a certain spin state up or down to represent information states true or false and 1 or 0 in binary computer language or quantum computer. The human mind uses a small set of the light frequencies called the aura and spirit to store information in neural networks of neurons in the brain, fibers, liquids, and genes of the body. And these patterns of light frequencies stored in the human body, represent the beliefs that each person and group of person holds, to organize photons and electrons around them to form their body and environment.
With meditation any person can focus on the electrons and photons around their body, local, and global environment, to cause the electrons and photons, to organize themselves into a small quantum computer using photon waves for memory and photon states for a processor with a programed photon pattern similar to the thought patterns in the mind that matches the meditational belief patterns to run a small energy to matter transfer and manipulation photonic device. This small spiritual and mental meditational channeling of a few million photons from energy around the body, to make a photonic computer, program and energy to matter transfer device may appear invisible as dark super light or as a small burst of light or misty infrared light cloud which can barely be seen or heard by the human eye and mind.
An example of a meditational session to make the above photon computer and energy transfer device levitate an object or cause the clouds to move or rain may be as follows:
A person sits in a meditational position or moves in symmetric and geometric Tai Chi movements in a comfortable pattern that allows the photon energies around the persons body to flow freely and connect with the energies of the mind and spirit. The person then gradually focuses the mind and spirit, to relax, and think about geometric forms in color in the mind to begin to collect photons around them into organized patterns sometimes called "Chi" in martial arts. Then the person may fine tune the image of the rough geometric shapes in the mind, into detailed ideas and images of objects around them in their environment, such as a piece of wood or a cloud in the sky. Then the person meditates or channels photons to connect their mind to the piece of wood or cloud with a photonic wave communication path. Then the person may focus on the resonant frequencies of a piece of wood or cloud, and organize the photons in the air to create a sound pattern or resonant pattern similar to wind that matches the cloud or stick center of gravity, to cancel out the natural center gravity, to cause the stick to levitate or the cloud to move in a new direction. Also the person may think about the frequencies and energy patterns that may cause the cloud to rain or create lightening, which are around 500Khz, and communicate with photons to organize the photons around the cloud to rain make lightening. Depending on the skills of person, it may take longer than others to focus and collect enough photons to channel them into a photonic computer, communication wave, and energy manipulation pattern to change an object in the environment.
All of the above natural spiritual photonic programs, can also be captured, and simulated with scalar interferometric radio or cellular waves from satellites, and Gwen radio towers, and programed with computers instead of the human mind to achieve the above same effects of levitating a piece of wood or causing the clouds to rain.
It is possible for the scalar cellular phone waves used in ordinary cellular phones, and in Echelon surveillance programs, to create programed photonic holographs around any object or person in an environment, to capture or jam the natural spiritual photonic beliefs and programmed patterns of any object or person, and change them to match an artificial object or image of that person in a computer database, to control the persons thoughts, beliefs, and cellular growth with subliminal sound waves, and cellular phone waves used in ordinary TV media.
A person may have to imagine in their mind a force field around their body, to program the photons around their body, to jam the artificial cellular phone waves from mind control projects, Gwen submarine radio towers, and Echelon surveillance satellites. I myself have a photonic program that I meditate on daily to create several natural photonic force fields around my body. One force field captures all incoming harmful photons like an energy well and channels them to power and create the other force fields to filter out the harmful photons that do not match my belief patterns of my body, spirit, and environment.
Then I also imagine in my mind a photonic geometric grid around my body in the colors and detailed images, which matches the true form of my body and spirit to encourage the photonic energies, to highlight the proper genetic alleles in each cell and gene, to form the shape of the cell growth. I also imagine photonic force field grids around may home, city, state, nation, planet, solar system, and universe, through all possible timelines. I have been doing these above meditational photonic programs for about 2 years now. I have been able to jam out some of the Echelon surveillance mind control cellular radio waves around my body, but not most of them. It may take up to 10 years of mediation to even jam out 30 to 50 percent of the mind control cellular radio waves, which is not enough to counter the other 50 percent of the mind control radio waves, which works 24 hours a day, to change the beliefs and forms of the body and local environment. Every person may need to have their own small portable mechanical scalar wave sensor, power source, computer, and generator, to generate a force field strong enough to block out or filter out all echelon satellite surveillance and Gwen tower cellular radio waves.
Even if the all of the electromagnetic devices on Earth are shut down due to the photon belt, this may not stop the mind control projects and echelon surveillance satellites from targeting citizens with holograph and scalar waves, since these devices may use positive monopole scalar electronics which have been hardened to radiation such as photons. The beliefs of all of the citizens on Earth, form a natural neural network, which can also program photons naturally, to counter the mind control projects, and more photons may enhance the natural beliefs to counter mind control projects even more so. However, many of the citizens on Earth may all be divided and fighting over their own personal and often selfish clannish or cultural goals, which then may cancel each other out. And this is why many of the mind control projects on Earth encourage conflicts between genders, races, religious and political beliefs, and cultures, to keep the belief patterns of Earth divided, so that they cannot counter the mind control projects belief patterns in the popular media, and in the subliminal radio waves messages from the Echelon satellites and Gwen radio towers.
If certain individuals such as celebrities, business men, and world leaders become popular and may unit many people into a fashion or movement, that could counter the mind control projects media, then those individuals may be repressed by the mind control projects even more so, by means of false negative double speak media, and pitting everyone against that person which happens to many of our very successful world leaders today and historical icons in the Past, in the popular media.
In most of my emails and businesses I have been encouraging the use of science and technology to defend the powerless or the ordinary citizen against the powerful or government and underworld organizations. I still believe that the ordinary citizen needs technology, to defend themselves from the government and secret underworld organizations which will always have technology. Most of the popular religious trends encourage citizens to give up technology, and let a belief such a God or a photon belt, to save them from the corrupt governments and secret societies. And I have explained above the photon belt may not weaken the governments or secret societies use of technology but actually strengthen it, since primarily the ordinary citizen will lose their use of technology to defend themselves from the government, and underworld. Also the ordinary citizen will lose their basic legal rights, since if the photon belt jams electrical devices, then the governments may declare martial law and a state of emergency.
I have been advocating with my companies, the knowledge and means of developing new photonic energy sources, devices and force fields for each citizen and town, which the governments already have. And I have been advocating political trends which allow all citizens from all cultures to communicate and make agreements with E.T's to allow them to relocate to other planets physically and spiritually, if they want to based on their spiritual goals. Most governments do not want citizens to have the above spiritual freedoms and technologies, and I have also been advocating that the government should change their politics to defend local citizens rather than to repress citizens, and that the government should become republican to decentralize and minimize the government. I am just one citizen like everyone else, and any one can also repress me or take over my companies as well. I have filed cases in federal court posted at at Federal Case to be filed in Federal Court in November, 2002 and at http://www.rhfweb.com/nsagovcase.html and placed safeguards into my company trust statements posted at [Company quality and ethical procedureal rules] and at
http://www.rhfweb.com/erules.html to prevent takeovers and infiltration, but this may not be enough. If I cannot achieve the above goals then each citizens who believes in the goals, must also work to achieve them as I have explained in these emails.
If the photon belt occurs in 10 to 20 years, then we may have time to develop the above technologies and political goals. Also if friendly E.T.'s can be contacted they may be able to give us, or ordinary citizens on Earth, the above technologies, political avenues, and information very quickly, to allows us to achieve similar goals as I have mentioned above, for all cultures on Earth.
Respectfully,
Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron
Thomas D. Clark
tom rhfweb.com
www.rhfweb.com\personal
--part1_1a0.b8aef92.2afe8ada_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 08:45:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15589;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:44:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:44:27 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
<5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
<001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1 asus>
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 10:45:13 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"gGI6R1.0.Kp3.gjJpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48252
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Robin van Spaandonk posted;
>In reply to Mike Carrell's message of Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:15:26 -0800:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
>>water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
>>
>>Mike Carrell
>>
>Note that Stanley Meyer was also using water vapour and microwaves.
>He just didn't know where the energy was coming from.
Are you saying that Stan actually produces some surplus energy?
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 09:04:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA22658;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 09:01:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 09:01:45 -0800
X-Sent: 9 Nov 2002 17:01:36 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021109112831.00b032b8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 12:01:40 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com,
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
In-Reply-To: <005c01c287ac$89f2a360$3f5bccd1 asus>
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
<5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
<5.1.0.14.2.20021108140051.02cbb5c8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"CEJdd3.0.yX5.uzJpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48253
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Mike Carrell wrote:
>The Evanson cavity and the associated microwave generator are
>standard lab stuff and the measurement of direct and reflected power is
>built into the instrument and displayed on meters on the front the of the
>box.
I hope it is working right. I suppose it probably is, since off-the-shelf
meters used for the intended purpose are seldom wrong to this extent,
confusing 77 with 55 watts.
>The apparatus was initially designed just as "lamp" -- an exciter of
>ionizable gases so that their emission spectrum could be read. It was not
>intended as an element in a calorimetry experiment, so Mills is doing the
>best he can.
He could do somewhat better, although perhaps it is not necessary. He could
verify by calorimetric means, as I suggested. Monitoring the temperature of
the power supplies would be a start.
>Jed is saying that he suspects the measurement of microwave excitation
>power, which he does not understand, therefore all measurements which use
>this instrument are suspect.
All measurements with all instruments are always suspect, until they have
been verified in 5 or 10 independent replications. Any single group of
researchers might be wrong, or crazy, or even criminally faking it. That is
why a group in Russia worked on polywater for many years. Independent
replication is the only way to rule out the human factor. But I did not say
I "suspect" this measurement, I said -- quite clearly -- I have no idea how
it works.
>Jed's "accidentally 30.0 W forward" is irrelevant.
No, it is crux of the matter.
>He is sounding like a skeptic, which is what he is so far as Mills is
>concerned.
I am a skeptic about all claims, conventional and unconventional. I insist
on independent replication and the use of many different instrument types
and techniques before I believe anything. This claim of Mills has not yet
met these test as far as I know.
> > Perhaps they should dunk the whole power supply in the bath too. It can
> > handle 85 watts.
>
>And why in the world would they do that?
As a way to be sure the meters on the side are working correctly, obviously.
> > I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of these
> > people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it seems
> > insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive.
>
>This shows where Jed stands so far as objective evaluation and looking at
>the whole picture is concerned.
No, that shows that I can separately evaluate a scientific claim and a
personality. Just because I think a person is a jerk, criminally negligent,
or a child abuser does not mean I think his scientific or artistic claims
have no merit. My impression of Mills, Correa, Bill Gates or Gen. Rommel is
that they are (were) dreadful people I would not want to associate with or
invite to dinner, but on the other hand Mills, Gates are Rommel were
world-class geniuses who knew how to do their jobs. Their failings are
moral or ethical, not professional.
The reason I do not yet believe Mills has nothing to do with his
personality. He has not been widely replicated yet. I would not believe his
claims even if he were Albert Schweitzer (who was supposedly a very nice
fellow), or Tadahiko Mizuno (who I know to be a very nice fellow).
>Mills welcomes collaborators and has hired a guy to look for partners.
Either he hired is the most incompetent person available, or Mills is
preventing success by not selling demonstration kits and taking other
commonsense steps to convince people. When I last heard from him, Mills was
actively trying to prevent people from learning about his work, and hoping
that people would not believe him, like the late Jim Reding and the Wright
brothers from 1905 to 1907. He said that, and he acted that way too.
>The business plan, available on the website, shows concepts for water
>heaters of all scales, micropower generation, etc. He is looking for $100
>million to support an aggressive development and advertising campaign for
>BLP ...
Yes, I have seen the business plan. I think it is idiotic, and I think $100
million is $99.99 million more than the job calls for.
But of course let me reiterate:, this business plan and these absurd budget
number have no connection with the scientific claims. Mills may be a
scientific genius but a terrible businessman. So were the Wrights and so
was Shockley.
>What Jed's rhetoric missies is the inertia of the marketplace.
That inertia could be overwhelmed in two weeks with a proper PR campaign.
It is a myth. Almost all of the problem is caused by Mills himself, and the
rest by 2-bit pipsqueaks like Robert Park. The fact that Park was able to
block Mills' patent demonstrates how inept Mills is. Park is a fool with
real no power or expertise. Mills could have swept him aside easily, with a
little common sense and few public demonstrations.
>BLP heaters will have low installation costs and very low or no fuel
>costs. But it's new technology and many customers will be more concerned
>about support, reliability, features and name brand than some savings on a
>fuel bill.
Oh nonsense! This is completely off the track. First of all, no customer
anywhere will be allowed to buy a Mills device until every scientist,
engineer and corporate manager in the world has become convinced they are
real, and major industrial companies manufacture them, the Congress has
passed new laws, and the Underwriters' Laboratory and other institutions
have spent years and billions of dollars testing the devices. Support,
reliability and features mean absolutely nothing in this context. Mills
himself will never be in a position to make gadgets and sell them to the
public any more than he can make Boeing 747 aircraft in his garage. Before
a single Mills gadget is installed we must have a social revolution. We
could have one. Indeed, once scientists and engineers everywhere believe
his claims a revolution is inevitable. But Mills must take steps to trigger
that revolution. Half measures and fights with idiots like Park will not
suffice.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 14:38:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20627;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 14:38:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 14:38:02 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 09:37:23 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <113rsusckimjh5otc3uk689a29modaim4n 4ax.com>
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus>
In-Reply-To:
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA20541
Resent-Message-ID: <"txAO1.0.825.9vOpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48254
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Sat, 9 Nov 2002 10:45:13 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin van Spaandonk posted;
>
>>In reply to Mike Carrell's message of Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:15:26 -0800:
>>Hi,
>>[snip]
>>>No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
>>>water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
>>>
>>>Mike Carrell
>>>
>>Note that Stanley Meyer was also using water vapour and microwaves.
>>He just didn't know where the energy was coming from.
>
>Are you saying that Stan actually produces some surplus energy?
I have been informed by private email, that Stan did not in fact deliberately
make use of microwaves, and indeed upon closer examination of the documents I have I have been able to find no explicit mention thereof.
I was mislead by his constant mention of "resonant chambers".
Nevertheless, I suspect that he did indeed produce some surplus energy
based upon hydrinos. Stan himself appears to have believed that it
came from another dimension (judging by his WFC Technical Brief).
BTW Stan passed away several years ago.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 20:23:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA17012;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 20:22:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 20:22:39 -0800
Message-ID: <005e01c28889$d372ac00$d65bccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:16:13 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"13Hv03.0.i94.EyTpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48255
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Thomas Malloy wrote:
>
> Are you saying that Stan actually produces some surplus energy?
I did not follow Meyer's claims closely. I believe that he asserted that he
had a method of electrolyzing water that took very little energy. He
"appeared" to have a vehicle with an on-board electrolyzer producing a gas
used by an IC engine, whose alternator furnished enough power to electrolyze
the water.
This bears only the most superficial resemblance to Mills' claims. He has
ionized water vapor and produced the BLP reaction, but he has not extracted
enough power from any of his lab experiments to produce the hydrogen fuel
from water. Such remains a possibility predicted by his theory, but
engineering accomplishment is not yet realized.
Meyer's apparatus probably ionized some water. If it produced O++ and H,
quite possibly, then the BLP reaction may have occurred. I don't think Mills
has at this point explored the range of conditions which will produce the
BLP reaction in water.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 21:16:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA05818;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 21:16:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 21:16:17 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCDEBAD.3B92A2A8 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 07:16:29 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus> <005e01c28889$d372ac00$d65bccd1@asus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"JutF-2.0.qQ1.WkUpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48256
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Hi,
On this occasion, Spontaneous Human Combustion phenomenon could be also mentioned.
On last discuss on this SHC issue with Horace Heffner, I had proposed not the fat but
the water could be the fuel. This hypothesis is supported by the character of the burning,
as blue flames, high temperature, absence of smoke and carbonic residues but white ashes,
unburned extremities, sign of anaerobic reaction like burning from inside and non propagation.
Fire does not propagate because outside of the body is burned at the and as it is not H2O rich
as interior or the required water vapor concentration for the reaction is only obtained inside
the body. So less vigorous reactions occurs on exterior parts, and less heat is produced.
Maybe the released H2 by the reaction consume the air's O2 and prevent burning of the environment.
Alternatively the Hydrogen in anomalous state does not produce exothermic reaction with Oxygen,
or even dont react. As acting as inert gas, behave as fire extinguisher. This also help to explain
why the fire does not propagate to environment.
This look like the body is burned in Oxygen rich environment, where the Oxygen is supplied by
disintegration of the H2O energized by the Mills reaction.
Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> Thomas Malloy wrote:
>
> >
> > Are you saying that Stan actually produces some surplus energy?
>
> I did not follow Meyer's claims closely. I believe that he asserted that he
> had a method of electrolyzing water that took very little energy. He
> "appeared" to have a vehicle with an on-board electrolyzer producing a gas
> used by an IC engine, whose alternator furnished enough power to electrolyze
> the water.
>
> This bears only the most superficial resemblance to Mills' claims. He has
> ionized water vapor and produced the BLP reaction, but he has not extracted
> enough power from any of his lab experiments to produce the hydrogen fuel
> from water. Such remains a possibility predicted by his theory, but
> engineering accomplishment is not yet realized.
>
> Meyer's apparatus probably ionized some water. If it produced O++ and H,
> quite possibly, then the BLP reaction may have occurred. I don't think Mills
> has at this point explored the range of conditions which will produce the
> BLP reaction in water.
>
> Mike Carrell
Regards,
hamdi ucar
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 9 22:08:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA21036;
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 22:07:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 22:07:57 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCDF7BC.CE517D61 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:07:56 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1@asus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"HwiyC1.0.c85.zUVpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48257
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 Mike Carrell's message of Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:15:26 -0800:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
> >water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
> >
> >Mike Carrell
This extra energy could be balanced if an exothermic reaction is considered. By product O2 and hydrogen in atomic or molecular form need be released. This hydrogen should be in a special state being less reactive and less exothermic. In the report I dont not recall an analyses of the processed gas or the water vapor. Even this atypic H could not be noticed if proper method is not used.
It would be funny that "cheap hydrogen" produced by such a reaction would be indeed cheap, less calorific like the cheap coal.
> >
> Note that Stanley Meyer was also using water vapour and microwaves.
> He just didn't know where the energy was coming from.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
Regards,
hamdi ucar
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 08:14:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21544;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:12:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:12:53 -0800
Message-ID: <005601c288ed$0da159e0$9a56ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
Subject: Ionized water vapor
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:11:10 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"fOj5-1.0.TG5.5Mepz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48258
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
My remark:
-------------
No more mysterious than that. Of course extracting excess heat from ionized
water vapor is quite "mysterious" enough. It is a paradigm breaker.
-------------
Seems to be taking on a life of its own and is being misinterpreted. Soon I
expect to see kits touting the medicinal effects of ionized water.
It is altogether remarkable that a BLP reaction directly from water can
happen. Very explicitly his tests were at a low pressure, in the 1 Torr
region, and required use of microwaves to ionize oxygen to the +2 state
wherein it is a BLP catalyst and can react with atomic hydrogen. The same
microwave field that ionizes the oxygen can also dissociate the water vapor
and the hydrogen. Mills has reported one experiment. I don't know that he
has explored the range of conditions under which the process occurs. That
may not be understood for decades.
A number of energy phenomena have been associated with underwater arcs,
which transiently might produce the conditions for the BLP reaction. Such is
a conjecture which requires study in itself. The BLP reaction will not
originate from a chemical source by itself.
Since Mills began his work, he has found more and more catalysts in Nature.
Even with known catalysts, producing the BLP reaction takes know-how and at
the moment some fairly sophisticated equipment. Eventually the support cost
will become quite manageable.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 08:14:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21609;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:13:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:13:01 -0800
Message-ID: <005501c288ed$0bd48920$9a56ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus> <5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021108140051.02cbb5c8@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021109112831.00b032b8@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:10:50 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"cCwx13.0.YH5.DMepz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48259
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed wrote:
> Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> >The Evanson cavity and the associated microwave generator are
> >standard lab stuff and the measurement of direct and reflected power is
> >built into the instrument and displayed on meters on the front the of the
> >box.
>
> I hope it is working right. I suppose it probably is, since off-the-shelf
> meters used for the intended purpose are seldom wrong to this extent,
> confusing 77 with 55 watts.
There is no reason to assume that it was not working right.
> >The apparatus was initially designed just as "lamp" -- an exciter of
> >ionizable gases so that their emission spectrum could be read. It was not
> >intended as an element in a calorimetry experiment, so Mills is doing the
> >best he can.
>
> He could do somewhat better, although perhaps it is not necessary. He
could
> verify by calorimetric means, as I suggested. Monitoring the temperature
of
> the power supplies would be a start.
As I've said, the several calorimetric methods Mills used would not pass
muster in the CF world, where ultraprecise techniques have been required.
Better is not necessary. The effects are large, beyond any reasonable
experimental error. We are talking about Existence Proofs: did the house
burn down or not?
> >Jed is saying that he suspects the measurement of microwave excitation
> >power, which he does not understand, therefore all measurements which use
> >this instrument are suspect.
>
> All measurements with all instruments are always suspect, until they have
> been verified in 5 or 10 independent replications. Any single group of
> researchers might be wrong, or crazy, or even criminally faking it. That
is
> why a group in Russia worked on polywater for many years. Independent
> replication is the only way to rule out the human factor. But I did not
say
> I "suspect" this measurement, I said -- quite clearly -- I have no idea
how
> it works.
Quite so. An unassailable argument in principle applied to any minutiae of a
situation. It becomes more difficult to sustain when there are dozens of
supporting results. It is the same in the CF world. There are few genuine
replications, the identical experiment with identical results. There are
dozens if not hundreds of supporting experiments. It is so with BLP. Many
experiments were done in reputable university and industrial laboratories
under BLP sponsorship before the present facilities and staff were in place.
Critics do not accept those results as they were paid for by BLP and
therefore in principle suspect.
>
>
>
> I am a skeptic about all claims, conventional and unconventional. I insist
> on independent replication and the use of many different instrument types
> and techniques before I believe anything. This claim of Mills has not yet
> met these test as far as I know.
Jed has not really studied Mills' work. The standard stated above is not
realized until there are many commercial applications. Mills' papers show
many techniques, many instruments, and supporting results. So, of course Jed
does not know what Mills has done and is just making statements which in
themselves are correct but prove nothing about what Mills has accomplished.
> > > Perhaps they should dunk the whole power supply in the bath too. It
can
> > > handle 85 watts.
> >
> >And why in the world would they do that?
>
> As a way to be sure the meters on the side are working correctly,
obviously.
Obviously you have to waterproof an instrument designed for dry land. And
then you introduce still more variables, for what you can measure is the AC
input power to the microwave generator, not its microwave output. The
internal losses of the generator are a complex function of the output
condition and you would have to calibrate that too. Really.......!!!!!!!!!!
> > > I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of
these
> > > people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it
seems
> > > insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive.
> >
> >This shows where Jed stands so far as objective evaluation and looking at
> >the whole picture is concerned.
>
> No, that shows that I can separately evaluate a scientific claim and a
> personality. Just because I think a person is a jerk, criminally
negligent,
> or a child abuser does not mean I think his scientific or artistic claims
> have no merit. My impression of Mills, Correa, Bill Gates or Gen. Rommel
is
> that they are (were) dreadful people I would not want to associate with or
> invite to dinner, but on the other hand Mills, Gates are Rommel were
> world-class geniuses who knew how to do their jobs. Their failings are
> moral or ethical, not professional.
Having met and talked with and studied the writings of Randell Mills and
Paulo Correa and Jed Rothwell I have different opinions of their strengths,
weaknesses and ethical value to humanity.
>
> The reason I do not yet believe Mills has nothing to do with his
> personality. He has not been widely replicated yet. I would not believe
his
> claims even if he were Albert Schweitzer (who was supposedly a very nice
> fellow), or Tadahiko Mizuno (who I know to be a very nice fellow).>
>
> >Mills welcomes collaborators and has hired a guy to look for partners.
>
> Either he hired is the most incompetent person available,
The man was just hired.
> or Mills is
> preventing success by not selling demonstration kits and taking other
> commonsense steps to convince people.
Jed can only think in terms of sidewalk vending. He has no real
understanding of what it takes to do real world R&D. He has done very well
as a software entrepreneur, but computer programs exist in a world defined
by understood rules. Jed would be nowhere without the vast labor and
investment that creates standardized electronic parts from the raw materials
of nature. Hs has hammered on this theme to the abuse of researchers in CF
for the last decade or so and it has done no good. The one bright spot, the
Patterson Cell, was headed to defeat even as it shone, for the success which
Jed saw and valiantly defended was short lived. Patterson did not really
understand the process, it was not under control, and soon could no longer
be replicated. The failure to sell out to Motorola, with deep pockets, was a
blunder of management hubris on the part of Patterson's immature MBA
grandson who was president of the company.
The CF world has no covering theory to guide researchers toward experimental
success. Mills's track record in predicting successful experiments is simply
astounding. His problem is energy extraction from an unusual process, as was
Correa's with PAGD.
When I last heard from him, Mills was
> actively trying to prevent people from learning about his work, and hoping
> that people would not believe him, like the late Jim Reding and the Wright
> brothers from 1905 to 1907. He said that, and he acted that way too.
I don't know where Jed got that idea about Mills. Every indication I see
makes Jed's comment nonsense based on a repeated and determined failure to
study what Mills had done. Mills publishes detailed lab reports on a regular
basis on his website. that Jed can't understand them is not Mills' fault.
>
> >The business plan, available on the website, shows concepts for water
> >heaters of all scales, micropower generation, etc. He is looking for $100
> >million to support an aggressive development and advertising campaign for
> >BLP ...
>
> Yes, I have seen the business plan. I think it is idiotic, and I think
$100
> million is $99.99 million more than the job calls for.
Which simply means that Jed doesn't understand the problems or what Mills is
attempting.
>
> But of course let me reiterate:, this business plan and these absurd
budget
> number have no connection with the scientific claims. Mills may be a
> scientific genius but a terrible businessman. So were the Wrights and so
> was Shockley.
Mills has carefully avoided Shockley's mistakes. He has spent investors
money very carefully and for himself maintains a middle class lifestyle. As
for the numbers in the Company Description, I give them little credence, for
the present state of the technology is too far removed from commerce to make
reliable product cost estimates. That should not blind one to the potential.
>
>
> >What Jed's rhetoric missies is the inertia of the marketplace.
>
> That inertia could be overwhelmed in two weeks with a proper PR campaign.
Jed is ignoring they very extensive PR campaign that Edison undertook to
sell electric lighting, to separate the idees of "light" and "fire" in the
public mind. People did not fall all over themselves to acquire electric
lighting, even after Edison built the Pearl Street station and lighted JP
Morgan's board room.
> It is a myth. Almost all of the problem is caused by Mills himself
This is nonsense. Data, please.
, and the
> rest by 2-bit pipsqueaks like Robert Park. The fact that Park was able to
> block Mills' patent demonstrates how inept Mills is.
And on what evidence does Jed think that it was Park that got the USPTO to
block the patent? There are other, more powerful players in this game.
Park is a fool with
> real no power or expertise. Mills could have swept him aside easily, with
a
> little common sense and few public demonstrations.
This is quite irresponsible on Jed's part. He should well remember how
subtle were the errors that led the inventors of the Kinetic Furnace into
sincere belief that the devices was OU. The present state of any of the
devices in the lab require sophisticated understanding of instrument
readings to see the claimed effect. John Q. and even Jed Rothwell gain no
certainty from the Blamer line broadening or a warmed water bath. An
adequately trained observed can and does.
Jed and others think that Mills can trot out a closed loop water engine demo
and wow the world. Right now he can't. I've warned him privately that he
must not attempt such a demonstration until it is absolutely bulletproof and
he can provide a kit of parts so someone else can build one. Once he
surfaces with such a demonstration he will spend all his time defending
himself from critics. Already an article in Scientific American has placed
him in context with Joseph Newmann. It was a clever bit of journalism,
quoting selected facts in a context to denigrate Mills and his work.
>
> >BLP heaters will have low installation costs and very low or no fuel
> >costs. But it's new technology and many customers will be more concerned
> >about support, reliability, features and name brand than some savings on
a
> >fuel bill.
>
> Oh nonsense! This is completely off the track.
***Reader Alert*** If you have stuck with this so far, contrast the
following text with Jed's previous claims about how easy it should be for
Mills to conquer all if only he would sell deomo kits.
>First of all, no customer
> anywhere will be allowed to buy a Mills device until every scientist,
> engineer and corporate manager in the world has become convinced they are
> real, and major industrial companies manufacture them, the Congress has
> passed new laws, and the Underwriters' Laboratory and other institutions
> have spent years and billions of dollars testing the devices.
And Jed thinks Mills' need for substantial resources before moving forward
are unrealistic? Mills' theory is so sweeping and audacious that commercial
success will shake the very foundations of 20th century physics. Mills is
carefully building a foundation of scientific measurements and journal
papers to withstand accusations of fraud. Already the USPTO excuse for
blocking patents is that his theory is at odds with received opinion. Mills
has not sought "common sense" moves so glibly demanded by Jed because a lot
of development engineering is needed by someone with very deep pockets. He
needs to talk to sophisticated corporations, not technical journalists.
Enemies who understand how disruptive BLP technology can be will throw every
roadblock in the way, including questions about the toxicity of the hydrino
compounds which are end products of BLP reactions. If you think
radioactivity scares are silly, wait until the "oilies" start in on hydrino
scares. The fact that BLP technology produces clean energy without fossil
fuel with all those toxic hazards will be forgotten.
Support,
> reliability and features mean absolutely nothing in this context. Mills
> himself will never be in a position to make gadgets and sell them to the
> public any more than he can make Boeing 747 aircraft in his garage. Before
> a single Mills gadget is installed we must have a social revolution. We
> could have one. Indeed, once scientists and engineers everywhere believe
> his claims a revolution is inevitable. But Mills must take steps to
trigger
> that revolution. Half measures and fights with idiots like Park will not
> suffice.
Jed's logic is like a pretzel. Fortunately he doesn't write computer code
that way. First he says of Mills (quoting from earlier text)
--------------------
I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of these
people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it seems
insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive.
Yes, I have seen the business plan. I think it is idiotic, and I think $100
million is $99.99 million more than the job calls for.
-------------------
and now he begins to cite the obstacles that will be thrown in Mills' way.
Mills is not fighting Park. Park is noise. The real enemies are more hidden.
The real problem here is that Jed simply has not studied Mills' work enough
to understand what is going on. That isn't Mills' fault, there are dozens of
technical papers, tutorials and supporting information on the website. I see
in Mills' moves careful strategy to counter just the fight that Jed
foresees.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 11:02:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA11444;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:00:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:00:43 -0800
Message-ID: <007301c28904$7c025f80$9a56ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
Subject: LENR and BLP: A Perspective
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:59:42 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"0oN7e3.0.ko2.Rpgpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48260
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Vo,
Since the Rowan University study of BLP technology for rocker propulsion has
surfaced, there has been a riff of discussion about Mills and BLP. Some
Vortex members also subscribe to HSG, the list that discusses Mills' work.
Others may be newcomers, unfamiliar with these two important streams of
development. I will try to give some perspective to avoid misunderstandings.
Both streams surfaced in 1989 after some time of gestation. Both are deeply
disruptive of existing paradigms in physics and are of great potential value
to humanity. The may be complementary in some deep and yet-to-be-discovered
sense. LENR belongs to the nuclear realm, BLP to the chemical realm.
--------------------------
LENR-CANR-CF has no organized leadership and no organized funding. There is
a body of thousands of papers from around the world supporting the original
findings of Fleischmann and Pons of an "unknown nuclear reaction". There is
no covering theory and no set of rules that guarantee success in producing
active material after 13 years of search.
Mills heads a company, BlackLight Power, initially funded at about $25
million, with a board of directors with business and technical credentials.
There is a published book, the Grand Unified Theory of Classical Quantum
Mechanics, over 1000 pages long, laying out in detail Mills' theory, which
he claims is consistent over 85 orders of magnitude, from the subatomic to
cosmic scale. The book is available as a free download from the website.
Dozens of technical papers have been posted on the BLP website and many have
made their way into professional journals. A set of rules derived from
Mills' theory very reliably indicates what elements are catalysts in the BLP
reaction and what are not. Mills is able to show accurate numerical
correlation between calculations from his theory and measured features of
his experiments.
-----------------------------
LENR-CANR show that intense nuclear energy can be released in common
materials under general ambient conditions. Transmutations are also seen.
Toxic byproducts and harmful radiation are absent. Deuterium is the primary
fuel for these reactions, which is plentiful enough, but the list of
consumables in energy producing systems is as yet unknown. No way of
manufacturing reliable active material is known, or the energy and commodity
cost of doing so. The structure of devices for employing LENR is unknown.
BLP is a process which "shrinks" the electron orbit of hydrogen atoms by the
presence of catalysts meeting specific rules. Shrunken hydrogen atoms are
called hydrinos, which are themselves catalysts, so once created, hydrinos
can catalyze hydrinos with further energy release. There is no runaway
"chain reaction". The energy released per atom of hydrogen is much greater
than the energy gained by burning it to get water, thus water is a potential
fuel. Catalysts are elements such as potassium, rubidium, helium, oxygen,
neon, argon, and others. Many of these have to be ionized before they act as
catalysts. Systems to efficiently extract the energy of the BLP process will
require significant engineering investment.
-----------------------------
LENR produces transmutations which are direct evidence of nuclear processes
at work. At the present level of understanding, the transmutation patterns
are not well understood or controllable. Potentially, transmutation products
may have commercial value. There is evidence that transmutation occurs in
biological systems and such may have survival potential to supplement diets
deficient in essential minerals.
BLP end product is hydrinos, which can acquire electrons and become hydrino
hydrides, and may form di-hydrino molecules. The degree of "shrinkage" of
the hydrinos affects their chemical and energetic properties. Hydrino
compounds are a new class of matter. Potential products include electric
batteries whose storage density is well over 1000 watt-hours per kilogram.
Such would solve many problems associated with use of renewable energy
sources and transportation.
BLP energy modules produce a valuable chemical byproduct. BLP chemical
manufacturing modules produce energy as a marketable byproduct.
----------------------------
LENR/CF suffered very bad PR and is now commonly believed to be a great
scientific blunder. This opinion will slowly turn. A theory may evolve
which will make the experimental evidence more acceptable.
BLP theory has been generally ignored, like the elephant in the living room.
Consequently, experimental evidence supporting the theory is also dismissed
or attributed to experimental error.
----------------------------
LENR began with some questions by Fleischmannn about the behavior of
deuterium heavily loaded in palladium
BLP began with an inspiration by Mills on the nature of the electron orbit
in a hydrogen atom, leading to the 'orbitsphere' model and conditions for
the non-radiative stability of the orbit. The led to postulation of states
lower than 'ground state' and to a blending of quantum mechanics and
Maxwell's theory into a deterministic model of physics wherein the same laws
apply to all scales. The lower states were found when looked for. This is a
classical hypothesis - theory - experimental sequence in which the success
of the theory in predicting experiments demands serious consideration of the
theory.
----------------------------
At this point in time, BLP has presented very persuasive evidence that the
hydrino state of hydrogen is real, to the extent that it can be liquefied at
liquid nitrogen temperatures and characterized by many analytical methods.
Very strong heat release is seen in some cases. Water vapor can be a fuel
source by using microwaves to ionize the oxygen and to produce atomic
hydrogen. Very intense hydrogen plasmas have been produced from water vapor,
which have potential for very powerful lasers operating from the UV to IR
regions.
BLP has produced single crystal diamond films which may be of considerable
potential commercial value.
BLP is nearing the end of its research phase and is actively seeking
partners for commercial development of the technology to be billed as
"Greater Than Fire", making BlackLight as common as "Intel Inside".
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 13:16:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21307;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:14:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:14:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCECC5D.5EE7A6E0 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 23:15:09 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: LENR and BLP: A Perspective
References: <007301c28904$7c025f80$9a56ccd1 asus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"drkz23.0.rC5.Anipz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48261
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Dear Mike,
"Shrunken hydrogen atoms are called hydrinos, which are themselves catalysts,
so once created, hydrinos can catalyze hydrinos with further energy release.
There is no runaway "chain reaction". The energy released per atom of hydrogen
is much greater than the energy gained by burning it to get water, thus water
is a potential fuel. "
Could you clarify:
1) As energy is released when the hydrino is produced, hydrinos themselves are NOT be considered as energy storage for further reactions, isn't it?
2) Is it known that hydrinos have equally, less or more affinity than normal hydrogen on chemical reactions? Or they are inert or they have totally different chemical character?
hamdi ucar
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 16:03:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA20590;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:01:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:01:05 -0800
Message-ID: <002001c28915$6bc0a120$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter"
To: "vortex-L"
Subject: Transient weight changes in chiral materials
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 19:01:01 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"CSP-h3.0.Z15.1Dlpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48262
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Dear all,
The long promised "most recent paper" on transient weight changes is up on
the Avalon website:
http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/AcceleratedQuartz.htm
Enjoy, discuss, rip me apart.
NR
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 10 17:48:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA27117;
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 17:46:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 17:46:26 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: LENR and BLP: A Perspective
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 20:50:19 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <007301c28904$7c025f80$9a56ccd1 asus>
In-Reply-To: <007301c28904$7c025f80$9a56ccd1 asus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200211102050.19582.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA27088
Resent-Message-ID: <"7knxp2.0.cd6.nlmpz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48263
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
On Sunday 10 November 2002 16:59, Mike Carrell wrote:
> Vo,
>
> Since the Rowan University study of BLP technology for rocker propulsion has
> surfaced, there has been a riff of discussion about Mills and BLP. Some
> Vortex members also subscribe to HSG, the list that discusses Mills' work.
> Others may be newcomers, unfamiliar with these two important streams of
> development. I will try to give some perspective to avoid misunderstandings.
>
> Both streams surfaced in 1989 after some time of gestation. Both are deeply
> disruptive of existing paradigms in physics and are of great potential value
> to humanity. The may be complementary in some deep and yet-to-be-discovered
> sense. LENR belongs to the nuclear realm, BLP to the chemical realm.
> --------------------------
> LENR-CANR-CF has no organized leadership and no organized funding. There is
> a body of thousands of papers from around the world supporting the original
> findings of Fleischmann and Pons of an "unknown nuclear reaction". There is
> no covering theory and no set of rules that guarantee success in producing
> active material after 13 years of search.
>
> Mills heads a company, BlackLight Power, initially funded at about $25
> million, with a board of directors with business and technical credentials.
> There is a published book, the Grand Unified Theory of Classical Quantum
> Mechanics, over 1000 pages long, laying out in detail Mills' theory, which
> he claims is consistent over 85 orders of magnitude, from the subatomic to
> cosmic scale. The book is available as a free download from the website.
> Dozens of technical papers have been posted on the BLP website and many have
> made their way into professional journals. A set of rules derived from
> Mills' theory very reliably indicates what elements are catalysts in the BLP
> reaction and what are not. Mills is able to show accurate numerical
> correlation between calculations from his theory and measured features of
> his experiments.
> -----------------------------
> LENR-CANR show that intense nuclear energy can be released in common
> materials under general ambient conditions. Transmutations are also seen.
> Toxic byproducts and harmful radiation are absent. Deuterium is the primary
> fuel for these reactions, which is plentiful enough, but the list of
> consumables in energy producing systems is as yet unknown. No way of
> manufacturing reliable active material is known, or the energy and commodity
> cost of doing so. The structure of devices for employing LENR is unknown.
>
> BLP is a process which "shrinks" the electron orbit of hydrogen atoms by the
> presence of catalysts meeting specific rules. Shrunken hydrogen atoms are
> called hydrinos, which are themselves catalysts, so once created, hydrinos
> can catalyze hydrinos with further energy release. There is no runaway
> "chain reaction". The energy released per atom of hydrogen is much greater
> than the energy gained by burning it to get water, thus water is a potential
> fuel. Catalysts are elements such as potassium, rubidium, helium, oxygen,
> neon, argon, and others. Many of these have to be ionized before they act as
> catalysts. Systems to efficiently extract the energy of the BLP process will
> require significant engineering investment.
> -----------------------------
> LENR produces transmutations which are direct evidence of nuclear processes
> at work. At the present level of understanding, the transmutation patterns
> are not well understood or controllable. Potentially, transmutation products
> may have commercial value. There is evidence that transmutation occurs in
> biological systems and such may have survival potential to supplement diets
> deficient in essential minerals.
>
> BLP end product is hydrinos, which can acquire electrons and become hydrino
> hydrides, and may form di-hydrino molecules. The degree of "shrinkage" of
> the hydrinos affects their chemical and energetic properties. Hydrino
> compounds are a new class of matter. Potential products include electric
> batteries whose storage density is well over 1000 watt-hours per kilogram.
> Such would solve many problems associated with use of renewable energy
> sources and transportation.
>
> BLP energy modules produce a valuable chemical byproduct. BLP chemical
> manufacturing modules produce energy as a marketable byproduct.
> ----------------------------
> LENR/CF suffered very bad PR and is now commonly believed to be a great
> scientific blunder. This opinion will slowly turn. A theory may evolve
> which will make the experimental evidence more acceptable.
>
> BLP theory has been generally ignored, like the elephant in the living room.
> Consequently, experimental evidence supporting the theory is also dismissed
> or attributed to experimental error.
> ----------------------------
> LENR began with some questions by Fleischmannn about the behavior of
> deuterium heavily loaded in palladium
>
> BLP began with an inspiration by Mills on the nature of the electron orbit
> in a hydrogen atom, leading to the 'orbitsphere' model and conditions for
> the non-radiative stability of the orbit. The led to postulation of states
> lower than 'ground state' and to a blending of quantum mechanics and
> Maxwell's theory into a deterministic model of physics wherein the same laws
> apply to all scales. The lower states were found when looked for. This is a
> classical hypothesis - theory - experimental sequence in which the success
> of the theory in predicting experiments demands serious consideration of the
> theory.
> ----------------------------
>
> At this point in time, BLP has presented very persuasive evidence that the
> hydrino state of hydrogen is real, to the extent that it can be liquefied at
> liquid nitrogen temperatures and characterized by many analytical methods.
> Very strong heat release is seen in some cases. Water vapor can be a fuel
> source by using microwaves to ionize the oxygen and to produce atomic
> hydrogen. Very intense hydrogen plasmas have been produced from water vapor,
> which have potential for very powerful lasers operating from the UV to IR
> regions.
>
> BLP has produced single crystal diamond films which may be of considerable
> potential commercial value.
>
> BLP is nearing the end of its research phase and is actively seeking
> partners for commercial development of the technology to be billed as
> "Greater Than Fire", making BlackLight as common as "Intel Inside".
>
>
> Mike Carrell
>
>
>
>
>
It appears that the rocket works. Now maybe there should be some work done
on that. Barring unforseen radiation problems, just maybe here might be a
fuel type that a re-engineered shuttle could use...single stage to orbit.
Yakov
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 00:13:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA06701;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:12:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:12:27 -0800
Message-ID: <3DCF6667.4F206074 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:12:23 +0200
From: hamdi ucar
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Transient weight changes in chiral materials
References: <002001c28915$6bc0a120$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"MD1OT1.0.Ye1.hPspz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48264
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Nicholas Reiter wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> The long promised "most recent paper" on transient weight changes is up on
> the Avalon website:
>
> http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/AcceleratedQuartz.htm
>
> Enjoy, discuss, rip me apart.
>
> NR
Some ideas:
1) Quantitative or parametric experimenting. Get series of measurements using same setup but only varying a parameter of "conditioning" process. For example if an loudspeaker driven by a signal generator is used for agitating the sample, after finding enough responsive configuration (sine, square, triangle or saw tooth!) perform 20 or more measurements by varying the amplitude of the vibration or the frequency or the duration. It is also worth to try ultrasonic. An ultrasonic power transducer can be obtained in $ 5-$30 range in second hand. Log and report all details of each experiment as time/date, and all environment conditions.
It may also require a more resolution (0.1mg) could be fine. Digital scales on this resolution are expensive but mechanical ones can be obtained in $50-$100 as second hand.
2) Repeatability analysis. Perform exactly same tests
a) consecutively
b) by intervals (minutes, hours, days)
Again record all details and report.
3) After or prior of each tests in (1) and (2), perform a control measurement.
a) with a reference weight
b) with the actual target prior to conditioning. You probably doing it already.
4) Test sensitivity of measurements to environment conditions variation. For example temperature, humidity, pressure, light (natural and lamp), ambient electromagnetic fields, etc. if some environment conditions can be controlled, forcefully change them and see the dependence.
You have already obtained results that suggest the phenomenon exist. Maybe before to find the cause of the phenomenon it would be better to report individual results of each experiment including null ones.
hamdi ucar
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 00:35:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12898;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:34:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:34:59 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id:
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 02:35:26 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy
Subject: Parksie's damn dam
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"dlT0u1.0.Q93.pkspz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48265
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Parksie has managed to interfer with several patents, the BLP patent
was the latest in a list which includes the hydrogen loading patent
that one of the Vortexians had applied for. He was also instrumental
in getting Tom Valone fired from the Patent Office. I assume that he
will do his best to interfer with Carl Tilley's patent too. The car
and the SUV's might cause the old boy a bit of a problem though. What
will really cause him a problem is if Carl succeeds in building a
free running F E machine, which I have heard is what he is working on.
What he has done, metaphorically, is build a dam across the river of
human progress. It doesn't stop innovations, it just causes them to
build up like water behind a dam. Eventually, the water overflows the
dam and washes the damn thing down the river. Jed Rothwell posted
about an article published in Scientific American several years after
Kitty Hawk, ridiculing the possibility of heavier that air flying
machines.
The thing that made aviation take off was the great war. Those of us
who lived through the gas shortage of the '70's can appreciate what a
boon a cut off of middle eastern oil would be for Tilley's Technology.
Now if I can just figure out how he's doing it, so that I can figure
out an alternative method of accomplishing the same thing.
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 00:35:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12917;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:35:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:35:00 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <005e01c28889$d372ac00$d65bccd1 asus>
References: <008901c28628$a7185a00$887cccd1 asus>
<5.1.0.14.2.20021107172318.0330b358 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
<001901c2874a$70faa7c0$3f5bccd1 asus>
<005e01c28889$d372ac00$d65bccd1 asus>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 02:35:26 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy
Subject: Re: Line width: confirmation of Mills' hydrino for NASA?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Kp-y-1.0.f93.qkspz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48266
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
>Thomas Malloy wrote:
>
>>
>> Are you saying that Stan actually produces some surplus energy?
>
>I did not follow Meyer's claims closely. I believe that he asserted that he
>had a method of electrolyzing water that took very little energy. He
>"appeared" to have a vehicle with an on-board electrolyzer producing a gas
>used by an IC engine, whose alternator furnished enough power to electrolyze
>the water.
Well, that much is true.
>
>This bears only the most superficial resemblance to Mills' claims. He has
>ionized water vapor and produced the BLP reaction, but he has not extracted
>enough power from any of his lab experiments to produce the hydrogen fuel
>from water. Such remains a possibility predicted by his theory, but
>engineering accomplishment is not yet realized.
In the past I have posted the story of Tathicus Resources and the
newly issued patents which are a rehash of Meyer's. Leon and I were
discussing the difference between ortho and para hydrogen on Friday.
I was moving my finger tips round and round in order to minic the
motion of the electrons. They I attempted to move one finger
clockwise, and the other counterclockwise, this proved difficult.
Tathicus got in's corporate tit in the wringer over their investment
in this technology. I was on their emailing list, but I haven't heard
from them lately. Hum, I wonder if Parksie knows about this?
>
>Meyer's apparatus probably ionized some water. If it produced O++ and H,
>quite possibly, then the BLP reaction may have occurred. I don't think Mills
>has at this point explored the range of conditions which will produce the
>BLP reaction in water.
>
>Mike Carrell
Interesting observation Mike, You know Stan was using tap water, and
you know what that means, there was calcium and magnesium in it.
My brother, nephew, Phil and I drove down to Ohio to see Stan's dog
and pony show. It ended with Stan hitting us up for $5000. Phil, who
is the professional engineer that I'm hoping to take with me when I
visit Carl Tilley, believes that Stan was producing surplus energy,
despite my efforts to convince him otherwise.
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 06:37:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA13100;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 06:36:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 06:36:23 -0800
Message-ID: <20021111143551.90723.qmail web40402.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 06:35:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford
Subject: Re: Parksie's damn dam
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"C2Pef3.0.XC3.d1ypz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48267
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Thomas:
Unfortunately Parks has influence and a whole choir of fellow
'schentests' who also have not produced anything to back him up. I n all
reality he has no business at the patent office. But then nether does
congress. and they have played an instrumental role in fouling the
integrity of the office.
In the long run it is counterproductive to worry about patents. You
stake you claim when the thing is applied for. If your application is
good then any grants past that point can be turned over.
I am wondering if it would not be better to ignore the SOB and drive on.
Maybe later he can be sewed for his metaling. A strong argument can be
made for persistence at interfering with progress. IF it can be proven
he has slowed the wheel then damages can be assessed and those who are as
well prepared as mills can go after him.
Also in a moment of humor. Your subject line reminds me of a story that
involves simular such manner of government bureaucracy and the
foolishness of publishing without knowing the full story...
I will have to dig it out. look for "Dam Environmentalists"
--- thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com> wrote:
> Parksie has managed to interfer with several patents, the BLP patent
> was the latest in a list which includes the hydrogen loading patent
> that one of the Vortexians had applied for. He was also instrumental
> in getting Tom Valone fired from the Patent Office. I assume that he
> will do his best to interfer with Carl Tilley's patent too. The car
> and the SUV's might cause the old boy a bit of a problem though.
What
> will really cause him a problem is if Carl succeeds in building a
> free running F E machine, which I have heard is what he is working
on.
>
> What he has done, metaphorically, is build a dam across the river of
> human progress. It doesn't stop innovations, it just causes them to
> build up like water behind a dam. Eventually, the water overflows
the
> dam and washes the damn thing down the river. Jed Rothwell posted
> about an article published in Scientific American several years
after
> Kitty Hawk, ridiculing the possibility of heavier that air flying
> machines.
>
> The thing that made aviation take off was the great war. Those of us
> who lived through the gas shortage of the '70's can appreciate what
a
> boon a cut off of middle eastern oil would be for Tilley's
Technology.
>
> Now if I can just figure out how he's doing it, so that I can figure
> out an alternative method of accomplishing the same thing.
>
=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 09:11:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA31587;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 09:09:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 09:09:13 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Nov 2002 17:09:04 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111120509.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:09:13 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Mills' business strategy
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"b9gaH1.0.Oj7.uG-pz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48268
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Mike Carrell wrote:
> > He could do somewhat better, although perhaps it is not necessary. He
>could
> > verify by calorimetric means, as I suggested. Monitoring the temperature
>of
> > the power supplies would be a start.
>
>As I've said, the several calorimetric methods Mills used would not pass
>muster in the CF world, where ultraprecise techniques have been required.
>Better is not necessary.
However, "different" is necessary. A claim as revolutionary as this should
be demonstrated with different instrument types and techniques if possible.
> > I "suspect" this measurement, I said -- quite clearly -- I have no idea
>how
> > it works.
>
>Quite so. An unassailable argument in principle applied to any minutiae of
>a situation. It becomes more difficult to sustain when there are dozens of
>supporting results.
Many of these supporting results are from the same authors, and they are of
a theoretical nature. We need similar results independently derived:
different people using different instrument types observing the same
phenomenon with the same gasses.
> It is the same in the CF world. There are few genuine
>replications, the identical experiment with identical results.
After P&F announced in 1989, many other electrochemists set to work
replicating with a palladium cathode, platinum anode, heavy water
electrolyte. Within a year about ~100 of them reported excess heat,
tritium, and some x-rays. Fewer reported helium, because it is so difficult
to detect. The electrochemical cell contents were exactly the same,
although the instruments used to measure the effects varied.
>There are dozens if not hundreds of supporting experiments. It is so with BLP.
No, it isn't. I have read enough of the BLP literature to see that no one
else has observed excess heat from these gasses under these conditions
(although there are scattered, undocumented and unconfirmed reports about
heat from helium and other noble gasses.)
>Critics do not accept those results as they were paid for by BLP and
>therefore in principle suspect.
That is reasonable. No sensible person would believe in cold fusion if only
a few confirmations had been made, and all were paid for and performed
under the direction & guidance of Pons and Fleischmann themselves, using
their equipment. In the early stages verifications performed by others
under BLP auspices are okay, but for real proof we must see truly
independent replications.
> > I am a skeptic about all claims, conventional and unconventional. I insist
> > on independent replication and the use of many different instrument types
> > and techniques before I believe anything. This claim of Mills has not yet
> > met these test as far as I know.
>
>Jed has not really studied Mills' work.
I do not have to know anything about Mills for the above statements to
apply. All claims must be independently replicated -- no exceptions
granted, except for large effects demonstrated in front of crowds of
experts, such the turbine marine engine, the airplane, and the atom bomb.
>The standard stated above is not realized until there are many commercial
>applications.
No, the standard stated above has always been required for claims made in
physics, chemistry, biology and other sciences. It has nothing to do with
commercialization.
>Mills' papers show many techniques, many instruments, and supporting results.
That is a good start, but we must see papers from other researchers,
totally independent of Mills. The human factor must be eliminated. One or
two researchers may crazy or fraudulent. With five or ten that likelihood
becomes insignificantly small, and with ~100 or so it is out of the question.
> > > > Perhaps they should dunk the whole power supply in the bath too. It
>can
> > > > handle 85 watts.
> > >
> > >And why in the world would they do that?
> >
> > As a way to be sure the meters on the side are working correctly,
>obviously.
>
>Obviously you have to waterproof an instrument designed for dry land.
No, you could put the power supplies in a watertight box and submerge the
box, or use air flow calorimetry through the insulated box. A commercially
designed air-cooled chamber like the one Mizuno uses would probably work,
if the excess really is ~20 watts.
>And
>then you introduce still more variables, for what you can measure is the AC
>input power to the microwave generator, not its microwave output.
Measuring AC power is relatively easy. In any case, the idea is to provide
additional backing for the claim, not to supersede or replace the
present method.
>Jed can only think in terms of sidewalk vending.
That is the level Mills is at, and the level he must master. He must
convince a handful of people before he gets anywhere. For example, he might
start with a few professors at MIT, including Peter Hagelstein. We are
talking about one-on-one demonstrations and communication -- the sidewalk
vendor level.
>He has no real understanding of what it takes to do real world R&D.
Actually, I do have some understanding, having participated at major
corporations and read about it, but real world R&D has nothing to do with
Mills. He cannot possibly succeed in doing it, and he is wasting his time
and his investor's money trying. It is as if the Wright brothers had tried
to set up a consortium to develop a practical airplane in 1905. The job was
far too big for them. Before the Mills discovery can be exploited, it will
require input and expertise from hundreds of thousands of people in many
professions -- an army of scientists, engineers, lawyers, lawmakers,
bankers, factory production experts, managers & salesmen. This is not 1867.
We live in a tightly regimented, rule-bound society. Mills cannot quietly
develop this thing and spring it on society a fait accompli. The oil
lobbyists and the APS will tear him to shreds if he tries. Mills cannot
marshal the technical resources or political power to fight them, and his
attempts to do so only distract him from the real job, which is *to
convince society it is real*.
>He has done very well as a software entrepreneur, but computer programs
>exist in a world defined by understood rules.
Actually, they did not when I started, but in any case my observations are
supported by the experiences and histories of other people, not myself.
>The CF world has no covering theory to guide researchers toward
>experimental success. Mills's track record in predicting successful
>experiments is simply astounding.
And his attitude toward the public, and his business & legal strategies are
suicidal. He is trying to fight the APS and the oil companies on their
turf, by their rules, at places like the Patent Office!
>When I last heard from him, Mills was
> > actively trying to prevent people from learning about his work, and hoping
> > that people would not believe him, like the late Jim Reding and the Wright
> > brothers from 1905 to 1907. He said that, and he acted that way too.
>
>I don't know where Jed got that idea about Mills.
A few years ago, Mills told Mallove and he saw no value to demonstrations,
and he did not care whether the public believes his claims or not. Mallove
& I got the impression Mills prefers to have the discovery "to himself."
Many misguided CF scientists and people like the late Jim Reding say the
same thing, for the same reason, and so did the others throughout history.
Some CF scientists will not give me papers for LENR-CANR for that reason.
They want to "corner the market" for intellectual property.
>Every indication I see makes Jed's comment nonsense based on a repeated
>and determined failure to study what Mills had done.
My statements have nothing to do with Mills' technical claims. I am
critiquing his business strategy alone. He is making the same mistakes many
other people have made, including some of history's greatest geniuses.
Actually, my critique only applies if Mills' claims are correct, and he
really has something.
> > Yes, I have seen the business plan. I think it is idiotic, and I think
>$100
> > million is $99.99 million more than the job calls for.
>
>Which simply means that Jed doesn't understand the problems or what Mills
>is attempting.
I understand perfectly what he is attempting. It is spelled out in his
business plan. I think it is the wrong goal, and it is impossible for him
to achieve, against political opposition from the world's largest and most
ruthless vested interests. It is the kind of goal that a naive scientist
might choose, without any consideration of power politics, as if the Patent
Office is an objective organization dedicated to fairness and progress,
banks give money to ventures strictly according to technical merit, and the
Congress makes laws to benefit the nation as a whole, without regard for
the oil oligarchy.
>Mills has carefully avoided Shockley's mistakes. He has spent investors
>money very carefully and for himself maintains a middle class lifestyle.
Shockley spent the money carefully too, but he did not make products people
wanted. He considered himself a genius in all aspects of business, not only
discovery. His mistakes were caused by hubris and naivete.
> > That inertia could be overwhelmed in two weeks with a proper PR campaign.
>
>Jed is ignoring they very extensive PR campaign that Edison undertook to
>sell electric lighting . . .
That PR campaign is exactly what I had in mind! The scientific
establishment was up in arms against Edison. Every major journal and expert
said he was wrong, fraudulent, crazy, etc. Scientists who knew his previous
work, who lived 30 minutes away condemned him without even bothering to
come and see the demonstration. Yet Edison convinced the world in two weeks
in December 1879, at the cost of a dozen bulbs strung up around his
laboratory. People heard about them by word of mouth, and soon, "the
platforms of the Pennsylvania Railroad in Newark and Jersey City, Trenton
and Philadelphia were jammed. The railroad added extra trains. Three
thousand people poured into the one-store village." It would be a little
more difficult to demonstrate the Mills gadget, but if the machine works
reliably and it can be reproduced at a reasonable cost, the job could be
done in weeks or months, for a few hundreds thousand dollars, and zero
advertising costs. If 3,000 technically sophisticated people saw proof that
the Mills is correct, he would be unstoppable, just as Edison was. The job
does not call for $100 million! In fact, unless he first convinces the
public, he cannot succeed, or commercialize anything, or overcome the oil
industry and APS even with $10 billion.
>People did not fall all over themselves to acquire electric
>lighting, even after Edison built the Pearl Street station and lighted JP
>Morgan's board room.
They fell over themselves long before the Pearl Street station was built,
and long before bulbs could be mass produced. Edison swept aside organized
opposition from the gas lighting interests and the hostility and jealousy
of the scientific establishment by convincing ~10,000 people he was right.
> > It is a myth. Almost all of the problem is caused by Mills himself
>
>This is nonsense. Data, please.
It is manifest! He has done nothing to convince people. He has lost every
fight. He cannot even beat Robert Park, for crying out load. It is as if
Prof. Du Moncel and the other dunderheads had had the last word against
Edison in 1879, and five years later no one believed the light bulb was real.
>And on what evidence does Jed think that it was Park that got the USPTO to
>block the patent?
He bragged that he did. But he is not a reliable source of information.
> There are other, more powerful players in this game.
My point exactly. Fighting them by conventional means is impossible.
>Mills could have swept him aside easily, with
>a
> > little common sense and few public demonstrations.
>
>This is quite irresponsible on Jed's part. He should well remember how
>subtle were the errors that led the inventors of the Kinetic Furnace into
>sincere belief that the devices was OU.
My statements are predicated on the working assumption that Carrell is
correct, and subtle errors cannot explain Mills' results. It resembles a
burning house. If subtle errors are possible and convincing demonstrations
cannot be performed, then Mills has the same problem CF researchers such as
Storms has.
I cannot yet judge whether subtle errors are possible.
>The present state of any of the devices in the lab require
>sophisticated understanding of instrument readings to see the claimed
>effect. John Q. and even Jed Rothwell gain no certainty from the Blamer
>line broadening or a warmed water bath.
Rothwell would, if others observe the same thing and find other means to
verify input power.
> An adequately trained observer can and does.
There are millions of adequately trained observers. Out of this pool of
potential witnesses Mills can find 10,000 or so in a few months. It is not
quite as easy as showing incandescent lights on a winter night, but it can
be done. There are probably a dozen people reading this forum who would
qualify and would take the trouble to do it. The growth in the number of
believers would be exponential once devices become available.
>Jed and others think that Mills can trot out a closed loop water engine
>demo and wow the world.
No, I said explicitly that is not necessary. Of course it would make the
job much easier, but a reasonably reliable 20 watt demonstration that can
be replicated for less than $10,000 would be sufficient.
>I've warned him privately that he must not attempt such a demonstration
>until it is absolutely bulletproof and he can provide a kit of parts so
>someone else can build one.
That is bad advice. He should work with what he has now to do the best
demonstration he can. The first few hundred people who look at it will be
sympathetic and willing to forgive an error or come back some other day
when the gadget is working again.
>Once he surfaces with such a demonstration he will spend all his time
>defending himself from critics.
No, he will spend all his time convincing his friends. The critics will
melt away eventually.
> Already an article in Scientific American has placed
>him in context with Joseph Newmann. It was a clever bit of journalism,
>quoting selected facts in a context to denigrate Mills and his work.
Look at what the Sci. Am. said about Edison in 1879. "It would be almost a
public calamity if Mr. Edison should employ his great talent on such a
puerility." He did not respond. He went over the critics heads to the
public. He never had to respond to the critics.
> > Oh nonsense! This is completely off the track.
>
>***Reader Alert*** If you have stuck with this so far, contrast the
>following text with Jed's previous claims about how easy it should be for
>Mills to conquer all if only he would sell deomo kits.
>
> >First of all, no customer
> > anywhere will be allowed to buy a Mills device until every scientist,
> > engineer and corporate manager in the world has become convinced they are
> > real, and major industrial companies manufacture them, the Congress has
> > passed new laws, and the Underwriters' Laboratory and other institutions
> > have spent years and billions of dollars testing the devices.
There is no contradiction. Doing experiments is one thing. Selling water
heaters is quite another!
Mills or any CF scientist is allowed to give or sell components to other
scientists engaged in basic research. A demo kit would have no consumer
liability attached. Research is done at the researcher's own risk. Most
conventional experiments at the Nuclear Engineering Department at Hokkaido
U., for example, would be completely illegal at home, for good reason.
Furthermore, no one believes the Mills and CF experiments are real, so the
authorities see no reason to intervene, investigate or set standards. If
the government thought CF really is fusion, and it really does produce
tritium, there is no way it would let people like Storms do it at home.
After 10,000 engineers and scientists begin frantically working to
replicate Mills you can be sure that regulations and liability will become
a major issue. The oil industry will probably use them to try and squash
the research.
>And Jed thinks Mills' need for substantial resources before moving forward
>are unrealistic?
More resources will be needed than Mills himself could gather in hundred
lifetimes. Also, orders of magnitude more intelligence, innovation and
creativity than Mills alone could ever muster, even if he were given $10
billion, and even if he is the smartest man who ever lived. No single human
being has the power to do this. Instead, it must resemble research on the
airplane in 1911: we need 250,000 people frantically working on it, in
competition, independent of one-another. Bell Labs was arguably the
greatest concentration of creativity or intellectual power in the world
from 1952 to 1960, but even that was not enough to develop the transistor.
It took the combined efforts of hundreds of corporations. Shockley and the
others at Bell Labs soon went off in the wrong direction, and would have
made little progress on their own. If they had been given command of a
national, coordinated project, it would have stalled. Shockley et al.
dismissed the idea of integrated circuits, even after others invented them
and began commercializing them.
>He needs to talk to sophisticated corporations, not technical journalists.
He needs to talk to anyone who will listen! That the lesson of history.
>Enemies who understand how disruptive BLP technology can be will throw
>every roadblock in the way, including questions about the toxicity of the
>hydrino compounds which are end products of BLP reactions. If you think
>radioactivity scares are silly, wait until the "oilies" start in on
>hydrino scares.
Right. That is why commercialization must wait until everyone is convinced
the claims are real. We need a million engineers and venture capitalists
out there anxious to make money with this device.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 11:20:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07567;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 11:18:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 11:18:23 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 14:18:31 -0800
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
From: "Eugene F. Mallove"
To: "vortex l eskimo.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111120509.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"KSyks3.0.8s1.-90qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48269
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
On 11/11/02 9:09 AM, "Jed Rothwell" wrote:
> A few years ago, Mills told Mallove and he saw no value to demonstrations,
> and he did not care whether the public believes his claims or not.
If Rothwell is talking about small-scale, sellable demonstration devices,
that is correct about what I have gathered from Mills, although I do not
recall the specific discussion with Mills. But I most certainly did NOT
state that he does not care whether the public believes his claims or not.
It is preposterous to suggest that Mills does not want the public to believe
his claims. I have never made any such statement. It is obvious from the
historical record that Mills has made a quite exemplary effort in getting
other independent labs to verify his thermal and spectroscopy work and to
publish it and to try to get others to accept it. The Mills work has a much
higher dimensionality than that of only excess heat. Like the nuclear
products of LENR, the spectral signatures and other data go right along with
the Mills excess heat
However, let me state that I emphatically reject Jed's continuing reckless,
amateurish assault on the Mills business strategy. As far as I am
concerned, Mills is following a very sound strategy. Not that there are not
other possible workable strategies, but the one he is using right now is a
viable one. It is in the process of working - though it is not necessarily
guaranteed to succeed.
Concerning a recent exchange on Vortex:
********
Rothwell:
> > I will never understand the psychology or the business strategy of these
> > people! I hope I live to see them succeed despite my doubts, but it seems
> > insane to me, and unethical, and repulsive.
>
Carrel:
>This shows where Jed stands so far as objective evaluation and looking at
>the whole picture is concerned.
Rothwell:
No, that shows that I can separately evaluate a scientific claim and a
personality. Just because I think a person is a jerk, criminally negligent,
or a child abuser does not mean I think his scientific or artistic claims
have no merit. My impression of Mills, Correa, Bill Gates or Gen. Rommel is
that they are (were) dreadful people I would not want to associate with or
invite to dinner, but on the other hand Mills, Gates are Rommel were
world-class geniuses who knew how to do their jobs. Their failings are
moral or ethical, not professional.
*****
Lumping Rommel together with Mills and Gates is about as logically and
ethically justified as Time Magazine placing Pons and Fleischmann and
Wilhelm Reich on the same page with Joseph Mengele, as it did in March 1999
(see IE#37 for the context of that Time story).
As Editor-in-Chief of Infinite Energy, I hereby dissociate our magazine from
such a scurrilous, unjustified attack on Gates and Mills.
Jed has been cautioned before about such attacks. But apparently he has an
incurable passion to repeat them. I hereby advise Jed that his e-mail
account JedRothwell infinite-energy.com will terminate, effective November
29, 2002. If he want to attack inventors and businesses, and me, on Vortex
in the manner that he has been doing, he is welcome to do so -- but it by
the end of the month, if not sooner, it will be under his own mindspring.com
e-mail imprint.
Since I associate editorially and otherwise with people like Mills, the
Correas, Bearden, Shoulders, the late James Reding, and others whom Jed has
attacked, and since Jed does not want to be associated with these people,
this change of e-mail nomenclature should be pleasing to all concerned.
Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
President, New Energy Foundation, Inc.
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
editor infinite-energy.com
www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 12:46:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA19185;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:43:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:43:54 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Nov 2002 20:43:49 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111140114.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 14:52:00 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111120509.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.co
m>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"BeVmU.0.hh4.9Q1qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48270
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
By the way, the quote about Edison came from R. Conot, "A Streak of Luck,"
(Da Capo edition), p. 164
Stripping away a few details and some confusion, Mike Carrell and I
actually agree on most points relating to Mills. We agree that Mills may
find it difficult to overcome opposition from vested interests even though
in a rational world, scientific proof should be enough to convince people.
Actually, I am more optimistic than Carrell about this point. I think the
20-watt experiment, if properly employed, *would* be enough to convince
society, and bring Mills everything he desires, even without a
self-sustaining demonstration. A self-sustaining system would be better,
but what he has now is good enough. I base that statement on the support
for cold fusion I have seen over the years. That support is more widespread
than people realize. I wish the CF scientists would seek out supporters,
take advantage of this hidden reserve of enthusiasm and goodwill, and
publish papers for this audience. Unfortunately, many of them go out of
their way to alienate supporters instead.
The other disagreements between Carrel and I are somewhat more subtle than
they seem. They more a matter of emphasis and timing than substance. I
think the PR campaign must come before a major, multi-million dollar
development effort. Carrel & Mills think development must come first, and
they hope to spring a full-blown prototype on society. If they can do it,
more power to them. Perhaps they will succeed, but I think this strategy is
unnecessarily risky, expensive, time consuming, and it ignores the lessons
of history. I prefer to do things the easy way, with as much assurance of
success as possible, especially when I am fighting the oil industry -- the
most powerful, wealthy and ruthless gang of corporations and dictators on
earth. Without massively public support I see no chance of success.
Carrel is apparently convinced the findings are real. I don't know and I am
cautiously skeptical, but by no means would I categorically deny them!
There is a huge difference between demanding independent scientific
replications and setting some impossible goalpost such as "full
commercialization before I look at it." An anti-CF or anti-Mills skeptic
would demand impossible levels of proof. I want standard levels - 5 or 10
independent replications. This is what you would demand for an plodding,
conventional, incremental new claim in physics or engineering.
If these noble gas experiments can be replicated, they are the best proof
Mills has yet presented, and the technique may have commercial value.
Of course I realize that public support is difficult to secure, and it is
no instant guarantee of success. The public overwhelmingly supports
conservation and better automotive gas mileage, but the oil industry and
the administration have prevented any improvements over the last twenty
years. We do not live in a perfect democracy or a perfectly free society.
The oil industry has great influence over the government, the Congress and
the press. But at least you have some hope of winning when you make your
case in the public forum, working person-to-person, convincing sympathetic,
rational scientists instead of flakes like Robert Park. You must use
unfettered channels of communication such as the Internet. You have no hope
in the courts, at the Patent Office, with regulators, venture capitalists,
at the APS, or with the editors of Scientific American. As far as I can
see, Mills is trying to storm the strongholds of the establishment, instead
of attacking where the enemy is weak.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 12:46:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA19201;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:43:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:43:54 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Nov 2002 20:43:50 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111145235.03c4d0b8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:05:46 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
In-Reply-To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111120509.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"G9ytj3.0.th4.AQ1qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48271
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Eugene F. Mallove wrote:
>If Rothwell is talking about small-scale, sellable demonstration devices,
>that is correct about what I have gathered from Mills, although I do not
>recall the specific discussion with Mills.
I do, and I took notes. Mills said he sees no point in public
demonstrations or demo kits, and does not care about general public
opinion. (The man on the street, as it were -- not to be confused by the
Arab street.) He want to selectively sway the opinion of powerful members
of the establishment.
>But I most certainly did NOT state that he does not care whether the
>public believes his claims or not.
Mills said that, not Mallove.
>It is preposterous to suggest that Mills does not want the public to
>believe his claims.
It is obvious he does not, or he would take steps to convince the public.
Either that, or he is incompetent at PR and cannot imagine what steps are
needed. Everyone says he is smart, so I suppose he does not want to
convince the public.
>However, let me state that I emphatically reject Jed's continuing
>reckless, amateurish assault on the Mills business strategy.
Instead of characterizing my views as reckless or amateur, I suggest
Mallove and Carrell should provide counter-examples from the history of
business showing why I am wrong. I have pointed to parallel,
well-documented history with Edison, the Wrights, the inventors of the
transistor and so on. Edison invented the technique I propose -- not me. If
Mallove and Carrell think Edison was wrong, they should find
counter-examples. I do not think they will find any examples of severely
disruptive technology (as defined by Christensen) where the inventor
succeeded by challenging the establishment in its strongholds.
>As far as I am concerned, Mills is following a very sound strategy.
He has spent years and millions of dollars, and he cannot even get a patent
past the opposition of Robert Park! It is hard to imagine a weaker
position, or a worse performance.
>Lumping Rommel together with Mills and Gates is about as logically and
>ethically justified as Time Magazine placing Pons and Fleischmann and
>Wilhelm Reich on the same page with Joseph Mengele, as it did in March 1999
No, it is completely different. Rommel and Gates were very similar in some
ways, and utterly different from Joseph Mengele. At the height of WWII,
following Rommel's great victories in Africa, Churchill rose in the
Parliament to acknowledge that Rommel was genius and one of history's great
generals. I do not recall that Churchill ever cited any other German
soldier for genius. (Churchill also ordered the MI6 to assassinate Rommel,
another unique distinction. They tried, but failed.) By all accounts --
British, U.S. and German -- Rommel was fair, decent, and he abided
scrupulously by the Geneva Conventions. In the end he joined the conspiracy
against Hitler, and Hitler killed him. That is about as different from
Mengele as any German officer could be.
The reason I cited Rommel, and equate him with Gates, and the reason I
would not want to invite either of them to dinner, is that despite their
genius and personal honesty, I find them both repellant, for similar
reasons. They were ruthless people who did bad things. They served the
wrong masters. They put their enormous talents to use in ways I disapprove
of. War is infinitely worse than business, but in the world of business
Gates has caused harm -- perhaps more harm than good. He has violated
anti-trust laws and business ethics; he has taken other people's ideas
unfairly; and he has sold millions of copies of substandard, badly written
software than infuriates the public, wastes millions of hours, and leaves
computers vulnerable to hackers. Gates is like Andrew Carnegie: ruthless in
business, and a saint in philanthropy. In his Sunday articles in the New
York Times about AIDS in India, Gates once again showed himself personally
to be a great humanitarian and one of the greatest philanthropists in history.
People are complicated and multifaceted.
>As Editor-in-Chief of Infinite Energy, I hereby dissociate our magazine
>from such a scurrilous, unjustified attack on Gates and Mills.
As Editor-in-Chief I suggest you bone up on the biographies of Rommel and
Gates. Calling Mills their equivalent is a complement, after a fashion. If
Mills really has what he claims he is indeed a genius, but a deeply flawed
genius, with personality defects that threaten to prevent his own success.
He is so weak he cannot shove Robert Park aside. And genius or not, he rubs
me the wrong way! Many geniuses do. They can be insufferable, self
destructive jerks.
>Jed has been cautioned before about such attacks.
That's like waving a red flag in front of a bull.
>But apparently he has an incurable passion to repeat them. I hereby
>advise Jed that his e-mail account JedRothwell infinite-energy.com will
>terminate, effective November 29, 2002.
Oh, don't be an ass, Gene. What is the point of doing that? It will annoy
everyone and serve no purpose. People will have difficulty reaching me by
e-mail for a few weeks. No other consequences will follow, and it will
prove nothing. Simmer down.
>Since I associate editorially and otherwise with people like Mills, the
>Correas, Bearden, Shoulders, the late James Reding, and others whom Jed
>has attacked, and since Jed does not want to be associated with these
>people, this change of e-mail nomenclature should be pleasing to all concerned.
No, it would be a big mistake. These people all hate one other too, and
they say much worse things about one-another than I do. In fact, in the
whole batch of authors who have published in I.E., I am the practically the
only one with a sense of humor who knows enough history to distinguish
Rommel from Mengele. Such distinctions are essential to our understanding
of history, and our successful use of knowledge. Lumping your enemies
together without distinction serves no purpose. When Mallove gets the
mistaken notion that I am against him, just because I criticize people like
Mills, he he lumps people together and makes enemies unnecessarily. He --
and Mills -- should listen to what I have to say instead. It would be good
medicine for them.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 13:58:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA24778;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 13:57:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 13:57:30 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 16:57:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
From: "Eugene F. Mallove"
To: "vortex l eskimo.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111145235.03c4d0b8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
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 NAA24726
Resent-Message-ID: <"Pad191.0._26.AV2qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48272
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
On 11/11/02 12:05 PM, "Jed Rothwell"
wrote:
> Oh, don't be an ass, Gene. What is the point of doing that?
It's done -- as of Nov. 29th. Midnight. There will no longer be danger of
having infinite-energy.com associated with your outbursts posing as
historical analysis. E.G. "I don't believe in either Tesla or Reich." --
and on and on....
>It will annoy
> everyone and serve no purpose. People will have difficulty reaching me by
> e-mail for a few weeks.
I gave you two weeks. Contact your list and let them know of the change.
>No other consequences will follow, and it will
> prove nothing. Simmer down.
I'm as cool as a cucumber already. I've been trying to get this taken care
of for a long time. You just gave me the final straw.
>
>
>> Since I associate editorially and otherwise with people like Mills, the
>> Correas, Bearden, Shoulders, the late James Reding, and others whom Jed
>> has attacked, and since Jed does not want to be associated with these
>> people, this change of e-mail nomenclature should be pleasing to all
>> concerned.
>
> No, it would be a big mistake. These people all hate one other too,
You do not know the facts and are blowing smoke, as usual. You prove my
point over and over. I have been privy to correspondence of just the past
week between some of the parties. They are quite complimentary and
respectful of each other. Use your own e-mail nomenclature for such
shoot-from-the-hip performances.
Stick to what you claim to know -- e.g. Rommel vs. Gates -- not the opinion
of various people about each other when you are not privy to their
conversations
> and
> they say much worse things about one-another than I do. In fact, in the
> whole batch of authors who have published in I.E., I am the practically the
> only one with a sense of humor who knows enough history to distinguish
> Rommel from Mengele.
Unfortunately you forget that some people or most people -- such as myself
-- see their primary commonality. They were both vicious Nazis. There is NO
humor in associating Rommel with Gates (or calling people insane or possible
frauds when you know almost nothing of their work). The gradation of their
responsibility for being Nazis and what their particular roles were is of no
concern in the context of your discussion. Furthermore, you did not qualify
any such distinctions when you made the comparisons.
>Such distinctions are essential to our understanding
> of history, and our successful use of knowledge. Lumping your enemies
> together without distinction serves no purpose. When Mallove gets the
> mistaken notion that I am against him, just because I criticize people like
> Mills, he he lumps people together and makes enemies unnecessarily.
You don¹t merely criticize them. You character assassinate them. You are
like a bull in a china shop when it comes to science. The important matters
concerning what Mills, Reich, Tesla, the Correas, and others have (or may
have) discovered and theorized with great difficulty means nothing to you --
if it can't satisfy your criteria for being sold on the street as a widget
as soon as you can get your hands on it -- whether in the primary market or
in the after market.
> He --
> and Mills -- should listen to what I have to say instead. It would be good
> medicine for them.
They are far ahead of you. With the kind of language and arguments you have
continued to use, it is no wonder that they are not interested in listening
to you. Jed Rothwell edited is fine. Jed Rothwell unedited is often -- too
often -- terrible.
>
> - Jed
- Gene
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 15:07:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA32309;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:06:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:06:08 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Nov 2002 23:06:00 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111170314.03c58ec0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:54:07 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
In-Reply-To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111145235.03c4d0b8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
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 PAA32254
Resent-Message-ID: <"CbFNa.0.lu7.VV3qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48273
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Eugene F. Mallove wrote:
>Unfortunately you forget that some people or most people -- such as myself
>-- see their primary commonality. They were both vicious Nazis.
No they were not. That is the point. Everyone who came in contact with
Rommel -- including British prisoners -- said he was a decent, upstanding,
honorable soldier, not a bit vicious. He was like Robert E. Lee. Both were
great generals, and decent, kind people, yet ruthless. Both fought for the
wrong cause, and should have surrendered sooner. If all of the Germans had
resembled Rommel, there would have been no atrocities in WWII (except the
war itself), and no Holocaust. It would have been like WWI. History would
have been far different.
>There is NO humor in associating Rommel with Gates . . .
Obviously I was not being humorous. It is a serious and legitimate
comparison, as is the comparison of Gates and the Robber Barons such as
Carnegie and Rockefeller. Carnegie one of the most despised, ruthless men
of his time, but he also gave away vast sums to good causes, and said "The
Man Who Dies Rich Dies Disgraced."
>(or calling people insane or possible frauds when you know almost nothing
>of their work).
People who act like insane frauds should not be upset when others point
that out. People who invent their own language should not be upset when
others do not understand them or assume they are talking nonsense. You must
conform to social norms if you want to be considered normal. Rugged
individualists who make up their own rules and invent their own language of
science must live with the fact that most people will say they are nuts.
Most people here, for example, think Correa has screw loose, judging by
comments here and e-mail sent to me. This is an open minded forum. If
Correa makes that impression here, imagine how the APS would view him! He
must realize that is the impression he makes. If he wants to appear sane
and well grounded, he must act normally and speak ordinary scientific
English instead of his own private language. No theory of science is so
revolutionary it cannot be expressed in normal English with standard
terminology, albeit with a few definitions and glosses for new concepts.
Newton introduced fewer new words into the language than Correa attempts
to! If scientific ideas required extensive neologisms, it would be
impossible to translate English papers into Japanese, Chinese or other
languages far removed from English. That is not the case.
Actually, Correa only pretends to be a rugged individualist. If he were the
real thing he would not care what I say, and he would be perfectly friendly
to me. He cares a great deal.
In any case, I have listed serious technical problems with Correa. Neither
you nor he responded, so I win by default. He did not calibrate, he has no
blank, he has no idea how much energy he appears to be producing, he did
not try to eliminate the noise from solar heat, so in my opinion -- based
strictly on technical issues -- his experiment is worthless. If you
disagree you should give us some technical reasons.
>The gradation of their responsibility for being Nazis and what their
>particular roles were is of no concern in the context of your discussion.
It makes all the difference in the world. If all Germans were like Rommel,
they would not have killed defenseless civilians and Russian prisoners,
they would have won the war, and they would still run Europe & Russia
today. Most of us would probably be reconciled to the situation, just as we
became reconciled to communist domination of Eastern Europe for 40 years.
We would think of Hitler the way we thought of Stalin during 1960s: "Thank
goodness he's gone. The others are pretty bad, but we can live with them."
>Furthermore, you did not qualify any such distinctions when you made the
>comparisons.
People who know about Rommel and Gates would know what I meant, and what I
had in mind. I cannot qualify every statement the moment I make it, or
explain every comparison and historical fact.
>You don¹t merely criticize them. You character assassinate them.
They assassinate themselves. In any case, comparing someone to Rommel is
not character assassination. Churchill & I admired him greatly, and said
so. (And we would both have shot him on sight, given the opportunity.)
>You are like a bull in a china shop when it comes to science. The
>important matters concerning what Mills, Reich, Tesla, the Correas, and
>others have (or may have) discovered and theorized with great difficulty
>means nothing to you -- if it can't satisfy your criteria for being sold
>on the street as a widget as soon as you can get your hands on it
Come, come! I only pretend that is my criterion. I am joking -- I play
Devil's advocate, or the role of crass businessman; or the man on the
street. You know perfectly well that I appreciate scientific achievement in
its own right, even if it never leads to a useful product. In any case, the
people in your list are totally different from one another. Mills & Tesla
made real accomplishments, which I fully recognize. The Correas made claims
about glow discharge that remain unreplicated, so no one can say whether
they are valid or not. Reich and the Correas made claims about Orgone
energy that I say are based on lousy experiments. I gave the technical
reasons. Until the Correas respond with good answers and new experiments, I
will stick to my opinions. As for the Mills or Orgone theories, I know
nothing about them and I make no comments.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 15:36:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16519;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:34:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:34:02 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <1c2.15f7143.2b019844 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:33:24 EST
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c2.15f7143.2b019844_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"px6U62.0.z14.fv3qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48274
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_1c2.15f7143.2b019844_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/11/02 6:07:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
JedRothwell infinite-energy.com writes:
> The Correas made claims
> about glow discharge that remain unreplicated, so no one can say whether
> they are valid or not. Reich and the Correas made claims about Orgone
> energy that I say are based on lousy experiments. I gave the technical
> reasons. Until the Correas respond with good answers and new experiments, I
>
> will stick to my opinions. As for the Mills or Orgone theories, I know
> nothing about them and I make no comments.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
Very good Jed I agree. Things in this field are hard enough without
inventing new lanuagues or making non-verifiable claims. I went back to
college and obtained a minor of 15 cr in physics + a EE degreee. I still
believe in new energy. I now can explain my ideas in terms of conventional
theory. I can provide a backgound and explain how I differ from the
convention. I do not, however, have a working overunity machine. Nor do I
have have nay investors. Perhaps I am too honest. If I ever get one going
you can believe it.
Right now I am gathering up so equipment to preform some nano powder ball
lighting experiments. I, like Mills, did experiments with ionized plasmas
and never obtained any excess energy. I now believe that nano power is a key
ingrediant.
My therorm has pointed me in this direction. The therom is:
"The gravitational and nuclear motion constants tend toward thouse of the
electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimensional
frequency of one megahertz-meter."
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/index.html
Frank Znidarsic
--part1_1c2.15f7143.2b019844_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/11/02 6:07:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, JedRothwell infinite-energy.com writes:
The Correas made claims
about glow discharge that remain unreplicated, so no one can say whether
they are valid or not. Reich and the Correas made claims about Orgone
energy that I say are based on lousy experiments. I gave the technical
reasons. Until the Correas respond with good answers and new experiments, I
will stick to my opinions. As for the Mills or Orgone theories, I know
nothing about them and I make no comments.
- Jed
Very good Jed I agree. Things in this field are hard enough without inventing new lanuagues or making non-verifiable claims. I went back to college and obtained a minor of 15 cr in physics + a EE degreee. I still believe in new energy. I now can explain my ideas in terms of conventional theory. I can provide a backgound and explain how I differ from the convention. I do not, however, have a working overunity machine. Nor do I have have nay investors. Perhaps I am too honest. If I ever get one going you can believe it.
Right now I am gathering up so equipment to preform some nano powder ball lighting experiments. I, like Mills, did experiments with ionized plasmas and never obtained any excess energy. I now believe that nano power is a key ingrediant.
My therorm has pointed me in this direction. The therom is:
"The gravitational and nuclear motion constants tend toward thouse of the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz-meter."
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/index.html
Frank Znidarsic
--part1_1c2.15f7143.2b019844_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 16:31:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16859;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 16:29:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 16:29:52 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021111160950.019ef018 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 16:28:29 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek
Subject: Who needs Robert Park ?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=====================_3908630==.ALT"
Resent-Message-ID: <"SAk9w2.0.I74.0k4qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48275
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
--=====================_3908630==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Dear Gene and Jed:
It saddens me to see such division between two of the most prominent
supporters of CF.
Can you put down your swords and find an agreeable way to bridge your
differences and mend your wounds?
Many scientists, supporters and other researchers of CF depend on you for
publication, exposure and support.
I know nothing of the personal history between each of you (and DON'T want
to), ...but I think very highly of you both.
I know that neither one of you probably gets many compliments nor much
appreciation from the world as a whole, working in such an unusual field as
CF..but please hang in there and don't give in to in-fighting.... I pray
that you will see the day where you are each and all recognized and
supported for your contributions to the world - and the specific
strategies you've used to achieve your success will become insignificant.
Steve Krivit
Los Angeles, CA USA
www.coldfusioninfo.com
--=====================_3908630==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Gene and Jed:
It saddens me to see such division between two of the most prominent
supporters of CF.
Can you put down your swords and find an agreeable way to bridge your
differences and mend your wounds?
Many scientists, supporters and other researchers of CF depend on you for
publication, exposure and support.
I know nothing of the personal history between each of you (and DON'T
want to), ...but I think very highly of you both.
I know that neither one of you probably gets many compliments nor much
appreciation from the world as a whole, working in such an unusual field
as CF..but please hang in there and don't give in to
in-fighting.... I pray that you will see the day where you are each
and all recognized and supported for your contributions to the
world - and the specific strategies you've used to achieve
your success will become insignificant.
Steve Krivit
Los Angeles, CA USA
www.coldfusioninfo.com
--=====================_3908630==.ALT--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 17:59:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA30584;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:58:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:58:09 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:58:56 -0800
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
From: "Eugene F. Mallove"
To: "vortex l eskimo.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111170314.03c58ec0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Hjp043.0.eT7.l06qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48276
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
On 11/11/02 2:54 PM, "Jed Rothwell" wrote:
> Reich and the Correas made claims about Orgone
> energy that I say are based on lousy experiments. I gave the technical
> reasons. Until the Correas respond with good answers and new experiments, I
> will stick to my opinions. As for the Mills or Orgone theories, I know
> nothing about them and I make no comments.
>
> - Jed
Thanks Jed for proving my case again.
Q.E.D.
- Gene
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 11 20:56:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA22225;
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:55:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:55:27 -0800
Message-ID: <004401c28a20$be43dbe0$826f53d8 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111140114.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 23:54:18 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"9pDiw2.0.BR5.-c8qz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48277
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed said:
> By the way, the quote about Edison came from R. Conot, "A Streak of Luck,"
> (Da Capo edition), p. 164
>
> Stripping away a few details and some confusion, Mike Carrell and I
> actually agree on most points relating to Mills. We agree that Mills may
> find it difficult to overcome opposition from vested interests even though
> in a rational world, scientific proof should be enough to convince people.
Jed and I agree on many things. I think the LENR-CANR website is a great
contribution.
>
> Actually, I am more optimistic than Carrell about this point. I think the
> 20-watt experiment, if properly employed, *would* be enough to convince
> society, and bring Mills everything he desires, even without a
> self-sustaining demonstration.
Sounds great, but what does "properly employed" mean? In the CF arena, there
were dreams of a small device that once activated would manifest safe heat
all by itself, sitting on a desk in impudent defiance of received opinion.
Multiplied, it would force recognition of the "unknown nuclear reaction". It
could be a toy and create a buzz, and by replication crush all attempts to
deny its existence. Eventually the APS would cave in and Park would be
parked.
For BLP, there are two "wow" possibilities. One is the "water engine", a box
that produces substantial energy using a few drops of water as fuel. Such a
thing is theoretically possible, but at present it is like a laptop computer
against ENIAC. They are siblings, separated by a few decades in time but by
tens of thousands of man-years and billions of investment.
The second is the BLP battery, which has such great storage potential that
if realized it could solved in a stroke the utilization of wind and solar
energy and transportation. So much has to happen before such a thing could
be shown that I hazard no guess as to the time. Mills told me once he would
be happy with something twice as good as lithium-ion technology for
starters.
Edison would have made no impact with lamps that lasted ten minutes. He had
to master a whole technology before surfacing. Mills is in the same
position. He has to know how to build the equivalent of the Pearl Street
Station before going "public". If he is there, he isn't saying so.
A self-sustaining system would be better,
> but what he has now is good enough. I base that statement on the support
> for cold fusion I have seen over the years. That support is more
widespread
> than people realize. I wish the CF scientists would seek out supporters,
> take advantage of this hidden reserve of enthusiasm and goodwill, and
> publish papers for this audience. Unfortunately, many of them go out of
> their way to alienate supporters instead.
Jed hasn't been paying attention to Mills. For a time after the Hydrino
Study Group (HSG) was founded (BLP equivalent of Vortex), Mills monitored
the conversation and would occasionally respond to criticisms and comments.
One critic went on and on about some perceived errors in spectroscopic
measurements, and BLP responded by refining the critical paper, which only
strengthened Mills' position. I have since engaged that person off-line in a
private dialogue and find that he "doesn't believe in hydrinos" and is
endlessly inventive in speculating about errors, beyond any reason. We have
seen his type on Vortex.
Mills is polite and generous with his time. But he has too much to do to
answer endless stupid questions.
What Mills has now is more than good enough for someone able to understand
the papers. Gene Mallove can, Jed cannot. No insult here, just the facts.
>
> The other disagreements between Carrel and I are somewhat more subtle than
> they seem. They more a matter of emphasis and timing than substance. I
> think the PR campaign must come before a major, multi-million dollar
> development effort. Carrel & Mills think development must come first, and
> they hope to spring a full-blown prototype on society.
If you don't have something ready, of what use is a promotional campaign?
The little water bath demo should tell any person of sufficient skill that
there is a potential gold mine here. There is the potential to heat homes,
boil oceans for fresh water, drive steamships, and so on. I've already cited
papers and quoted numbers based on real experiments. Jed has simply not
looked at them or understood them, for all his emphasis on reading the
papers. And Jed is a relatively sophisticated person. It will take a company
with strength and know-how to make it real, however. It's quite beyond BLP's
resources.
I have discussed this point with Mills. I have long experience bridging
between an R&D lab and production. There needs to be a bridge device between
the dunked Evanson cavity and a manufacturable approach. This is a demo for
a very small "public". For the right audience, it could create instant
investment. There is a bit of an intellectual disconnect. Bridging it from
the BLP side means diverting very thin resources from other work to engineer
a demo unit. I know how fast something like this can eat up a budget.
Gulp-Gone.
If they can do it,
> more power to them. Perhaps they will succeed, but I think this strategy
is
> unnecessarily risky, expensive, time consuming, and it ignores the lessons
> of history. I prefer to do things the easy way, with as much assurance of
> success as possible, especially when I am fighting the oil industry -- the
> most powerful, wealthy and ruthless gang of corporations and dictators on
> earth. Without massively public support I see no chance of success.
You have to have a bulletproof technical position first. Jed isn't the only
critic crying for replications before belief. There is one simple fact that
is overlooked. At present the only "public" Mills is responsible to are his
private ****qualified**** investors, who from available accounts are quite
happy with the way he is spending their money. Mills' board is also
qualified in a business and technical sense. When and if there is an IPO,
then Mills will be responsible to public investors.
The strategy has been very low key, careful, and stingy. Mills has been
carefully seeding the technical literature with papers supporting the
existence and properties of hydrinos and experiments with them.
Increasingly, these will appear in peer-reviewed journals. The USPTO will
then be unable to claim that the Mills patents are invalid because they are
not supported by received opinion. Mills is building for the long haul, for
which the squabbles of Internet groups matter not. Defending attacks on his
patents in court strengthens his positions, for undefended patents are so
much paper. By going to court, Mills can smoke out hidden enemies and by
systematic review of the literature he is creating with experimental
evidence, win a strong position. A court battle will attract attention and
free publicity. He will win, for court-appointed experts will review the lab
results.
>
> Carrel is apparently convinced the findings are real. I don't know and I
am
> cautiously skeptical, but by no means would I categorically deny them!
That's a good start.
> There is a huge difference between demanding independent scientific
> replications and setting some impossible goalpost such as "full
> commercialization before I look at it." An anti-CF or anti-Mills skeptic
> would demand impossible levels of proof. I want standard levels - 5 or 10
> independent replications. This is what you would demand for an plodding,
> conventional, incremental new claim in physics or engineering.
And Jed, they are there if you will look for them. It depends on how well
you understand the technical issues and how severe your test of
"independence" is. This link
http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/validation.pdf gives a validation
summary with references to other documents, many published. The list is
terse and quite technical and meaningless unless you are at a level of
understanding the significance. Early in his work, Mills contracted with a
series of university and industrial labs, Thermacore among them, to carry
out experiments. In the past, reports of these experiments were posted on
the BLP website, and later summaries of findings by other labs confirming
various aspects of Mills' theory. Now severe critics will not allow these
results because they were commissioned by Mills. By implication,
institutions such as Penn State and Lehigh University were bribed by Mills
to report what he wanted. Does your skepticism run so far as that? Mine
doesn't.
And don't count Scott Little's failure to "replicate" Mills. I have seen the
setup he used, and in no sense was it a replication of the experimental
apparatus Mills uses.
>
> If these noble gas experiments can be replicated, they are the best proof
> Mills has yet presented, and the technique may have commercial value.
If you read carefully, they already have been "replicated". Mills cites the
earlier papers, results found, and the "explanations" attempted. No, these
were not the exact setups Mills uses, but the same can be said of the many
experiments supporting LENR. If you cite those as support, then you must
accept the earlier work Mills cites as well.
>
> Of course I realize that public support is difficult to secure, and it is
> no instant guarantee of success.
Public support will come by subscription to an IPO. There has to be devices,
yet you have ridiculed the forward statements in the company profile.
>The public overwhelmingly supports
> conservation and better automotive gas mileage, but the oil industry and
> the administration have prevented any improvements over the last twenty
> years.
You mean cars now don't get better mileage than 20 years ago? Is the
"public" ready to give up comfort and performance for better mileage?
We do not live in a perfect democracy or a perfectly free society.
> The oil industry has great influence over the government, the Congress and
> the press. But at least you have some hope of winning when you make your
> case in the public forum, working person-to-person, convincing
sympathetic,
> rational scientists instead of flakes like Robert Park.
Mills does not bother with Park. Park creates public noise and chatter by
technical journalists. Others pull strings. Mills talks to the American
Chemical Society and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 06:38:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA21517;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:37:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:37:34 -0800
Message-ID: <20021112143654.72818.qmail web40409.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:36:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"y6j652.0._F5.i8Hqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48278
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Vo:
In the discussion of the Mills / BlackLightPower experiments the question
was put to the group "How do you measure the reflected power" I
have since had the chance to check out the evenson cavity and it
basically comes right down to this.
You just measure it. :-)
With an SWR and RF power meter.
just like you do when you are tuning an antenna.
"Does a different gas behave differently"
yes...
That is why you measure it.
As far as I can see there is absolutely no way to screw this up. The
Evenson cavity is totally closed to the outside world (within its
designed band)
An example
http://www.sairem.com/products/applicators/evenson.htm
RF power goes in and RF power comes out and you measure the standing
waves and calculate that back to the percentage of direct and reflected
power. Then you can produce a reflected power level.
Take the reflected power measurement and subtract it from the direct
power and ''Sha-Zamm!'' you have the absorbed power. Any setup errors
result in a lower absorption (less transfer efficiency) ANY ERRORS.
e.g the cavity is not tuned properly or the cable was not balanced or
there is an RF leak Even if we take these possibilities of a mal-tuned
measurement in to account we still would measure less returned (lower
SWR)
and assume that more power was adsorbed by the reaction.
All errors result in figures that show LESS reaction power.
Except of course for those in basic arithmetic.
=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 08:21:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15972;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:20:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:20:05 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:19:29 EST
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a.28502b30.2b028411_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"3ChW-2.0.Uv3.reIqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48279
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
--part1_a.28502b30.2b028411_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/11/02 11:57:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, mikec snip.net
writes:
> I have since engaged that person off-line in a
> private dialogue and find that he "doesn't believe in hydrinos" and is
>
Yes, who would ever believe in that. It goes against 100 years of science.
It undermimes the very tenemenet of modern science; the quauntum condtiion.
Bohr came up with this idea and it has proven correct in every experiment for
over 100 years. The quantum condition stiates that the minimum orbital
angular momentum is h/6.28
I don't believe that we will find new energy by tossing out the known rules
of science. I do believe that we can find new energy within the existing
framwork of conservation laws and the quantum condition.
I have read . Peter Hagelstein's talk at MIT. He speaks of proton exchange.
This is possible. It does not violate some basic tenement of physics.
Electronic Cooper pairs exchange positions in Bose condensates. In a Bose
condensate involving nucleons protons may also exchange postions. Such is
possible although difficult. I beleive the process is the key to new energy.
I like what Hagelstein has said and it agress with my work on a
vibrationally reinforced Bose condensate.
Mill, however. has a lot of money. He may stumble on things because he has
the means to do it. He would get there faster if he had a real theroreticalo
structure to guide him.
Frank Znidarsic
--part1_a.28502b30.2b028411_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/11/02 11:57:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, mikec snip.net writes:
I have since engaged that person off-line in a
private dialogue and find that he "doesn't believe in hydrinos" and is
Yes, who would ever believe in that. It goes against 100 years of science. It undermimes the very tenemenet of modern science; the quauntum condtiion. Bohr came up with this idea and it has proven correct in every experiment for over 100 years. The quantum condition stiates that the minimum orbital angular momentum is h/6.28
I don't believe that we will find new energy by tossing out the known rules of science. I do believe that we can find new energy within the existing framwork of conservation laws and the quantum condition.
I have read . Peter Hagelstein's talk at MIT. He speaks of proton exchange. This is possible. It does not violate some basic tenement of physics. Electronic Cooper pairs exchange positions in Bose condensates. In a Bose condensate involving nucleons protons may also exchange postions. Such is possible although difficult. I beleive the process is the key to new energy. I like what Hagelstein has said and it agress with my work on a vibrationally reinforced Bose condensate.
Mill, however. has a lot of money. He may stumble on things because he has the means to do it. He would get there faster if he had a real theroreticalo structure to guide him.
Frank Znidarsic
--part1_a.28502b30.2b028411_boundary--
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 09:18:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16921;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:17:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:17:08 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <27.311fce7c.2b029173 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:16:35 EST
Subject: Rothwell is on the money..Mallove has become wacked out
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"tXGyc2.0.J84.JUJqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48280
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
If I can see this so to others. Mallove and Rothwell have different goals.
Rothwell wants to find new energy. It is boring and a lot of work. Mallove
wants to sell more magazines. It is fun with a lot of hipe. I only skim
Mallove's articles while I read everything that Jed writes with great
interest.
As for Mills. He is off of the mark. Malwell Boltzmann described the
distribution of kinetic energy in a gas by introducing the quantum condition
h. Planck and Einstein extended this idea to the photo electric effect.
Bohr explained the atom with it. Schrodinger and Heisenberg explained the
intensity of the spectral lines using the quantum condition. Compton
explained the scattering of X-rays with it. Over the last 100 years ithe
quantum condition has proven true. Astophysicists have found it true on all
stars in all galaxies.
The transitor was developed with this in mind. Look in front of you at the
at the computer screen. The phosphors were developed with the qunatum
condition in mind. The same applies the the electric supply to your comuter.
Again the quantum conditions holds. What about the communications link by
which you receive this. Again it is based on the quantum condition. Now who
do you believe Mill that the quantum condition does not apply or do you see
what is before your eyes?
Again, new energy can be had within what we already know to be true.
Frank Znidarsic
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/index.html
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 09:22:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18878;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:20:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:20:12 -0800
Message-ID: <001601c28a88$c7c29a40$e66f53d8 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
Subject: BLP & LENR: A Perspective Part 2
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:19:12 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"TELEj2.0.uc4.CXJqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48281
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Referencing recent exchanges among Jed, Gene and myself. Jed's a good guy at
heart, but there are some things he doesn't understand about BLP. And
lurkers here may not understand either. So I will continue a bit, hoping to
bring understanding and with it less rancor about Mills' intentions and
strategy.
--------------------
LENR meets resistance because if the data are believed, then a major
overhaul of nuclear physics will be forced and lots of people will have to
think real hard. The evidence is "excess heat" detected by refined
calorimetry, nuclear "ash" -- He, T, etc. in trace amounts, and
transmutation products. The last require sophisticated instruments to
detect. There is no covering theory. No method of guaranteeing active
material. Positive reports easily dismissed as error. No desktop toys.
BLP meets resistance because if the data are believed, then a major overhaul
of chemistry will be forced and lots of people will have to think real hard,
for the data support Mills' monumental overhaul of 20th century physics. The
evidence is "excess heat" of large magnitude, extreme ultraviolet radiation
and the existence of hydrinos, hydrogen atoms whose energy level is less
than the classical "ground" state.
---------------------
Some necessary nomenclature. Mills designates hydrinos this way: H(1/p),
where p is a parameter indicating the degree of shrinkage. The first stage
is H(1/2), produced if the energy hole presented by the catalyst fits the
orbital energy of the hydrogen electron. In some reactions, the energy hole
is N times greater, N being an integer. Thus there can be H(1/4) in one
step. It is also possible for two H(1/2) to interact to produce H and
H(1/3). In the hot plasma cloud of an active cell, anything that can happen
will happen.
Until very recently, the existence of hydrinos had to be detected by various
sophisticated technologies because very small quantities were available,
like the detection of transmutation products in LENR. Mills presented
various spectral plots showing bumps on curves, whose values he could
associate with hydrino states by calculation from his theoretical base. Now
in Jed's world, this is very vaporous, but such correlation between spectra
and calculations from theory is the bedrock of a very large amount of
physical theory. A small problem: nobody wants to believe the theory, so the
data is ignored or attributed to calibration errors or contamination. (Where
have we heard this before?)
Within recent weeks, Mills has announced liquefaction of a gaseous product
of a BLP cell in a liquid nitrogen trap. The product has been characterized
by many techniques, all of which show it to be "new" and Mills shows
correlation of the signatures with H(1/p).
Hydrinos themselves are chemically inert because the electron is bound
tightly (below "ground" state) and can't easily exchange with other atoms,
forming chemical bonds. However, hydrinos can capture electrons, forming
hydrino hydrides H-(1/p) [conventional negative charge notation doesn't work
in email]. These can react chemically, but the ionization potential is much
higher than normal hydrogen so the chemical properties are different. Peter
Gluck has suggested the term "orbitality" to denote this new and significant
property of hydrinos.
Small quantities of hydrino compounds have been available for a year or two.
One is magnetic. Pictures of these are available in several papers on the
BLP website. I have handled the vials in Mills' conference room. Samples
have reportedly been given to qualified parties for study. These are "real",
verifiable evidence of hydrinos.
The catch is that the samples cost thousands of dollars to produce. Unless
an analysis is done correctly, their special properties will not be seen. If
company X is curious about application of hydrino compounds for their
products, then X's lab guys have to be familiar with the chemicals and what
they can do. That can take much time & money. But most important, company X
must have assurance of a reliable supply of H-(1/p). Suppose the ideal
product depends on H-(1/3). Can BLP guarantee a continuous supply in
quantity? Not now. Can BLP build company X a facility to make pure H-(1/3)?
Not now, perhaps not for some time.
-----------------
LENR desk top "wow" demo that Jed wants would be a thing that once activated
generates excess heat safely an indefinitely, like a lump of radium that
heats without killing.
BLP "wow" demo would be a battery with much higher storage capacity than the
expensive lithium ion batteries used in laptops, camcorders, etc. BLP has
detected the presence of H(1/16) in the output of some experiments. There is
a paper showing conceptually how an ion exchange battery chemistry can be
made using H(1/16). The cell potential is ~70V and the potential energy
storage density is 600,000 WH/kg. The best exotic battery chemistry now
available is 300 WH/kg. Batteries with lower values of H(1/p) would have
less spectacular capacity. Ion exchange chemistry is indefinitely
rechargeable.
---------------------
If BLP could trot out a family of such batteries the entrepreneurial market
would go wild as Jed has often predicted. All kinds of products would
result. GM's new platform technology would be a breeze. Wind and solar farms
could charge batteries to be shipped everywhere. A BLP battery in your car
would speed you for a thousand miles in style on a single charge.
For all I know, some battery manufacturere may now be working quietly with
BLP. Note here that the Edison nickel hydride battery chemistry has been
know for many decades, yet it is only in the last year or two that one cany
buy them at Radio Shack. I use them, they are clearly superior to NiCd
batteries for many applications. So while a chemistry looks good at first,
getting a commercial product may take a very long time.
The BLP reactors producing the H(1/p) material could power cities.
Why hasn't this happened? At present, BLP reactors produce a mix of H(1/p).
Only in the last few weeks has Mills disclosed that H(1/p) can be liquefied
at room temperature. The higher the p value, the higher the boiling point.
This opens a path to purification by fractional distillation, a well
understood technique. For batteries, the higher the p value, the more potent
the battery, but high p values may be rare and expensive. Controlling the
yield of this process is like ordinary process chemistry where you throw
reagents in a vat, heat and stir, and then try to sort out the reaction
products. It's going to take a major partner with deep pockets and
determination to get useful products. BLP can't do this alone.
The story is similar for the "water engine". Getting then plasma energy out
as heat is very direct, but the losses in a heat cycle generating plant will
overcome the energy yield for the H(1/2) reaction. Perhaps the reactor must
operate at an average of , say, p = 6 for the output of a thermal generating
cycle to produce enough excess energy to electrolyze water and produce the
hydrogen fuel. I don't know. This is a tough engineering problem. Mills has
searched diligently for methods of extracting electrical energy directly
from the plasma. there is progress, but no public evidence of a real good
technique.
--------------------
I hope the above gives some understanding of why Mills has not surfaced with
gadgets as Jed thinks would create instant public demand. He isn't being
difficult or greedy. He has to follow Nature's lead, as do the LENR workers.
Screaming and pouting just doesn't help.
One thing is sure. If Mills "goes public" his position must be technically
bulletproof and he must have a path to product well laid out. I think he is
doing very well.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 09:58:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA11183;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:56:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:56:50 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 17:56:48 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112111005.00b035e8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:13:06 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy
In-Reply-To: <004401c28a20$be43dbe0$826f53d8 asus>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111140114.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"OhRq22.0.Wk2.X3Kqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48282
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Mike Carrell wrote:
> > Actually, I am more optimistic than Carrell about this point. I think the
> > 20-watt experiment, if properly employed, *would* be enough to convince
> > society, and bring Mills everything he desires, even without a
> > self-sustaining demonstration.
>
>Sounds great, but what does "properly employed" mean?
It means the devices must be located where many scientists and engineers
can test them hands on, at universities, LANL and other national
laboratories, the Royal Institution in England, as well as many informal
venues. You might think all of these institutions are all tightly closed
and will not allow such heretical experiments, but that is not so. There is
a network of open minded people who can open many of these doors. After a
few thousand of these experiments are observed, verified and replicated
from scratch the world would see that Mills is right. It would not take a
million independent replications.
>In the CF arena, there were dreams of a small device that once activated
>would manifest safe heat all by itself, sitting on a desk in impudent
>defiance of received opinion.
That is the ideal. However an experiment that produces a watt or two with,
say, 10 watts of input would be nearly as good. It could be confirmed with
confidence, using reasonably cheap instruments; i.e., ordinary static
calorimeter that cost a few hundred dollars, not a $6,000 Seebeck.
Unfortunately I do not know anyone capable of building such a thing.
>Multiplied, it would force recognition of the "unknown nuclear reaction".
>It could be a toy and create a buzz, and by replication crush all attempts
>to deny its existence.
I have no doubt that is true. Every breakthrough in history has met with
hostile opposition -- inoculations, photographs, telegraphs, electric
lights, vitamins, computers . . . Hoards of angry "skeptics" always attack
innovations. I guess it is human nature. As far as I know, in every
recorded example in history, the opposition was only pushed aside
when many members of the public saw the physical devices (or cured
disease) for themselves and confirmed the truth. People only believe what
they see for themselves. Actually, that's a good thing.
>Eventually the APS would cave in and Park would be parked.
It has always happened that way in the past.
>For BLP, there are two "wow" possibilities. One is the "water engine", a
>box that produces substantial energy using a few drops of water as fuel.
>Such a thing is theoretically possible, but at present it is like a laptop
>computer against ENIAC.
If the device that produces 20 watts excess works most of the time, it
would be almost as good as a self-sustaining demonstration. The skeptics
would refuse to look at it, but there are thousands of open minded educated
people *would* look, and that's all you need.
>Edison would have made no impact with lamps that lasted ten minutes.
Most of the lamps he demonstrated publicly in 1879 did, in fact, last only
ten minutes or so. When he called in a group of investors, the lamps flared
for a few seconds, exploded, and set fire to the parlor. In 1880 he had
people manufacturing dozens of lamps, but only 2 or 3 per day worked. (p.
173) The others burned out with seconds or minutes.
>He had to master a whole technology before surfacing.
He "surfaced" two years before any lamp worked, "bobbing up" in the
newspapers constantly, boasting that he would soon solve the incandescent
lamp problem. He did not even begin to work on the generators, fixtures,
switches, distribution system and components other than the lamp until
after the famous public demonstrations that attracted thousands of people.
(During the demonstration they used off-the-shelf dynamos made by other
people, and a telegraph key for an on-off switch.) The screw socket and
fuses was invented in 1881. The first buildings in Manhattan were
illuminated that year.
>Mills is in the same position. He has to know how to build the equivalent
>of the Pearl Street Station before going "public".
It is just the opposite. The opposition will never allow him to build a
Station unless he goes public first. Today's opposition is a great deal
more powerful than the gas-lamp interests who tried to block Edison.
>Jed hasn't been paying attention to Mills. For a time after the Hydrino
>Study Group (HSG) was founded (BLP equivalent of Vortex), Mills monitored
>the conversation and would occasionally respond to criticisms and comments.
That is not enough. He must reveal every detail, attend conferences, invite
people to visit, and see to it that hundreds of people replicate his
experiment. That is what Pons and Fleischmann did, and what all scientists
do. In other words, Mills must act like a scientist not an inventor or
corporate researcher. Normally this is not advisable but in his case this
would be the less risky approach. At present, he is so vulnerable he cannot
even overcome Robert Park. How will he cope with Exxon or OPEC?
>One critic went on and on about some perceived errors in spectroscopic
>measurements, and BLP responded by refining the critical paper, which only
>strengthened Mills' position. I have since engaged that person off-line in
>a private dialogue and find that he "doesn't believe in hydrinos" . . .
Such critics do not matter. Mills has thousands of potential friends --
people who would be thrilled to replicate, and who would work hard to
replicate. They are the ones he must reach out to.
>Mills is polite and generous with his time. But he has too much to do to
>answer endless stupid questions.
His job is to answer stupid questions. That is the only way to succeed. If
he does not want to answer question, he must train someone else. He has to
hold two week seminars the way AT&T did to show customers how to use
transistors, and later how to make them. A scientist MUST teach others how
to replicate if his work is to have any meaning. I understand that Mills
wants to act as a inventor or corporation instead of a scientist, but I do
not think he can. He is too weak politically; the job is taking too long,
costing too much. It is too risky. He can have everything he wants using
the academic approach.
>What Mills has now is more than good enough for someone able to understand
>the papers.
No, it isn't. Not until many others have replicated him. He must meet the
same standard we demanded of Pons and Fleischmann, Shockley, and all other
illustrious scientists and inventors.
>If you don't have something ready, of what use is a promotional campaign?
He has 20 watts. That is enough. Edison, Shockley and others succeeded with
less.
>The little water bath demo should tell any person of sufficient skill that
>there is a potential gold mine here.
Yes, but it must be independently replicated first.
>I've already cited papers and quoted numbers based on real experiments.
>Jed has simply not looked at them or understood them . . .
That's not true. I demand independent replication before I believe any
experiment is real.
>There needs to be a bridge device between the dunked Evanson cavity and a
>manufacturable approach. This is a demo for a very small "public".
Worldwide the potential audience amounts to millions of people! In the U.S.
alone you could convince hundreds of thousands of smart people with this
demo, once it is independently confirmed and replicated.
>You have to have a bulletproof technical position first. Jed isn't the only
>critic crying for replications before belief.
If the present experiment is verified by 5 or 10 others, and the input is
confirmed with a few other techniques, it will be believable enough.
>The strategy has been very low key, careful, and stingy.
It is not careful. It is extremely risky. It is not stingy; it is probably
a waste of money. The academic technique would cost essentially nothing.
>Mills has been carefully seeding the technical literature with papers
>supporting the existence and properties of hydrinos and experiments with
>them. Increasingly, these will appear in peer-reviewed journals.
Unless they are written by others who have independently replicated, they
will count for nothing. If all cold fusion papers in journals were written
by Pons and Fleischmann, no sensible person would believe them. Arata has
credibility because McKubre replicated him -- none on his own, by himself.
>The USPTO will then be unable to claim that the Mills patents are invalid
>because they are not supported by received opinion.
Certainly it will! Until there are hundreds of thousands of people who
swear they have replicated the effect and sure it is real, the USPTO will
deny patents to Mills, and to all CF researchers as well. A handful of
journal papers will make no difference.
>Defending attacks on his patents in court strengthens his positions . . .
In court? In the heart of the establishment? That is like opening an ice
cream parlor in Hell. The courts, the journals and the USPTO will be very
last places that fall to Mills. He must first win zealous support from
millions of people before he has any chance of prevailing in court. After
every newspaper endorses him and Time magazine make him Man of the Year,
then -- perhaps -- he can win in court, if he is lucky and the oil industry
screws up and hires the wrong $1000 per hour lawyer.
>A court battle will attract attention and free publicity. He will win, for
>court-appointed experts will review the lab results.
No A Chance!!! The way things stand today, any court-appointed expert who
gives Mills the green light will find himself unemployed for life the next
morning.
>And Jed, they are there if you will look for them. It depends on how well
>you understand the technical issues and how severe your test of
>"independence" is. This link
>http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/validation.pdf gives a validation
>summary
I have seen that document before. It does not begin to qualify as
independent replication. No one would accept CF on the basis of such
loosely connected findings. That would be like saying Mizuno's neutron
results in the mid 1980 verified P&F in 1989.
Look, it is very simple: Other people have to set up the same kind of
experiment and measure the same kind of excess heat and spectrum changes.
Once 5 or 10 qualified people do that, and publish detailed descriptions of
their work, then the claim will be replicated. That is what we demand of
any scientific claim. Mills does not get a free ride.
>By implication, institutions such as Penn State and Lehigh University were
>bribed by Mills to report what he wanted.
That's absurd. No one is making such accusations. But people make mistakes.
Researchers at several institutions thought, at first, they were seeing
Polywater. One must wait for high quality, high sigma, reasonably similar
replications before declaring a claims is true -- or false.
>And don't count Scott Little's failure to "replicate" Mills. I have seen the
>setup he used, and in no sense was it a replication of the experimental
>apparatus Mills uses.
The number of failed replications does not matter, as long as there are
enough good quality positive replication. Hundreds of people tried to
replicate CF in 1989 but they made elementary mistakes and their failures
have so significance.
>If you read carefully, they already have been "replicated".
Come now. No one reports excess heat in the range of 1 to 10 watts with
noble gasses. I would have spotted that. When 5 or 10 people do, that will
be a replication, not a "replication" with quotes. Experiments that confirm
the theory are not replications. The definition is quite simple: the same
physical system produces the same phenomenon.
>You mean cars now don't get better mileage than 20 years ago?
Unfortunately, they get slightly worse mileage than 20 years ago.
>Is the "public" ready to give up comfort and performance for better mileage?
Comfort and performance have nothing to do with it. We need motors with
better Carnot efficiency, and better streamlining, improved tires and so
on. Superior technology such as hybrid motors was developed before 1910,
and applied to railroads and ships in the 1940s. It could have been applied
in automobiles generations ago. The U.S. would be still be exporting oil
instead of fighting wars over it. The technology has been blocked by the
oil industry and by "conservatives" in government, in overt, political
campaigning. They have duped the public into thinking that safety, comfort
or performance must be traded off for fuel efficiency. (They are not
actually conservatives, and certainly not conservationists.)
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 10:08:37 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17163;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:06:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:06:39 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [192.82.7.111]
From: "Mark Goldes"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BLP & LENR: A Perspective Part 2
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:06:04 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2002 18:06:05.0205 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B00EC50:01C28A76]
Resent-Message-ID: <"BhLjM2.0.sB4.jCKqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48283
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Mike,
Thanks for this excellent two part summary of the Mills work.
The late Dr. Robert Carroll, a theoretical physicist who was a consultant to
Magnetic Power Inc. for 12 years, prior to his death, predicted the
importance of fractional quantum states during the 1960s.
Arie de Geus,(not to be confused with an ex-Shell oil CEO with a very
similar name) has also been commercializing a fractional hydrogen system. A
PCT Patent application has surfaced which reveals details of his early
efforts. Other patents are pending. He also has developed a comprehensive
theory, quite different from Mills. It used to be possible to download it
from the web for about $60. If that is still the case, Google may help
interested parties find it.
Mark
Mark Goldes, CEO
Magnetic Power Inc.
Room Temeprature Superconductors Inc.
>From: "Mike Carrell"
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To:
>Subject: BLP & LENR: A Perspective Part 2
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:19:12 -0800
>
>Referencing recent exchanges among Jed, Gene and myself. Jed's a good guy
>at
>heart, but there are some things he doesn't understand about BLP. And
>lurkers here may not understand either. So I will continue a bit, hoping to
>bring understanding and with it less rancor about Mills' intentions and
>strategy.
>--------------------
>LENR meets resistance because if the data are believed, then a major
>overhaul of nuclear physics will be forced and lots of people will have to
>think real hard. The evidence is "excess heat" detected by refined
>calorimetry, nuclear "ash" -- He, T, etc. in trace amounts, and
>transmutation products. The last require sophisticated instruments to
>detect. There is no covering theory. No method of guaranteeing active
>material. Positive reports easily dismissed as error. No desktop toys.
>
>BLP meets resistance because if the data are believed, then a major
>overhaul
>of chemistry will be forced and lots of people will have to think real
>hard,
>for the data support Mills' monumental overhaul of 20th century physics.
>The
>evidence is "excess heat" of large magnitude, extreme ultraviolet radiation
>and the existence of hydrinos, hydrogen atoms whose energy level is less
>than the classical "ground" state.
>---------------------
>Some necessary nomenclature. Mills designates hydrinos this way: H(1/p),
>where p is a parameter indicating the degree of shrinkage. The first stage
>is H(1/2), produced if the energy hole presented by the catalyst fits the
>orbital energy of the hydrogen electron. In some reactions, the energy hole
>is N times greater, N being an integer. Thus there can be H(1/4) in one
>step. It is also possible for two H(1/2) to interact to produce H and
>H(1/3). In the hot plasma cloud of an active cell, anything that can happen
>will happen.
>
>Until very recently, the existence of hydrinos had to be detected by
>various
>sophisticated technologies because very small quantities were available,
>like the detection of transmutation products in LENR. Mills presented
>various spectral plots showing bumps on curves, whose values he could
>associate with hydrino states by calculation from his theoretical base. Now
>in Jed's world, this is very vaporous, but such correlation between spectra
>and calculations from theory is the bedrock of a very large amount of
>physical theory. A small problem: nobody wants to believe the theory, so
>the
>data is ignored or attributed to calibration errors or contamination.
>(Where
>have we heard this before?)
>
>Within recent weeks, Mills has announced liquefaction of a gaseous product
>of a BLP cell in a liquid nitrogen trap. The product has been characterized
>by many techniques, all of which show it to be "new" and Mills shows
>correlation of the signatures with H(1/p).
>
>Hydrinos themselves are chemically inert because the electron is bound
>tightly (below "ground" state) and can't easily exchange with other atoms,
>forming chemical bonds. However, hydrinos can capture electrons, forming
>hydrino hydrides H-(1/p) [conventional negative charge notation doesn't
>work
>in email]. These can react chemically, but the ionization potential is much
>higher than normal hydrogen so the chemical properties are different. Peter
>Gluck has suggested the term "orbitality" to denote this new and
>significant
>property of hydrinos.
>
>Small quantities of hydrino compounds have been available for a year or
>two.
>One is magnetic. Pictures of these are available in several papers on the
>BLP website. I have handled the vials in Mills' conference room. Samples
>have reportedly been given to qualified parties for study. These are
>"real",
>verifiable evidence of hydrinos.
>
>The catch is that the samples cost thousands of dollars to produce. Unless
>an analysis is done correctly, their special properties will not be seen.
>If
>company X is curious about application of hydrino compounds for their
>products, then X's lab guys have to be familiar with the chemicals and what
>they can do. That can take much time & money. But most important, company X
>must have assurance of a reliable supply of H-(1/p). Suppose the ideal
>product depends on H-(1/3). Can BLP guarantee a continuous supply in
>quantity? Not now. Can BLP build company X a facility to make pure H-(1/3)?
>Not now, perhaps not for some time.
>-----------------
>LENR desk top "wow" demo that Jed wants would be a thing that once
>activated
>generates excess heat safely an indefinitely, like a lump of radium that
>heats without killing.
>
>BLP "wow" demo would be a battery with much higher storage capacity than
>the
>expensive lithium ion batteries used in laptops, camcorders, etc. BLP has
>detected the presence of H(1/16) in the output of some experiments. There
>is
>a paper showing conceptually how an ion exchange battery chemistry can be
>made using H(1/16). The cell potential is ~70V and the potential energy
>storage density is 600,000 WH/kg. The best exotic battery chemistry now
>available is 300 WH/kg. Batteries with lower values of H(1/p) would have
>less spectacular capacity. Ion exchange chemistry is indefinitely
>rechargeable.
>---------------------
>If BLP could trot out a family of such batteries the entrepreneurial market
>would go wild as Jed has often predicted. All kinds of products would
>result. GM's new platform technology would be a breeze. Wind and solar
>farms
>could charge batteries to be shipped everywhere. A BLP battery in your car
>would speed you for a thousand miles in style on a single charge.
>
>For all I know, some battery manufacturere may now be working quietly with
>BLP. Note here that the Edison nickel hydride battery chemistry has been
>know for many decades, yet it is only in the last year or two that one cany
>buy them at Radio Shack. I use them, they are clearly superior to NiCd
>batteries for many applications. So while a chemistry looks good at first,
>getting a commercial product may take a very long time.
>
>The BLP reactors producing the H(1/p) material could power cities.
>
>Why hasn't this happened? At present, BLP reactors produce a mix of H(1/p).
>Only in the last few weeks has Mills disclosed that H(1/p) can be liquefied
>at room temperature. The higher the p value, the higher the boiling point.
>This opens a path to purification by fractional distillation, a well
>understood technique. For batteries, the higher the p value, the more
>potent
>the battery, but high p values may be rare and expensive. Controlling the
>yield of this process is like ordinary process chemistry where you throw
>reagents in a vat, heat and stir, and then try to sort out the reaction
>products. It's going to take a major partner with deep pockets and
>determination to get useful products. BLP can't do this alone.
>
>The story is similar for the "water engine". Getting then plasma energy out
>as heat is very direct, but the losses in a heat cycle generating plant
>will
>overcome the energy yield for the H(1/2) reaction. Perhaps the reactor must
>operate at an average of , say, p = 6 for the output of a thermal
>generating
>cycle to produce enough excess energy to electrolyze water and produce the
>hydrogen fuel. I don't know. This is a tough engineering problem. Mills has
>searched diligently for methods of extracting electrical energy directly
>from the plasma. there is progress, but no public evidence of a real good
>technique.
>--------------------
>I hope the above gives some understanding of why Mills has not surfaced
>with
>gadgets as Jed thinks would create instant public demand. He isn't being
>difficult or greedy. He has to follow Nature's lead, as do the LENR
>workers.
>Screaming and pouting just doesn't help.
>
>One thing is sure. If Mills "goes public" his position must be technically
>bulletproof and he must have a path to product well laid out. I think he is
>doing very well.
>
>Mike Carrell
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 10:28:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28527;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:26:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:26:50 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 18:26:46 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112131733.039e0ad8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:26:53 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
In-Reply-To: <20021112143654.72818.qmail web40409.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"sakFg3.0.az6.gVKqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48284
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Charles Ford wrote:
>I have since had the chance to check out the evenson cavity and it
>basically comes right down to this.
>
>You just measure it. :-)
>
>With an SWR and RF power meter.
>
>just like you do when you are tuning an antenna.
I am pleased to hear it is easy & reliable. Mills' credibility increases
another notch. BUT, we still need independent replication!
>"Does a different gas behave differently"
>
>yes...
>
>That is why you measure it.
I thought so. Mills should list the reflected power for both gasses.
>Take the reflected power measurement and subtract it from the direct
>power and ''Sha-Zamm!'' you have the absorbed power. Any setup errors
>result in a lower absorption (less transfer efficiency) ANY ERRORS. e.g
>the cavity is not tuned properly or the cable was not balanced or there is
>an RF leak Even if we take these possibilities of a
>mal-tuned measurement in to account we still would measure less returned
>(lower SWR) and assume that more power was adsorbed by the reaction.
>
>All errors result in figures that show LESS reaction power.
The last sentence seems to contradict the previous: "we still would measure
less returned . . ."
The last sentence seems to mean that all errors underestimate the amount of
power delivered to the cell. That would misinterpreted as excess heat in
this case.
Is a 20 watt error possible? Or likely? I doubt it.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 10:33:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA31152;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:31:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:31:50 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:31:56 -0800
Subject: Re: Rothwell is on the money..Mallove has become wacked out
From: "Eugene F. Mallove"
To: "vortex l eskimo.com"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <27.311fce7c.2b029173 aol.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"1w90e1.0.gc7.LaKqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48285
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
On 11/12/02 9:16 AM, "FZNIDARSIC aol.com" wrote:
Dear Frank,
Thanks for entering the cross fire. You are way off the mark, however.
> If I can see this so to others. Mallove and Rothwell have different goals.
> Rothwell wants to find new energy. It is boring and a lot of work. Mallove
> wants to sell more magazines.
That's garbage, Frank, with all due respect. I want to find the fastest
possible path to two goals:
1. A raging New Energy revolution ASAP
2. Determine and learn the truth about nature. Specifically, is our present
(establishment model) nearly correct, as you seem to think, or is it way off
in left field, as I think it is.
> It is fun with a lot of hipe. I only skim
> Mallove's articles while I read everything that Jed writes with great
> interest.
Frank, thanks for the admission that you are not reading (or cannot read)
carefully the excellent science and experimentation in Infinite Energy.
Infinite Energy is not for everyone, to be sure, especially those who think
that the Standard Model is correct, relativity and QM are a complete picture
of the universe, etc. Jed is a politician/computer entrepreneur/sometimes
historian, not a scientist or engineer. He fancies that he knows how to move
forward in new energy and that his business strategies are supreme. He has
helped the cause of cold fusion/LENR greatly and will continue to do so, but
he has reached his limits, which are profound.
>
> As for Mills. He is off of the mark. Malwell
Make that Maxwell -- or has Mallove and Maxwell blended together?
> Boltzmann described the
> distribution of kinetic energy in a gas by introducing the quantum condition
> h. Planck and Einstein extended this idea to the photo electric effect.
> Bohr explained the atom with it. Schrodinger and Heisenberg explained the
> intensity of the spectral lines using the quantum condition. Compton
> explained the scattering of X-rays with it. Over the last 100 years ithe
> quantum condition has proven true. Astophysicists have found it true on all
> stars in all galaxies.
Astrophysicists cannot even understand a picture that is shoved in front of
them by Hoyle, Arp, and others -- that show that their basic theory of the
"cosmological" red shift is bogus. How do you expect them to see other
astrophysical evidence such as Mills has stuck in their faces?
>
> The transitor was developed with this in mind. Look in front of you at the
> at the computer screen. The phosphors were developed with the qunatum
> condition in mind. The same applies the the electric supply to your comuter.
> Again the quantum conditions holds. What about the communications link by
> which you receive this. Again it is based on the quantum condition. Now who
> do you believe Mill that the quantum condition does not apply or do you see
> what is before your eyes?
You are fooled by what science bigot/Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg has
called the "unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics." The actual truth is
that most of the mainstream has been fooled by the "effectiveness of
unreasonable mathematics," which allows them to believe that this or that
theory -- because I fits LOTS of data from LOTS of experiments is
necessarily a proper description of nature. They are blissfully unaware, as
you are Frank, that an infinity of curves (e.g. Multiple theories) can fit
multiple data points (experiments). We need to find better and better
theories that fit more and more of the data -- not less and less of it. This
is Science 101, which 99.9% of the world's scientists fail to realize. Too
bad for them. Too bad for us. It is the precise reason why cold fusion was
rejected outright on "theoretical grounds" and it continues to be. It is the
same reason that nitwits like David Goodwin of Caltech can state that
"special relativity is a fact, not a theory."
>
> Again, new energy can be had within what we already know to be true.
You are lost in a forest of confusion, Frank. But I still think you are a
charming guy -- particularly your spelling and in advertent creation de novo
of new words. Someday we'll stick something in front of you and you'll say,
"Damn, Gene, you were right!" Then we'll go out and celebrate..
Gene Mallove
Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
editor infinite-energy.com
www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975
>
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 10:41:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA05316;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:40:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:40:08 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 18:39:57 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112133736.039e0ad8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:40:02 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: New Oriani paper in JJAP
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"43vRS.0.-I1.7iKqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48286
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
A marvelous paper! Peter Hagelstein will love this. See:
http://jjap.ipap.jp/journal/pdf/JJAP-41-10R/6180.pdf
You have to register to download this, but registration is free.
- Jed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Generation of Nuclear Tracks during Electrolysis
R. A. ORIANI and J. C. FISHER
We show that energetic charged particles are produced during electrolysis
of a D2O solution of Li2SO4 in a cell with a platinum anode and a palladium
cathode. CR-39 plastic detectors, designed for recording alpha particles
from radon decay, were immersed in the electrolyte during electrolysis.
They recorded signi.cantly larger numbers of energetic particle tracks than
were recorded by control detectors not subject to electrolysis. Statistical
analysis shows only a 3 106 probability that the electrolysis tracks and
the control tracks could have arisen from a common population. We conclude
that there is a causal relationship between electrolysis and the production
of energetic charged particles. Because track formation requires particle
energies substantially greater than thermal or electrochemical energies it
seems inescapable that a nuclear reaction was responsible.
KEYWORDS: electrolysis, heavy water, lithium sulfate, palladium cathode,
CR-39 detector, particle tracks, energetic particles, nuclear reaction
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:01:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15693;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:59:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:59:34 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 18:59:25 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112135319.02cca000 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:59:30 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Rothwell is on the money..Mallove has become wacked out
In-Reply-To: <27.311fce7c.2b029173 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ge90y1.0.xq3.L-Kqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48288
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
>If I can see this so to others. Mallove and Rothwell have different
>goals. Rothwell wants to find new energy. It is boring and a lot of
>work. Mallove wants to sell more magazines.
That is not true. Actually, Mallove and I continue to have the same goals,
and I remain sympathetic to him. He is presently upset with me, but perhaps
that will pass. It is unimportant, in any case, since the only thing at
risk is my e-mail address.
I think Gene sometimes has difficulty distinguishing friends from enemies.
Correa and others may be taking advantage of him. I have not taken
advantage of anyone in the CF business yet, mainly for lack of opportunity
I suppose.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:01:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15669;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:59:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:59:32 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 18:59:21 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112134726.02c7bb70 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:53:07 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: New Oriani paper in JJAP
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112133736.039e0ad8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.co
m>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"K9rn72.0.lq3.K-Kqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48287
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
That was supposed to say:
"Statistical analysis shows only a 3 * 10^-6 probability that the
electrolysis tracks and the control tracks could have arisen from a common
population."
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:02:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16498;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:00:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:00:59 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [192.82.7.111]
From: "Mark Goldes"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Patent Applications by Arie de Geus
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:00:26 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID:
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2002 19:00:26.0970 (UTC) FILETIME=[C32AC3A0:01C28A7D]
Resent-Message-ID: <"LeZq12.0.h14.h_Kqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48289
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
In case anyone is interested, there are now two published PCT applications.
They are: WO0231833
NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONAL PROCESSES
and
WO0208787
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SO CALLED
”FRACTIONAL HYDROGEN” AND
ASSOCIATED PRODUCTION OF PHOTON ENERGY
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:04:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17383;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:02:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:02:38 -0800
From: BVicknair bjservices.com
Subject: Re:Monty Python
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:00:18 -0600
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LNGW1/BJSUSA/BJSERVICES(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at
11/12/2002 01:01:58 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"fxiWr3.0.TF4.D1Lqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48290
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
I wish Chis Tinsley was still among us. He had a way of putting discussions
into perspective.
bv
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:25:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28359;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:22:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:22:37 -0800
Message-ID: <20021112192159.18523.qmail web40410.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:21:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112131733.039e0ad8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"k8EcY2.0._w6.zJLqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48291
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Jed:
I understand it perfectly but my english is sometimes backwards. :-)
Lower SWR means more power is adsorbed by the reaction.
Any tuning or connectivity booboo results in a higher SWR then what is
true at the cavity. Therefore actually less energy is making it to the
plasma cloud then you are measureing making the real performance of the
reaction higher then observed.
--- Jed Rothwell wrote:
> >the cavity is not tuned properly or the cable was not balanced or
> there is
> >an RF leak Even if we take these possibilities of a
> >mal-tuned measurement in to account we still would measure less
> returned
> >(lower SWR) and assume that more power was adsorbed by the reaction.
> >
> >All errors result in figures that show LESS reaction power.
>
> The last sentence seems to contradict the previous: "we still would
> measure
> less returned . . ."
>
> The last sentence seems to mean that all errors underestimate the
> amount of
> power delivered to the cell. That would misinterpreted as excess heat
> in
> this case.
>
> Is a 20 watt error possible? Or likely? I doubt it.
>
> - Jed
=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 11:41:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04397;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:39:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:39:20 -0800
Reply-To:
From: "Keith Nagel"
To:
Subject: Randy Mills chemical "convincer"
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:55:12 -0500
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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:
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To:
Resent-Message-ID: <"gqtRo3.0.Q41.dZLqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48292
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Hi All.
Jed mentioned noble gasses and OU, as if this was
something new??? Come on Jed, lots of prior art
claims here, one that jumps immediately to mind
was from that wacky character Joseph Papp. You all complain
about Robert Park, imagine having Richard Feynman
debunking you (grin).
http://www.indian-skeptic.org/html/fey1.htm
I don't see what problem everyone has with Randy
Mills. He's a serious researcher, and has accumulated
enough capital to fund his research. By that measure,
he's been a resounding success. Jed wants a
"convincer" gadget to play with; fair enough
but considering the complexity of the technology
this is asking quite a bit.
In fact, Randy seemed to have just that, and it
comes to the point of this post. That business with
the rejection of his chemical patent struck me
as remarkably nasty. For it is the very thing
which could be easily distributed and shown to
be anomalous. It's also the thing most easily
developed and commercialized. I was under the
impression at the time, that Randy was willing
to ship samples of hydrino compounds to anyone
suitably equipped to handle them. I doubt that
is the case now, without legal protection.
Perhaps someone closer to the story can shed
some light here.
K.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Goldes [mailto:mgoldes msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 2:00 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Patent Applications by Arie de Geus
In case anyone is interested, there are now two published PCT applications.
They are: WO0231833
NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONAL PROCESSES
and
WO0208787
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SO CALLED
”FRACTIONAL HYDROGEN” AND
ASSOCIATED PRODUCTION OF PHOTON ENERGY
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 12:37:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03924;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:36:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:36:11 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 20:36:05 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 15:36:11 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer"
In-Reply-To:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Rd7k8.0.Ez.wOMqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48293
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Keith Nagel wrote:
>Jed mentioned noble gasses and OU, as if this was something new??? Come on
>Jed, lots of prior art claims here, one that jumps immediately to mind was
>from that wacky character Joseph Papp.
Right, yes. I couldn't recall the name. I mentioned this parenthetically:
"there are scattered, undocumented and unconfirmed reports about heat from
helium and other noble gasses." There may be others, but as far as I know
there is no detailed description or paper describing this work.
For people unfamiliar with the story: While Feynman was observing Papp's
machine, the machine exploded and killed someone.
>I don't see what problem everyone has with Randy Mills. He's a serious
>researcher, and has accumulated enough capital to fund his research.
That is pretty good, I have to agree. If he were strictly an inventor or a
corporate researcher, no one could complain, but he seems to want academic
recognition. He must play by the academic rules for that. He must
facilitate replications, and teach others, like a professor. He cannot have
it both ways. I think it would be to his advantage to use the academic
approach pioneered by P. T. Barnum and T. A. Edison. (Barnum was as much an
educator as today's "History Channel" executives are.)
>By that measure, he's been a resounding success. Jed wants a
>"convincer" gadget to play with; fair enough but considering the
>complexity of the technology this is asking quite a bit.
You and Mike Carrell misunderstand the point I am trying to make. I think
that Mills already has a "convincer" gadget, and he should deploy it.
Perhaps I am wrong, but from the description I read and the reaction of the
friendly public that reads papers on LENR-CANR.org, I believe he could
achieve his goals with that device quickly at practically no expense or
risk to himself. I fully support his goals, and I would be very pleased to
see him with three Nobel Prizes and $100 billion, or whatever else he desires.
I have often advocated this strategy. People have *consistently*
misunderstood me, I think because they have not read history. Researchers
accuse me of wanting to wrench their discovery out their hands, give it to
the public for free, and deny them the fruits of their labors. Some have
accused me of wanting to sell magazines at their expense. Actually, my
strategy should result in the opposite outcome, if history is any guide.
>That business with the rejection of his chemical patent struck me
>as remarkably nasty.
Yes, and it is NOTHING to what the establishment will do to him next, if he
does not rally public opinion in his favor. With our new enlightened
interpretation of the Constitution he may find himself held in a cage in
Guantanamo without charges, without access to a lawyer, indefinitely, for
as many years as the oil executives wish.
>I was under the impression at the time, that Randy was willing to ship
>samples of hydrino compounds to anyone suitably equipped to handle them. I
>doubt that is the case now, without legal protection.
Probably not. The people opposing him will ensure that he never gets legal
protection. He and other researchers have foolishly decided not to go
public without patent protection. This makes it easy to stop them. You
order P.O. to block them, and boom -- they surrender. Apparently they
cannot think of any way to strike back. Mike Carrell envisions a
confrontation with a court-appointed expert telling the truth about the
experiments. Frankly, that scenario is ridiculous. The expert would be
fired immediately! There is no high level, James-Bond-movie organized
conspiracy in Washington against cold fusion, or new CAFE regulations, or
wind energy. What you find is garden variety power politics, and
old-fashioned intimidation. Experts foolish enough to defy the APS, the
NSF, or OPEC are fired and never work in their profession again.
- Jed
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 13:11:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21706;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:10:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:10:05 -0800
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 16:10:51 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer
To: Jed Rothwell
cc: vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112131733.039e0ad8 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"XX4H5.0._I5.iuMqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48294
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
Dear Jed,
What is "....the evenson cavity...." ?
Please.
JH
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Charles Ford wrote:
>
> >I have since had the chance to check out the evenson cavity and it
> >basically comes right down to this.
> >
> >You just measure it. :-)
> >
> >With an SWR and RF power meter.
> >
> >just like you do when you are tuning an antenna.
>
> I am pleased to hear it is easy & reliable. Mills' credibility increases
> another notch. BUT, we still need independent replication!
>
>
> >"Does a different gas behave differently"
> >
> >yes...
> >
> >That is why you measure it.
>
> I thought so. Mills should list the reflected power for both gasses.
>
>
> >Take the reflected power measurement and subtract it from the direct
> >power and ''Sha-Zamm!'' you have the absorbed power. Any setup errors
> >result in a lower absorption (less transfer efficiency) ANY ERRORS. e.g
> >the cavity is not tuned properly or the cable was not balanced or there is
> >an RF leak Even if we take these possibilities of a
> >mal-tuned measurement in to account we still would measure less returned
> >(lower SWR) and assume that more power was adsorbed by the reaction.
> >
> >All errors result in figures that show LESS reaction power.
>
> The last sentence seems to contradict the previous: "we still would measure
> less returned . . ."
>
> The last sentence seems to mean that all errors underestimate the amount of
> power delivered to the cell. That would misinterpreted as excess heat in
> this case.
>
> Is a 20 watt error possible? Or likely? I doubt it.
>
> - Jed
>
>
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 14:30:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09083;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:28:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:28:20 -0800
Message-ID: <008901c28ab3$c9c364c0$e66f53d8 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References:
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 17:25:21 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"djk3s1.0.nD2.32Oqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48295
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status:
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Schnurer"
To: "Jed Rothwell"
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Evenson cavity measurements
>
>
> Dear Jed,
>
> What is "....the evenson cavity...." ?
>
> Please.
There is absolutely nothing magical about an "Evanson Cavity" BLP purchased
one from Opthos Instruments Inc. and a data sheet is available at
http://www.e-opthos.com/cavities.htm It is simply a tunable microwave cavity
through which you can slip a tube containing a gas you want to ionize. It
has provision for forced air cooling. It has a coax connector for connection
to a microwave generator.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 14:30:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09098;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:28:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:28:21 -0800
Message-ID: <008a01c28ab3$ca9d9820$e66f53d8 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell"
To:
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer"
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 17:26:12 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"yQCWS2.0.4E2.42Oqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48296
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status:
Jed wrote:
> >By that measure, he's been a resounding success. Jed wants a
> >"convincer" gadget to play with; fair enough but considering the
> >complexity of the technology this is asking quite a bit.
>
> You and Mike Carrell misunderstand the point I am trying to make. I think
> that Mills already has a "convincer" gadget, and he should deploy it.
> Perhaps I am wrong, but from the description I read and the reaction of
the
> friendly public that reads papers on LENR-CANR.org, I believe he could
> achieve his goals with that device quickly at practically no expense or
> risk to himself.
This seems to be the nub of Jed's problem. He thinks that Mills already has
a "convincer" gadget, and is selfishly withholding it. In this email fracas
messages get out of sequence, but I hope I have made it quite clear that
such a gadget is a fiction in Jed's mind. He pointedly doesn't understand
Mills' work, the problems overcome, and those yet remaining.
I fully support his goals, and I would be very pleased to
> see him with three Nobel Prizes and $100 billion, or whatever else he
desires.
We agree on this. Mills potentially could become deservedly richer than
Gates or he can be swept away.
>
> I have often advocated this strategy. People have *consistently*
> misunderstood me, I think because they have not read history. Researchers
> accuse me of wanting to wrench their discovery out their hands, give it to
> the public for free, and deny them the fruits of their labors. Some have
> accused me of wanting to sell magazines at their expense. Actually, my
> strategy should result in the opposite outcome, if history is any guide.
Jed makes his case well, but it is not the only successful business model.
Even Jed can't fool Mother Nature. >
>
> >That business with the rejection of his chemical patent struck me
> >as remarkably nasty.
>
> Yes, and it is NOTHING to what the establishment will do to him next, if
he
> does not rally public opinion in his favor. With our new enlightened
> interpretation of the Constitution he may find himself held in a cage in
> Guantanamo without charges, without access to a lawyer, indefinitely, for
> as many years as the oil executives wish.
Jed needs to take another look as Mills' board of directors. >
>
> >I was under the impression at the time, that Randy was willing to ship
> >samples of hydrino compounds to anyone suitably equipped to handle them.
I
> >doubt that is the case now, without legal protection.
I think too much is read into the USPTO action and court decision. There
probably is a cabal seeking to thwart Mills, and an attack on a fundamental
patent might scare away investors, and so weaken BLP's survivability. Not
necessarily. The excuse given was the radical nature of the CQM theory, so
'there ain't no such animal'. Recent papers by Mills have sidestepped CQM
altogether by essentially stating what I have called Mills' Rules; a set of
conditions defining reagents in the described process. Mills can get all the
patents he wants on such a basis. They are recipes. They have the
disadvantage that they are individually limited in scope, so someone may
find a way around one or more, and you have to file a lot to cover your
whole hide like fish scales. Patents are licenses to sue, and if infringing
products appear on the market it will be very easy to detect if they are
using BLP materials or processes.
But it's nice to have a fundamental patent on a whole new chemistry to hang
on your wall.
All the court did was to rule that the USPTO was within its legal authority
to withdraw the patent. There will be appeals.
As far as Mills giving samples of hydrino compounds for analysis by
qualified experimenters, there is no problem with this. There will be an
agreement about derivative products and possibly confidentiality. If
derivative products show up, Mills knows how to detect the presence of
hydrinos, and a suit can follow even without a patent. At present BLP is the
sole source, but there is very little preventing anyone with money and
brains from duplicating Mills work if they take him seriously and read his
papers.
Mike Carrell
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 15:08:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04101;
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 15:06:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 15:06:42 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Nov 2002 23:06:35 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112173548.039d8998 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:06:36 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer"
In-Reply-To: <008a01c28ab3$ca9d9820$e66f53d8 asus>
References:
<5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"pnkhf2.0.-_.1cOqz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: