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
There is an IMPRESSIVE new pdf doc at:

http://= engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/finalpres.pdf

NASA=20 INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED CONCEPTS PHASE I FINAL PRESENTATION  = ATLANTA, GA,=20 OCTOBER 25, 2002

Done by Dr.Marchese et al. at Rowan Engineering = College=20 in Joysee
 
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 -----
From:=20 Jones Beene=20
To: vortex
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, = 2002 2:05=20 PM
Subject: New independent = confirmation of=20 Mills' hydrino for NASA?

There is an IMPRESSIVE new pdf doc at:

http://= engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/finalpres.pdf

NASA=20 INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED CONCEPTS PHASE I FINAL PRESENTATION  = ATLANTA, GA,=20 OCTOBER 25, 2002

Done by Dr.Marchese et al. at Rowan = Engineering=20 College in Joysee
 
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: archive/latest/48297 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: >This seems to be the nub of Jed's problem. He thinks that Mills already >has a "convincer" gadget, and is selfishly withholding it. Foolishly withholding it. I wish he would act selfishly and propagate 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. Perhaps I misunderstand, but this Carrell seems to be contradicting himself here. *He* is the one who said the s/n ratio is very high this device. It is like a "burning house" so even relatively crude methods work. Assuming the input measurement is reliable, I have to agree. The difference between ~85 and ~107 watts is very large. The paper by Mills and the NASA paper led me to believe the effect occurs regularly; it is reasonably reproducible. (The issue is not discussed much, but I do not get the impression the graph represents one good run out of 50 that failed, like some cold fusion excess heat graphs.) So, if the effect is fairly reproducible, and it really is as high as ~22 watts, where is the problem? With a gadget like that we would convince thousands of people in a few months, and create an international sensation. A few months later we would have 250,000 people frantically working on the problem, and from then on what Carrell calls: "Mills' work, the problems overcome, and those yet remaining." . . . would be moot. It would no longer be "Mills work," or Mills' remaining problems." It would become the central problems of physics; the most important job in world; the focus of the thousands of the best minds on Earth. The remaining problems, whatever they may be, would be overcome more swiftly than Mills can ever hope to fix them. Isn't that what he wants? That seems to me to be the most desirable outcome for him, and for everyone. He would get recognition and a revenue stream -- or a revenue Niagara Falls. The Congress would hand him a special patent by decree if he desires. He would be acclaimed the most brilliant scientist since Einstein. His enemies would evaporate. If you think this is a fantasy, you need to read the history of the photograph, telegraph, the incandescent light, the airplane and the transistor. And what is the alternative? He will fight for years against overwhelming opposition, in a corrupt court system and Patent Office. He is up against the Federal Government, for crying out loud! The lap dog of the oil interests! When the oil industry snaps its fingers, the government will throw away $30 billion in a war to defend oil profits, even when only 60% of the voters support war. Does anyone think the government will hesitate to crush one lone scientist working in obscurity? There is not the slightest chance they will allow him to proceed! That's absurd. They play dirty tricks and intimidation games on the wind electricity industry, which earns billions of dollars and fights back. If the oil industry ever becomes aware of Mills' existence, and takes him seriously, they will crush him before breakfast. They will take all of his money, ruin his reputation, put him in jail permanently or drive him out of the country, or simply kill him. This is real life, not a Frank Capra movie. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 18:17:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19417; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:15:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:15:02 -0800 Message-ID: <00a001c28ad3$7ba5ef40$e66f53d8 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021112173548.039d8998@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer" Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 21:13:34 -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: <"MLCs03.0.Cl4.bMRqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote, > Mike Carrell wrote: > > >This seems to be the nub of Jed's problem. He thinks that Mills already > >has a "convincer" gadget, and is selfishly withholding it. > > Foolishly withholding it. I wish he would act selfishly and propagate 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. > > Perhaps I misunderstand, but this Carrell seems to be contradicting himself > here. *He* is the one who said the s/n ratio is very high this device. It > is like a "burning house" so even relatively crude methods work. Assuming > the input measurement is reliable, I have to agree. The difference between > ~85 and ~107 watts is very large. The paper by Mills and the NASA paper led > me to believe the effect occurs regularly; it is reasonably reproducible. > (The issue is not discussed much, but I do not get the impression the graph > represents one good run out of 50 that failed, like some cold fusion excess > heat graphs.) OK, now it comes into closer focus. What Jed is looking at is chart 8 of the Rowan presentation package. Jed seems to have looked at the relevant BLP paper, which I listed. In this case water vapor is the fuel. Now let's look at the rest of the equipment. Microwave Generator Opthos Evenson Cavity Turbomolecular vacuum pump Water vapor source (heated reservoir) Pressure and flow regulators The reaction occurs at a pressure of 50-100 milliTorr, about 1/1000 of atmospheric pressure. Water vapor was formed externally and flowed into the cell at a rate of 10 sccm (standard cubic centimeters per minute). The microwave energy was 2.45 GHz with about 50W power into the cavity. All this is standard lab stuff, as Jed would approve using. Mills uses it because it is standard and known. Yes, the s/n is quite high. Yes, the equipment costs thousands. No, it is not ready for a sidewalk sale. I have pointed out to Mills that I think it would scare away a development engineer. Why? If I were a development engineer, I can't see a product that has to be run at 2.45 GHz with an Evenson cavity. I need to see a cheaper and more direct way of producing the essential ionization. Mills has experimented with several excitation modes in other papers, and they don't behave the same for reasons that require more study. I have suggested an approach, which Mills indicated as unfeasible. So I don't know the range of frequencies over which the excitation will work. I suspect that the 2.45 GHz is simply an FCC allowed frequency, for the Evenson cavity will assuredly leak microwaves. Choose another frequency and there could be major shielding problems to satisfy the FCC. The tests are run with a flow of water vapor through the cell, with the low pressure maintained by a vacuum pump. BLP has a turbomolecular pump which is capable of reaching high vacuum, not needed here. A "scroll" pump is much better and requires less power, and BLP has one of these too. Since water is cheap, one can allow unreacted gases to escape. The flow is small, but the vacuum pump must work against atmospheric pressure and is therefore doing work indirectly to vaporize the water, along with the heater in the reservoir. In the total picture, the heat of vaporization of the water must be part of the energy budget, which is not included in the Rowan chart. This is a laboratory kluge. It is nowhere near a product. It's not a toy. It's not even useful, and the energy budget may be negative when all is included. To make the reaction run, H2O has to be converted to H + H + O++. Ionization can do it, but that takes some power. I don't know the power yield as a function of operating parameters. Mills may not know either. It requires systematic study which Mills very probably has not done yet. Such is a job for an engineering lab of a business partner. I could go on at some length about all of this. I hope Jed gets the point by now that this demo is not a gadget. In principle, Mills could divert effort to build a better package, stripping away unessential expense so that a path to production is clearly visible. This takes a different kind of mindset than research. It can Gulp-Gone a budget real fast. There may be more important issues. I have seen a comment to the effect that BLP is investing effort in building a laser cavity to work with the water vapor plasma. Experiments indicate that a powerful hydrogen laser operating from the infrared to ultraviolet can be built. If BLP can even get a few watts of beam power from this, it will be singular achievement that will attract scientific as well as commercial and military attention. It's not a public toy, but it will fit into a number of very high value niche applications. > > So, if the effect is fairly reproducible, and it really is as high as ~22 > watts, where is the problem? See above. With a gadget like that we would convince > thousands of people in a few months, and create an international sensation. > A few months later we would have 250,000 people frantically working on the > problem, and from then on what Carrell calls: > > "Mills' work, the problems overcome, and those yet remaining." > > . . . would be moot. It would no longer be "Mills work," or Mills' > remaining problems." It would become the central problems of physics; the > most important job in world; the focus of the thousands of the best minds > on Earth. The remaining problems, whatever they may be, would be overcome > more swiftly than Mills can ever hope to fix them. The laser might be one trigger. > > Isn't that what he wants? That seems to me to be the most desirable outcome > for him, and for everyone. He would get recognition and a revenue stream -- > or a revenue Niagara Falls. The Congress would hand him a special patent by > decree if he desires. He would be acclaimed the most brilliant scientist > since Einstein. His enemies would evaporate. And such may happen yet. > > If you think this is a fantasy, you need to read the history of the > photograph, telegraph, the incandescent light, the airplane and the transistor. The founders became legends. Photography was a curiosity until Eastman, who brought together essential known elements into a system that changed the equation with "You push the button, we do the rest". He could not do this without the previous technical base, in part established by others. Mills is engaged in building the technical base. The telegraph also relied on an existing technical base of electromagnetism, wire, electric batteries, etc. Morse put things together. Mills is busy building the technical base. There were many incandescent lamps before Edison. Edison looked at the system needs and realized he needed a high resistance lamp that would work off 100 volts or so. He was stymied until he got a real high vacuum pump that could produce a hard vacuum so his filaments would not burn up. Mills is building the technical base. The transistor relied on decades of investigation of semiconductor physics and WW2 need for a reliable switch that would protect radar receivers from the high powered output pulse, which went down the same tube. A junction diode was reliable and fast enough to protect the receiver. That gave a basis for pure germanium and it was a couple of small points away from the point-contact transistor. Without the immense technical and financial resources of Bell Labs, transistors might have been much, much later. Mills is building a new technology with a new theory in the face of opposition. Jed, choose your examples more wisely. You missed here. Land and Eastman and Edison had the technical and business savvy to put together something new and create new industries. LENR has no comparable person. But none of these started from a new insight into physics, generated a sweeping theoretical structure, built a company, and produced a series of remarkable experimental results. > > Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 12 21:04:22 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08259; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 21:02:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 21:02:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 23:03:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Does this man know what he is talking about? Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"6FQIu2.0.z02.ipTqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Does this man know what he is talking about?
Thomas Clark posted an article recently which raises some interesting questions, does anybody know anything about gyrons? Might gyrons be the same thing as the zitternbegung? How about GWEN radio towers? I'm planning on visiting the U of M's library to see if they have the article mentioned at the end of this email.

I am a big fan of Issiac Newton's, I regard him as one of the finest minds that the human race has ever produced. I recently came across a website which talks about his writings. While he is most famous for his work in physics. the majority of his writings are about alchemy. He also wrote a book on Daniel, which is at the top of my reading list. I'm also wondering if his writings on alchemy might give insights into LENR's.

Thomas Clark, is the author of the Radiation Health Foundation's website, www.rhfweb.com . He has some strange ideas. His writings are the first I've heard of a Gwen radio towers. These towers and Echelon satellites. According to Tom, are being used by the powers that be, to attempt to control his mind, with these and other systems. He has filed suit against the Federal Government, specifically the NSA. attempting to get them to stop the broadcasts. Well, hope springs eternal.

I never disregard a man's ideas because he has some strange ideas. He posted an article about Newton. Have you ever heard of Gyrons? According to this article, there are 10 to the 90 of these per cubic centimeter. That's a big number! The article continues by saying that these particles collide with each other on a regular basis and that their energy is totally conserved.

Later he quotes Newton on atoms. 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. Well, he missed on that one. I wonder what he will have to say about thermonuclear reactions.

He continues by saying that According to my model, there are no continuous physical fields in nature. The gyron collisions are instantaneous events, described by the Dirac delta functions. Hum, I met an engineer who explained Dirac's delta function to me, but I can't remember how it works, but I know that it is important.

If these gyrons aggregate into electrons, as the article says that they do, then it would seem to me that the two ideas would be mutually contradictory.

Tom attributes all this to this article. Frank M. Meno, Phys. Essays 4, 94 (1991).Ibid. 7, 450 (1994).Ibid. 8, 245 (1995).
From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 08:01:00 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20492; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 07:59:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 07:59:28 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Nov 2002 15:59:24 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113100421.02cab278 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:38:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer" In-Reply-To: <00a001c28ad3$7ba5ef40$e66f53d8 asus> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021112173548.039d8998 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"pN3bg.0.605.WRdqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: >Yes, the s/n is quite high. Yes, the equipment costs thousands. No, it is >not ready for a sidewalk sale. I have pointed out to Mills that I think it >would scare away a development engineer. Why? It might scare away development engineers, perhaps most, but it would attract hundreds of thousands of others, as well as scientists worldwide. I am sure many development engineers would have confidence that they can solve the remaining technical problems as quickly as Mills can, or as anyone else can. The reward for doing so would be enormous. >If I were a development engineer, I can't see a product that has to be run >at 2.45 GHz with an Evenson cavity. I need to see a cheaper and more >direct way of producing the essential ionization. Mills has experimented >with several excitation modes in other papers, and they don't behave the >same for reasons that require more study. I have suggested an approach, >which Mills indicated as unfeasible. . . . Mike, you are missing the forest for the trees! This discussion is way off base. These issues do not matter. Not in the least! To me, this is as if you were to look at the 1908 Wright Flyer and say: This machine is still extremely dangerous. It has killed several people already. The controls are very poorly designed, counter intuitive, and will probably kill pilots. (It has already killed several, and will probably kill 33 over the next few years.) The liability issue alone makes demonstrations and sales completely out of the question. The canard wing forward will not work above 40 mph, and in fact it will make it nearly impossible to control. There is no landing gear. The motor is so underpowered, the airplane cannot get off the ground without a boost from a catapult. There is no seat belt and even in a minor accident, the motor is likely to break loose and crush the pilot. We must hold the machine off the market at least until 1930. To make this practical we need retractable landing gear, radios, lights for night flying, reliable engines and a host of other breakthroughs. The technical details listed above are correct as far as I know -- and totally irrelevant to the success of the airplane. When the Flyer was demonstrated in Paris and Washington, it took the world by storm. Congress issued the Wrights gold medals, investors offered millions of dollars. By 1911 a special issue of Scientific American devoted to aviation reported that "more than half a million men are now actively engaged in some industrial enterprise that has to do with navigation of the air." Yet even then airplanes were impractical deathtraps. Those 500,000 people were needed to make them practical. One or two geniuses working in isolation could never have done it. >So I don't know the range of frequencies over which the excitation will >work. I suspect that the 2.45 GHz is simply an FCC allowed frequency . . . Details like this will be worked out by armies of enthusiastic experts. Compared to the initial breakthrough made by Mills these details are trivial. Nobody remembers the name of the man who invented retractable landing gear, but everyone remembers the Wrights. If it is shown that Mills is right, his machine works, and his theory explains it, he will be the most celebrated, wealthy and respected scientist in history. >This is a laboratory kluge. It is nowhere near a product. It does not have to be. The 1908 Flyer was not a Douglas DC3. That was the first profitable commercial airplane, and the first reasonably safe, practical, quiet and comfortable one. It was introduce in December 1935. (All previous civilian airplanes lost money.) >The founders became legends. Photography was a curiosity until Eastman, >who brought together essential known elements into a system that changed >the equation with "You push the button, we do the rest". When photography was announced in 1839, it was an overnight worldwide sensation. It swept through Europe and American, and within a few years every city and town had photography studios, generating millions of dollars in revenue. The discovers became wealthy. However, patents and copyright protection was not strong back then, so they did become moguls. A few years later, the people who invented and implemented the telegraph such as Morse and Cornell *did* become multi-millionaires. >The telegraph also relied on an existing technical base of >electromagnetism, wire, electric batteries, etc. Morse put things together. No, it did not. Actually, all Morse invented was the code. Henry invented the technical breakthroughs, but he was a scientist, uninterested in profit, so Morse took the credit, and the profit. When Congress appropriated $30,000 for the first telegraph line, from Washington to Baltimore, the technology was nowhere near ready. All Morse and his partners had was a proof of principle machine, chutzpah, sticky fingers, influence in high places, and (they were pretty sure) the ability to transmit over long distances. Morse's plans called for running lines underground, which would never have worked, and for transmission equipment that was utterly impractical. When his employees invented better equipment that used a sounder instead of making marks on paper, he fired them in a fit of jealousy, and forbade the use of it. If they had followed his orders the first line would never have worked. A crowd of experienced, savvy engineers and builders such as Cornell joined with Morse and invented the needed technology in a big hurry, at the taxpayer's expense. One of his business partners apparently took a bribe and bought a huge lot of defective wire, which almost ruined the project. That was the first telecom purchasing agent scandal, but hardly the last! After screwing up and wasting huge amounts of public funding, they finally managed to get the project to work. Then they got patents, formed private companies, and made hundreds of millions of dollars overnight. The latest telecom scams and scandals carry on the traditions established by Morse and his colleagues. Actually, when the line was first installed, it worked, but no one could think of a use for it. A few months went by without a single customer sending a message. The Congress and most experts dismissed it as a white elephant and a waste of money. It took a while for people to realize how valuable it was. >Mills is busy building the technical base. He cannot do it single handed, any more than Morse could string telegraph wire, or the Wrights could invent retractable landing gear. >There were many incandescent lamps before Edison. Edison looked at the >system needs and realized he needed a high resistance lamp that would work >off 100 volts or so. He was stymied until he got a real high vacuum pump >that could produce a hard vacuum so his filaments would not burn up. And much else, but most of it was not ready when he convinced the public in December 1879. He was still inventing key parts of the technology two years later, and he never did pay for that vacuum pump, as far as I know. (For his whole life he was reportedly trailed by angry crowd of creditors, swindled business partners, and alienated employees. He was not a likeable fellow.) >Jed, choose your examples more wisely. You missed here. Land and Eastman >and Edison had the technical and business savvy to put together something >new and create new industries. That was 50 years after photography became a multimillion dollar worldwide industry. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 08:25:26 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA04283; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 08:23:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 08:23:54 -0800 Message-ID: <003101c28b4a$113dd1a0$1f5bccd1 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <27.311fce7c.2b029173 aol.com> Subject: Frank Znidarsic's Beliefs Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:22:50 -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: <"y0jye.0.p21.Podqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Znidarsic wrote: > > 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 the > quantum condition has proven true. Astophysicists have found it true on all > stars in all galaxies. Frank is confusing "useful" with "true" and is not including pieces that don't fit. Einstein did not render Newton "wrong", Newton's work became a special case. Mills' claim for CQM is that Nature obeys a consistent set of rules over 85 orders of magnitude, and that he has found a way to meld Maxwell's work with QM. He cites detail observations and a large body of experimental work to support the claim. Mill is not "overturning" QM. Frank should read http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/technical/Schrodinger%20Paper%205_24_00_W .pdf for a discussion by Mills of QM and the hydrogen atom. One thing Mills points out about quantum mechanics is that it allows a long trial and error process of calculation to find parameters which will fit an observation. These parameters are then presented in texts as if they are reasoning form first principles, which they are not. This gives students a false sense of surety about the validity of QM. > > The transistor was developed with this in mind. Look in front of you at the > at the computer screen. The phosphors were developed with the quantum > condition in mind. The same applies the electric supply to your computer. > 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? A wholly irrelevant argument, but Frank should have a better grasp of Mills' theory before he denigrates it. He cites the glowing phosphors on the screen before us as evidence of the "quantum condition" and fancies that somehow Mills denies this. If Frank had actually studied Mills' work, he would find that a key factor is the resonant transfer process whereby energy is transferred between atoms without ionization. Mills notes that this process is well known in chemistry and cites the processes in common phosphors as an example. > > Again, new energy can be had within what we already know to be true. It happens that the sub-ground state of the hydrogen atom is among what is already known to be true by senior authors. College texts from which people commonly learn are subsets of senior texts by earlier authors. Sorry I can't quote chapter and verse here, but the notion that everything is known about the hydrogen atom is held by "authorities" like Park and other partially informed people. >From another post by Frank: >Yes, who would ever believe in that (hydrinos). It goes against 100 years of science. It undermines 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 "Correct in every experiment for over 100 years" is pure hubris. There may be 100 years of experiments that support Bhor's postulate, but that does not include "all" experiments, especially those of Mills which show the very clear presence of exceptions. >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. Frank is now expressing a belief. His belief that Mills is tossing out the known rules of science is mistaken and a result of not studying what Mills has actually done. Nothing in Mills' work violates conservation laws and if Frank thinks so, it only indicates how poor his grasp of Mills' work actually is. He also apparently does not understand Mills' theory. >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 theoretical structure to guide him. Here Frank clearly displays his utter ignorance of Mills' work. "Stumble????" 1) Mills had an inspired insight into the nature of the electron which enabled him to build a conceptual bridge between Maxwell's classical electrodynamics and quantum mechanics. This led to his obitsphere model of the electron. 2) Mills' orbitsphere model implies sub-ground states even though this goes against the current fashion in physics. 3) About 1989 when F&P were making their splash Mills was motivated to look for conditions that would enable resonant transfer energy release. He was at that time working with John Farrell at Franklin & Marshall College and he asked Farrell to find electronic energy transitions which matched the potential energy of hydrogen. He found it in K+ and built and electrolytic cell which turned on immediately and gave excess heat at a time when investigators of the F&P cells were loading cathodes for weeks or months hoping for some excess heat. This in no "stumble". It is direct inference from hypothesis to experiment and confirmation of hypothesis by experiment. 4) In ensuing years, experiments directed by Mills have consistently shown features consistent with the existence of hydrinos. He performs calculations from his theory of spectral lines in lab experiments and astronomical observations by others and gets consistent matches. This is not "stumbling". 5) In recent months, Mills has published a remarkable series of experiments very clearly showing existence of hydrinos, including liquefaction of a novel gas whose characterization is consistent with predictions of hydrino properties. 6) Mills' experiments are not "stumbles". His theory predicts specific catalysts which produce dramatic results in experiments. Reagents which are not predicted to be catalysts, though chemically similar, produce null results. All this is perfectly sound experimental science. It is Frank who is far off the mark. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 08:33:09 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA09040; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 08:31:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 08:31:01 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Nov 2002 16:30:50 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113112546.02ca3518 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:29:44 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Lipson ICCF-9 paper similar to Oriani Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"-t-pQ1.0.5D2.5vdqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I should have mentioned that Lipson, Roussetski, Miley and Castano detected particles with CR-39, and reported that at ICCF-9. Perhaps that is what inspired Oriani. I asked Miley for the paper about that. He just sent me: "IN-SITU CHARGED PARTICLES AND X-RAY DETECTION IN Pd THIN FILM-CATHODES DURING ELECTROLYSIS IN Li2SO4/H2O" The format is a little messed up. Anyway, I will convert it to .pdf and post it on LENR-CANR.org this afternoon. It has a much more detailed analysis than Oriani. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 09:57:37 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30061; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 09:53:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 09:53:10 -0800 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 09:49:00 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Patent Applications by Arie de Geus To: vortex Message-id: <001b01c28b3c$f349e4c0$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_0018_01C28AF9.E4B126A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"Qfvn02.0.UL7.56fqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48303 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_0018_01C28AF9.E4B126A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is a revised resend of a post from yesterday that apparently was = lost in cyberspace. Here are some details and commentary from the De Geus patents (which = does indeed refer to Mills' hydrino work as prior art, but is so close = in the operating principle that litigation is a certainty if de Geus = should get something to market first.)=20 You will see near the end of the disclosure that AdG claims his process = is different from that of BLP, but how it could be unique enough for a = patent is not clear to me, except that he emphasizes the nucleon for = purposes of catalysis, while Mills emphasizes the electron. This has = some important nuances, but the end product, excess energy and "shrunken = hydrogen", the hydrino, is apparently the same. To quote: "In this Invention use is made of the properties of certain = isotopes of Li, Be and B, which carry an extra neutron, in a function as "nucleonic catalysts". This is a new concept; so far catalysts always only referred = to actions by electrons in the outer shell of atoms." If Mills "borrowed" anything from de Geus in return, it is probably in = certain active catalysts, including oxygen (assuming that 17O and 18O = are active and 16O is not), which Mills did not emphasize until after = the de Geus disclosures (though O is mentioned as a possibility in later = editions of Mills' book, along with half the periodic table - at any = rate, it is clear that almost every element can be mathematically wedged = into the loose definition that Mills is trying to claim, including a few = that he has used as controls in the past). An independent technical report is mentioned in the de Geus filing - a = lab that is near Atlanta -and perhaps Rothwell, should he want to try to = verify that the testing was actually done, and knows of the lab, will = choose to inquire, but they are likely to be under some kind of NDA as = to the details of the device. "At this time numerous laboratory runs have been made (more than 1,000 = hours), during which fractional hydrogen and photon energy were being = produced.... This process technology has been certified by the well = known national laboratory:=20 Applied Technical Services Inc., 1280 Field Parkway, Marietta, Ga., 30066, USA. The report number is M14343 and is dated March 01, 2001" Further info from the De Geus WPO Patent app: "The background of this Invention relates mostly to astronomical = observations, some of which are of the last few decades. It has been noted that when looking at the Abundancy Curve of the = elements, which are known to exist in our universe, that the elements Li, Be and B = are very scarce in relation to their location in the Periodical System. (See = Fig. 1; the Abundancy Curve of the elements). There must be reasons for this. = The factors: pressure, temperature and other parameters e. g. certain = configurations in their respective nuclei, whereby these named elements are being = converted, apparently are occurring rather frequently in many locations in the = universe, wherefore we can assume that the values of the factors which allow = conversions of these elements, either'upwardly'via nucleo-synthesis processes into = heavier elements, or'downwardly'by means of fission to hydrogen or helium or = isotopes thereof (He2, He2, H3, HI2, Hl) are favorable for such conversions to = take place. Also it became clear to Inventor that certain isotopes of Li, Be = and B can act as catalysts in certain processes. Whereas these elements carry = few electrons, their nuclei are easily approachable by elementary = "particles", e. g. protons. In this Invention use is made of the properties of certain = isotopes of Li, Be and B, which carry an extra neutron, in a function as"nucleonic catalysts". This is a new concept; so far catalysts always only referred = to actions by electrons in the outer shell of atoms." In the following there is a comparison of energy yields between the = process of this Invention with: a. Thermo-nuclear Fusion b. Conventional Combustion = of hydrogen with oxygen. Assume"fractional hydrogen"is being formed from the "ground-state" to = "state" n=3D1/6 ; then photon energy is emitted of about-KeV and if the"state"of = n=3D-were 2 9 reached then about l. lKeV is emitted. E. g. if an electron were to = go from n=3D-on=3D-then roughly 1KeV=3D1.6#10-16 Joule energy becomes available. = Considering: Thermo-nuclear Fusion in the sun: (See many publications on = this subject matter, e. g. in Scientific American, by John Bahcall of Cal. Tech) This shows that the energy yield of the process of this Invention is in the 1/1000x category compared to the yield of = thermo-nuclear fusion in the sun and which after many years of research and billions of = dollars of expenses has never been copied on any sustainable basis on earth. Considering: Conventional Combustion of hydrogen with oxygen. The energy produced by molecular hydrogen combustion is 51,600 BtulLb, which is = 118,700 kSlkg. One mole of hydrogen contains 6X1023 molecules (Avogadro = nr.); molecular weight of hydrogen being 2, means that that the energy = per hydrogen atom is 118.7 kJ/gr, divided by 6x1023, which is 1.2516per = hydrogen atom. The conclusion is that the process of this Invention is = in the category of producing 500-1000x more energy per atom of hydrogen = than the combustion process can produce, wherefore the technology of = this Invention provides for a'quantum leap' in progress for the = production of energy.=20 Recent lab runs show substantial overunity Outgoing electric power and = heat together are substantially (e. g. > 4 x) greater than the required = ingoing electric power. Two control mechanisms are desirable: a. The = intermittent addition of hydrogen be controlled by the pressure and = possibly also by removal of "fractional and bi-electronic hydrogen''for = temporary storage for later use purposes. b. The voltage differential = between cathode and anode be controlled majorly by temperature and = minorly by the pressure. In a newer further improved process version, no = addition of hydrogen during operations is needed, because of a secondary = and simultaneously running nuclear transmutational process which = produces protons. Also protons are produced if some "fractional = states''convert into lower fractional states''according to formula (6), = although this last named process would not produce enough protons to = keep the process continually going, wherefore the need for the nuclear = transmutational process. In the event that fractional and bi-electronic hydrogen''are removed = during process operations, then a secondary evacuating pump and storage are = needed. Such a sub-system is shown in Fig. 9."Fractional hydrogen can = react again with "ground- state" in a reactor with cathode and anode and = having a voltage differential between those and produce radiative = energy. Bi- electronic hydrogen can (upon ionization to negatively = charged hydrogen ions) form new molecules/materials hitherto unknown. One can logically assume that process conditions vary widely as to which "nucleonic catalyst" is being used. Furthermore many dimensional = parameters and alloy composition parameters greatly influence the energy = production. Energy is being produced in two locations: a. In the cathode = area 40-80% of the total energy. Radiation is Soft X-ray, extreme UV and some violet to blue. This = radiation can be directly converted into electrical power by using the photo-electric = effect, wherefore there are a photo-cathode and a photo-anode around the = cathode. The wavelengths of this radiation is such that the = surface-exit-energy" (is the "workfunction") of the electrons in certain metals, e. g. Cs, Rb, Na, K, = Ba, Srhas been surpassed. The first and second fractional series" radiation can also free = electrons out e. g. Cu and Zn. b. In the ionization area 20-60% of the total energy. = Radiation is from the blues to pink. This radiation is best used as = heat, either directly or for powering a thermo-dynamic cycle, including a Stirling cycle. With reference to a., two modes of construction have proven to be = possible. One is featuring a chamber around the cathode area from which = it is separated by a radiation transmitting material, e. g. quartz. = Inside the chamber are the photo-cathode as a shield against the outer wall of this chamber and the photo-anode, which can be either against the sides of said chamber or be = a screen diametrically inside of the photo-cathode. The photo-anode be = made of an electro- conductor. If the photo-cathode is covered with an = element with a relatively low energy "workfunction", e. g. Cs, Rb, Na, K, Ba, Sr, then = this chamber must be void of oxygen, wherefore it must be first evacuated and = then filled with an inert gas, e. g. Ar. The second mode of construction, = which was discovered in the fall of 2000 is by bringing the photo-cathode and = photoanode inside the reactor, but being electro-magnetically isolated from the electro-static and electro-magnetic fields which exist between the = cathode and anode in the reactor. This isolation is established by constructing a so = called Cage of Faraday'' around the cathode assembly, which allows sufficient = space for the electro-static and electro-magnetic fields, so that = protons can approach the cathode unhindered at all locations. The = openings in the "Cage of Faraday''as well as the openings in the = photoanode are sufficiently large and best also aligned with each other, = so as to allow that radiation from the cathode can easily reach the = photo-cathode. In operation small voltage differentials are in effect = between the photocathode and photo-anode, respectively "Cage of = Faraday". Substantial electric currents then result if sufficient radiation of = short enough wavelengths is available. This electric power is electronically = converted to a DC status at a voltage level, so that it can be directly used for = powering the primary electrical circuit (of which the cathode and anode are part) = and/or be stored into the intermediate electric power storage (small battery). = If the electric power production is greater than the electric power use = ("overunity"), then the excess power is available for whatever use. Also electric power = can be substantially produced from that part of the radiation in the ionization = area, which is in the 400nm-900nm range, by using GaAs/Gephoto-voltaic cells. = The electrical output efficiency runs up to 20% of all radiation in the = ionization area which is in the 400nm-900nm range. The remaining 80% becomes = available as heat. Some heat is produced in the cathode area although most radiation in = this location is of sufficiently short wavelengths that direct photo-electric conversion can take place; the majority of the heat (80% plus) is = produced in the ionization and anode areas. This heat can be used either directly or = for powering a cycle system (e. g. a Stirling system). Fig. 8 shows a = reactor system with an annular space surrounding its cathode area, from = which photo- electricity is being produced and a jacket around the = ionization area for the collection of the convective heat, which is = produced by this area. Fig. 9 shows a reactor system, which has a = diametrically enlarged cathode area in which the"Cage of Faraday''and = photo-cathode and photoanode are located and from which the = photo-electricity is being produced as well as a jacket around the = ionization area for the collection of the convective heat, which is = produced by this area.=20 End of quotes from WPO application ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C28AF9.E4B126A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is a revised resend of a post from yesterday that apparently = was lost=20 in cyberspace.
 
Here are some details and commentary from the De Geus patents = (which does=20 indeed refer to Mills' hydrino work as prior art, but is so close = in the=20 operating principle that litigation is a certainty if de Geus should get = something to market first.)
 
You will see near the end of the disclosure that AdG claims his = process is=20 different from that of BLP, but how it could be unique enough for a = patent is=20 not clear to me, except that he emphasizes the nucleon for purposes of=20 catalysis, while Mills emphasizes the electron. This has some important = nuances,=20 but the end product, excess energy and "shrunken hydrogen", the hydrino, = is=20 apparently the same.
 
To quote: "In this Invention use is made of the properties of = certain=20 isotopes of
Li, Be and B, which carry an extra neutron, in a function = as=20 "nucleonic
catalysts". This is a new concept; so far catalysts always = only=20 referred to
actions by electrons in the outer shell of = atoms."

If=20 Mills "borrowed" anything from de Geus in return, it is probably in = certain=20 active catalysts, including oxygen (assuming that 17O and 18O are active = and 16O=20 is not), which Mills did not emphasize until after the de Geus = disclosures=20 (though O is mentioned as a possibility in later editions of Mills' = book,=20 along with half the periodic table - at any rate, it is clear that = almost every=20 element can be mathematically wedged into the loose definition that = Mills is=20 trying to claim, including a few that he has used as controls in the=20 past).

An independent technical report is mentioned in the = de Geus=20 filing - a lab that is near Atlanta -and perhaps Rothwell, should he = want to try=20 to verify that the testing was actually done, and knows of the lab, will = choose=20 to inquire, but they are likely to be under some kind of NDA as to the = details=20 of the device.

"At this time numerous laboratory runs have been = made=20 (more than 1,000 hours), during which fractional hydrogen and photon = energy were=20 being produced.... This process technology has been certified by the = well known=20 national laboratory:
Applied Technical Services Inc.,
1280 Field = Parkway,
Marietta, Ga.,=20 30066, USA.
The report number is M14343 and is dated March 01,=20 2001"

Further info from the De Geus WPO Patent app:

"The=20 background of this Invention relates mostly to astronomical=20 observations,
some of which are of the last few decades.

It = has been=20 noted that when looking at the Abundancy Curve of the elements,
which = are=20 known to exist in our universe, that the elements Li, Be and B = are
very=20 scarce in relation to their location in the Periodical System. (See Fig. = 1;
the Abundancy Curve of the elements). There must be reasons for = this.=20 The
factors: pressure, temperature and other parameters e. g. certain = configurations
in their respective nuclei, whereby these named = elements are=20 being converted,
apparently are occurring rather frequently in many = locations=20 in the universe,
wherefore we can assume that the values of the = factors which=20 allow conversions
of these elements, either'upwardly'via = nucleo-synthesis=20 processes into heavier
elements, or'downwardly'by means of fission to = hydrogen or helium or isotopes
thereof (He2, He2, H3, HI2, Hl) are = favorable=20 for such conversions to take
place. Also it became clear to Inventor = that=20 certain isotopes of Li, Be and B
can act as catalysts in certain = processes.=20 Whereas these elements carry few
electrons, their nuclei are easily=20 approachable by elementary "particles", e. g.
protons. In this = Invention use=20 is made of the properties of certain isotopes of
Li, Be and B, which = carry an=20 extra neutron, in a function as"nucleonic
catalysts". This is a new = concept;=20 so far catalysts always only referred to
actions by electrons in the = outer=20 shell of atoms."

In the following there is a comparison of energy = yields=20 between the process of
this Invention with: a. Thermo-nuclear Fusion = b.=20 Conventional Combustion of
hydrogen with = oxygen.

Assume"fractional=20 hydrogen"is being formed from the "ground-state" to "state"
n=3D1/6 ; = then=20 photon energy is emitted of about-KeV and if the"state"of n=3D-were
2 = 9 reached=20 then about l. lKeV is emitted. E. g. if an electron were to go=20 from
n=3D-on=3D-then roughly 1KeV=3D1.6#10-16 Joule energy becomes = available.=20 Considering: Thermo-nuclear Fusion in the sun: (See many publications on = this=20 subject matter, e. g. in Scientific American, by John Bahcall of
Cal. = Tech)  This shows that the energy yield of the process of = this
Invention=20 is in the 1/1000x category compared to the yield of = thermo-nuclear
fusion in=20 the sun and which after many years of research and billions of = dollars
of=20 expenses has never been copied on any sustainable basis on=20 earth.

Considering: Conventional Combustion of hydrogen with = oxygen. The=20 energy
produced by molecular hydrogen combustion is 51,600 BtulLb, = which is=20 118,700 kSlkg. One mole of hydrogen contains 6X1023 molecules (Avogadro = nr.);=20 molecular weight of hydrogen being 2, means that that the energy per = hydrogen=20 atom is 118.7 kJ/gr, divided by 6x1023, which is 1.2516per hydrogen = atom. The=20 conclusion is that the process of this Invention is in the category of = producing=20 500-1000x more energy per atom of hydrogen than the combustion process = can=20 produce, wherefore the technology of this Invention provides for = a'quantum leap'=20 in progress for the production of energy.
 
Recent lab runs show substantial overunity Outgoing electric power = and heat=20 together are substantially (e. g. > 4 x) greater than the required = ingoing=20 electric power. Two control mechanisms are desirable: a. The = intermittent=20 addition of hydrogen be controlled by the pressure and possibly also by = removal=20 of "fractional and bi-electronic hydrogen''for temporary storage for = later use=20 purposes. b. The voltage differential between cathode and anode be = controlled=20 majorly by temperature and minorly by the pressure. In a newer further = improved=20 process version, no addition of hydrogen during operations is needed, = because of=20 a secondary and simultaneously running nuclear transmutational process = which=20 produces protons. Also protons are produced if some "fractional = states''convert=20 into lower fractional states''according to formula (6), although this = last named=20 process would not produce enough protons to keep the process continually = going,=20 wherefore the need for the nuclear transmutational process.

In = the event=20 that fractional and bi-electronic hydrogen''are removed = during
process=20 operations, then a secondary evacuating pump and storage are needed. = Such a=20 sub-system is shown in Fig. 9."Fractional hydrogen can react again with = "ground-=20 state" in a reactor with cathode and anode and having a voltage = differential=20 between those and produce radiative energy. Bi- electronic hydrogen can = (upon=20 ionization to negatively charged hydrogen ions) form = new
molecules/materials=20 hitherto unknown.

One can logically assume that process = conditions vary=20 widely as to
which "nucleonic catalyst" is being used. Furthermore = many=20 dimensional parameters and alloy composition parameters greatly = influence the=20 energy production. Energy is being produced in two locations: a. In the = cathode=20 area 40-80% of the total energy.

Radiation is Soft X-ray, extreme = UV and=20 some violet to blue. This radiation can
be directly converted into = electrical=20 power by using the photo-electric effect,
wherefore there are a = photo-cathode=20 and a photo-anode around the cathode. The wavelengths of this radiation = is such=20 that the surface-exit-energy" (is the
"workfunction") of the = electrons in=20 certain metals, e. g. Cs, Rb, Na, K, Ba,
Srhas been = surpassed.

The=20 first and second fractional series" radiation can also free electrons = out=20 e.
g. Cu and Zn. b. In the ionization area 20-60% of the total = energy.=20 Radiation is from the blues to pink. This radiation is best used as = heat, either=20 directly or for
powering a thermo-dynamic cycle, including a Stirling = cycle.

With reference to a., two modes of construction have = proven to be=20 possible. One is featuring a chamber around the cathode area from which = it is=20 separated by a radiation transmitting material, e. g. quartz. Inside the = chamber=20 are the
photo-cathode as a shield against the outer wall of this = chamber and=20 the
photo-anode, which can be either against the sides of said = chamber or be=20 a
screen diametrically inside of the photo-cathode. The photo-anode = be made=20 of an electro- conductor. If the photo-cathode is covered with an = element with=20 a
relatively low energy "workfunction", e. g. Cs, Rb, Na, K, Ba, Sr, = then=20 this
chamber must be void of oxygen, wherefore it must be first = evacuated and=20 then
filled with an inert gas, e. g. Ar. The second mode of = construction,=20 which was
discovered in the fall of 2000 is by bringing the = photo-cathode and=20 photoanode
inside the reactor, but being electro-magnetically = isolated from=20 the
electro-static and electro-magnetic fields which exist between = the=20 cathode and
anode in the reactor. This isolation is established by=20 constructing a so called
Cage of Faraday'' around the cathode = assembly, which=20 allows sufficient space for the electro-static and electro-magnetic = fields, so=20 that protons can approach the cathode unhindered at all locations. The = openings=20 in the "Cage of Faraday''as well as the openings in the photoanode are=20 sufficiently large and best also aligned with each other, so as to allow = that=20 radiation from the cathode can easily reach the photo-cathode. In = operation=20 small voltage differentials are in effect between the photocathode and=20 photo-anode, respectively "Cage of Faraday".

Substantial electric = currents then result if sufficient radiation of short
enough = wavelengths is=20 available. This electric power is electronically converted
to a DC = status at=20 a voltage level, so that it can be directly used for powering
the = primary=20 electrical circuit (of which the cathode and anode are part) = and/or
be stored=20 into the intermediate electric power storage (small battery). If = the
electric=20 power production is greater than the electric power use = ("overunity"),
then=20 the excess power is available for whatever use. Also electric power can=20 be
substantially produced from that part of the radiation in the = ionization=20 area,
which is in the 400nm-900nm range, by using = GaAs/Gephoto-voltaic cells.=20 The
electrical output efficiency runs up to 20% of all radiation in = the=20 ionization
area which is in the 400nm-900nm range. The remaining 80% = becomes=20 available as heat.

Some heat is produced in the cathode area = although=20 most radiation in this
location is of sufficiently short wavelengths = that=20 direct photo-electric
conversion can take place; the majority of the = heat=20 (80% plus) is produced in
the ionization and anode areas. This heat = can be=20 used either directly or for
powering a cycle system (e. g. a Stirling = system). Fig. 8 shows a reactor system with an annular space surrounding = its=20 cathode area, from which photo- electricity is being produced and a = jacket=20 around the ionization area for the collection of the convective heat, = which is=20 produced by this area. Fig. 9 shows a reactor system, which has a = diametrically=20 enlarged cathode area in which the"Cage of Faraday''and photo-cathode = and=20 photoanode are located and from which the photo-electricity is being = produced as=20 well as a jacket around the ionization area for the collection of the = convective=20 heat, which is produced by this area.
 
End of quotes from WPO application
 

 
------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C28AF9.E4B126A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 10:34:17 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25411; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:30:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:30:50 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Nov 2002 18:30:39 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113132921.02cab278 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:30:53 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: A response to the Oriani paper from s.p.f. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"9gvVz1.0.rC6.Pffqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is not normally a good idea to cross-post messages from s.p.f., but perhaps this one deserves exposure. - JR - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Originally-From: kirk.shanahan srs.gov (Kirk L. Shanahan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Oriani & Fisher in JJAP Date: 13 Nov 2002 09:15:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ "Jed Rothwell" wrote in message news:<3dd16e6f$1_2 nopics.sjc>... > Here is a marvelous paper! This is similar to the results reported at ICCF-9 > by Miley et al. See: > > http://jjap.ipap.jp/journal/pdf/JJAP-41-10R/6180.pdf > > You have to register to download this, but registration is free. > - Jed > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Comments on R. A. Oriani and J. C. Fisher, "Generation of Nuclear Tracks during Electrolysis" Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 41 (2002) 6180 Executive Summary ----------------- Unfortunately, the evidence presented is inconclusive and the analysis is incorrect. There is in fact no statistical proof there is any excess tracks formed in the electrolytic cells, and even if there were, there is considerable concern that other, mundane chemical processes could produce the proposed noted effects. Discussion ---------- Oriani and Fisher (O&F) have placed CR-39 plates in close proximity to Pd and Pt electrodes in working electrolysis cells, and claim to observe an increase in the area density of tracks in so treated CR-39 plates when compared to control plates. This supposedly implies a nucelar reaction giving rise to charged energetic particles that impact the CR-39 and cause damage that is later chemically developed (etched) for a visible count of particles observed. They present 35 experimental results in their Table 1, broken into two parts, 27 in the 'active' category and 8 in the 'control' category. They then claim to determine statistically that the track area density has changed, from a mean of the logarithm of tracks/cm2 for the control group of 2.187 to 2.801 for the 'electrolyzed' CR-39 chips. The logarithm transform is used since the raw data are not randomly distributed. Unfortunately, the average of the log base 10 values of the active chips is 2.372 for the controls and 2.565 for the active chips, which is not what was reported. Apparently O&F have incorrectly computed something. Furthermore O&F attempt to statistically prove that the observed difference is statistically significant, but they do not apply the correct statistical methodology. Based on methods given to me by the corporate statisticians of DuPont Corporation (which are the same as those presented in Snedecor and Cochran, "Statistical Methods', 7th ed., section 6.11 , p.96 (=S&C)), the statistical test is to compute a confidence interval about the difference and see whether it includes 0 at a given confidence level. (Normally one uses either the 95% or 99% confidence level.) This computation must be for different sized populations with different estimated standard deviations (checked via an F-test). The confidence interval (CI) computed using the mean and variance of the reported data (Table 1) is then: CI = .1930 +/- t * .1838 S&C note that the t for such a case is not the normal Student t, and give an approximation to real one, via an approximated degrees of freedom value (p. 97). I compute that value as 11, and t(95%)= 2.20 and t(99%)=3.11. Thus it is clear that the CI includes 0 and the difference in means is not statistically significant. (Note that pratically _any_ t value would lead to the same conclusion.) In the end, this result could be anticipated just by looking at the data table. The control values are bracketed by the active values. HOWEVER, there is another problem that the JJAP reviewers missed, namely, O&F compute an average of 987 track/cm2 for the active plates, while I compute 725. But there is a break in the active data after the 14th point. However the average of the 1st 14 points is 1269. Now, 10^2.801= 632, so that's no help. The data after the 14th point are all less than 261, so that also doesn't lead to 987 either. I never did figure out where they got 987. They imply in their statistics that they are using the data of Table 1, since they mention 35 data points. Their Table caption also mentions 'all' chips are represented. But in the end, they clearly made some serious error between data analysis and publication that must be cleared up. At this point, their claim is refuted, on the simple basis of correct math. However, let's assume that there is a trivial explanation for this problem, and that they will correct it and arrive at the same conclusion, i.e. that there is a real difference. The question becomes how can I explain that supposed observation. As you may recall, I have postulated that apparent excess arises due to a calibration constant shift, which in turn arises because of a redistribution of heat sources in the cell. I also speculate further that the electrode surfaces becomes 'active' to normal recombination. This implies that there are miniature chemical explosions (H2/D2 + O2) occurring at the electrode. The CR-39 plates are placed in close proximity to the electrodes, sometimes even between them, and represent about half of the available cross-sectional area of the cell. (This is a major disturbance in and of itself, and the cases of above and between ought to be discussed separately, at least to establish whether they are the same or different.) The speculation is what exploding bubbles of D2+O2 would do to the Cr-39 material. I find it hard to exclude, a priori, a chemical effect of this on the CR-39, which would then be observed by 'etched tracks' in the developed plates. Clearly, any such effect should be quite position dependent, and that whole aspect should be more fully explored than it is in the paper. While they did place controls in the electrolyte (separately, no electrolysis ongoing) and test what unreactive D2 bubbles might do, I contend that that does not simulate the physical/chemical action of exploding D2+O2 bubbles, possibly right on the CR-39 plates. I'd also like to comment that O&F do a lot of 'judging' of what to count as a track and what not. I'd like to see some data to convince me they are doing a good job of that. In any case, we are again presented with inadequate data poorly analyzed but used to prove 'nuclear' reactions are present. I don't think so... --- Kirk Shanahan {My opinions...noone else's} -------------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 11:36:15 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05801; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:34:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:34:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD2A978.2080308 pobox.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:35:20 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peter Hagelstein to Give Cold Fusion Talk at MIT References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HMrql3.0.PQ1.Sbgqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Eugene F. Mallove wrote: > > SPECIAL RLE SEMINAR > > Monday, November 4, 2002 > Grier Room B, 34-401B > > Refreshments at 3:45 PM > Talk at 4:00 PM > > Are there New Physical Mechanisms Associated > with the Anomalies in Metal Deuterides? > > Professor Peter L. Hagelstein > MIT I was hoping to see some comments on the talk on Vortex from someone else. Since no one has posted anything about it, I will. I attended the talk with a friend who was a staunch "non-believer", and we were both extremely impressed (the friend is no longer a non-believer). Unfortunately the QM left me in the dust, so I can't say anything very intelligent about the technical details. However, there were a couple of overall points that even someone with my limited QM background could grasp: -- Hagelstein's theory seems to explain most of the results which have been seen to date in the cold fusion arena. He didn't go into detail on all the various effects that have been seen, but he talked about several and claimed to have analyzed more that he didn't go into. -- If I understood what he said correctly, he has predicted anomalous effects that hadn't been seen yet, and had them verified subsequently by later experiments. This, by itself, seems to go a long way toward vindicating his theory. So, if you have any kind of background in QM, it's worth making the effort to find the text of the talk, assuming it's published in IE (or elsewhere). If you have to subscribe to IE just to get the text of this single talk, it would probably be worth it. Since no comments, however sketchy, would be complete without _some_ mention of what he said :-) , here's a very brief summary of some high points. This is from memory -- I didn't take notes during the talk (whole thing should be in IE anyway, right?). He started by reviewing the results in the field. That was pretty impressive by itself, but I suspect the same information is also available on Dr. Storms' web site. After the review, he went into a brief discussion of his original theory from 1989, which was that there is a phonon exchange between the active site and the Pd lattice, which carries off the energy of the fusion reaction. He explained at some length why that didn't pan out (several slides of lots of equations...); in summary, the coupling to the lattice was too weak. Next, he considered the notion that there was a three-way coupling between _two_ active sites and the lattice. The first active site would contain two D nuclei smooshed into a single lattice cell (apparently legal, though an unusual configuration). The second active site would be a Pd atom. The energy from the D-D fusion would be transfered via phonons through the lattice to the Pd nucleus, which would fission (well, it sounds like fission to me, anyway) by spitting out an alpha particle, leaving an Ru nucleus behind (is that Rubidium? Ruthenium? Uh... chemistry too many years in the past, and I haven't looked it up). This was more promising, but apparently the phononic coupling is still too weak to make it fly. Finally, he said he considered the case where _many_ active sites were coupled at once. At this point I started getting pretty lost, but I'll slog on in the hope that someone will at least find my blurry notes of some interest. Here we have a side excursion. He asked what, given this theory, the dominant reaction should be. It turns out it's _not_ D+D+Pd -> He+Ru+Alpha. Rather, it's D+D+He -> He+D+D. In other words, two D nuclei at one site fuse, and an He at another site in the lattice fissions into two D nuclei which are left in very close proximity to each other. At this point he spent a while discussing the angular momentum of the system, and about the most I can say is that angular momentum considerations provide the solution to how the two D nuclei can remain stably in close proximity to each other after the He fissions, and they also result in what's nearly a requirement for phonon interactions -- it's the phonons that carry the angular momentum around and make the whole thing balance. So, it turns out that what's actually going on in a CF cell is lots of "null reactions", where two D's get together and an He splits, with a very occasional reaction involving two D's and a Pd, which is where the occasional high energy alpha particle (and the heat?) comes from. And (I think) many of these active sites with D-D pairs and He nuclei are coupled at once. And when he worked out the coupling with _that_ assumption, it was adequate to make the whole thing go. By the way, when questioned about the source of the helium, I believe he asserted that there's normally enough helium left in the Pd from the manufacturing process to get the reactions started. There's no need to assume that some gets added from side reactions or from captured alpha particles. He then asked if we could possibly detect this "null reaction", and went on to say that we could. If this is really going on, then there should be many D-D pairs in very close proximity, and that should have consequences. In particular, if one bombards the system with energetic particles, one should occasionally see two D nuclei participating in the same collision -- and for anything more coherent on this particular topic you'll need to get the transcript. Suffice it to say that he predicted an effect here which was subsequently observed, thus providing evidence that his "null reaction" is really taking place during CF. Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons". Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves highly energetic -- if I understand the term, it means that they're carrying about as much energy as visible-light photons (can that be right?). In response to a question from the floor, he asserted that when D falls down the energy gradient into a Pd lattice in a CF cell, it generates optical phonons -- his actual statement was something like "That's about the best way to generate optical phonons I can think of". And that's about as much as I can put together. Apologies for taking up time and space, if it doesn't turn out to be of interest. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 12:05:20 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22415; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:03:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:03:09 -0800 Message-ID: <007701c28b68$b2c04580$1f5bccd1 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021112173548.039d8998@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021113100421.02cab278@mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer" Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 15:00:24 -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: <"6RKfs3.0.9U5.z_gqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: > Mike Carrell wrote: > > >Yes, the s/n is quite high. Yes, the equipment costs thousands. No, it is > >not ready for a sidewalk sale. I have pointed out to Mills that I think it > >would scare away a development engineer. Why? > > It might scare away development engineers, perhaps most, but it would > attract hundreds of thousands of others, as well as scientists worldwide. I > am sure many development engineers would have confidence that they can > solve the remaining technical problems as quickly as Mills can, or as > anyone else can. The reward for doing so would be enormous. Jed, the apparatus and operating conditions are described in detail in papers posted on the BLP website. Anybody can set it up. As it stands it represents several kilobucks of equipment. If it were that easy, then there should be a parade of copies right now. In fact, critics ask why others have not done so. The reasons are human psychology, no more. Or, there may be subtleties that amateurs won't notice. If you think it's that easy, why not try yourself? > > > >If I were a development engineer, I can't see a product that has to be run > >at 2.45 GHz with an Evenson cavity. I need to see a cheaper and more > >direct way of producing the essential ionization. Mills has experimented > >with several excitation modes in other papers, and they don't behave the > >same for reasons that require more study. I have suggested an approach, > >which Mills indicated as unfeasible. . . . > > Mike, you are missing the forest for the trees! No, there is a difference. As you have pointed out very ably in your discussion of the Wrights, it took a critical demonstration in front of a specific audience to light the fuse. You pointed out that the local papers ignored the Wrights flights because they "didn't go any place". Other inventors managed short straight forward hops. It was the Wright demonstration in front of a skeptical government audience of a controlled takeoff, circling and making a controlled landing. It showed in a stroke to the right people that controlled flight could be accomplished. There had been years, decades of effort, dreams, and failure. People ached for the dream of flight. Copying the cell Mills has right now, as is, won't fulfill any dreams because there is an adequate infrastructure of water heaters. In the long run it is very important. If it is shown that Mills > is right, his machine works, and his theory explains it, he will be the > most celebrated, wealthy and respected scientist in history. I agree. > > > >This is a laboratory kluge. It is nowhere near a product. > > It does not have to be. The 1908 Flyer was not a Douglas DC3. That was the > first profitable commercial airplane, and the first reasonably safe, > practical, quiet and comfortable one. It was introduce in December 1935. > (All previous civilian airplanes lost money.) Yes, because capability and design had to evolve to a certain point before the DC3 was possible. That plane is a marvel and there are probably some still flying today. It's that growth for which Mills needs partners. > > > >The founders became legends. Photography was a curiosity until Eastman, > >who brought together essential known elements into a system that changed > >the equation with "You push the button, we do the rest". > > When photography was announced in 1839, it was an overnight worldwide > sensation. It swept through Europe and American, and within a few years > every city and town had photography studios, generating millions of dollars > in revenue. The discovers became wealthy. However, patents and copyright > protection was not strong back then, so they did become moguls. A few years > later, the people who invented and implemented the telegraph such as Morse > and Cornell *did* become multi-millionaires. Because photography met an unmet need. Before that there were only artists making portraits and landscapes. In the Boston Museum there is a fantastic collection of botanical specimens modeled in glass, the work of a father and son over 40 years, sponsored by the Ware sisters. When they began, there was no photography and botany students had only dried pressed flowers and sketches to work from. These specimens are so detailed that good photographs of them look like natural flowers. There is no crying unmet need for a water heater kit. Potentially, it should be possible to boil oceans to get fresh water for a thirsty planet and irrigation of deserts. There will be a desperate need. It is there now, as you have pointed out, in the developing countries of Africa and elsewhere. People lead miserable lives because this technology is not available to them. But that isn't what Mills has right now. > > > >The telegraph also relied on an existing technical base of > >electromagnetism, wire, electric batteries, etc. Morse put things together. > > No, it did not. > > >Mills is busy building the technical base. > > He cannot do it single handed, any more than Morse could string telegraph > wire, or the Wrights could invent retractable landing gear. Of course he can't. He knows this full well, which is why he is soliciting partnerships. I don't think he would mind if anybody duplicated one of his experiments, so long as credit was given and nobody was trying to rip him off. he certainly cooperated with Rowan. > > > >There were many incandescent lamps before Edison. Edison looked at the > >system needs and realized he needed a high resistance lamp that would work > >off 100 volts or so. He was stymied until he got a real high vacuum pump > >that could produce a hard vacuum so his filaments would not burn up. > > And much else, but most of it was not ready when he convinced the public in > December 1879. He was still inventing key parts of the technology two years > later, and he never did pay for that vacuum pump, as far as I know. (For > his whole life he was reportedly trailed by angry crowd of creditors, > swindled business partners, and alienated employees. He was not a likeable > fellow.) No, he wasn't in many respects. He also ripped off the French cinematographer who made the film about the trip to the moon. > > > >Jed, choose your examples more wisely. You missed here. Land and Eastman > >and Edison had the technical and business savvy to put together something > >new and create new industries. > > That was 50 years after photography became a multimillion dollar worldwide > industry. I should not take you on in the matter of history of technology. You are much better versed in the gritty details than I am. We differ in perception of what needs to be done to move BLP forward. In my previous post I discussed the problems with a BLP battery, which you have not responded to here. Some years ago, Mills attracted industrial investors with the vision of a BLP boiler retrofitting fossil fuel boilers in utility plants. He eventually realized that while oil costs are relatively low, and fuel a small part of the operating cost, that promoting a new, untried system with even zero fuel cost is not attractive. No utility manager would install such a thing until it had been shaken down for years in test runs. Mills can't afford such a thing. Mike Carrell > > - Jed > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 12:31:30 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA04543; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:29:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:29:12 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD2B63D.50300 pobox.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 15:29:49 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Who needs Robert Park ? References: <5.1.1.6.2.20021111160950.019ef018 mail.dlsi.net> In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20021111160950.019ef018 mail.dlsi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"N60L73.0.v61.OOhqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48307 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: stevek wrote: > Dear Gene and Jed: > > It saddens me to see such division between two of the most prominent > supporters of CF. Hear, hear! I have found some of Jed's contributions in the past, on this mailing list and in other forums, to be extremely cogent, informative, and thought provoking. I'm less familiar with Dr. Mallove, but I have been quite impressed with what I have seen. I would hate to see either of them absent themselves from this forum. However, the ongoing flame wars during the past weeks have been quite painful to witness. Since the Correa discussion started a while back Vortex has seemed caught in a rather nasty downward spiral. I thought this mailing list was supposed to provide a supportive, positive environment for discussing unlikely or implausible scientific ideas having to do primarily with energy generation. Of late, it's been more reminiscent of the sci.physics.fusion news group a couple years back, when every mention of CF resulted in really vicious attacks from a few of the regulars. Could you guys try to turn down the critical intensity a little, at least when you're writing to Vortex? Many of us would appreciate it if you would. Thanks... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 13:30:02 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17376; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:27:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:27:40 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Nov 2002 21:27:31 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113151321.02ca9f88 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 15:44:26 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Randy Mills chemical "convincer" In-Reply-To: <007701c28b68$b2c04580$1f5bccd1 asus> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021112144444.03a18330 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021112173548.039d8998 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021113100421.02cab278 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"iYMUP.0.KF4.CFiqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: >Jed, the apparatus and operating conditions are described in detail in >papers posted on the BLP website. Anybody can set it up. As it stands it >represents several kilobucks of equipment. If it were that easy, then >there should be a parade of copies right now. . . . There would be, if people realized it is real. It would be the biggest parade in history! Therefore, Mills must convince people it is real. Success will follow inevitably, although the precise sequence of events that will follow are impossible to predict. All hell will break loose! >If you think it's that easy, why not try yourself? I do not think it is easy. That is why I say Mills must take steps to shepherd the first batch of replications. He did that with the NASA investigation. He must do it again a dozen time more. Then he will probably need to give more removed, "hands off" assistance to perhaps ~100 researchers. That is more or less what P&F, Bockris and a few others did in 1989 and 1990. I would certainly be willing to contribute money to defray the cost of a replication. >No, there is a difference. As you have pointed out very ably in your >discussion of the Wrights, it took a critical demonstration in front of a >specific audience to light the fuse. My point exactly! Mills must light the fuse. He must find the audience. Fortunately, the Internet makes that much easier than it ever has been in history. I expect he could find some qualified people right here in this forum, and in the BLP forum. >It was the Wright demonstration in front of a skeptical government >audience of a controlled takeoff, circling and making a controlled >landing. It showed in a stroke to the right people that controlled flight >could be accomplished. Right. To nitpick a little, in France the witnesses were aviation experts and engineers mainly outside the government. In Washington the Army sponsored the test. President Roosevelt personally broke the logjam to get the test underway. I do not think Pres. Bush would help Mills under any circumstances, but it is wide world, and there are thousands of others who can and would. >Copying the cell Mills has right now, as is, won't fulfill any dreams >because there is an adequate infrastructure of water heaters. In the long >run it is very important. Oh come now! Really, Mike, everyone will realize that this has infinitely greater significance than mere water heaters. The physicists will know it is an unprecedented scientific revolution. Of course they do not believe it now, but when enough of them see it with their own eyes, and measure it with their own instruments, they will be convinced. The 1908 Wright demonstration in Paris was a flight of 100 meters, 10 meters off the ground, with one loop. It lasted less than one minute. But no one watching it imagined that the technology was limited to such performance, and that it had no significance. The crowd went wild because they understood the larger significance. They were trained experts, not like the people in Dayton in 1905 who saw the flights from the trolley car and did not know what to make of them. Any smart scientist or engineer who sees 20 watts generated from ordinary water in the Mills device -- and who is convinced it is real -- will know at once that he or she is looking at the most important breakthrough since fire. The kind of problems you are worried about -- practical issues about which excitation mode to use -- are insignificant details. Mills should leave that sort of thing to others. There are probably a million trained engineers in the world who can work out the answers as well as Mills could, and several thousand who can do it far better than he can. After 1908 hundreds of people like Sikorski built better, safer airplanes than the Wrights ever thought up. Furthermore, it makes no difference what design Mills introduces in the first consumer heaters or motors. Whatever he comes up with will be obsolete six months later. In the early phases of the development of a machine, progress & change is much swifter than any one person can imagine or come up with on his own. Look at the dizzying sequence of early typewriters, automobiles, airplanes, transistors, mainframe computers, or personal computers. Various models and types appear and disappear, most lasting only a few months. It is impossible for any person or corporation to pick the "right" design or approach, and no implementation will last longer than a year. > > practical, quiet and comfortable one. It was introduced in December 1935. > > (All previous civilian airplanes lost money.) > >Yes, because capability and design had to evolve to a certain point before >the DC3 was possible. That plane is a marvel and there are probably some >still flying today. It's that growth for which Mills needs partners. That kind of growth can never be achieved by one group of people, or one set of "partners." It can never be planned, or directed, or consciously achieved -- not even by the most brilliant people who ever lived. Any one group will always, ALWAYS, go off the track at some stages in the development of new technology, and ignore a critical improvement, the way Bell Labs ignored integrated circuits for some years. (After a while this wayward group will recognize it made a mistake, just as Bell Labs did.) The progress that led from the 1908 Flyer to the 1935 DC3 can only be achieved by whole nations working in competitive capitalistic chaos, without leaders, without plans, without direction. >There is no crying unmet need for a water heater kit. There is a crying need for energy. Everyone knows that. Every smart person on earth will realize that the Mills effect will probably lead to a solution, even if it is limited to heating water in the first implementation. The first airplanes flew short uncontrolled hops, but perceptive people saw the significance instantly. When a British reporter published a brief description of an early flight and played down the significance of it in 1906, publishing magnate Lord Northcliff was outraged. He called his editor on the telephone and said, the news was not "that Santos-Dumont flies 722 feet, but that England is no longer an island. . . It means the aerial chariots of a foe descending on British soil if war comes." Northcliff's vocabulary may have been archaic, but his vision of the future was sharp. (He later became the Wrights' good friend and supporter.) There are millions of people like Northcliff in the world today -- potential friends of Mills. If Mills really has what he claims, he must enlist their support as quickly as he can, because they are vastly outnumbered by potential enemies. For every friend there are a thousand reactionary people who despise progress. They would enslave the human race to fossil fuels until the last drop of oil runs out. They block the CAFE efficiency improvements even if it means the air is filthy, terrorist governments get millions of dollars of our money every day and kill thousands of us, and we must go to war every ten years in the Middle East. They will not upgrade the coal fired generators on the East Coast, even though that means 20,000 people die every year, because the upgrade will cost a fraction of a penny per kilowatt hour. They are the most wealthy & powerful people in history. They would crush Mills in an instant, if they believed his claims. >In my previous post I discussed the problems with a BLP battery, which you >have not responded to here. Whatever the technical problems may be, they will be solved instantly by the mass collective genius of a million people, once knowledge of the device becomes public. >Some years ago, Mills attracted industrial investors with the vision of a >BLP boiler retrofitting fossil fuel boilers in utility plants. He eventually >realized that while oil costs are relatively low, and fuel a small part of >the operating cost, that promoting a new, untried system with even zero >fuel cost is not attractive. No utility manager would install such a thing >until it had been shaken down for years in test runs. Mills can't afford >such a thing. Also, the utility managers will be smart enough to see that this invention makes their industry obsolete, and that if it succeeds they will lose their jobs and fortunes, and their lives will be ruined. If Mills actually tried to sell to them, he understands NOTHING nothing about business or history. Frankly, I find it very hard to believe that anyone would be so stupid! Yes, I did see that on his web page years ago, and I groaned with agony. What could he be thinking?!? That is like inventing a supercomputer that costs $1 to make, sells for $1.10, and asking IBM to sell it. "Here you are gentleman! Sell this, and you will cannibalize your own market. You will reduce your profits by a factor of three, and reduce total sales of computing equipment worldwide by a factor of a million. You will irrevocably wipe out your entire industry, and you will be lucky to retire to a trailer park in five years." Gee, who could resist that sales pitch? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 14:08:56 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11911; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:01:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:01:15 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:00:25 EST Subject: Fwd: Peter Hagelstein to Give Cold Fusion Talk at MIT To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"YWeER3.0._v2.hkiqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48309 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_boundary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_alt_boundary" --part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/02 2:36:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, slawrence pobox.com writes: > Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons". > Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves > highly energetic -- Optical phonons result from the coupling of a light nucleus and a heay nucleus. The frequency of vibration is generally in the infrared spectrum. The mode does not propagate. Frank Z --part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/02 2:36:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, slawrence pobox.com writes:


Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons".
Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves
highly energetic --


Optical phonons result from the coupling of a light nucleus and a heay nucleus.
The frequency of vibration is generally in the infrared spectrum.
The mode does not propagate.

Frank Z
--part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_alt_boundary-- --part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-xk04.mx.aol.com (rly-xk04.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.41]) by air-xk04.mail.aol.com (v89.12) with ESMTP id MAILINXK42-1113143617; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:36:17 -0500 Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by rly-xk04.mx.aol.com (v89.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXK45-1113143608; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:36:08 -0500 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05801; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:34:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:34:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD2A978.2080308 pobox.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:35:20 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peter Hagelstein to Give Cold Fusion Talk at MIT References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HMrql3.0.PQ1.Sbgqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Eugene F. Mallove wrote: > > SPECIAL RLE SEMINAR > > Monday, November 4, 2002 > Grier Room B, 34-401B > > Refreshments at 3:45 PM > Talk at 4:00 PM > > Are there New Physical Mechanisms Associated > with the Anomalies in Metal Deuterides? > > Professor Peter L. Hagelstein > MIT I was hoping to see some comments on the talk on Vortex from someone else. Since no one has posted anything about it, I will. I attended the talk with a friend who was a staunch "non-believer", and we were both extremely impressed (the friend is no longer a non-believer). Unfortunately the QM left me in the dust, so I can't say anything very intelligent about the technical details. However, there were a couple of overall points that even someone with my limited QM background could grasp: -- Hagelstein's theory seems to explain most of the results which have been seen to date in the cold fusion arena. He didn't go into detail on all the various effects that have been seen, but he talked about several and claimed to have analyzed more that he didn't go into. -- If I understood what he said correctly, he has predicted anomalous effects that hadn't been seen yet, and had them verified subsequently by later experiments. This, by itself, seems to go a long way toward vindicating his theory. So, if you have any kind of background in QM, it's worth making the effort to find the text of the talk, assuming it's published in IE (or elsewhere). If you have to subscribe to IE just to get the text of this single talk, it would probably be worth it. Since no comments, however sketchy, would be complete without _some_ mention of what he said :-) , here's a very brief summary of some high points. This is from memory -- I didn't take notes during the talk (whole thing should be in IE anyway, right?). He started by reviewing the results in the field. That was pretty impressive by itself, but I suspect the same information is also available on Dr. Storms' web site. After the review, he went into a brief discussion of his original theory from 1989, which was that there is a phonon exchange between the active site and the Pd lattice, which carries off the energy of the fusion reaction. He explained at some length why that didn't pan out (several slides of lots of equations...); in summary, the coupling to the lattice was too weak. Next, he considered the notion that there was a three-way coupling between _two_ active sites and the lattice. The first active site would contain two D nuclei smooshed into a single lattice cell (apparently legal, though an unusual configuration). The second active site would be a Pd atom. The energy from the D-D fusion would be transfered via phonons through the lattice to the Pd nucleus, which would fission (well, it sounds like fission to me, anyway) by spitting out an alpha particle, leaving an Ru nucleus behind (is that Rubidium? Ruthenium? Uh... chemistry too many years in the past, and I haven't looked it up). This was more promising, but apparently the phononic coupling is still too weak to make it fly. Finally, he said he considered the case where _many_ active sites were coupled at once. At this point I started getting pretty lost, but I'll slog on in the hope that someone will at least find my blurry notes of some interest. Here we have a side excursion. He asked what, given this theory, the dominant reaction should be. It turns out it's _not_ D+D+Pd -> He+Ru+Alpha. Rather, it's D+D+He -> He+D+D. In other words, two D nuclei at one site fuse, and an He at another site in the lattice fissions into two D nuclei which are left in very close proximity to each other. At this point he spent a while discussing the angular momentum of the system, and about the most I can say is that angular momentum considerations provide the solution to how the two D nuclei can remain stably in close proximity to each other after the He fissions, and they also result in what's nearly a requirement for phonon interactions -- it's the phonons that carry the angular momentum around and make the whole thing balance. So, it turns out that what's actually going on in a CF cell is lots of "null reactions", where two D's get together and an He splits, with a very occasional reaction involving two D's and a Pd, which is where the occasional high energy alpha particle (and the heat?) comes from. And (I think) many of these active sites with D-D pairs and He nuclei are coupled at once. And when he worked out the coupling with _that_ assumption, it was adequate to make the whole thing go. By the way, when questioned about the source of the helium, I believe he asserted that there's normally enough helium left in the Pd from the manufacturing process to get the reactions started. There's no need to assume that some gets added from side reactions or from captured alpha particles. He then asked if we could possibly detect this "null reaction", and went on to say that we could. If this is really going on, then there should be many D-D pairs in very close proximity, and that should have consequences. In particular, if one bombards the system with energetic particles, one should occasionally see two D nuclei participating in the same collision -- and for anything more coherent on this particular topic you'll need to get the transcript. Suffice it to say that he predicted an effect here which was subsequently observed, thus providing evidence that his "null reaction" is really taking place during CF. Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons". Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves highly energetic -- if I understand the term, it means that they're carrying about as much energy as visible-light photons (can that be right?). In response to a question from the floor, he asserted that when D falls down the energy gradient into a Pd lattice in a CF cell, it generates optical phonons -- his actual statement was something like "That's about the best way to generate optical phonons I can think of". And that's about as much as I can put together. Apologies for taking up time and space, if it doesn't turn out to be of interest. --part1_a3.323a0127.2b042579_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 14:14:49 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20996; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:13:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:13:12 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Magnetrons Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:12:36 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: 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 OAA20941 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZOue13.0.x75.uviqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, If free electrons couple to an EM field in a magnetron, then they should also be able to couple at lower frequencies, e.g. several kHz, provided that the field forms part of a resonant system. This would appear to be Paul Brown's method of extracting energy from a nuclear battery. Comments? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 14:48:22 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA14068; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:45:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:45:10 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Nov 2002 22:45:04 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113165802.02ca9f88 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:24:42 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Famous examples of geniuses who went astray Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"7ALcB1.0.kR3.sNjqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here are a few well known examples of inventive geniuses who founded industries and then missed the boat, failed to make the right choices, and were left behind. If these people had done what Mills and other OU inventors do, and formed a collaborative group of "partners" to guide the development of technology, the technology would either have failed or it would have limped along for decades, making no impact on society. Progress in science and technology requires the collective unconscious genius of many people, in chaotic, unregulated competition. James Watt insisted that high pressure steam engines were dangerous and had no advantage. He had such influence over the industry that it was not until he died that serious R&D on high pressure engines began. Without high pressure, the steam locomotive and steam driven ships would be impossible. Imagine how the world would be if people lived forever, and steam engines were developed like Tokamak reactors are today, under the auspices of the government, in an organized project without capitalist competition. Wise men would put the best qualified person in history in charge -- James Watt -- and he would have prevented all meaningful progress. Edison make many bad calls. He insisted that record players should be powered by batteries or by running water. That did not work, and the machines did not sell. Finally his competitors forced him and the industry to use spring-loaded, wind-up players. He assumed players would have to be able to record, as well as play. The battery powered models cost much more than the other types, and the speed kept changing. Water-powered recording machines were attached to kitchen sinks with a hose. They made a racket and sprayed water everywhere. Edison was so thrilled with these notions he did not realize how impractical they were. Edison's most famous mistake was to stick with DC instead of AC. He was so upset with the technical choices made by the managers at the Edison Electric Company, he sold out early, or was forced out, depending on the account. The company went on to become General Electric and was soon one of the biggest companies in the world. Edison used most of the money from the sale to develop magnetic separation of iron ore, which was more expensive than ordinary ore processing. He spent years of effort, and millions of dollars, and lost it all. Bell Labs invented the transistor, and then ignored the integrated circuit. The decision makers there had good reasons for thinking the IC was a dead end. It was not cost effective, it did not work as well as discrete components, and it had few apparent advantages at first. Shockley made great contributions to the transistors. He left AT&T, formed his own company, and trained a cadre of people who still run the semiconductor industry. But he himself made many business mistakes, and went down many blind alleys. He never made money. People called him the Moses of semiconductors: he saw the promised land, but he never entered it. Steve Jobs made contribution to computer design and marketing, but he mismanaged Apple and lost market share, and the Next computer went nowhere. There are many other examples. It is common knowledge that stupid, short sighted people make dumb mistakes in business, or they develop the wrong product for wrong market. What is less often noted is that great geniuses with proven track records also make terrible mistakes, and lose fortunes. They work for years on products and ideas even when it is obvious to objective observers that these ideas have no commercial prospect of success. The pick catastrophic business strategies, such as Mills' plan to sell his water-heating technology to power companies. Any freshman business school student would see the danger of this! No individual, no matter how brilliant, can be equally brilliant in all fields of endeavor, or in every situation he encounters. No one's judgement is good in all situations. Putting a genius like Watt in charge of development would be the death of steam engines. Let Edison decide how record players will work, and you will never see them in the marketplace. *No one* is qualified to guide the development of any important, basic technology, such as the Mills effect. It would take God-like omniscience. Never in history has any individual succeeded in guiding a basic technology beyond the level of a crude prototype. Edison was good for the first few hundred record players, and electric lights in the first few office buildings in New York. After that, the collective genius of capitalism took over. When Edison succeeded at all, he should have thanked his competitors for pushing him in the right direction, and keeping him from implementing idiotic schemes such as water powered record players. (Of course, just as often he *did* have the right idea, and he pushed his competition the right direction.) Businessmen do not like competition, but without it they would not survive. One person's isolated ideas are never sufficient, never correct enough, never farsighted enough. You must have *collective intelligence*. (These are not my ideas or examples by the way! This is common knowledge in business and this history of science. Most of these examples from from D. Cardwell, "The Norton History of Technology," and M. Riordan, "Crystal Fire.") - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 13 17:12:47 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09949; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:11:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:11:46 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <115.1a89985f.2b04522b aol.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:11:07 EST Subject: Re: Peter Hagelstein to Give Cold Fusion Talk at MIT To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_115.1a89985f.2b04522b_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"akiL7.0.AR2.HXlqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_115.1a89985f.2b04522b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/02 2:36:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, slawrence pobox.com writes: > Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons". > Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves > highly energetic -- if I understand the term, it means that they're > carrying about as much energy as visible-light photons (can that be > right?). In response to a question from the floor, he asserted that > when D falls down the energy gradient into a Pd lattice in a CF cell, it > generates optical phonons -- his actual statement was something like > "That's about the best way to generate optical phonons I can think of". > > I'm not sure of the about the amount of energy they carry. Energy = h/P Phonons move slowly and have a lot of momentum compared to light. Optical refers to the frequency of vibration. It is usually below the visible band in the infrared spectrum. Here we Hegelstein and I agree. I say "the Constants of the Motion tend toward thouse of the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz-meter. The frequency of stimulation is ~10exp14 hertz. This frequency is of an optical phonon vibration. Less massive H, D, and L1 tend to vibrate at these lattice frequencies. I don't believe that Hagelstein has taken the next step and put this frequency together with the 50nm size to give the megahertz-meter realtionship. Frank Znidarsic --part1_115.1a89985f.2b04522b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/02 2:36:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, slawrence pobox.com writes:


Last, I should mention that he referred frequently to "optical phonons".
Apparently the phonons that are carrying the energy are themselves
highly energetic -- if I understand the term, it means that they're
carrying about as much energy as visible-light photons (can that be
right?).  In response to a question from the floor, he asserted that
when D falls down the energy gradient into a Pd lattice in a CF cell, it
generates optical phonons -- his actual statement was something like
"That's about the best way to generate optical phonons I can think of".



I'm not sure of the about the amount of energy they carry.

Energy = h/P

Phonons  move slowly and have a lot of momentum compared to light.   Optical refers
to the frequency of vibration.  It is usually below the visible band in the infrared
spectrum.  Here we Hegelstein and I agree.  I say "the Constants of the Motion tend toward thouse
of the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimensional frequency
of one megahertz-meter.  The frequency of stimulation is ~10exp14 hertz.  This frequency is of
an optical phonon vibration.  Less massive H, D, and L1 tend to vibrate at these lattice frequencies.
I don't believe that Hagelstein has taken the next step and put this frequency together with the 50nm
size to give the megahertz-meter realtionship.

Frank Znidarsic
--part1_115.1a89985f.2b04522b_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 09:36:58 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA05198; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:34:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:34:08 -0800 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:34:53 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: ] EZE WEENIE MICRO POWER MOTOR 0.0509 Watts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"uh5dB2.0.8H1.Gwzqz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Folks, On another note the motors that operate commercial devices use very little power in some cases. Does anyone have any examples of very low power motors? On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Ben Thomas wrote: > Hi Gang > > I invite you to check out the latest on the EZE WEENIE Micro Power > ADAMS type motor. If I hadn't made all the measurements myself, I > wouldn't believe it! Notice all measurements are to at least 3 > places and in some cases 5 places when calculated. > > http://www.geocities.com/k4zep/ > > It measures .0509 watts, DC input 50.9 mw. 6.82 X 10-5 HP! Enjoy > and read the theory, it is VERY important. There is more energy > there than from the battery, I just don't see how that kind of power > can turn that wheel otherwise! > > To show how sensitive it is, increasing the voltage from 1.54 to > 1.84 VDC will increase the RPM to 84 with only about 10% increase in > power input. This appears to be the absolute bottom value for this > setup that the motor will run not the best combo, but the least. > The funny thing too is the bearings in the old bicycle wheel are > noisy as an ol granny. They just grind away! > > Respectfully > > Ben > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 11:42:43 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01639; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:28:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:28:35 -0800 Message-ID: <20021114192736.53266.qmail web40414.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:27:36 -0800 (PST) From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Famous examples of geniuses who went astray To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113165802.02ca9f88 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"-TdhL3.0.GP.Yb_qz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48314 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lets face it one simply cannot predict the future. Here is an example of the equally true and revolutionarry thing resulting from 'bad business stratagy' I do see the corrilation with Mills. He has a thing that is (or will be) privatly marketable. he should licence power compianys to use this and use the time and money to develop a small automated version for the home and/or transportation. IBM under pressure to keep the business markets that they where rapidly loosing to Steve Jobbs (and others including Radio Shack) licenced the arcitecture of the XT personal computer to just about anybody who was willing to play the game and say "IBM Compatable" In the short term they made a bunch of money. In the long term it hurt. e.g It still hurts. But now we have "Clone PCs" steming form that decision. IF anybody asks me "What brand of computer do you recomend" I will say "get a computer with no brand name. A "Clone PC". That way when you are ready to change it you can do so without liquidating your IRA. --- Jed Rothwell wrote: > Here are a few well known examples of inventive geniuses who founded > industries and then missed the boat, failed to make the right choices, > and > were left behind. If these people had done what Mills and other OU > inventors do, and formed a collaborative group of "partners" to guide > the > development of technology, the technology would either have failed or ===== Charles Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 11:53:16 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA05619; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:36:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:36:12 -0800 Message-ID: <20021114193531.54577.qmail web40414.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:35:31 -0800 (PST) From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: ] EZE WEENIE MICRO POWER MOTOR 0.0509 Watts To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"chrLS2.0.iN1.hi_qz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sparrow fan or just about any cooling fan used in a PC --- John Schnurer wrote: > > > Dear Folks, > > > > On another note the motors that operate commercial devices > use very little power in some cases. > > Does anyone have any examples of very low power motors? > > > > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Ben Thomas wrote: > > > Hi Gang > > > > I invite you to check out the latest on the EZE WEENIE Micro Power > > ADAMS type motor. If I hadn't made all the measurements myself, I > > wouldn't believe it! Notice all measurements are to at least 3 > > places and in some cases 5 places when calculated. > > > > http://www.geocities.com/k4zep/ > > > > It measures .0509 watts, DC input 50.9 mw. 6.82 X 10-5 HP! Enjoy > > and read the theory, it is VERY important. There is more energy > > there than from the battery, I just don't see how that kind of power > > can turn that wheel otherwise! > > > > To show how sensitive it is, increasing the voltage from 1.54 to > > 1.84 VDC will increase the RPM to 84 with only about 10% increase in > > power input. This appears to be the absolute bottom value for this > > setup that the motor will run not the best combo, but the least. > > The funny thing too is the bearings in the old bicycle wheel are > > noisy as an ol granny. They just grind away! > > > > Respectfully > > > > Ben > > > > > > > > > > > ===== Charles Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 12:45:38 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12490; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:43:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:43:22 -0800 X-Sent: 14 Nov 2002 20:43:13 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021114150518.02c77cb0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 15:43:04 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Famous examples of geniuses who went astray In-Reply-To: <20021114192736.53266.qmail web40414.mail.yahoo.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021113165802.02ca9f88 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"ms8rx2.0.y23.eh0rz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Charles Ford wrote: >Lets face it one simply cannot predict the future. But as A. C. Clarke wrote in the introduction to "Profiles of the Future:" "It is impossible to predict the future, and all attempts to do so in any detail appear ludicrous within a very few years. This book has a more realistic yet at the same time more ambitious aim. It does not try to describe *the* future, but to define the boundaries within which possible futures must lie. If we regard the ages which stretch ahead of us as an unmapped and unexplored country, what I am attempting to do is to survey its frontiers and to get some idea of its extent. . . ." >IBM under pressure to keep the business markets that they where rapidly >loosing to Steve Jobbs (and others including Radio Shack) licenced the >arcitecture of the XT personal computer to just about anybody who was >willing to play the game and say "IBM Compatable" In the short term they >made a bunch of money. In the long term it hurt. e.g It still hurts. That is a fascinating story! It is described in several recommended books, especially "Accidental Empires." It was both a brilliant decision and a bad one. At first it was a fantastic and unexpected success. Then, gradually as computers became commodities, it turned around and almost destroyed IBM. But I think that would have happened even if IBM had not set the standard with the PC. Some other standard would have emerged, perhaps a few years later. >I do see the corrallation with Mills. He has a thing that is (or will be) >privately marketable. he should licence power compianys to use this and >use the time and money to develop a small automated version for the home >and/or transportation. There is where I disagree. That was his strategy for a while, and I thought it was a terrible idea. It is obvious to me, and probably to the power companies, that if he succeeds he will destroy them. The only advantages to centralized power production are fuel efficiency and reduced pollution (in modern plants, that is). Mills would erase both advantages, making it cheaper to generate power on site. Therefore, as I see it, when Mills goes around trying to sell to a power company, it is as if in 1920 Henry Ford were to go to the railroads to raise capital. By 1920 it was clear that automobiles were eating the railroads' lunch. Passenger traffic, the most profitable business, was falling drastically. Imagine how a railroad company president would react if Ford said to him, "You should buy 10% of my company, so that I will have the capital to take away 90% of your business." There may have been individual railroad tycoons who sold their stock and bought automobile stock. Some railroad executives might have quit and gone into the auto business. But as a rule, when corporations are challenged by disruptive technology, they do not buy into the new technology. They do not try to build it themselves. First they pretend the challenge does not exist, then they put up futile resistance, draining their resources, trying to avoid the inevitable. Then they go bankrupt. Christensen gives many examples in "The Innovator's Dilemma." (In actual historical fact, Ford did not need capital, and the company did not go public until 1956.) Based on Christensen and other observers, I predict the power companies and oil companies will never try to buy into or co-op Mills or CF. They will fight it. Whether they win or lose will depend on Mills' business savvy. So far, based on the textbooks, he has done everything wrong, and made every mistake that people usually make when challenging powerful, entrenched competition. He has played into their hands. When I rail against him and say his business plan stinks, I am not merely raving or jealous, or emotional -- as Mallove and others seem to think. I have good reasons for that opinion, based on authoritative textbooks from the Harvard Business School, Cornell and elsewhere. The experts on business & history at Harvard may be wrong, and Mills may be right, but I would not bet on it. Of course Mills has experts too on his board of directors. Maybe they read different textbooks than I did. Or perhaps they are making a colossal mistake because they have not read history, and not thought carefully about how they might succeed, and what the real risks & prospects are. They are doing things the conventional way, in a highly unconventional situation. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 14:58:06 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA29977; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 14:56:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 14:56:18 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <190.10a17f7d.2b0583eb aol.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:55:39 EST Subject: Re: Subj: [DrRichBoylanReports] Russian Scientist Pegs Earth Changes to "exte... To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_190.10a17f7d.2b0583eb_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"7I0a51.0.FK7.Ie2rz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48319 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_190.10a17f7d.2b0583eb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/14/02 5:21:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, cjford1 yahoo.com writes: > > Gee and I thouht is was the life cycle of east pacific coral... > > Which is why we measure coral bleaching to predict climate changes. e.g. > El nino. > > And it works... > > I saw this being done at the Biosphere II near Pheonix Az Frank Z --part1_190.10a17f7d.2b0583eb_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/14/02 5:21:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, cjford1 yahoo.com writes:



Gee and I thouht is was the life cycle of east pacific coral...

Which is why we measure coral bleaching to predict climate changes. e.g.
El nino.

And it works...



I saw this being done at the Biosphere II near Pheonix Az

Frank Z
--part1_190.10a17f7d.2b0583eb_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 18:12:44 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA20055; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:11:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:11:37 -0800 Message-ID: <000c01c28c4c$53aac9a0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: "vortex-L" Subject: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:11:31 -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: <"rBu4_.0.Fv4.OV5rz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gentlemen, On many occasions, I have posted my own observations here of things that I find surprising. I do so because of the diverse base of skills and background on this list. They usually end up being explainable, either by my own diligence in coughing up artifacts, or by help from Vort...case in point the unusual force I thought I was seeing between a magnet and the optical axis of a quartz crystal. Ended up, as I mentioned here, as being an electrostatic attraction to my hand. Now here is the latest. I have not yet witnessed the anomaly first hand, however this afternoon it was described to me faithfully, and I am told that it has been repeated on demand. I have also had the honor of examining the system producing the anomaly during operation. Hopefully, I will be able to get some time on this apparatus over the next two weeks, run some tests of my own and see if this is BS or not, for my own sake. A small company in Toledo, Ohio has been trying to find marketable applications for a unique plasma torch that was developed about 15 years ago, I believe. It has not found any wide use yet, because frankly it is not an extremely portable or necessarily efficient sort of device. But it is unique as hell, and the plasma produced has some mighty odd properties. The device pumps an RF current at a standard 13.56MHz through a jet of inert gas such as helium. This jet is fed into the open air from a concentric oriface nozzle. Which up to that point makes it seem a lot like a traditional plasma cutter. However, the whole system, including the ionized jet of helium, is tuned with a simple matching network (like RF sputtering or PECVD) and a standing wave is set up. The plasma sheath acts like an extension of the coaxial conductor. The output - typically run in the 100s of watts range for power is a purplish torch - like beam, up to several inches long. It is NOT a neutral plasma. Tom Shepparak, the developer, explained that the jet core is mainly ions and neutral atoms, and the outer sheath or surrounding region becomes filled with free electrons and forms a negative cloud. A grounded metal workpiece will attract the jet / flame and then form something like an arc. This afternoon, I watched the plasma jet light up a tungsten rod with about 100 watts of power behind it. But a sheet of paper passed through the jet is hardly browned. Anyway, all of this is fun and unique enough as it is. But the REALLY strange claim is that when a laser beam is aimed at the plasma jet, the jet deflects! Shepparak claims that even a 5mW HeNe causes the jet to deflect noticeably. He videotaped it, and has shown it to faculty at UT. Who presumably have been scratching their heads too. OK, laser beams can push around atoms at low temperatures, and can cool, and pump, etc. This I know. But does anyone out there amongst the august minds of this group know of any dynamics that occur between a plasma - or an aggregate of charged particles at modest to high energies - and a laser beam?!?!? If this is so, and is not an illusion of some sort, then I think these fellows may have stumbled onto a bizarre little loophole in electrodynamics. Beam me up, NR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 14 19:03:57 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA09126; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 19:02:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 19:02:09 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:01:33 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <000c01c28c4c$53aac9a0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <000c01c28c4c$53aac9a0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> 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 TAA09075 Resent-Message-ID: <"gaVrh2.0.VE2.mE6rz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48321 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Nicholas Reiter's message of Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:11:31 -0500: Hi Nick, [snip] >pump, etc. This I know. But does anyone out there amongst the august minds >of this group know of any dynamics that occur between a plasma - or an >aggregate of charged particles at modest to high energies - and a laser >beam?!?!? If this is so, and is not an illusion of some sort, then I think [snip] Try looking up free-electron lasers, and bench-top particle accelerators based on lasers passed through a plasma. 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 15 11:36:24 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA20604; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:32:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:32:10 -0800 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:27:54 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: CF, the hydrino and Arie de Geus To: vortex Message-id: <001101c28cdd$190c6920$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_000E_01C28C9A.0A8473E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"Zz99v1.0.n15.vkKrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48322 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_000E_01C28C9A.0A8473E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings, Mention has been made of the alternative WPO patent for creating = hydrinos by Arie de Geus and his contention that, unlike Mills & Co. he = is using the properties of certain isotopes which carry extra neutrons, = [as defined in his book and in the patent] in order to function as = "nucleonic catalysts". This is a new concept - as catalysts typically = only function through electrons in the outer shell of atoms. IF he is correct... AND IF "shrinkage below ground state" is also an instrumental, or even = essential, first step in the broader field of cold fusion and other = forms of low energy nuclear reactions, where shrinkage of deuterium to a = deuterino is the first step towards creating a higher probability i.e. = "cross-section" for either fusion or deuterium tunneling...=20 THEN, the likely "active" material for cold fusion reactions can be = pinpointed specifically as 110 Palladium, a stable isotope that is 11.7 = % of natural and is unique in many respects, not the least of which is = its large mass increase over the next lower stable element in the = periodic table, which is 102Rhodium.=20 This jump of nearly 7% in nuclear mass is much less than the = corresponding percentage jumps found in de Geus' preferred catalysts, = Li, Be, and B but palladium is also unique in its ability to absorb and = contain hydrogen in its matrix under what is essentially extreme = pressure. A critical point to remember here is that other researchers = (R. Mills) have shown that only atomic hydrogen (not molecular hydrogen = nor ionic hydrogen) will shrink when catalyzed, therefore obvious = candidates like LiD or deuterated boranes would not work, because the = deuterium is already molecular, and this is why a metal matrix is = important to keep the D in an atomic (or at least occasionally atomic) = state. This 7% jump in nuclear mass of 110 Pd is extreme among heavier = hydrogen-absorbing elements... But one of the few similarly large = increases (actually larger) is found in 50Titanium (over 45Scandium) and = there have actually been a few reports of cold fusion using titanium in = the early years after the P&F announcement! Is this merely = coincidental? 50 Ti is unfortunately only 5% of natural titanium. If it were a higher = percentage, or if experimenters had ready access to an enriched form of = this isotope, 50Ti, then CF research would likely be focusing on = titanium rather then palladium... IF, that is, Arie de Geus is correct... Regards, Jones Beene BTW, another prospect that I have never seen mentioned as a candidate = matrix for LENR is Cadmium, specifically 116 Cd. Unlike Ti and Pd, this isotope might possibly, just possibly, be = available now in enough quantity to use in a CF cell - but only to a = researcher who had access to one of the national labs (Ed Storms ?) = Isotopes of Cadmium are such excellent neutron absorbers, that I suspect = that someone, somewhere must have gone to the effort to fractionalize = cadmium into its various isotopes for that purpose. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C28C9A.0A8473E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greetings,
 
Mention has been made of the alternative WPO patent for creating = hydrinos=20 by Arie de Geus and his contention that, unlike Mills & Co. he = is using=20 the properties of certain isotopes which carry extra neutrons, [as = defined=20 in his book and in the patent] in order to function as "nucleonic = catalysts".=20 This is a new concept - as catalysts typically only function through = electrons=20 in the outer shell of atoms.
 
IF he is correct...
 
AND IF "shrinkage below ground state" is also an instrumental, = or even=20 essential, first step in the broader field of cold fusion and other = forms of low=20 energy nuclear reactions, where shrinkage of deuterium to a deuterino is = the=20 first step towards creating a higher probability i.e. "cross-section" =  for=20 either fusion or deuterium tunneling...
 
THEN, the likely "active" material for cold fusion reactions can be = pinpointed specifically as 110 Palladium, a stable isotope that is 11.7 = % of=20 natural and is unique in many respects, not the least of which is its = large mass=20 increase over the next lower stable element in the periodic table, which = is=20 102Rhodium.
 
This jump of nearly 7% in nuclear mass is much less than the = corresponding=20 percentage jumps found in de Geus' preferred catalysts, Li, Be, and B = but=20 palladium is also unique in its ability to absorb and contain hydrogen = in its=20 matrix under what is essentially extreme pressure. A critical point to = remember=20 here is that other researchers (R. Mills) have shown that only = atomic=20 hydrogen (not molecular hydrogen nor ionic hydrogen) will shrink when = catalyzed,=20 therefore obvious candidates like LiD or deuterated boranes would not = work,=20 because the deuterium is already molecular, and this is why a metal = matrix is=20 important to keep the D in an atomic (or at least occasionally atomic)=20 state.
 
This 7% jump in nuclear mass of 110 Pd is extreme among heavier=20 hydrogen-absorbing elements... But one of the few similarly = large=20 increases (actually larger) is found in 50Titanium (over 45Scandium) and = there=20 have actually been a few reports of cold fusion using titanium in the = early=20 years after the P&F announcement!   Is this merely=20 coincidental?
 
50 Ti is unfortunately only 5% of natural titanium. If it were = a=20 higher percentage, or if experimenters had ready access to an enriched = form of=20 this isotope, 50Ti, then CF research would likely be focusing on = titanium rather=20 then palladium...
 
IF, that is, Arie de Geus is correct...
 
Regards,
 
Jones Beene
 
BTW, another prospect that I have never seen mentioned as a = candidate=20 matrix for LENR is Cadmium, specifically 116 Cd.
 
Unlike Ti and Pd, this isotope might possibly, just possibly, be = available=20 now in enough quantity to use in a CF cell - but only to a researcher = who had=20 access to one of the national labs (Ed Storms ?)  Isotopes of=20 Cadmium are such excellent neutron absorbers, that I suspect that = someone,=20 somewhere must have gone to the effort to fractionalize cadmium into its = various=20 isotopes for that purpose.
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C28C9A.0A8473E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 13:10:11 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29480; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:07:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:07:03 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD562E0.173FDE19 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:10:56 -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, 14 Nov 02] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kYGib3.0.XC7.t7Mrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48323 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, 14 Nov 02 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:29:39 -0500 From: "What's New" Reply-To: opa aps.org To: "What's New" WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 14 Nov 02 Washington, DC 1. BOGDANOV BROTHERS: IT'S NOT A "SOKAL HOAX," BUT IT SHOULD BE. If you are older than six, you must remember the Sokal hoax (WN 24 May 96). NYU physicist Alan Sokal had published an article in Social Text, a prestigious postmodern journal. "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity" was pure spoof, but the editors couldn't tell it from the usual pompous nonsense they publish. While physicists had a good laugh, social scientists were presumably plotting revenge. So when the rumor spread that the Bogdanov cosmology theory is really an elaborate hoax, it seemed to explain everything. Their theory, after all, looks at the universe before the big bang. As logical-positivist physics, that is literally non sense, but as a Sokal-hoax-in-reverse commentary on the excesses of theoretical physics completely divorced from experiment, such as parallel universes, it would be truly brilliant. Sokal revealed his prank immediately. Alas, the Bogdanovs, as Dennis Overbye described them in last Saturday's NY Times, take themselves seriously. 2. NSF: THE DOUBLING BILL IS ON ITS WAY TO THE PRESIDENT. Last night, both the House and the Senate passed a bill authorizing a doubling of funding for the National Science Foundation over a five year period. However, funding for the final two years was made contingent on whether the Foundation has made progress toward meeting certain management goals. These contingencies were apparently added to satisfy the White House Office of Management and Budget. It is now up to the President. 3. RADIATION-PROOF FABRIC: WILL IT PROTECT YOU FROM CELL-PHONES? A company in Florida claims to have developed a new lightweight fabric called Demron that will protect you from nuclear radiation as well as a lead vest. The secret is said to be a polymer that mimics heavy metals. We can hardly wait to see how that works. Originally developed to protect medical staff from X rays, the company says Demron also blocks gamma rays but didn't say if it will protect you from cell-phone radiation (WN 13 Sep 02). Maybe Demron will inspire a new line of designer clothing by Christie Brinkley, who lives in the Hamptons and worries about radiation from Brookhaven all the time (WN 19 Nov 99). 4. GALILEO: AGING SPACECRAFT IS NOW IN ITS DEATH SPIRAL. Having long since completed its primary mission, and then a second mission of discovery to Europa, where it found a frozen ocean, Galileo last week visited the small moon Amalthea. Now in its 35th and final orbit of Jupiter, suffering arthritis in its movable arm, and failing senses from years of intense radiation, Galileo is running low on propellant. While it can still be controlled, it has been ordered to plunge into Jupiter next September to be sure it doesn't contaminate Europa. 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 15 14:17:41 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA31059; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:16:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:16:05 -0800 X-Sent: 15 Nov 2002 22:15:54 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021115171547.00b04b60 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:15:53 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Cravens ICCF-4 paper uploaded Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"14Y971.0.8b7.b8Nrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48324 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is a fun paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDfactorsaff.pdf - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 14:58:12 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13714; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:57:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:57:00 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:10:27 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"bVv2S2.0.CM3.ykNrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48325 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 9:11 PM 11/14/2, Nicholas Reiter wrote: > ... the REALLY >strange claim is that when a laser beam is aimed at the plasma jet, the jet >deflects! Shepparak claims that even a 5mW HeNe causes the jet to deflect >noticeably. He videotaped it, and has shown it to faculty at UT. Who >presumably have been scratching their heads too. If true then of course this is an amazing fact. It is imperative and should be easy to measure the force on the laser. If there is no measurable force on the laser then the device can be used as a space drive by imparting momentum to a torch flame without corresponding counter-force, thus violating Newton's laws. It is also clearly important to include a mirror in the path of the light beam and measure any force on the mirror as a function of beam deflection. It should be easier to measure the force on a mirror than on a laser, so that would be the easiest significant experiment to pull off. If there IS an equal but opposite force on the laser, then a flying device could use a laser to project a long distance beamed force (e.g. upon a large torch) and thus a scaled up version of the device could be used as an earth to space lifter. Important question: which way does the jet deflect? Away from or towards the laser beam, or sideways to it? If the deflection is in whole or in part sideways then many novel devices are possible, including free energy generators. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 15:07:58 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17656; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:04:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:04:50 -0800 Message-ID: <000a01c28cfb$67e472e0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: References: Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:04:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"_Gmkj2.0.eJ4.IsNrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48326 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, I hope that within the next two weeks I can examine this for myself. From what I am told...anecdote only... the force appears to be pushing or repelling the plasma, when the laser is directed at right angles to the plasma jet. But again, I have to see this one to believe it...or at least see the video. NR > If there IS an equal but opposite force on the laser, then a flying device > could use a laser to project a long distance beamed force (e.g. upon a > large torch) and thus a scaled up version of the device could be used as an > earth to space lifter. > > Important question: which way does the jet deflect? Away from or towards > the laser beam, or sideways to it? > > If the deflection is in whole or in part sideways then many novel devices > are possible, including free energy generators. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 15:27:46 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA27451; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:26:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:26:10 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:25:36 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <000a01c28cfb$67e472e0$5e201f41@woh.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <000a01c28cfb$67e472e0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> 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 PAA27417 Resent-Message-ID: <"ajgiI3.0.ri6.IAOrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48327 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Nicholas Reiter's message of Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:04:52 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Horace, > >I hope that within the next two weeks I can examine this for myself. From >what I am told...anecdote only... the force appears to be pushing or >repelling the plasma, when the laser is directed at right angles to the >plasma jet. But again, I have to see this one to believe it...or at least >see the video. > >NR Also check out the Compton effect, which though normally only applied to high energy photons, is actually valid for all photons. 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 15 15:30:54 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA28880; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:29:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:29:28 -0800 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:30:17 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Nicholas Reiter cc: vortex-L Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma In-Reply-To: <000c01c28c4c$53aac9a0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"X51FI2.0.437.ODOrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48328 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Nicholas, Can we get any more information, such as the URL or information source this experimental work came from? Please. Thank you, JH On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Nicholas Reiter wrote: > Gentlemen, > > On many occasions, I have posted my own observations here of things that I > find surprising. I do so because of the diverse base of skills and > background on this list. They usually end up being explainable, either by > my own diligence in coughing up artifacts, or by help from Vort...case in > point the unusual force I thought I was seeing between a magnet and the > optical axis of a quartz crystal. Ended up, as I mentioned here, as being > an electrostatic attraction to my hand. > > Now here is the latest. I have not yet witnessed the anomaly first hand, > however this afternoon it was described to me faithfully, and I am told that > it has been repeated on demand. I have also had the honor of examining the > system producing the anomaly during operation. Hopefully, I will be able to > get some time on this apparatus over the next two weeks, run some tests of > my own and see if this is BS or not, for my own sake. > > A small company in Toledo, Ohio has been trying to find marketable > applications for a unique plasma torch that was developed about 15 years > ago, I believe. It has not found any wide use yet, because frankly it is > not an extremely portable or necessarily efficient sort of device. But it > is unique as hell, and the plasma produced has some mighty odd properties. > > The device pumps an RF current at a standard 13.56MHz through a jet of inert > gas such as helium. This jet is fed into the open air from a concentric > oriface nozzle. Which up to that point makes it seem a lot like a > traditional plasma cutter. However, the whole system, including the ionized > jet of helium, is tuned with a simple matching network (like RF sputtering > or PECVD) and a standing wave is set up. The plasma sheath acts like an > extension of the coaxial conductor. The output - typically run in the 100s > of watts range for power is a purplish torch - like beam, up to several > inches long. It is NOT a neutral plasma. Tom Shepparak, the developer, > explained that the jet core is mainly ions and neutral atoms, and the outer > sheath or surrounding region becomes filled with free electrons and forms a > negative cloud. A grounded metal workpiece will attract the jet / flame and > then form something like an arc. This afternoon, I watched the plasma jet > light up a tungsten rod with about 100 watts of power behind it. But a > sheet of paper passed through the jet is hardly browned. > > Anyway, all of this is fun and unique enough as it is. But the REALLY > strange claim is that when a laser beam is aimed at the plasma jet, the jet > deflects! Shepparak claims that even a 5mW HeNe causes the jet to deflect > noticeably. He videotaped it, and has shown it to faculty at UT. Who > presumably have been scratching their heads too. > > OK, laser beams can push around atoms at low temperatures, and can cool, and > pump, etc. This I know. But does anyone out there amongst the august minds > of this group know of any dynamics that occur between a plasma - or an > aggregate of charged particles at modest to high energies - and a laser > beam?!?!? If this is so, and is not an illusion of some sort, then I think > these fellows may have stumbled onto a bizarre little loophole in > electrodynamics. > > Beam me up, > > NR > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 15:39:20 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA32079; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:38:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:38:14 -0800 Message-ID: <001601c28d00$140232c0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: References: Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:38:18 -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: <"koXfh.0.9r7.cLOrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48329 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John, To my knowledge, these folks - Energy Beam Dynamics - do not have a website. It continues to be about a 2 or 3 man company, I believe. Tom Shepparak, the developer of the device, is supposed to be faxing or sending me a copy of the paper that was prepared a couple of years ago when the US Navy took a look at some possibilities for the beam. John, I will e-mail you a contact phone number. For any other vortex members, please contact me off - list, and I can supply this to you as well. NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Schnurer" To: "Nicholas Reiter" Cc: "vortex-L" Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 6:30 PM Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma > > > Dear Nicholas, > > Can we get any more information, such as the URL or information > source this experimental work came from? > > Please. > > Thank you, > > JH > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 15:49:52 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04098; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:47:03 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:47:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:44:21 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: The Aspen Effect has been tested, and it is for real! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aSkU32.0.y_.rTOrz" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Same question here.... any validators of OU, as described below? If you are one of the "MANY MANY" people in the US that has replicated and seen the Aspend effect please email me. I would like to see and discuss this. Norman On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Tim wrote: > http://www.geocities.com/theadamsmotor/cdmotor.html > That's a motor that reproduces the Aspden effect. > About $50. > > It also produces massive over-unity, if that interests you.> > MANY MANY people have now validated this fact. > The Adamsmotor Egroup validated the Aspden effect several months ago. > It's hardly news, as such. > > Tim > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 16:27:09 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA21146; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:24:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:24:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:37:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"0CAd3.0.GA5.n0Prz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:25 AM 11/16/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Also check out the Compton effect, which though normally only applied to >high energy photons, is actually valid for all photons. All photon momentum transfer effects are limited to momentum p = E/c. This is barely measurable for common laser photon energies, so it does not seem likely that a visible jet deflection could result from laser beam momentum. It seems to me that the likely conventional explanation might be plasma heating and expansion (on the laser side of the jet) deflecting the jet. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 15 21:09:09 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10981; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 21:07:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 21:07:46 -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: Mills' business strategy Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 00:11:56 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111140114.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <004401c28a20$be43dbe0$826f53d8@asus> In-Reply-To: <004401c28a20$be43dbe0$826f53d8 asus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200211160011.56843.rockcast net-link.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA10945 Resent-Message-ID: <"LofUJ2.0.Rh2.YATrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Suppose problems come from another direction. Suppose this is all true and an explanation will be forced on the scientific establishments by a stark fait-de-compli in progress. I read somewhere about this process that at some point in time it becomes self catalyzing. This process burns water and produces some dense by product that probably is no substitute for the water in our own bodies. What is to stop it from turning our Earth into another Venus.....and incinerates us in the process!? Somebody come up with a reply to this that convincingly does not spell the end of all of us; some way that this can be used safely. It would be beautiful if that BLP rocket works at high output; already feel confident that it does work based on the final report from Rowan to NIAC. Would make a fine propulsion device for the next generation shuttle........maybe not even need a booster.....true single stage to orbit Tuesday 12 November 2002 02:54, Mike Carrell wrote: > 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 Sat Nov 16 06:07:07 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA10582; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 06:06:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 06:06:01 -0800 Message-ID: <001701c28d92$4f74ee00$1c41ccd1 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021111140114.032f95f0 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> <004401c28a20$be43dbe0$826f53d8@asus> <200211160011.56843.rockcast@net-link.net> Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 09:04:59 -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: <"yMZ3z2.0.Eb2.83brz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48333 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yakov wrote: > Suppose problems come from another direction. Suppose this is all true > and an explanation will be forced on the scientific establishments by a > stark fait-de-compli in progress. I read somewhere about this process that > at some point in time it becomes self catalyzing. This process burns water > and produces some dense by product that probably is no substitute for the > water in our own bodies. What is to stop it from turning our Earth into > another Venus.....and incinerates us in the process!? > Somebody come up with a reply to this that convincingly does not spell > the end of all of us; some way that this can be used safely. It would be > beautiful if that BLP rocket works at high output; already feel confident > that it does work based on the final report from Rowan to NIAC. Would make > a fine propulsion device for the next generation shuttle........maybe not > even need a booster.....true single stage to orbit A great many things stop this vision of a runaway condition. There is an old story by Kurt Vonnegut called, I think, "Ice Nine" about a supposed form of crystalline water with wondrous properties but also the ability to catalyze any water into a crystalline state. One can guess where greed leads in the story. I don't remember the details. Fission reactions rely on this "chain reaction", but such occurs only in specially prepared materials and structures. It doesn't happen naturally, although there is some evidence that at least once in the planet's history the conditions for a low-level chain reaction did occur naturally but is effects were soon quenched. The chain reaction is self-amplifying unless quenched. This is the function of neutron-absorbing control rods used in power reactors. It is true that hydrinos can catalyze hydrinos with increasing energy yield. But hydrinos do not produce hydrinos from atomic hydrogen; that requires a separate catalyst. Production of hydrinos from atomic hydrogen requires special conditions, produced in BLP reactors. Available evidence indicates that while the reaction of hydrinos producing hydrinos can occur, as the degree of reduction increases, the events producing the reduction become increasingly rare. This is not the condition for the nuclear chain reaction, which exponentially increases unless moderated. All this has a deep influence on Mills' long term technical strategy. Thus this whole process requires special conditions not found in the normal Earth environment and there is zero danger of the scenario that Yakov suggested. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 08:47:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32566; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:46:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:46:37 -0800 Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: Mills' business strategy Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 12:02:36 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001701c28d92$4f74ee00$1c41ccd1 asus> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <"VoVyL2.0.gy7.jPdrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48334 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi. Funny you should mention ice-9, I thought of the same thing when I read Yakov's post. I disagree though, he's bringing up a very good point. For assume that hydrinos are real. Due to the difficulty of manufacture, the balance of earth's H is the normal form. Now we introduce wide scale Mill's technology. Naturally the balance will tend to tip in the other direction. What determines the H/hydrino balance in nature? And why, if it's a lower energy state, isn't all H in the hydrino form already? Also, I would like to think that there's a cage of mice in Mill's lab which are being raised on hydrino fortified water. Certainly if a rocket application is being considered. Last time I checked, NASA wasn't sending some guy with a pooper scooper to follow the space shuttle and clean up after the exhaust plume. K. -----Original Message----- From: Mike Carrell [mailto:mikec snip.net] Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 12:05 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy Yakov wrote: > Suppose problems come from another direction. Suppose this is all true > and an explanation will be forced on the scientific establishments by a > stark fait-de-compli in progress. I read somewhere about this process that > at some point in time it becomes self catalyzing. This process burns water > and produces some dense by product that probably is no substitute for the > water in our own bodies. What is to stop it from turning our Earth into > another Venus.....and incinerates us in the process!? > Somebody come up with a reply to this that convincingly does not spell > the end of all of us; some way that this can be used safely. It would be > beautiful if that BLP rocket works at high output; already feel confident > that it does work based on the final report from Rowan to NIAC. Would make > a fine propulsion device for the next generation shuttle........maybe not > even need a booster.....true single stage to orbit A great many things stop this vision of a runaway condition. There is an old story by Kurt Vonnegut called, I think, "Ice Nine" about a supposed form of crystalline water with wondrous properties but also the ability to catalyze any water into a crystalline state. One can guess where greed leads in the story. I don't remember the details. Fission reactions rely on this "chain reaction", but such occurs only in specially prepared materials and structures. It doesn't happen naturally, although there is some evidence that at least once in the planet's history the conditions for a low-level chain reaction did occur naturally but is effects were soon quenched. The chain reaction is self-amplifying unless quenched. This is the function of neutron-absorbing control rods used in power reactors. It is true that hydrinos can catalyze hydrinos with increasing energy yield. But hydrinos do not produce hydrinos from atomic hydrogen; that requires a separate catalyst. Production of hydrinos from atomic hydrogen requires special conditions, produced in BLP reactors. Available evidence indicates that while the reaction of hydrinos producing hydrinos can occur, as the degree of reduction increases, the events producing the reduction become increasingly rare. This is not the condition for the nuclear chain reaction, which exponentially increases unless moderated. All this has a deep influence on Mills' long term technical strategy. Thus this whole process requires special conditions not found in the normal Earth environment and there is zero danger of the scenario that Yakov suggested. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 10:31:16 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA08589; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:30:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:30:02 -0800 X-Sent: 16 Nov 2002 18:29:56 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021116130916.00b06460 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 13:29:46 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: LENR-CANR.org stats; Please phone home Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"FNekO2.0.762.fwerz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The number of downloads again increased nicely: Week ending, PDF files downloaded 10/12/2002, 373 10/19/2002, 433 10/26/2002, 574 11/2/2002, 532 11/9/2002, 738 11/16/2002, 1,111 The number of visitors has not increased: Week ending, Visitors 10/12/2002, 331 10/19/2002, 472 10/26/2002, 395 11/2/2002, 357 11/9/2002, 792 11/16/2002, 537 In other words, the average visitor is downloading more papers, perhaps because the number of papers on file has grown from ~60 to ~100. In the last 24 hours, 140 copies of the Cravens paper were downloaded. Since I announced that paper here, I wonder if most of these 140 people were Vortex readers who flocked to download it. I am gratified if that is the case, but at the same time I am a little concerned that we are not reaching a larger audience, beyond those who already know about cold fusion. Therefore, as a test, or a form of crude market research, I would like to ask readers here who downloaded the Cravens paper to Phone Home, like ET. Please zap me a brief e-mail, at my soon-to-be-defunct address: JedRothwell infinite-energy.com Subject: I read Cravens A longer e-mail message would also be welcome! Another thing Ed & I would welcome would be more opinions and feedback about LENR-CANR.org. You can post suggestion here, or e-mail them. Let us know what papers you would like to see added to the library, and what other features or information you would like to see. Also, ask the cold fusion scientists you know to send us material. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 10:56:41 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA19539; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:55:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:55:26 -0800 From: Erikbaard aol.com Message-ID: <5b.316aec4a.2b07ee79 aol.com> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 13:54:49 EST Subject: BlackLight Rocket in Nature To: hydrino yahoogroups.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Language: en X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10512 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA19511 Resent-Message-ID: <"56nbq.0.Dn4.TIfrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Note last 4 grafs . . . 07 November 2002 Nature 420, 10 - 11 (2002); doi:10.1038/420010a Space science: Out of this world NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts aims to turn speculative ideas into tomorrow's space missions. Tony Reichhardt attends its latest get-together, and asks whether the investment is worth it. R. M. WINGLEE; A. COLOZZA/OHIO AEROSPACE INST./R. MICHELSON/GEORGIA TECH. RES. INST.; R. A. CASSANOVA Thrusting forwards: the test set-up for a plasma-induced magnetic bubble (top), and the insect-like Mars entomopter ‹ two of the concepts being backed by Robert Cassanova and his institute. For an organization that declares itself "bounded only by the limits of the human imagination", NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) is housed in a surprisingly down-at-heel neighbourhood. Home is a nondescript, grey building in a slightly run-down section of Atlanta. Looming a mile or so in the distance are the glittering high-rise offices of the South's largest city, but this part of town is all 'space for rent' signs and cracked pavements. Out of such surroundings, NASA hopes to nurture some big ideas. Established in 1998 with an annual budget of about $4 million, NIAC funds researchers from outside NASA who want to work on long-term, speculative projects. "We're not looking for evolutionary ideas," says director Robert Cassanova, an aerospace engineer who used to run the nearby Georgia Tech Research Institute. "We're looking for great leaps forward." To date, more than 75 researchers have answered his call. Some propose technology that appears to be achievable, such as sails that use sunlight to propel spacecraft. Plans to send people and cargo into Earth orbits using space elevators are more speculative. A few ideas, such as a study of a propulsion system based on a hypothesized form of matter known as the hydrino, are deemed unworthy of study by most researchers. But all fall within NIAC's remit: the exploration of ideas that are likely to require 10­40 years to bring to fruition. Late last month, recipients of NIAC funding gathered at a two-day workshop at the institute's headquarters to discuss their progress. "Don't let your preoccupation with reality stifle your imagination," declared one of Cassanova's slides, and first-time attendees could be heard introducing themselves with: "So what's your crazy idea?" But this was no crackpot convention, and there wasn't a warp drive in sight. The outer limits Cassanova says that a "good handful" of the 600-plus proposals received by NIAC to date have been science fiction. But these don't qualify for phase I funds ‹ the institute's initial six-month grants of up to $75,000. NIAC fellows are, for the most part, from universities, government labs and small aerospace companies. Meeting presentations resemble those at other NASA technical gatherings, with the main difference being that speculation is encouraged. Audience members may ask for clarification, but if anyone has doubts about whether an idea is practical, or even possible, they keep them to themselves. After two days of presentations, the difficulty of running a grants programme for space missions that are decades away becomes clear. NIAC has a radical philosophy, but other institutes have far greater resources. With its limited budget, what can NIAC contribute? Often it is a matter of finding a use for cutting-edge research from other fields. Steven Howe, a physicist formerly with the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, has a phase I grant to develop plans for an antimatter propulsion system. Antimatter rockets, which would use the energy produced when matter and antimatter annihilate each other, have been dreamed about for decades. But Howe, who founded Hbar Technologies, a Chicago-based company that aims to develop antimatter technologies, points out that physics is now catching up with science fiction. Last month, researchers at CERN, the European particle-physics laboratory near Geneva, described the production of about 50,000 antihydrogen atoms ‹ the first time such a large quantity has been generated (M. Amoretti et al. Nature 419, 456­459; 2002). And Fermilab, near Chicago, Illinois, is producing upwards of 1014 antiprotons a year. Howe says it should soon be possible to make the 30 milligrams or so of antimatter needed to send a spacecraft to the Kuiper belt, the band of rocks and ice beyond Neptune. Howe's design fires an antihydrogen beam at the uranium-coated inner surface of a sail to trigger a fission reaction. He hopes to secure phase II funding, which can provide up to $500,000 over two years, to investigate how much momentum this reaction would transfer to the sail, and to study the antimatter storage techniques being developed at CERN and other labs. Other NIAC fellows want to exploit existing technology. Anthony Colozza at the Ohio Aerospace Institute in Cleveland has his eyes on the 'entomopter', a flying robotic vehicle that mimics the motion of an insect's wings. The device is the work of Robert Michelson, an engineer at the Georgia Tech Research Institute, who developed it for the US Department of Defense. Colozza has designed a system for surveying the surface of Mars using a camera carried by the entomopter. The device is ideal for use on the red planet, where the thin air would make it impossible for craft with conventional wings to fly at low speeds, or to land. NIAC liked the idea enough to give it phase II funding. Then there are the genuinely novel ideas. In the first round of NIAC grants in 1998, Robert Winglee, a space physicist at the University of Washington in Seattle, won funding for his Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion (M2P2) concept. Winglee proposes creating a large magnetic bubble around a spacecraft by using a plasma to expand an existing magnetic field. The bubble would deflect the stream of charged particles, known as the solar wind, that flows from the Sun. The small but constant pressure against the bubble's large surface area would accelerate a 200-kilogram payload to 80 kilometres per second within three months. A trip to Pluto would take six years, instead of the ten it takes now. Better yet, building such a vehicle would not require huge technological leaps. The M2P2 study was an eye-opener for NASA, admits Murray Hirschbein, who is senior adviser to the agency's chief technologist. "Instead of something 10 to 40 years in the future, it may be a lot closer," he says. Winglee's NIAC grant expired last year, but the work has already produced promising results in test chambers. It is likely to be picked up by NASA's advanced propulsion programme, and the agency might produce a working prototype for testing in space. Mission improbable Not all NIAC fellows are so lucky. The institute aims to draw clever ideas from outside NASA, validate the best ones and have the space agency take over. But some researchers say that "not invented here" attitudes within NASA ensure that few NIAC ideas will ever do more than gather dust. One such critic is Ivan Bekey, a space technology consultant from Annandale, Virginia, and former head of NASA's advanced concepts programme, an in-house scheme that pre-dates NIAC. After leaving the agency in 1997, he won a phase I NIAC grant to study the feasibility of a large space telescope with no supporting structure, just a thin membrane shaped into a reflecting surface. The telescope's instruments would fly in formation to collect radiation reflected by the membrane. If the technique worked, it would lead to revolutionary devices 125 times lighter than the Hubble Space Telescope, but with mirrors ten times the diameter of Hubble's. Bekey was turned down for a phase II grant but received funding from the National Reconnaissance Office, a government body that builds spy satellites. He says that an advanced concepts programme would be better off run from NASA's Washington headquarters. Bekey doesn't dispute the quality of NIAC's work, but says that it is divorced from the rest of NASA. Without advocates within the agency, NIAC is doomed to generate "nice reports, and that's it", he says. Success stories such as Winglee's plasma propulsion do indeed appear rare, and most phase II concepts end up as orphans. The entomopter, for example, is too immature a technology to be incorporated into the Mars missions planned for the next decade, which leaves Colozza struggling to find funding to continue his work now that his phase II funding has ended. But Hirschbein isn't worried if most NIAC ideas languish on the shelf. "These are advanced concepts," he says. "They're not going to find a direct home right away." NIAC's real purpose, he adds, is to influence NASA's "general thought process". That means the NIAC fellows may not even be involved if their idea eventually flies. But what of NIAC ideas that only a tiny minority believe will ever take off? Projects that are, in Cassanova's words, "on the fringe". Exhibit A is the BlackLight Rocket. According to its backers, the device uses a mysterious new form of power generated when a hydrogen atom becomes a hydrino ‹ a hydrogen atom whose electron is unusually close to its nucleus. Mainstream physicists contend that electrons cannot approach the nucleus as closely as the hydrino team predicts. But Anthony Marchese, a mechanical engineer at Rowan University in Glassboro, New Jersey, has a phase I grant to study the propulsion possibilities of such an energy source. Marchese doesn't buy all the claims being made by BlackLight Power, the New Jersey company that is developing hydrino-based technologies, but he does believe that "there is something going on that's interesting". This vagueness, together with the ridicule heaped on hydrino research by figures such as Robert Park, the American Physical Society's director of public information and a keen observer of pseudo-science, makes some NIAC officials nervous about having funded Marchese's work. But others say this twilight zone between safe and wacky is where NIAC belongs. During a break in the workshop, engineer Donna Shirley, who worked on NASA's celebrated Mars Pathfinder mission in the 1990s before moving to the University of Oklahoma, points out that many of the ideas could be duds, but the investment is worthwhile if an occasional jewel is produced. And the ideas presented at this meeting, says Shirley, are more interesting than the fare at other advanced concepts workshops. But, she adds with a smile, "not as good as at a science fiction convention". http://www.niac.usra.edu TONY REICHHARDT Tony Reichhardt writes for Nature from Washington. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nature © Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2002 Registered No. 785998 England. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 13:43:45 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13706; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 13:42:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 13:42:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:43:37 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex , Schnurer Subject: Need heat pipe source info ... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"C9aza3.0.4M3.Olhrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48337 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., I am looking for PLEASE .... some help with Heat Pipe application for ultimate use in a home fireplace .... A) Vendor B) design information for materials and temperatures of average home fireplace ... just brick and grate plus andirons ...... no insert C) vendor[s] of: 1) circulated fluid 2) heat pipe ... and pipes 3) heat pipe systems 4) home made types, plans, people Please and thank you. JH Schurer From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 14:23:24 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25043; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:22:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:22:17 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD6B995.33CCA9CC ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 15:33:44 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Need heat pipe source info ... References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------09ABE7E7D6A24729586E3D55" Resent-Message-ID: <"2KhG21.0.876.PKirz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------09ABE7E7D6A24729586E3D55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thermacore http://www.thermacore.com/mcp.htm Indek Corporattion http://www.indek.com/products/product.html Noren Products http://www.norenproducts.com/Heat_Pipe_Main_Page.html Indium Corporation http://www.indium.com/index1.html Ed John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Vo., > > I am looking for PLEASE .... some help with Heat Pipe application > for ultimate use in a home fireplace .... > A) Vendor > B) design information for materials and temperatures of > average home fireplace ... just brick and grate > plus andirons ...... no insert > C) vendor[s] of: > > 1) circulated fluid > 2) heat pipe ... and pipes > 3) heat pipe systems > 4) home made types, plans, people > > Please and thank you. > > JH Schurer --------------09ABE7E7D6A24729586E3D55 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="storms2.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="storms2.vcf" begin:vcard n:; tel;work:505 988 3673 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html org:Energy K. System adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html version:2.1 email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com x-mozilla-cpt:;1 fn:Edmund Storms end:vcard --------------09ABE7E7D6A24729586E3D55-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 16:03:39 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27902; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:02:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:02:47 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mills' business strategy Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:02:07 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001701c28d92$4f74ee00$1c41ccd1 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 QAA27841 Resent-Message-ID: <"EtEPx1.0.sp6.dojrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Keith Nagel's message of Sat, 16 Nov 2002 12:02:36 -0500: Hi, [snip] >For assume that hydrinos are real. Due to the difficulty >of manufacture, the balance of earth's H is the normal >form. Now we introduce wide scale Mill's technology. Naturally >the balance will tend to tip in the other direction. >What determines the H/hydrino balance in nature? And why, >if it's a lower energy state, isn't all H in the hydrino >form already? [snip] Hydrinos may be difficult to manufacture, but nature has a very big lab, and lots of time. I think it's safe to say that if they exist at all, then they must be created in nature occasionally (particularly in the oceans, where potassium salts are present). Neither under the special conditions in Mills' lab, nor in nature has a run away reaction occurred. Therefore I seriously doubt this is a possibility. 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 16 16:03:48 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27777; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:02:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:02:31 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:01:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: 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 QAA27688 Resent-Message-ID: <"1hL6S3.0.wn6.Nojrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:37:38 -0800: Hi, [snip] >At 10:25 AM 11/16/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >>Also check out the Compton effect, which though normally only applied to >>high energy photons, is actually valid for all photons. > > >All photon momentum transfer effects are limited to momentum p = E/c. This >is barely measurable for common laser photon energies, so it does not seem >likely that a visible jet deflection could result from laser beam momentum. I agree, however I mentioned it simply as an indication of a known effect where charged particles and photons interact. It may provide a starting point for further library research. > > >It seems to me that the likely conventional explanation might be plasma >heating and expansion (on the laser side of the jet) deflecting the jet. [snip] I also considered this, however it seems to me that the plasma jet is probably already much hotter than the likely slight heating of the air due to a milliwatt laser. Actually I think the most likely explanation is that the laser accelerates some of the charged particles (bench top accelerator mechanism), which in turn results in a charge separation creating a local field that distorts the rest of the plasma. 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 16 18:53:28 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA22388; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 18:52:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 18:52:32 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:06:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"vp6xs3.0.jT5.mHmrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:01 AM 11/17/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >I also considered this, however it seems to me that the plasma jet is >probably already much hotter than the likely slight heating of the air due >to >a milliwatt laser. I expect the laser to heat the jet, not the air. The fact the laser is He Ne may be significant in its ability to heat the He jet. I must admit, however, I overlooked in the statement "Shepparak claims that even a 5mW HeNe causes the jet to deflect noticeably." that the power was a mere 5 mW. That does not seem to be enough power to affect the beam direction by heating. > >Actually I think the most likely explanation is that the laser accelerates >some of the charged particles (bench top accelerator mechanism), which in >turn results in a charge separation creating a local field that distorts >the rest of the plasma. Whatever the laser beam does it likely can not appreciably affect the jet direction via the laser beam momentum, regardless of the choice of mechanism. The net lateral momentum of the jet must remain zero because the net momentum of the laser beam is zero for all practical purposes. The effect of the laser on the jet is limited by the particle kinetics, by the particle momenta. Much more meaningful quatitative statements can be made if the gas jet flow rate and cross sectional area is given. Perhaps the laser acts upon the electrons in such a way that lateral momentum is achieved by a force transmitted directly to/from the nozzel rim, and this is how momentum is conserved. Perhaps the laser sets up some kind of standing wave that deflects the beam, and applies torque to the nozzel. The deflection can not be due to an electron cloud being stripped off (in a lateral direction to the jet) by the photon momentum and then the electrons attracting the rest of the jet along with the electrons, because the initial lateral momentum of the electrons would have to be too great for the photon beam to supply it. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 19:07:15 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA27473; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:06:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:06:38 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:20:08 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"aKFRx3.0.6j6.zUmrz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48342 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: "Perhaps the laser acts upon the electrons in such a way that lateral momentum is achieved by a force transmitted directly to/from the nozzel rim, and this is how momentum is conserved. Perhaps the laser sets up some kind of standing wave that deflects the beam, and applies torque to the nozzel." I sometimes say "beam when I mean "jet". I meant to write: "Perhaps the laser acts upon the electrons in such a way that lateral momentum is achieved by a force transmitted directly to/from the nozzel rim, and this is how momentum is conserved. Perhaps the laser sets up some kind of standing wave that deflects the JET, and applies torque to the nozzel." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 16 21:10:53 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02719; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 21:09:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 21:09:56 -0800 Message-ID: <3DD7248E.15215CEA verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 07:09:34 +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: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gIqTn.0.Og.ZIorz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Horace and All, My critic is not for Horace but to other people in general. I common mistake or laziness on giving opinions on anomalies like this case is people ignore the anomaly is related to a specific condition just like this experiment, They are lazy enough to check their propositions on other common conditions where it is known the anomaly does not exist. For example a laser can not bend flame of ordinary torch or its variation. So the scientific thinking should consider specific conditions as well as general conditions. It would be also a good start to look for other effects where a flame or plasma is bend by non-mechnical effects. For example flame is bend in presence of strong electric field. So next step could be testing how this plasma affected by a electric field. also by a nearby magnet. As this plasma carry current, it would be expected magnetic field bend it in some extend. It would also very interesting technologically bending beams by fields, because it allow precisely focus the plasma allowing to obtain very high temperatures. Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 11:01 AM 11/17/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > >I also considered this, however it seems to me that the plasma jet is > >probably already much hotter than the likely slight heating of the air due > >to > >a milliwatt laser. > > I expect the laser to heat the jet, not the air. The fact the laser is He > Ne may be significant in its ability to heat the He jet. I must admit, > however, I overlooked in the statement "Shepparak claims that even a 5mW > HeNe causes the jet to deflect noticeably." that the power was a mere 5 mW. > That does not seem to be enough power to affect the beam direction by > heating. > > > > >Actually I think the most likely explanation is that the laser accelerates > >some of the charged particles (bench top accelerator mechanism), which in > >turn results in a charge separation creating a local field that distorts > >the rest of the plasma. > > Whatever the laser beam does it likely can not appreciably affect the jet > direction via the laser beam momentum, regardless of the choice of > mechanism. The net lateral momentum of the jet must remain zero because > the net momentum of the laser beam is zero for all practical purposes. The > effect of the laser on the jet is limited by the particle kinetics, by the > particle momenta. > > Much more meaningful quatitative statements can be made if the gas jet flow > rate and cross sectional area is given. > > Perhaps the laser acts upon the electrons in such a way that lateral > momentum is achieved by a force transmitted directly to/from the nozzel > rim, and this is how momentum is conserved. Perhaps the laser sets up some > kind of standing wave that deflects the beam, and applies torque to the > nozzel. > > The deflection can not be due to an electron cloud being stripped off (in a > lateral direction to the jet) by the photon momentum and then the > electrons attracting the rest of the jet along with the electrons, because > the initial lateral momentum of the electrons would have to be too great > for the photon beam to supply it. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 17 03:57:05 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA18739; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 03:55:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 03:55:48 -0800 Message-ID: <000501c28e30$4959ee00$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: "vortex-L" References: <3DD7248E.15215CEA@verisoft.com.tr> Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:55:55 -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: <"ZXCAg.0.fa4.4Furz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48344 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hamdi, This is a good point. On the other hand, I perhaps should offer my apologies if I did not state clearly enough that I have not seen the specific effect in action yet - only the device wherein it is said to occur. My posing this matter here on vortex was one of second guessing myself. Since my knowledge of plasma physics is far less than the level of some who might be on here, I wanted to do a little exploratory research to see if anything even vaguely similar to what was reported exists and is already studied. There may be lots I do not know, that is already well known by other specialists. So in that sense, I did actually put out the call for everybody to throw in their 2 cents worth. And they have, with some tidbits for me to follow up on. As always, though, I remain the archetypal empiricist. If Tom and his team cannot show me the effect, or if I try it myself there with my own laser, and I don't see it, then I will move on to the next anomaly, without any further armchair theorizing. Thanks, all NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "hamdi ucar" To: Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 12:09 AM Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma > Dear Horace and All, > > My critic is not for Horace but to other people in general. > > I common mistake or laziness on giving opinions on anomalies like this case is people ignore the anomaly is related to a specific condition just like this experiment, They are lazy enough to check their propositions on other common conditions where it is known the anomaly does not exist. For example a laser can not bend flame of ordinary torch or its variation. So the scientific thinking should consider specific conditions as well as general conditions. > > It would be also a good start to look for other effects where a flame or plasma is bend by non-mechnical effects. For example flame is bend in presence of strong electric field. So next step could be testing how this plasma affected by a electric field. also by a nearby magnet. As this plasma carry current, it would be expected magnetic field bend it in some extend. > > It would also very interesting technologically bending beams by fields, because it allow precisely focus the plasma allowing to obtain very high temperatures. > > > Horace Heffner wrote: > > > > At 11:01 AM 11/17/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > > >I also considered this, however it seems to me that the plasma jet is > > >probably already much hotter than the likely slight heating of the air due > > >to > > >a milliwatt laser. > > > > I expect the laser to heat the jet, not the air. The fact the laser is He > > Ne may be significant in its ability to heat the He jet. I must admit, > > however, I overlooked in the statement "Shepparak claims that even a 5mW > > HeNe causes the jet to deflect noticeably." that the power was a mere 5 mW. > > That does not seem to be enough power to affect the beam direction by > > heating. > > > > > > > >Actually I think the most likely explanation is that the laser accelerates > > >some of the charged particles (bench top accelerator mechanism), which in > > >turn results in a charge separation creating a local field that distorts > > >the rest of the plasma. > > > > Whatever the laser beam does it likely can not appreciably affect the jet > > direction via the laser beam momentum, regardless of the choice of > > mechanism. The net lateral momentum of the jet must remain zero because > > the net momentum of the laser beam is zero for all practical purposes. The > > effect of the laser on the jet is limited by the particle kinetics, by the > > particle momenta. > > > > Much more meaningful quatitative statements can be made if the gas jet flow > > rate and cross sectional area is given. > > > > Perhaps the laser acts upon the electrons in such a way that lateral > > momentum is achieved by a force transmitted directly to/from the nozzel > > rim, and this is how momentum is conserved. Perhaps the laser sets up some > > kind of standing wave that deflects the beam, and applies torque to the > > nozzel. > > > > The deflection can not be due to an electron cloud being stripped off (in a > > lateral direction to the jet) by the photon momentum and then the > > electrons attracting the rest of the jet along with the electrons, because > > the initial lateral momentum of the electrons would have to be too great > > for the photon beam to supply it. > > > > Regards, > > > > Horace Heffner > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 18 08:52:48 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27263; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:50:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:50:43 -0800 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:46:18 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Cookin' up a storm To: vortex Message-id: <001e01c28f22$04c255a0$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_001B_01C28EDE.F64B2940" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"F5l022.0.uf6.YfHsz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48345 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C28EDE.F64B2940 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For your amusement as a prelude to "turkey day,"=20 Most readers of this forum are familiar with Bill B's excellent web site = and in particular, the aptly named: *Unwise Microwave Oven = Experiments* Probably more than a few of you have even tried a "ball lightning" = variant. BTW, if you have children/grandchildren around the house who share (or = sneak into) your computer files, together with a clean kitchen that your = spouse would like to keep that way, then immediately erase this message = and return to less threatening fare. Last night I was surfing through Bill's site, and the recent disclosure = of excess energy purported to have been obtained by Blacklight Power = came to mind - in which simple microwave plasmas of water vapor are used = - and cognizant that many kitchens nowadays are equipped with those = vacuum-sealer machines for freezer bags, and wondering what would happen = if the unwitting housewife stumbled on .... well, not to worry, it = really couldn't happen without some major planning, but... It turns out = that BLP doesn't use a high vacuum for active plasmas and one of those = home sealers might draw down a plastic cup with a few drops of H2O, = placed in a freezer baggie, down to low enough of a vacuum to see some = fleeting anomaly in an irradiated plasma under just the right = circumstances.=20 Perhaps even a hydrino-fueled ball lightning? Not likely, but even if a school kid did want to pursue this for a = science project, say looking for an abnormal temperature gain using a = few drops of water in one run and a few drops of water in boric acid for = another - a big problem would be, what does one use for a "control"? = There are almost no common kitchen liquids that don't contain a lot of = water. Vinegar is 95% water, vodka 60%, Baccardi 151 is getting closer = (but you better save that for when your spouse comes home early and = blames this episode on you, rather than junior. There are few good = choices for a commonly available control liquid that are not extremely = flammable, or inflammable, if you prefer one of the oddest quirks in the = English language. So even though this experiment should not spark, and = microwave energy is non-ionizing, nevertheless DO NOT let your advisee = use anything flammable for a control. Butter should do just fine. OK. Enough chewing the fat. All of the above excess verbiage (and futile = attempt at humor) is really leading up to this one serious observation = about why Mills uses a common microwave 2.45 Ghz tube as power input for = his water vapor plasmas.=20 It is this: 1) in order to accomplish shrinkage below ground state, Mills needs to = get a population of hydrogen *occasionally* into only its singlet atomic = form, NOT ionic form, NOT molecular form AND the average physical = spacing between hydrogen is critical to success. A spacing of slightly = less than 50 nm is ideal and Mills' vacuum pressures are likely chosen = to maximize this spacing between the hydrogen singlet and adjacent = molecules. Shrinkage is rapid, so even a few nanosecond as a singlet = could be enough time. 2) microwave energy is non-ionizing so an isolated hydrogen will not = completely ionize, but it will periodically "stretch," becoming a = "virtual singlet". 3) the microwave heating effect is due to dielectric polarization and = molecular resonance - and this particular frequency, 2.45 Ghz , was = chosen because the OH radical and OH bond (which are common in all = foods, particularly fats) is resonant precisely there, therefore the OH = continually attempts to rotate to align itself with the applied field = and absorbs energy by coupling with this exact microwave frequency. When = this happens with water vapor, H2O, then one of the two hydrogen atoms = becomes the "odd-man-out," and though it will not ionize, it will = stretch to its elastic limit (if the plasma is at the correct = pressurization) and at this elastic limit, it may occasionally *shrink * = below ground state, due to one of two things: either the presence of a = physical catalyst that presents an "energy hole" (according to Mills) or = equally if not more likely, an imposed nano-pressure due to Beta-aether = (ZPE) disruption (according to the present writer and F. Grimer). Next time you throw in a bag of microwave popcorn, ask yourself this, = "what is really going on in there"? Jones Beene ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C28EDE.F64B2940 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For your amusement as a prelude to "turkey day,"
 
Most readers of this forum are familiar with Bill B's excellent web = site=20 and in particular, the aptly named:   *Unwise Microwave Oven=20 Experiments*
Probably more than a few of you have even tried a "ball lightning"=20 variant.
 
BTW, if you have children/grandchildren around the house who share = (or=20 sneak into) your computer files, together with a clean kitchen that your = spouse=20 would like to keep that way, then immediately erase this message and = return to=20 less threatening fare.
 
Last night I was surfing through Bill's site, and the recent = disclosure of=20 excess energy purported to have been obtained by Blacklight Power came = to mind -=20 in which simple microwave plasmas of water vapor are used - and = cognizant that=20 many kitchens nowadays are equipped with those vacuum-sealer machines = for=20 freezer bags, and wondering what would happen if the unwitting housewife = stumbled on .... well, not to worry, it really couldn't happen without = some=20 major planning, but... It turns out that BLP doesn't use a high vacuum = for=20 active plasmas and one of those home sealers might draw down a plastic = cup with=20 a few drops of H2O, placed in a freezer baggie, down to low enough = of a=20 vacuum to see some fleeting anomaly in an irradiated plasma under just = the right=20 circumstances.
 
Perhaps even a hydrino-fueled ball lightning?
 
Not likely, but even if a school kid did want to pursue this for a = science=20 project, say looking for an abnormal temperature gain using a few drops = of water=20 in one run and a few drops of water in boric acid for another - a = big=20 problem would be, what does one use for a "control"? There are almost no = common=20 kitchen liquids that don't contain a lot of water. Vinegar is 95% water, = vodka=20 60%, Baccardi 151 is getting closer (but you better save that for when = your=20 spouse comes home early and blames this episode on you, rather than = junior.=20 There are few good choices for a commonly available control = liquid that are=20 not extremely flammable, or inflammable, if you prefer one of the oddest = quirks=20 in the English language. So even though this experiment should not = spark, and=20 microwave energy is non-ionizing, nevertheless DO NOT let your advisee = use=20 anything flammable for a control. Butter should do just fine.
 
OK. Enough chewing the fat. All of the above excess verbiage (and = futile=20 attempt at humor) is really leading up to this one serious observation = about why=20 Mills uses a common microwave 2.45 Ghz tube as power input for his water = vapor=20 plasmas.
 
It is this:
 
1) in order to accomplish shrinkage below ground state, Mills = needs to=20 get a population of hydrogen *occasionally* into only its singlet = atomic=20 form, NOT ionic form, NOT molecular form AND the average physical = spacing=20 between hydrogen is critical to success. A spacing of slightly less than = 50 nm=20 is ideal and Mills' vacuum pressures are likely chosen to maximize = this=20 spacing between the hydrogen singlet and adjacent molecules. = Shrinkage is=20 rapid, so even a few  nanosecond as a singlet could = be enough=20 time.
 
2) microwave energy is non-ionizing so an isolated hydrogen will = not=20 completely ionize, but it will periodically "stretch," becoming a = "virtual=20 singlet".
 
3) the microwave heating effect is due to dielectric polarization = and=20 molecular resonance - and this particular  frequency, 2.45 Ghz , = was chosen=20 because the OH radical and OH bond (which are common in all foods, = particularly=20 fats) is resonant precisely there, therefore the OH continually attempts = to=20 rotate to align itself with the applied field and absorbs energy by = coupling=20 with this exact microwave frequency. When this happens with water=20 vapor, H2O, then one of the two hydrogen atoms becomes=20 the "odd-man-out," and though it will not ionize, it will stretch = to its=20 elastic limit (if the plasma is at the correct pressurization) = and at this elastic limit, it may occasionally *shrink * below = ground=20 state, due to one of two things: either the presence of a physical = catalyst that=20 presents an "energy hole" (according to Mills) or equally if not more = likely, an=20 imposed nano-pressure due to Beta-aether (ZPE) disruption (according to = the=20 present writer and F. Grimer).
 
Next time you throw in a bag of microwave popcorn, ask yourself = this, "what=20 is really going on in there"?
 
Jones Beene
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C28EDE.F64B2940-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 20 08:18:24 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20236; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 08:14:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 08:14:47 -0800 X-Sent: 20 Nov 2002 16:14:33 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021120110919.02ca7818 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:09:21 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: R. Oriani issues corrigendum to JJAP paper Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"RVCSr2.0.5y4.sJxsz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48346 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Richard Oriani just returned from a vacation. He sent me a note about the papers I uploaded onto LENR-CANR.org, and a correction to his recent paper in the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics. He calls it a "corrigendum" -- a word I had to look up in the dictionary: "Now, with respect to my paper in Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.41 (2002) 6180 I have not had time to study the remarks of Kirk Shanahan . . . [T]he publisher reformatted the entries in the Table and made a mistake. The entries were correct in the proofs sent to me. We have sent in a corrigendum as follows: Due to an error in the production process eight data entries (143, 143, 118, 108, 95, 95, 75, 59) were shifted from the bottom of the 'Control' column of Table 1 to the bottom of the 'Active' column. They should be shifted back to the bottom of the 'Control' column." It is a shame the paper got messed up. I wonder if I can correct the Acrobat .pdf version and put on LENR-CANR.org. Maybe the JJAP On Line editors will correct their version. I can at least upload a corrected version of the table. (I have the full Acrobat package. I find the tools used to correct text are rather awkward.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 20 09:48:50 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07861; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:44:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:44:41 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDBBE86.EE2709C3 ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:55:37 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: R. Oriani issues corrigendum to JJAP paper References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021120110919.02ca7818 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------141DB21194C76FB403398A61" Resent-Message-ID: <"CbCCu.0.lw1.9eysz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48347 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------141DB21194C76FB403398A61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This paper now makes sense. The Shanahan critique no longer applies. I agree, you should make the corrections on the copy provided on the website, with a comment that this was done. I will change my critique, which shows more clearly that the two sets are different than does the argument provided by Oriani. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > Richard Oriani just returned from a vacation. He sent me a note about the > papers I uploaded onto LENR-CANR.org, and a correction to his recent paper > in the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics. He calls it a "corrigendum" -- > a word I had to look up in the dictionary: > > "Now, with respect to my paper in Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.41 (2002) 6180 I have > not had time to study the remarks of Kirk Shanahan . . . [T]he publisher > reformatted the entries in the Table and made a mistake. The entries were > correct in the proofs sent to me. We have sent in a corrigendum as follows: > > Due to an error in the production process eight data entries (143, 143, > 118, 108, 95, 95, 75, 59) were shifted from the bottom of the 'Control' > column of Table 1 to the bottom of the 'Active' column. They > should be shifted back to the bottom of the 'Control' column." > > It is a shame the paper got messed up. I wonder if I can correct the > Acrobat .pdf version and put on LENR-CANR.org. Maybe the JJAP On Line > editors will correct their version. I can at least upload a corrected > version of the table. (I have the full Acrobat package. I find the tools > used to correct text are rather awkward.) > > - Jed --------------141DB21194C76FB403398A61 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="storms2.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="storms2.vcf" begin:vcard n:; tel;work:505 988 3673 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html org:Energy K. System adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html version:2.1 email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com x-mozilla-cpt:;1 fn:Edmund Storms end:vcard --------------141DB21194C76FB403398A61-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 20 11:07:47 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19910; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:05:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:05:13 -0800 X-Sent: 20 Nov 2002 19:05:09 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021120133059.00b05f00 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 14:04:50 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Interesting PBS show about B. Franklin Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Ys-G63.0.os4.epzsz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48348 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There was an interesting Public Television show about Benjamin Franklin last night, so if this is the first you have heard, you missed it. It described some of his scientific achievements, and showed some experiments in action. It begins by showing an experiment in which he attempted to electrocute a turkey, but he accidently knocked himself cold instead. The description of the 18th century "gentleman scientists" reminded me of CF researchers. Chris Tinsley called himself a "gentleman scientist" except, he noted, they were independently wealthy and he was flat broke. It is a shame they did not tell more about Franklin's research, but there is a lot to say about the man, after all. His discoveries in electricity, weather, oceanography and mathematics, and his practical inventions were enough to make him one of the most famous people of the 18th century and one of the most important scientists in history. Add to that his contributions to public health, safety (firefighting and lightning) literacy (public libraries), education, urban design, politics, and his key role in winning the Revolutionary war and you have enough achievements for a dozen famous people. The only Americans who come close to him in intellect and achievements in both science and politics were Jefferson, and perhaps Theodore Roosevelt. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 06:56:50 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16925; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 06:55:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 06:55:39 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:09:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"wUgaX2.0.L84.hFFtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48349 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:55 AM 11/17/2, Nicholas Reiter wrote: >So in that sense, I did actually put out the call for everybody to throw in >their 2 cents worth. And they have, with some tidbits for me to follow up >on. It would be appreciated if you could post some information on vortex when and if it is available. There may be more than 2 cents worth of info to post. 8^) 1. Does the jet operate in ambient conditions or in some kind of vacuum chamber? 2. What is the approximate flow rate of the jet in vol/sec or gm/sec.? 3. What is the approximate jet velocity? 4. What is the nozzle area. (Any two of questions 2-4 sufficient for force calculations, assuming jet is appx. ambient pressure.) 5. Approximate jet deflection angle in degrees. Thanks. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 07:49:03 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA07528; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:47:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:47:07 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 08:00:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Photons and dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <"Wcf_.0.Yr1.x_Ftz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48350 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to their energy. It is now of interest to estimate the average energy photons must carry to account for dark matter. "The measured abundance of helium in the universe (about 25% of all normal matter) suggests that there is about one proton for every 10^10 photons." Source: "PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE", The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 614 November 20, 2002 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein, and James Riordon Given the mass of the proton is 938 MeV, or 9.38x10^8 eV, and assuming roughly 1 neutron per proton, photons can account for the dark mass of the universe being about 4 times greater than the visible mass if 10^10 of them carry 8 * 9.38x10^8 eV, or about 8x10^9 eV. The average photon then need carry at most 0.8 eV energy for photons to account for the dark matter of the universe being roughly 4 times the mass of the visible matter. The actual amount of energy per photon required is less, due to the matter in black holes being "dark" and also due to the aggreagate mass of neutrinos, which are also "dark." The energy of the photons existing inside stars, however, would have to be excluded, however, because their mass, if it exists as posited, would be included in the estimated mass of the star, assuming that the estimate of the mass of such bodies is by gravitational effect. This exclusion raises the the average free photon energy required to account for dark matter using photon mass. However, most such intrnal photons eventually escape the star, so, on average, perhaps this is not so significant an exclusion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 11:26:12 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04945; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:23:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:23:38 -0800 X-Sent: 21 Nov 2002 19:23:24 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021121142321.02cc6228 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:23:24 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Photos help clarify an experiment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"BP9gE1.0.yC1.uAJtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48351 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been having difficulty understanding a new experiment by Mizuno et al., described in an upcoming paper "Confirmation of anomalous hydrogen generation by plasma electrolysis." They are collecting the hydrogen from glow discharge electrolysis and channelling it into a quadrupole mass spectrometer. I do not know whether the hydrogen in anomalous or not, but there is much more of it than normal electrolysis produces. Up to 60 times more. More about that later. I expect Mizuno will let us post the paper on LENR-CANR.org where you can read all about it. Anyway, I have written material in English and Japanese, a schematic, web sites of the equipment vendors and so on, but I was still floundering around trying to understand where the cooling water runs, how they separates out oxygen and water vapor, and how the parts fit together. I figure if I cannot understand this, readers will also have problems. Today Mizuno sent me some sharp, large scale, close-up digital photos of the equipment. Suddenly everything is clear to me. There is nothing like *seeing something*. You still need schematics and descriptions, though. Without them you would see only a confused jumble of wires and tubes. As Arthur Clarke wrote: ". . . the eye had to be educated before it could pass intelligible impressions to the brain. Anything utterly unfamiliar could be, quite literally, invisible . . ." ("Imperial Earth") Scientists, engineers and technical salespeople should learn to take advantage of photos, videos, color graphics and so on. Their presentations often depend on black & white graphs and written descriptions. If we publish this paper on LENR-CANR I will include these photographs. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 12:00:54 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21798; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:58:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:58:06 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 06:57:26 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: 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 LAA21723 Resent-Message-ID: <"5Ehxl1.0.NK5.DhJtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Nov 2002 08:00:45 -0800: Hi, [snip] >In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I >suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to >their energy. It is now of interest to estimate the average energy photons >must carry to account for dark matter. [snip] What is the energy of the average photon in the microwave background? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 13:55:07 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32503; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:52:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:52:00 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54 aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:51:16 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"f1Uhz.0.mx7._LLtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48353 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 3:00:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes: > > >In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I > >suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to > >their energy. It is now of interest to estimate the average energy > photons > >must carry to account for dark matter. > [snip I have a paper on this. Photons have gravitational "mass" due to the effective force they experience while propagating throught Hubble's constant. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/sourceof.txt Frank Z --part1_11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 3:00:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:



>In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I
>suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to
>their energy.  It is now of interest to estimate the average energy photons
>must carry to account for dark matter.
[snip


I have a paper on this.  Photons have gravitational "mass" due to the effective force they experience while propagating throught Hubble's constant.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/sourceof.txt

Frank Z
--part1_11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 14:41:47 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20779; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:39:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:39:28 -0800 Message-ID: <001501c291ae$dea22320$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: References: Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:39:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"WHNdi1.0.U45.W2Mtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48354 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, I certainly will, whenever I have a chance to look at this again. The fellow in charge of the research is out of town for the rest of this week. My guess is that by perhaps next Wednesday, I will can take a look at it, hopefully with a laser of my own. For right now... 1. The plasma jet is in the open air. (like a plasma torch or flame spray jet) 2. I believe the He flow rate is something like .1 to 1 liter per minute 3,4,and 5 are still unknown. The plasma oriface is annular, but it depends on which model of the torch is fired up, with what tip. Again, I invite you to contact Tom Shepparak at the phone number I provided off-list. He would be more than happy to discuss applications and ideas. Best, NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" To: Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:09 AM Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma > At 6:55 AM 11/17/2, Nicholas Reiter wrote: > > >So in that sense, I did actually put out the call for everybody to throw in > >their 2 cents worth. And they have, with some tidbits for me to follow up > >on. > > It would be appreciated if you could post some information on vortex when > and if it is available. There may be more than 2 cents worth of info to > post. 8^) > > 1. Does the jet operate in ambient conditions or in some kind of vacuum > chamber? > > 2. What is the approximate flow rate of the jet in vol/sec or gm/sec.? > > 3. What is the approximate jet velocity? > > 4. What is the nozzle area. (Any two of questions 2-4 sufficient for > force calculations, assuming jet is appx. ambient pressure.) > > 5. Approximate jet deflection angle in degrees. > > Thanks. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 14:49:37 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24353; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:47:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:47:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:00:46 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <"Cx9u53.0.7y5.j9Mtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:57 AM 11/22/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Nov 2002 08:00:45 -0800: >Hi, >[snip] > >>In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I >>suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to >>their energy. It is now of interest to estimate the average energy photons >>must carry to account for dark matter. >[snip] >What is the energy of the average photon in the microwave background? The microwave background peak and mean are in the vicintity of nu = 200 GHz, or 2x10^11 Hz. Using Plank's E = h nu we obtain E = 1.33X10^-22 J = 8.3X10^-4 EV. This is about 1/1000 the amount required to explain dark matter via photon mass. However, the average photon energy should be much higher, true? Significant portions of cosmic energy are even in xray and cosmic ray energy range, especially in the vicinity of observable masses. It is only the action of observable masses that indicates the presence of dark matter. A significant portion of that dark mass may be in the form of black holes, thus reducing the burden of the photon in the explanation of dark matter. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 14:58:50 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28882; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:56:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:56:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDD649A.B3CFAC9D verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:56:26 +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: Photons and dark matter References: <11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Du8ob1.0.B37.9IMtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48356 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > > I have a paper on this. Photons have gravitational "mass" due to the effective force they experience while propagating throught Hubble's constant. > > http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/sourceof.txt > > Frank Z > > Horace, I understand that Frank hypothesizes that a gravitational force is produced by a photon only at the moment it scattered, or Poynting vector change. (*) As this gravitational force is directional, one can not produce arbitrary large gravitational force by increasing number of scattering per seconds. This is because increasing the scattering reduce the distance between scattering and as gravitational forces produced by opposite directions cancel each other at distance, possibly making gravitational force not dependent to number of scattering. For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating in a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase. So when photon scattering is considered as statistical process, we may obtain a constant which link energy of available photons and the average gravitational field produced. This will be true for natural scattering process. But if one disturb this statistical distribution of scattering (i.e. limiting to one dimension or in a plane, or produce coherent scatterings, may obtain different form of gravity and strengths. (*) It may even be generalized as gravity is proportional to change of energy, IMO. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 15:17:01 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04256; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:15:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:15:55 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:29:32 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <"x54uU1.0.Q21.gaMtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:57 AM 11/22/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Nov 2002 08:00:45 -0800: >Hi, >[snip] > >>In an earlier thread, "Photons and gravity, a thought experiment", I >>suggested rationale for assuming that photons have mass corresponding to >>their energy. It is now of interest to estimate the average energy photons >>must carry to account for dark matter. >[snip] >What is the energy of the average photon in the microwave background? The microwave background peak and mean are in the vicintity of nu = 200 GHz, or 2x10^11 Hz. Using Plank's E = h nu we obtain E = 1.33X10^-22 J = 8.3X10^-4 EV. This is about 1/1000 the amount required to explain dark matter via photon mass. However, the average photon energy should be much higher, true? Significant portions of cosmic energy are even in xray and cosmic ray energy range, especially in the vicinity of observable masses. It is only the action of observable masses that indicates the presence of dark matter. A significant portion of that dark mass may be in the form of black holes, thus reducing the burden of the photon in the explanation of dark matter. An argument that the average photon energy is large, on the order of an eV, is that at the time of the big bang the universe was eqaully populated with mater and anti-matter. Through a break in symmetry, the anti-matter was destroyed, converting it to energy. This implies that a lower bound on the energy of a photon must be around .2 eV in order for it to correspond to the matter destroyed. If we further assume that some portion of the normal matter was converted to (photon) energy, say about half, we then see that the average energy of the photon must be in the vicinity of .6 eV. In other words, if the mass of the universe is M, and addtional mass M of matter was annihilated, then the universe initially consisted of mass 4 M, of which 3 M is now in the form of photons. From this perspective not much of the universe need be in black holes for the dark matter to be explained. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 16:54:45 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA13313; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:52:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:52:54 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <185.12450c9d.2b0ed9ba aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:52:10 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_185.12450c9d.2b0ed9ba_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"QQSjK3.0.tF3.c_Ntz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_185.12450c9d.2b0ed9ba_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 5:59:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > (*) It may even be generalized as gravity is proportional to change of > energy, IMO. > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar > You have got it exactly correct. From gen rel gravity is gravity = G/ccr (dp/dt) dp/dt may be electromagnetic or non electromagnetic. It's E/c. I applied this relationship across a braod spectrum of phenomena. Frank Z --part1_185.12450c9d.2b0ed9ba_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 5:59:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes:


(*) It may even be generalized as gravity is proportional to change of energy, IMO.

Regards,

hamdi ucar


You have got it exactly correct.  From gen rel gravity is

gravity = G/ccr (dp/dt)

dp/dt may be electromagnetic or non electromagnetic.  It's E/c.
I applied this relationship across a braod spectrum of phenomena.

Frank Z



--part1_185.12450c9d.2b0ed9ba_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 17:00:52 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15957; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:58:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:58:49 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <5f.3076a29d.2b0edafd aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:57:33 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_5f.3076a29d.2b0edafd_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"1rw_m2.0.Fv3.95Otz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48359 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_5f.3076a29d.2b0edafd_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 5:59:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > scattered, or Poynting vector change. (*) As this gravitational force is > directional, one can not produce arbitrary large gravitational force by > increasing number of scattering per seconds. This is because increasing the > scattering reduce the distance between scattering and as > gravitational forces produced by opposite directions cancel each other at > distance, possibly making gravitational force not dependent to number of > scattering. For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon > circulating in a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should > not increase. > Exactly field = G/ccr (dp/dt) gravity varies as 1/rr The superposition of a +1/r from one scattering event and a -1/r from another scattering event generates the gravitational field of matter. Chapter 7 shows the math of this scattering process Chapter six develops the relationship G/ccr (dp/dt) Frank Z --part1_5f.3076a29d.2b0edafd_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 5:59:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes:


scattered, or Poynting vector change. (*) As this gravitational force is directional, one can not produce arbitrary large gravitational force by increasing number of scattering per seconds. This is because increasing the scattering reduce the distance between scattering and as
gravitational forces produced by opposite directions cancel each other at distance, possibly making gravitational force not dependent to number of scattering. For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating in a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase.

Exactly  field = G/ccr (dp/dt)

gravity varies as 1/rr

The superposition of a +1/r from one scattering event and a -1/r from another scattering event generates the gravitational field of matter.


Chapter 7 shows the math of this scattering process

Chapter six develops the relationship G/ccr (dp/dt)


Frank Z
--part1_5f.3076a29d.2b0edafd_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 17:08:58 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20003; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:07:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:07:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDD837D.FF8BB77C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 03:08:13 +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: Re: Photons and dark matter - correction References: <11b.1a29a72a.2b0eaf54 aol.com> <3DDD649A.B3CFAC9D@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JbduS3.0.Nu4.PDOtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Correction: hamdi ucar wrote: > For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating in > a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase. Should be: For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating in a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase by decreasing the loop radius. (small radius cause photon change direction faster) Regards, hamdix From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 18:12:05 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA15810; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 18:10:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 18:10:54 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <48.14bc2fc1.2b0eec03 aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 21:10:11 EST Subject: Fwd: Photons and dark matter - correction To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eec03_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"c_0ts1.0.ys3.k8Ptz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eec03_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eec03_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <136.176d1a56.2b0eebb6 aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 21:08:54 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - correction To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eebb6_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 --part2_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eebb6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 8:08:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > > For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating > in > a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase by > decreasing the loop radius. (small radius cause photon change direction > faster) > > Regards, > > Yes in the near field. Assuming one field is of a +1/r component and the other a -1/r component the far superimposed 1/rr field is independent on the loop size. Check my math. Chapter 7 --part2_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eebb6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/21/02 8:08:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes:



For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating in
a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase by decreasing the loop radius. (small radius cause photon change direction faster)

Regards,



Yes in the near field.  Assuming one field is of a +1/r component and the other a -1/r component the far superimposed 1/rr field is independent on the loop size.  Check my math.


Chapter 7
--part2_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eebb6_boundary-- --part1_48.14bc2fc1.2b0eec03_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Nov 21 19:16:14 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA04097; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:14:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:14:51 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDDA14B.E414CFB8 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 05:15:23 +0200 From: hamdi ucar Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - correction References: <136.176d1a56.2b0eebb6 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UOXVK1.0.k_.g4Qtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48362 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In a message dated 11/21/02 8:08:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > > For example effect of gravitational force produced by a photon circulating > > in a fiber optic loop (radius r) at distance (d, d>>r) should not increase > > by decreasing the loop radius. (small radius cause photon change direction > > faster) > Yes in the near field. Assuming one field is of a +1/r component and the > other a -1/r component the far superimposed 1/rr field is independent on > the loop size. Check my math. Oh, I think the opposite. As photon would change direction faster in smaller loop I assumed dp/dt is proportional to 1/r: g would be proportional to (1/r)( 1/a+r - 1/a+r ) = 2/(a^2-r^2) only at far field r^2 is too small and can be ignored and g would be proportional to 2/a^2 , independent of radius. hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 00:37:37 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA17552; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:36:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:36:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:50:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, hamdix@verisoft.com.tr From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <"LwTTr2.0.9I4.UoUtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:52 PM 11/21/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 11/21/02 5:59:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, >hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > > >> (*) It may even be generalized as gravity is proportional to change of >> energy, IMO. >> >> Regards, >> >> hamdi ucar >> > >You have got it exactly correct. From gen rel gravity is > >gravity = G/ccr (dp/dt) > >dp/dt may be electromagnetic or non electromagnetic. It's E/c. For photons p = E/c, thus dp/dt = dE/dt, or else is meaningless, depending on your point of view. >I applied this relationship across a braod spectrum of phenomena. > >Frank Z You are of course entitled to your own view of the universe. However, this is contrary to the view I am suggesting/exploring. What I have suggested is that change in gravity (mass) is at all times proportional to change in energy, that mass and energy remain in constant proportion. This is because any theory in which photons do not carry mass in proportion to energy at all times can be shown to invalidate momentum and energy conservation laws. Further, if photons are capable of exchanging gravitons, then there is possibly a basis for developing a quantum theory of gravity which is independent of GR space warping concepts. There is an interesting problem with this idea. Where have the energetic photons from the great annihilation of anti-matter gone? They can't be hanging around locally, because they are not detectable. They can not account for dark matter unless it is almost all, including the photons, locked up in black holes. The mass of energetic photons moving away from us at the fringe of the universe can not account for locally observed gravtational anomalies, because the gravitational forces of such evenly distibuted photons would cancel here locally. Space may have a high density of black holes. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 07:01:54 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06936; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 06:59:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 06:59:44 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <1c0.1ef0330.2b0fa038 aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:59:04 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c0.1ef0330.2b0fa038_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"0SxuU1.0.Ei1.WPatz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_1c0.1ef0330.2b0fa038_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 3:37:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > There is an interesting problem with this idea. Where have the energetic > photons from the great annihilation of anti-matter gone? They can't be > hanging around locally, because they are not detectable. They can not > account for dark matter unless it is almost all, including the photons, > locked up in black holes. The mass of energetic photons moving away from > us at the fringe of the universe can not account for locally observed > gravtational anomalies, because the gravitational forces of such evenly > distibuted photons would cancel here locally. Space may have a high > density of black holes. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner I not there at all. I don't want to go there! What I am doing is modeling the wave properties of matter at low energy. I want to stay away from high energy. My model has a limited domain and is valid only with the harmonic wave properties of the matter. Frank --part1_1c0.1ef0330.2b0fa038_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 3:37:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


There is an interesting problem with this idea.  Where have the energetic
photons from the great annihilation of anti-matter gone?  They can't be
hanging around locally, because they are not detectable. They can not
account for dark matter unless it is almost all, including the photons,
locked up in black holes.  The mass of energetic photons moving away from
us at the fringe of the universe can not account for locally observed
gravtational anomalies, because the gravitational forces of such evenly
distibuted photons would cancel here locally.  Space may have a high
density of black holes.

Regards,

Horace Heffner         


I not there at all.  I don't want to go there!  What I am doing is modeling the wave properties of matter at low energy.  I want to stay away from high energy.  My model has a limited domain and is valid only with the harmonic wave properties of the matter. 

Frank
--part1_1c0.1ef0330.2b0fa038_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 07:05:54 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08562; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 07:02:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 07:02:11 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <61.29946739.2b0fa0cb aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:01:31 EST Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_61.29946739.2b0fa0cb_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"4dU0q2.0.i52.oRatz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48365 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_61.29946739.2b0fa0cb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 3:37:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > > For photons p = E/c, thus dp/dt = dE/dt, or else is meaningless, depending > on your point of view. > Upon reflection dp/dt = 2E/c Frank --part1_61.29946739.2b0fa0cb_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 3:37:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:



For photons p = E/c, thus dp/dt = dE/dt, or else is meaningless, depending
on your point of view.


Upon reflection dp/dt = 2E/c

Frank
--part1_61.29946739.2b0fa0cb_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 08:04:14 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA00695; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:02:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:02:40 -0800 X-Sent: 22 Nov 2002 16:02:35 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122110220.02cc2898 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:02:29 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"dC3Py1.0.lA.VKbtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48366 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: See brief abstracts: http://www.aps.org/meet/4CF02/baps/abs/S80.html#SCB.001 Details are not available at this site, and the results (positive or negative) are not described! - Jed [NOTE: For some reason Eskimo.com is rejecting messages. I have to send most Vortex postings twice, and this one three times. Weird!] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 08:31:12 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA11114; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:29:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:29:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:22:59 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <000501c29243$6d0fa080$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 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122110220.02cc2898 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA11081 Resent-Message-ID: <"sJ7eR3.0.Zj2.hjbtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Details are not available at this site, and the results (positive or > negative) are not described! > > - Jed This looks "positive," assuming evidence of a nuclear reaction is what one is desirous of (value judgment) or stated differently, how could evidence of neutron emissions from cold fusion be anything less than positive - particularly as neutrons are so seldom seen...well, I guess Park and Taubes would consider it negative, having built reputations on the expectation of contrary results... "Evidence of Neutron Emissions from Fusion at Low Temperatures" Frank Keeney (Particle Physics Research Co.), Steven Jones, Mark Scott (Brigham Young University) We report experimental results from the fusion reaction: d + d --> 3He (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV). We observed evidence of neutrons emanating from partially-deuterided titanium and copper foils using a highly-sensitive segmented detector. Deuteriding was achieved by both gas-loading and by acid loading. Our data show compelling evidence for low-level nuclear d-d fusion in deuterided metals under non-equilibrium conditions. One experiment showed a background-subtracted yield of 57 ± 13 counts/hour. An important advance was repeatability at the 40... Also by S.Jones, this looks positive "Evidence for Coincident Fusion Products Using Silicon Surface-barrier Detectors" From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 09:57:53 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA21363; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:55:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:55:40 -0800 X-Sent: 22 Nov 2002 17:55:31 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122114321.02c4a660 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 12:55:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere In-Reply-To: <000501c29243$6d0fa080$0a016ea8 cpq> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122110220.02cc2898 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"vjkIc1.0.gD5.S-ctz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >This looks "positive," assuming evidence of a nuclear reaction is what one >is desirous of (value judgment) . . . You are right, on second reading, it does sound positive. I got the impression at first that they were saying this a conventional, expected low level reaction -- perhaps something like the neutrons you get by whacking metal with a deuteron beam. The first abstract cuts off just where things are getting interesting, the way Russell Baker says detective story porno magazines did in the 1930s: "An important advance was repeatability at the 40..." Pow! The luscious tomato in detective's arms is shot dead, just as she is about to Reveal All. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 11:59:34 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19723; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:56:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:56:25 -0800 Message-ID: <020401c29261$367d0080$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122110220.02cc2898 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:56:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"OGmIJ.0.2q4.eletz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Check out this link: http://128.187.202.55/jones/rel491/handstext%20and%20figures.htm from Steve Jones website: http://physics1.byu.edu/atomic/jones_cv.htm Does this damage his credibility? Can one be a good scientist and be a devout Christian, as well? Doesn't the scientific method require skepticism in the absense of evidence? Craig (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 13:32:04 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA22194; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:30:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:30:11 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <66.2a7fe54a.2b0ffb93 aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:28:51 EST Subject: Re: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_66.2a7fe54a.2b0ffb93_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"457K2.0.hQ5.Z7gtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48371 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_66.2a7fe54a.2b0ffb93_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 2:59:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, cchaynie ix.netcom.com writes: > > Does this damage his credibility? Can one be a good scientist and be a > devout Christian, as well? Doesn't the scientific method require skepticism > in the absense of evidence? > > Craig (Houston) > You tell this to someone on there death bed that has lost all hope in this life. Sometimes it is better to take something with a grane of salt that to believe a dark impersonal and always fatal life. Frank Z --part1_66.2a7fe54a.2b0ffb93_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/22/02 2:59:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, cchaynie ix.netcom.com writes:



Does this damage his credibility? Can one be a good scientist and be a
devout Christian, as well? Doesn't the scientific method require skepticism
in the absense of evidence?

Craig (Houston)


You tell this to someone on there death bed that has lost all hope in this life.
Sometimes it is better to take something with a grane of salt that to believe a dark impersonal and always fatal life.

Frank Z
--part1_66.2a7fe54a.2b0ffb93_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 13:32:05 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA22110; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:29:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:29:51 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <156.17d02c3f.2b0ffba8 aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:29:12 EST Subject: Fwd: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_156.17d02c3f.2b0ffba8_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"Sh_-n3.0.OP5.E7gtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48370 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --part1_156.17d02c3f.2b0ffba8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_156.17d02c3f.2b0ffba8_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-xb04.mx.aol.com (rly-xb04.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.105]) by air-xb01.mail.aol.com (v89.21) with ESMTP id MAILINXB11-1122145931; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 14:59:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by rly-xb04.mx.aol.com (v89.21) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXB43-1122145921; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 14:59:21 -0500 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19723; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:56:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:56:25 -0800 Message-ID: <020401c29261$367d0080$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021122110220.02cc2898 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: Steve Jones reports cold fusion results . . . somewhere Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:56:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"OGmIJ.0.2q4.eletz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Check out this link: http://128.187.202.55/jones/rel491/handstext%20and%20figures.htm from Steve Jones website: http://physics1.byu.edu/atomic/jones_cv.htm Does this damage his credibility? Can one be a good scientist and be a devout Christian, as well? Doesn't the scientific method require skepticism in the absense of evidence? Craig (Houston) --part1_156.17d02c3f.2b0ffba8_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 13:42:51 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25596; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:39:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:39:27 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDEA4FC.94AA17E5 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:43:24 -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, 22 Nov 02] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"drdaZ.0.oF6.EGgtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48372 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, 22 Nov 02 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 14:47:49 -0500 From: "What's New" Reply-To: opa aps.org To: "What's New" WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 22 Nov 02 Washington, DC 1. SUV MILEAGE: THE ADMINISTRATION WON'T RAISE THE BAR TOO FAR. A year ago, the House crushed a move to raise the CAFE standard for SUVs from the present 20.7 mpg to 35 mpg(WN 3 Aug 01). Now the Bush administration is reviewing a proposal to raise it by a meager 0.5 mpg each year for just three years, starting with the 2005 model year. Take that Mr. Saudi oil baron! How did they arrive at the 22.2 mpg figure? Well, they asked the automakers what was possible. But the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers says even a 1.5 mpg increase would be "a real challenge." Gosh, maybe we're asking too much. Instead of tinkering with the SUVs, why don't we just shorten the mile? Lopping a mere 127 feet off the mile each year for three years would meet the same standard. The rest of the world won't care. They went metric years ago. 2. CELL PHONES: PROTECTING YOUR SECOND MOST IMPORTANT ORGAN. There is no credible evidence that cell phone radiation is linked to cancer (WN 4 Oct 02) and no reason to think it could be, but you can't be too careful. Last month we told you about a new line of Dockers with material that blocks cell-phone radiation if you carry the phone in your pocket(WN 13 Sep 02). Now, a company in Norway is selling caps for $53 that have a layer of woven silver to shield your brain when you hold the phone up to your head. It also blocks solar UV, but so does a paper hat. 3. MISCONDUCT IN PHYSICS: APS COUNCIL REVISITS ETHICS AND VALUES. In what may be remembered as the summer of lost faith, physicists woke up to find two separate cases of blatant fabrication in physics research. And it wasn't just two loners: Ninov and Schoen. They had as many as 15 coauthors on some of the papers (WN 19 Jun 02). This was not supposed to happen in physics. In some soft science maybe, but not in physics. At its meeting two weeks ago, the APS Council revised the "APS Guidelines for Professional Conduct" to spell out coauthor responsibility www.aps.org/statements/02.2.html and added a "Statement on improving education for professional ethics, standards and practices" www.aps.org/statements/02.4.html 4. GLOBAL TERRORISM WARNING: MAYBE YOU DIDN'T NOTICE. The first warnings issued by the administration after 9/11 were front page headline stuff. This week, the New York Times devoted 2 column inches at the bottom of page A17 to the latest helpful warning. It was truly a classic: "Terrorist actions may include, but are not limited to, suicide operations or kidnappings." 5. MASS MEDIA FELLOWSHIPS: APPLICATIONS INVITED FOR SUMMER 2003. Tired of the media misreporting science? Do something about it. APS supports a ten-week summer fellowship to allow physics students to work full time as reporters, researchers or production assistants in a mass media organization. Priority will be given to graduate students in physics or closely related fields. The deadline is 15 January 2003. Details at www.aps.org/public_affairs/massmedia/index.shtml . 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 22 19:35:55 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22929; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:33:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:33:49 -0800 Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: "Vortex" Subject: Surf the patent databases... Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 22:49:59 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <"Vnbuo3.0.9c5.TSltz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48373 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All. I'm pleased to announce that a freeware version of IP-Discover is now available for student and private use. That's probably most of you vorts. So come to the site, dig in, and enjoy surfing the public patent databases. It's an essential part of invention. www.ipdiscover.com K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 22 21:15:52 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA24174; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 21:14:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 21:14:44 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDF0E0F.7FD76923 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 07:11:43 +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: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wZ4UJ.0.av5.4xmtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48374 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Horace, Consider the relation between electric charge and magnetic field and project this relation to energy and to the gravitational field. I mean a hypothesis where the gravitational field produced when an energy is accelerated. This should be true for Frank's hypothesis to explain the gravity. But the observed gravity is not similar to magnetic field. But I am trying to model the observed gravity or macroscopic gravity as a statistical commutation of microscopic gravity produced by large number accelerated energy components. This could be similar to gas pressure (macroscopic gravity) produced individual random movements (momenta) of gas molecules (microscopic gravity). And basic question need to answered for this hypothesis is: If gravity is produced by acceleration of energy, why it is not possible to obtain arbitrary amount of gravity by increasing or decreasing acceleration of energy and gravity is precisely proportional to amount of energy? Answer is energy is always moving with speed of light whether it is carried by photons or condensed in matter form. So only way to vary acceleration is vary the number of direction change in unit of time of energy components. But when direction changes are increasing, distance between these changes are decreased and the the total effect on producing gravity remain unchanged. This is exactly I am exemplified with fiber optic loop. This invariance is provided by Frank's formula. Applying this formula to configuration where a photon is ping-ponging between two mirrors separated by 2r, at a point on the axis of the photon at distance d to the middle point of these mirrors instantaneous gravitational force(w) is calculated by each bounces on mirrors is w1 = +u/(d-r) w2 = -u/(d+r) where u is gravitational factor of bouncing photon having a specific energy w = g1-g2 = 2ur/(d^2 - r^2) for d>>r w= 2ur/d^2 as number of bounce of photons per second is determined by n= c/2r where c is speed of light quasi static gravitational force experienced would be g = n.w = (c/2r)(2ur/d^2) = 2uc/d^2 As one see, the parameter r is removed from the equation. Replacing u with k.e where e is energy of the photon and k is a constant g=kce/d^2 The similarity between Newton formula and the above can be seen. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 01:16:14 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA30237; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 01:14:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 01:14:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3DDF4732.3D4110D5 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 11:15:30 +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: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note - correction Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TmmPn.0.NO7.DSqtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48375 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I did some corrections and additions to my posting. I think this one is better. Note that the world "commutation" found in third paragraph of previous posting should read as "accumulation". Victimized by spell checker.:) Regards, hamdi ucar ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Horace, Consider the relation between electric charge and magnetic field and project this relation to energy and to the gravitational field. I mean a hypothesis where the gravitational field produced when an energy is accelerated. This should be true for Frank's hypothesis to explain the gravity. But the observed gravity not resemble to magnetic field in this analogy. Observed gravity is static and isotropic but hypotetized gravity produced by acceleration of energy is dynamic and directional. But considering large number of microscopic accelerated energy components are producing gravitational force or fields on all directions constantly, result would be similar to what we observe. I name it as macroscopic gravity. This could be similar to gas pressure (macroscopic gravity) produced individual random movements (momenta) of gas molecules (microscopic gravity). And basic question need be answered for this hypothesis is: If gravity is produced by acceleration of energy, why it is not possible to obtain arbitrary amount of gravity by increasing or decreasing acceleration of energy and why gravity is precisely proportional to amount of energy? Answer is energy is always moving with speed of light whether it is carried by photons or condensed in matter form. So, only way to vary acceleration is vary the number of direction change in unit of time of energy components. But when direction changes are increasing in time, distance between these changes are decreased and the the total effect on producing gravity remain unchanged. This is exactly I exemplified with fiber optic loop. This invariance is provided by Frank's formula. Applying this formula to configuration where a photon is ping-ponging between two mirrors separated by 2r, at a point on the axis of the photon at distance d to the middle point of these mirrors instantaneous gravitational force(w) is calculated by each bounces on mirrors is w1 = +u/(d-r) w2 = -u/(d+r) where u is gravitational factor of bouncing photon having a specific energy w = g1-g2 = 2ur/(d^2 - r^2) for d>>r w= 2ur/d^2 as number of bounce of photons per second is determined by n= c/2r where c is speed of light quasi static gravitational force experienced would be g = n.w = (c/2r)(2ur/d^2) = 2uc/d^2 As one see, the parameter r is removed from the equation. Replacing u with k.e where e is energy of the photon and k is a constant g=kce/d^2 The similarity between Newton formula and the above can be seen. So, how this hypothesis contribute to your consideration of gravity produced by photons in universe: 1) Photons are not often reflected by astronomical objects but they are mostly created ands absorbed. These event produce gravity but energy contained on freely moving photons should not. To make a proper analysis, a good mathematical formulation is needed. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 04:18:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA09966; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 04:17:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 04:17:28 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 04:31:02 -0800 To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note - correction Resent-Message-ID: <"2bL1p.0.eR2.N7ttz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48376 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am working away from home often now, so my response time may be long and my responses not well considered. Apologies in advance for my coming mistakes! At 11:15 AM 11/23/2, hamdi ucar wrote: >Consider the relation between electric charge and magnetic field and >project this relation to energy and to the gravitational field. > >I mean a hypothesis where the gravitational field produced when an energy >is accelerated. This should be true for Frank's hypothesis to explain the >gravity. I think this hypothesis probably can only have consistant meaning mathematicallly or physically if energy is treated as a vector. > >But the observed gravity not resemble to magnetic field in this analogy. >Observed gravity is static and isotropic but hypotetized gravity produced >by acceleration of energy is dynamic and directional. But considering >large number of microscopic accelerated energy components are producing >gravitational force or fields on all directions constantly, result would >be similar to what we observe. I name it as macroscopic gravity. This >could be similar to gas pressure (macroscopic gravity) produced individual >random movements (momenta) of gas molecules (microscopic gravity). The accelerating (path changing) of photons correlates exactly to gravitational force ... or to the warping of space by the gravitational source as sepcified in GR. Further the exchange of momentum of photons with mass is not in doubt, though this is momentum exchange results in a repulsive force, not an attracting force. It stikes me that what you are actually quantifying or converting macro form is actually inertia. It is not the acceleration of energy that fails in this (Frank's) context, but rather the counter-force on the accelerating mass (the mass that bends the photon path) that fails to be accounted for. That is the basis of my hypothesis: suppose there IS a counter force on the mass that redirects (deflects) the photon. I demonstrate by thought experiment that conservation of momentum and energy are violated if such counter-force does not exist. Given that the counter-force hypothesis IS true, then there is no difference in results between my hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis that photons carry gravity, i.e. that photons exchange gravitons. If something in all ways acts exactly like a rose why not call it a rose, or assume it might actually be a rose. Two systems that are isomorphic are really the same system with differing nomenclature. > >And basic question need be answered for this hypothesis is: If gravity is >produced by acceleration of energy, why it is not possible to obtain >arbitrary amount of gravity by increasing or decreasing acceleration of >energy and why gravity is precisely proportional to amount of energy? It appears to me that the reason for this is that the acceleration as discussed is a manifestation of gravity, not the production of gravity. The production of gravity only occurs by a theory is there is some underpinning law that makes it happen. This is the basis of the hypotheis I propose, that such a counter-force exists. However, I do not hypothesize that this counter-force exists only when there is phton acceleration. Suppose there are two masses m1 and m2 seperated by a photon beam: m1 ...................................photon beam...............> m2 The photon beam need not be bent in order for the gravitational attraction of m1 and m2 to be increased. Further, suppose the photon beam is directed into a black hole B: m1 ..photon beam..>B m2 As the photons are absorbed by the black hole its mass increases. The force on m1 and m2 increases. I ssuggest that this is true even if and/or while the photons remain photons while in the black hole. > >Answer is energy is always moving with speed of light whether it is >carried by photons or condensed in matter form. So, only way to vary >acceleration is vary the number of direction change in unit of time of >energy components. It seems that energy must be a vector for the above statement to have meaning. Further, it appears you are focusing here on inirtial mass and not gravitational mass. Without the counter-force hypothesis there is no gravity issued. > >But when direction changes are increasing in time, distance between these >changes are decreased and the the total effect on producing gravity remain >unchanged. This is exactly I exemplified with fiber optic loop. This >invariance is provided by Frank's formula. If the direction changes are increasing or decreasing in time (in the observer's frame) then the inirtial mass is changing, not gravity. > >Applying this formula to configuration where a photon is ping-ponging >between two mirrors separated by 2r, at a point on the axis of the photon >at distance d to the middle point of these mirrors instantaneous >gravitational force(w) is calculated by each bounces on mirrors is > >w1 = +u/(d-r) >w2 = -u/(d+r) > >where u is gravitational factor of bouncing photon having a specific energy I suggest that you are calculating an inirtial force here, not gravitational. > > >w = g1-g2 = 2ur/(d^2 - r^2) > >for d>>r > >w= 2ur/d^2 > >as number of bounce of photons per second is determined by >n= c/2r where c is speed of light > >quasi static gravitational force experienced would be > >g = n.w = (c/2r)(2ur/d^2) = 2uc/d^2 > >As one see, the parameter r is removed from the equation. > >Replacing u with k.e where e is energy of the photon and k is a constant > >g=kce/d^2 > >The similarity between Newton formula and the above can be seen. > >So, how this hypothesis contribute to your consideration of gravity >produced by photons in universe: > >1) Photons are not often reflected by astronomical objects but they are >mostly created ands absorbed. These event produce gravity but energy >contained on freely moving photons should not. To make a proper analysis, >a good mathematical formulation is needed. This hypothesis does not imply the necessary counter-force on the gravitational field producing mass. It seems to provide a model for inirtia. It is consistent with my consideration in that photons are acted upon by gravity and that phtons carry momentum, but inconsistant in that there is no provision for the necessary counter-force on the gravitational body. A further difference is that in my hypothesis light attracts light, and light in a black hole does not lose its mass. The mass/energy ratio in the universe remains constant. Given that the universe at the time of the big bang had M1 + M2 mass in anti-matter, and M1 + M2 mass in matter, and mass R in radiation mass, and assuming it now has mass M1 in ordinary matter and approximately 0 mass in anti-matter, the radiative mass of the universe must now be M1 + 2 M2 + R. Much of that photon mass should be in a spherical enevlope heading away from the locus of the big bang. However, a lot of it may be trapped in lots of black holes and still in our vicinity. If so, then it may account for a large portion of dark matter? The question then is why we cannot see most of these black holes. Perhaps it is because we can only see relatively new ones, or relatively large ones. The old ones have gobbled up everything in their vicinity and thus are realtively hidden. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 06:27:34 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA12362; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 06:26:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 06:26:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 06:22:19 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <000501c292fb$bbc52020$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 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id GAA12335 Resent-Message-ID: <"2Vumx.0.413.e0vtz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'm wondering if some of these contradictions that exist in tying photons to energy, gravitation, inertia, etc. can't be resolved (or at least rationalized) by employing extra-dimensionality, i.e. tachyons... I can practically see the collective grimacing over cyberspace whenever tachyons are mentioned. It's a leap of faith, sure, but if one can suspend disbelief long enough to actually study the "distilled" info that is finally showing up on the web, there are many surprising benefits to that understanding, but please don't ask me to try to verbalize them, instead here are two good resources.... First the more difficult. Over the years there has been an ongoing thread (occasional flame war) on Sci.Physics.Research that recently has taken on the name "Length of wavetrain of a single photon" - you can jump in at: http://www.lns.cornell.edu/spr/1999-02/threads.html#0014372 Every once in a while on reading these heated opinions, a glimpse of understanding shines through...it often takes the form of a photon being a two component entitiy having both a 3D (local) and a 4D (non-local) component, or stated otherwise, spending half its time in any one three dimensional reference plane (what we see) and the other half as connected back to its origin by means a wavetrain that must by definition be FTL, i.e tachyonic. Once the photon interacts in any local reference plane, then immediately the tachyonic wavetrain collapses, carrying with it all its formerly "imaginary" mass energy equivalent into the local frame of reference. When you were in university, if you wondered when you would really ever need to use all that crap about imaginary numbers, well here's the place ! A good introduction to tachyon mathematics and Feinberg's original 35 year old theory can be found in John G. Cramer's Alternate View Column # AV-61. Sorry don't have the URL handy. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 10:35:48 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA26687; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 10:34:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 10:34:57 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 13:29:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note - correction MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <45A115C3.76AEDFF1.0AB10C99 aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ruw3n.0.qW6.Hfytz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48378 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 11/23/2002 7:31:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > It is not the acceleration of energy that fails in this (Frank's) context, > but rather the counter-force on the accelerating mass (the mass that bends > the photon path) that fails to be accounted for. That is the basis of my > hypothesis: suppose there IS a counter force on the mass that redirects > (deflects) the photon. I demonstrate by thought experiment that > conservation of momentum and energy are violated if such counter-force does > not exist. Given that the counter-force hypothesis IS true, then there is > no difference in results between my hypothesis and the alternative > hypothesis that photons carry gravity, i.e. that photons exchange > gravitons. If something in all ways acts exactly like a rose why not call > it a rose, or assume it might actually be a rose. Two systems that are > isomorphic are really the same system with differing > nomenclature. Exacltly, this is where I started my reasoning. I hold that the the conservation of momentum always applies. In gravitational light bending gravity changes the momentum of light. There must be a reaction to this change in momentum. This reaction is produced when bending light generates a gravitational field. This induced field reaches back and changes the momentum of the the system. From general realitivity the required induced field is is G/ccr(dp/dt) frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 10:42:41 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29782; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 10:42:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 10:42:08 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 13:42:02 -0500 To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <35DFEC27.123E0085.0AB10C99 aol.com> X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QqLwe3.0.GH7._lytz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48379 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 11/23/2002 12:11:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, hamdix verisoft.com.tr writes: > > Answer is energy is always moving with speed of light whether it is carried by photons or condensed in matter form. So only way to vary acceleration is vary the number of direction > change in unit of time of energy components. This is correct according to my thinking but wrong according to conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom holds that the matter wave function moves at velocity v. It is locatlized by the Fourier addition of component waves sum (eiwt). I say the matter wave travels at velocity c. It is localized by reflections. These reflections take place when the intensity of the wave exceeds the elastic limit of space. I introduce a new idea. That space has a limit to elasticity. That's where my consstants of the motion theory sprang from. There is no counter force. The counter force is produced by the induced gravitational field. Frank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 16:20:32 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16717; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 16:19:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 16:19:41 -0800 Message-ID: <001c01c2934e$c0192240$a996c1d8 LocalHost> From: "David Rosignoli" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021120133059.00b05f00 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: Interesting PBS show about B. Franklin Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 19:16:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"NBsQw1.0.754.Ti1uz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48380 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, Thanks for the tip. The creators of this program had a presentation at the Society for Amateur Scientists conference here in Philadelphia.(See www.sas.org) I forgot all about this show. But depending on your area, it will probably be re-broadcast. Check out http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/about_localbroadcast.html -David Rosignoli ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Interesting PBS show about B. Franklin > There was an interesting Public Television show about Benjamin Franklin > last night, so if this is the first you have heard, you missed it. It > described some of his scientific achievements, and showed some experiments > in action. It begins by showing an experiment in which he attempted to > electrocute a turkey, but he accidently knocked himself cold instead. The > description of the 18th century "gentleman scientists" reminded me of CF > researchers. Chris Tinsley called himself a "gentleman scientist" except, > he noted, they were independently wealthy and he was flat broke. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 18:16:40 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19079; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:15:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:15:34 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Strange result Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 13:14:57 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: 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 SAA19047 Resent-Message-ID: <"WL9sz.0.0g4.5P3uz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, I'm currently doing an electrolysis experiment with a solution containing what I was sold as KNO3. I'm using an asymmetric AC current. I'm getting a considerable amount of gas development at the electrode that is primarily positive, and *no gas at all* at the other electrode. There is also a strong smell of bleach. The electrodes are steel plate. I turned off the power, and turned it on again after intervals of varying length, varying from seconds to an hour or so. I don't let it run for more than a few minutes at a time, due to the stench. Placing the electrolysis cell directly across the DC power supply had the same result. IOW it doesn't appear to be anything to do with the AC current. There is a stain spreading out through the electrolyte, from cathode to anode. Any suggestions as to what is happening to my hydrogen? If it's being absorbed into the steel, how much can steel absorb (/ unit volume)? 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 23 20:52:11 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA05634; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 20:51:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 20:51:29 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Yakov Smirnoff Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Robin van Spaandonk Subject: Re: Strange result Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:55:40 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200211232355.40251.rockcast net-link.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA05608 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ehykb.0.tN1.Hh5uz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48382 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Saturday 23 November 2002 21:14, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently doing an electrolysis experiment with a solution containing > what I was sold as KNO3. I'm using an asymmetric AC current. I'm getting > a considerable amount of gas development at the electrode that is primarily > positive, and *no gas at all* at the other electrode. There is also a strong smell of bleach. The electrodes are steel plate. I turned off the power, and turned it on again after intervals of varying length, varying from seconds to an hour or so. I don't let it run for more than a few minutes at a time, due to the stench. > Placing the electrolysis cell directly across the DC power supply had the same result. IOW it doesn't appear to be anything to do with the AC current. > There is a stain spreading out through the electrolyte, from cathode to anode. > Any suggestions as to what is happening to my hydrogen? If it's being absorbed into the steel, how much can steel absorb (/ unit volume)? > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > > > I'd check who gave you KCl....potassium chloride or similar halide salt instead of the nitrate. The bleach smell may be chlorine gas forming at the positive electrode as the negative Cl- ions migrate to that electrode to recieve their long lost electron on the way to the surface where they can go up your nose and dewater it, forming H20:HCl and giving it a nasty burn. Your lungs too if you breathe too much of it. Thats my first guess. All the others are much worse. Sorry. Might want to catch that chap. Yakov From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 23 23:21:56 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA11420; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:20:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:20:09 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange result Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 18:19:31 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <1cv0uukvd08oc568kmph8id86o63c4d4kc 4ax.com> References: <200211232355.40251.rockcast@net-link.net> In-Reply-To: <200211232355.40251.rockcast net-link.net> 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 XAA11388 Resent-Message-ID: <"U_BaT3.0.Mo2.es7uz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Yakov Smirnoff's message of Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:55:40 -0500: Hi, [snip] >I'd check who gave you KCl....potassium chloride or similar halide salt >instead of the nitrate. The bleach smell may be chlorine gas forming [snip] Yes, I had already considered that myself. That's why I mentioned that it was sold to me as KNO3, rather than saying that it was KNO3. However, that still doesn't explain why there was no hydrogen gas. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 04:39:13 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14100; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 04:37:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 04:37:47 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 09:58:15 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: 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 EAA14076 Resent-Message-ID: <"R2uGU.0.7S3.RWCuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48384 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:29:32 -0800: Hi, [snip] >An argument that the average photon energy is large, on the order of an eV, >is that at the time of the big bang the universe was eqaully populated with >mater and anti-matter. Through a break in symmetry, the anti-matter was >destroyed, converting it to energy. >This implies that a lower bound on the >energy of a photon must be around .2 eV in order for it to correspond to >the matter destroyed. How do you know how much matter-antimatter was destroyed, to allow you calculate the 0.2 eV? >If we further assume that some portion of the normal >matter was converted to (photon) energy, say about half, It could have been any amount, from one part per billion, to 99.999999%. This depends utterly on the degree to which the symmetry was broken, which AFAIK is complete guess work. >we then see that >the average energy of the photon must be in the vicinity of .6 eV. In >other words, if the mass of the universe is M, and addtional mass M of >matter was annihilated, then the universe initially consisted of mass 4 M, >of which 3 M is now in the form of photons. From this perspective not much >of the universe need be in black holes for the dark matter to be explained. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 05:01:46 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA19015; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 05:00:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 05:00:20 -0800 Message-ID: <001901c293b9$1f646060$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> From: "Nicholas Reiter" To: References: Subject: Re: Strange result Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 07:58:02 -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: <"LMa5V2.0.1f4.arCuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robin, A quick test to check for a mis-labelled chemical... take a little of your "KNO3", put it in a test tube or beaker, and add a little water, just enough to let it start to dissolve. Feel the beaker. If it becomes very cold, then you probably have KCl. KCl has a negative heat of solution. (or is it "positive" - oh well, whatever - it gets cold when it dissolves) NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 9:14 PM Subject: Strange result > Hi, > > I'm currently doing an electrolysis experiment with a solution containing > what I was sold as KNO3. I'm using an asymmetric AC current. I'm getting > a considerable amount of gas development at the electrode that is primarily > positive, and *no gas at all* at the other electrode. There is also a strong smell of bleach. The electrodes are steel plate. I turned off the power, and turned it on again after intervals of varying length, varying from seconds to an hour or so. I don't let it run for more than a few minutes at a time, due to the stench. > Placing the electrolysis cell directly across the DC power supply had the same result. IOW it doesn't appear to be anything to do with the AC current. > There is a stain spreading out through the electrolyte, from cathode to anode. > Any suggestions as to what is happening to my hydrogen? If it's being absorbed into the steel, how much can steel absorb (/ unit volume)? > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 13:00:42 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28805; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 12:59:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 12:59:22 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange result Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 07:58:46 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001901c293b9$1f646060$5e201f41@woh.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <001901c293b9$1f646060$5e201f41 woh.rr.com> 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 MAA28774 Resent-Message-ID: <"Mqh__1.0._17.fsJuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48386 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Nicholas Reiter's message of Sun, 24 Nov 2002 07:58:02 -0500: Hi Nick, Thanks for the tip. I was looking for a simple method of distinguishing the chloride. >Robin, > >A quick test to check for a mis-labelled chemical... take a little of your >"KNO3", put it in a test tube or beaker, and add a little water, just enough >to let it start to dissolve. Feel the beaker. If it becomes very cold, >then you probably have KCl. KCl has a negative heat of solution. (or is it >"positive" - oh well, whatever - it gets cold when it dissolves) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 15:08:02 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA03499; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 15:06:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 15:06:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE15015.7670045C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:18:45 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange result References: <200211232355.40251.rockcast@net-link.net> <1cv0uukvd08oc568kmph8id86o63c4d4kc@4ax.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------9EAD9B057310A881F900895B" Resent-Message-ID: <"JxHaS2.0.as.CkLuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48387 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------9EAD9B057310A881F900895B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robin, You can tell the difference between KCl and KNO3 several different ways. Solutions of KCl and AgNO3, when mixed, produce a white precipitate. Mixing KNO3 and AgNO3 produces nothing. When examined under a microscope KCl looks like little cubes. KNO3 looks like little rectangles. Carbon powder when saturated with KNO3 and dried will burn easily. Use of KCl makes the carbon practically inert to a flame. I suspect you are reducing KNO3 to KNO2 at the cathode which removes the H2 and converts it to H2O. The smell is NO2. Ed Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Yakov Smirnoff's message of Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:55:40 -0500: > Hi, > [snip] > >I'd check who gave you KCl....potassium chloride or similar halide salt > >instead of the nitrate. The bleach smell may be chlorine gas forming > [snip] > Yes, I had already considered that myself. That's why I mentioned that it was sold to me as KNO3, rather than saying that it was KNO3. > > However, that still doesn't explain why there was no hydrogen gas. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. --------------9EAD9B057310A881F900895B Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="storms2.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="storms2.vcf" begin:vcard n:; tel;work:505 988 3673 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html org:Energy K. System adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html version:2.1 email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com x-mozilla-cpt:;1 fn:Edmund Storms end:vcard --------------9EAD9B057310A881F900895B-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 16:27:59 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28683; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:26:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:26:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:39:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <"X56KV3.0.__6.ZuMuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:58 AM 11/23/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:29:32 -0800: >Hi, >[snip] >>An argument that the average photon energy is large, on the order of an eV, >>is that at the time of the big bang the universe was eqaully populated with >>mater and anti-matter. Through a break in symmetry, the anti-matter was >>destroyed, converting it to energy. >>This implies that a lower bound on the >>energy of a photon must be around .2 eV in order for it to correspond to >>the matter destroyed. > >How do you know how much matter-antimatter was destroyed, to allow you >calculate the 0.2 eV? I assumed the amount of anti-matter being destroyed at big bang time being at least equal to the amount of matter known to exist. We can assume in normal matter one neutron per protron, and in the initially matching anti-matter one anti-proton and one anti-neutron. Assuming one proton for every 10^10 photons, one neutron per protron, each protron and neutron equivalent to about 1x10^9 eV, we have about 0.2 eV per photon. I was simply assuming the (present) ratio of 10^11 photons per proton to be a given. However, this may be a very wrong assumption in that it is not a directly measured value, but (I think) a theoretical value based on a cosmological theory plus the measured abundance of helium in the universe I further assumed that more matter annihilating at big bang time would RAISE the average energy per presently existing photon, since there are a fixed number of present photons and an unknown amount of mass behind the energy they carry. This would mean that 0.2 eV is a lower bound because we have a lower bound on the mass behind the photon energy, that bound being the mass of existing normal matter. This too could be an erroneous assumption in that the energy from the initial mass annihilations and/or the symmetry breaking reactions could be either tied up in black holes, moving away from the universe in an unobservable envelope of photons more distant than any matter, or somehow reabsorbed by the universe. Perhaps all the really energetic photons form the big bang are thus not observable due to being tied up very quickly in unobservable form. However, if the proposed theory is correct, hat mass/energy remains in balance indefinitely, the photons of the annihilated matter and their mass/energy must still exist somewhere. > >>If we further assume that some portion of the normal >>matter was converted to (photon) energy, say about half, > >It could have been any amount, from one part per billion, to 99.999999%. >This depends utterly on the degree to which the symmetry was broken, >which AFAIK is complete guess work. Yes for sure to to that! Further, it is possible that matter zones and anti-matter zones were created at the big bang and somehow the anti-matter zones converted their mass/energy into black holes early on. This could mean that most of the black hole mass in the universe consists of anti-matter. On another note: it seems reasonable, due to the small size and large mass of the universe at the big bang, that we were in a black hole at the time of the formation of the universe, at the big bang. If we are still in that black hole, it is a horrific thought that the big bang photon "shockwave" that departed the bang at a velocity c, faster than any matter could follow, will eventually return. Further, if we are in a black hole, the universe might be much smaller than we realize, and the red shift may be due to gravitational red shift and due to an unexpected mass distribution in the universe. Fortunately, this is idle speculation, of course. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Nov 24 17:17:17 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA10285; Sun, 24 Nov 2002 17:13:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 17:13:31 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 17:27:13 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma Resent-Message-ID: <"XV_ey.0.cW2.waNuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nick, The following is just some food for thought when you get a look at the jet. Assume a gas density of He (.178 kg/m^3), a .5 liter/min flow rate, an annular nozzle size of about 10 mm OD and inner plug of about 8 mm, giving about a 1 mm plasma sheeet, and a minimum deflection of 1 deg. in order to be "clearly visible". The flow cross section area: A = Pi ( (.5 cm)^2 - (.4 cm)^2) = .283 cm^2 Flow speed: v = [(500 cm^3)/(.283 cm^2)]/(60 sec) = 30 cm/sec = .3 m/sec The mass flow deflection angle momentum ratio: sin(1 deg.) = 0.01745 The lateral mass flow is: sin(1 deg.)*(0.3 m/s)*(.283 cm^2)*(.178 kg/m^3) = 2.6x10^-8 kg/s and multiplying by velocity (again) we get a force of deflection: sin(1 deg.)*(0.3 m/s)^2*(.283 cm^2)*(.178 kg/m^3) = 7.9x10^-9 N This is about 8x10^-7 grams of force, or .8 micrograms, which is a very small force indeed. Now, let's for a moment consider that this came from photon thrust. The power P required is (P = F c as derived later below) then: P = F c = (7.9x10^-9 N)*(c) = 2.4 W which is 3 orders of magnitude too large for the 5 mW laser. The deflection can not be due to the laser beam momentum. However, there is a source of a lot more than 2.4 W power from the RF. It seems likely that increased ionization on the side of the jet towards the 5 mW laser causes lateral ion acceleration toward the laser that deflects (the tail end of) the beam visibly in the direction of the laser beam. The mass flow of the lateral jet caused by the laser, which would be directed towards the laser, or even the increased (5 mW worth of) ionization there may not even be visible, and/or may be masked by the laser light. I hope I got all those calculations correct. Following are some old (supporting) calculations relating to individual photons used as rocket mass reactants. The starting assumptions: E = h nu (Planck) (1) E = m c^2 (Einstein) (2) lambda = c/v (3) p = E/c = (h)(nu)/c = h/lambda (4) If photons are emitted at rate n photons per second for time t, then the total reaction force is given by: F = (n p)/t (5) and the power supplied to the rocket is given by: P = (E n)/t (6) It is of interest the amount of energy required per unit of momentum supplied to the rocket is obtained by substituting (4) into E/p: E/p = E/(E/c) = c (7) Notice that the amount of energy per unit of momentum is independent of wavelength of the photon. To determine the power cost per unit of thrust we devide (6) by (5) to obtain: P/F = (n E)/(n p) = E/p (8) but from (7) E/p = c, so: P/F = c (9) and we also immediately see: P = c F (10) We know that one kg-force is equalto 9.807 newtons, or 9.807 kg-m/s^2. So we now see that to produce thrust using photons of any energy we need to supply a power to the photonic drive of at least: P = (3x10^8 m/s)(9.807 kg-m/s^2) = 2.94x10^9 kg-m^2/s^3 (11) P = 2.94x10^9 watts (12) per kg-f of thrust. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 11:49:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00788; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 11:47:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 11:47:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 08:44:38 +1300 From: RBR Subject: re 10 dollors To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <012c01c294bb$1db82dc0$9698a7cb vuw.ac.nz> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4920.2300 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0129_01C29528.0E70D020" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"Bh8fM.0.EC.yuduz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0129_01C29528.0E70D020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi how am I going to get 10 bucks to you ,I live in New Zealand?. very good site. =20 regards Bruce=20 PS I could make an offering to a charity here on your behalf. ------=_NextPart_000_0129_01C29528.0E70D020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hi  how am I going to get 10 bucks = to you ,I=20 live in New Zealand?.
   very = good site.     
 regards Bruce
 PS I could make an offering to a = charity here=20 on your behalf.
------=_NextPart_000_0129_01C29528.0E70D020-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 12:05:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09982; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 12:04:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 12:04:32 -0800 X-Sent: 25 Nov 2002 20:04:27 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021125145358.0390ec58 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell mail.DIRECTVInternet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:04:19 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: re 10 dollors In-Reply-To: <012c01c294bb$1db82dc0$9698a7cb vuw.ac.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"k6Z0V2.0.uR2.G9euz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: RBR wrote: >hi how am I going to get 10 bucks to you ,I live in New Zealand?. > very good site. > regards Bruce I did not see the first message in this thread, so I am not sure what it is in reference to, or who is asking for $10, but anyway, here is a suggestion. A world-wide service called "PayPal" is becoming increasingly popular. It allows private individuals with PayPal accounts to receive credit card payments. (The person paying you does not have to have a PayPal account.) The charge to individuals is about 5%, I think, which is reasonable for a small transactions at low volume. See: https://www.paypal.com/ Come to think of it, perhaps Bill Beaty should get one of these accounts so that we can more conveniently (and punctually) help him defray the cost of this discussion group. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 12:27:58 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20295; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 12:26:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 12:26:39 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 12:40:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photons and dark matter - a short note - correction Resent-Message-ID: <"zr4Gt2.0.xy4._Teuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48392 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:29 PM 11/23/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 11/23/2002 7:31:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, >hheffner mtaonline.net writes: > >> It is not the acceleration of energy that fails in this (Frank's) context, >> but rather the counter-force on the accelerating mass (the mass that bends >> the photon path) that fails to be accounted for. That is the basis of my >> hypothesis: suppose there IS a counter force on the mass that redirects >> (deflects) the photon. I demonstrate by thought experiment that >> conservation of momentum and energy are violated if such counter-force does >> not exist. Given that the counter-force hypothesis IS true, then there is >> no difference in results between my hypothesis and the alternative >> hypothesis that photons carry gravity, i.e. that photons exchange >> gravitons. If something in all ways acts exactly like a rose why not call >> it a rose, or assume it might actually be a rose. Two systems that are >> isomorphic are really the same system with differing >> nomenclature. > >Exacltly, this is where I started my reasoning. I hold that the the >conservation of momentum always applies. In gravitational light bending >gravity changes the momentum of light. There must be a reaction to this >change in momentum. This reaction is produced when bending light >generates a gravitational field. This induced field reaches back and >changes the momentum of the the system. From general realitivity the >required induced field is is G/ccr(dp/dt) > >frank Z As far as I can see your reasoning does not provide any special means for gravity being created during the acceleration. At this point this seems to be a chicken and egg problem. Which is the cause and which is the effect? If a photon is being accelerated, then it is in a gravity field, be that field due to space warp or graviton exchange. If the photon IS in a gravity field, then it is the mechanism of that field production that accounts for the gravity and thus the photon acceleration. The acceleration is merely a manifestation of that gravitational field and not a causitive agent. Your assumption that there is photon acceleration is an a priori assumption of the existence of a gravitational field. That there is a counter-force on the field producing agent is then due to the symmetry of the gravity exchange mechanism, be it gravity exchange or mutual space warping of two mass carrying bodies. You provide no other means of gravitational force exchange, nor of photon acceleration. Your equations merely show the well known relation of acceleration (or at least momentum change) and gravitational fields. That essentially amounts to a description of and not an explanation for the counter-force. An alternative hypothesis, that in my opinion actually provides an explanation for the counter-force, is that photons carry mass, have mass at all times, regardless of their acceleration. This then provides a causitive agent for the counter-force on the accelerating body. If a graviton force exchange model is used then the counter-force comes from the symmetry of the graviton particle exchange. If the space warping GR model is used then the fact that the photon has mass can be used to show that the space warping about the photon (due to the mass the photon carries) creates exactly the right apparent acceleration of the mass which interacts with the photon to produce equal but opposed forces. The mass of the photon is then not deferent from any other mass, except at the moments of photon creation and destruction. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 16:06:50 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA26083; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:05:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:05:30 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:04:55 EST Subject: Re: re 10 dollors To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: rbr clear.net.nz 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: <"JqI_h2.0.TN6.Ahhuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I don't want 10 bucks. I have a young girl that collects coins. Could you send a few New Zealand coins to us? She is next to me in my birthday picture. Frank Znidarsic 481 Boyer St. Johnstown PA. 15906 USA From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 17:48:31 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08317; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:46:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:46:44 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:00:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: re 10 dollors Resent-Message-ID: <"mfFbA2.0.o12.3Ajuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:44 AM 11/26/2, RBR wrote: >hi how am I going to get 10 bucks to you ,I live in New Zealand?. > very good site. > regards Bruce > PS I could make an offering to a charity here on your behalf. Donations to support this list are mailed to: William J. Beaty 7040 22nd Ave NW Seattle, WA 98117 You can contact Bill directly at for suggestions about alternative methods of sending donations. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 18:11:36 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19929; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:10:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:10:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE2D8A0.D200D8F7 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:12:48 -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: Status of Infinite Energy magaxine Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LV9g81.0.Et4.LWjuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48395 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nov. 25, 2002 Vortex, The recent issue of Infinite Energy magazine, Volume 8. issue 48 2002, contains a notice that henceforth a non-profit, tax deductible charitable organization called the New Energy Foundation, Inc. (NEF) has been formed and the publication of the magazine is now being published by it. The tax deductible portion is to be decided by the IRS soon and announced. The directorship of the NEF is made up of four New Hampshireans. Who makes up the directorship are not identified by names Other changes noted in the magazine are the names of Jed Rothwell and Susan Seddon as contributing editors. They are no longer listed. Also there is no explanation of the now missing mention or activities of New Energy Research Laboratory (NERL). What happened to it and Ken Rauen? The recent Vortex crossfire between 'Gene and Jed over Correa may have been staged in light of the changes occurring at the magazine. Why do I say this? The publication position states that "Infinite Energy does not independently verify the content, citation, validity . or paternity of anything published herein by ousted authors." That being the case, why the hubbub? The magazine still has Eugene Mallove as Editor-in-Chief and now president of NEF, inc. All communication numbers and address remains the same. One other item. "The Scientific Advisory Board " listing of eight scientists world-wide has been listed from the beginning of the magazine and still remains unchanged and un-updated. It has never been explained what their function to the magazine is/has been. I wonder if, only by lending names, it only supposedly adds to the creditability of the publication and nothing else. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Nov 25 19:42:12 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29822; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:41:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:41:13 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:42:16 -0800 Subject: Re: Status of Infinite Energy magaxine From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "vortex l eskimo.com" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3DE2D8A0.D200D8F7 ix.netcom.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MOMrh2.0.sH7.Orkuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 11/25/02 6:12 PM, "Akira Kawasaki" wrote: Akira, Since you have been a good friend of Infinite Energy, let me answer some of your questions. > Nov. 25, 2002 > > Vortex, > > The recent issue of Infinite Energy magazine, Volume 8. issue 48 2002, > contains a notice that henceforth a non-profit, tax deductible > charitable organization called the New Energy Foundation, Inc. (NEF) has > been formed and the publication of the magazine is now being published > by it. That is correct. The main reason is that since Infinite Energy has always required either gifts or loans to bridge the gap between expenses and revenue -- despite an increasing number of issues now on newsstands, it is advantageous to benefactors to donate to a 501c3 organization. It's a simple as that. The New Hampshire corporation, Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. still exists and has partial ownership in certain intellectual property rights (patent applications, demonstration devices, etc.) -- mostly due to the exemplary work of NERL's Ken Rauen. This work is confidential for now, but it is in the realm of thermodynamics, as you may have guessed. Publications are being contemplated, pending the resolution of patent issues. > The tax deductible portion is to be decided by the IRS soon and > announced. NEF is a New Hampshire non-profit corporation. >The directorship of the NEF is made up of four New > Hampshireans. Five, including myself. >Who makes up the directorship are not identified by names > Other changes noted in the magazine are the names of Jed Rothwell and > Susan Seddon as contributing editors. These have always been contributors, not editors. So that is how it is reflected in the masthead. Jed is welcome to contribute articles to Infinite Energy -- he has one in the present issue. We have offered material from IE to his web site lenr-canr.com, which is doing an important archival task for LENR-type new energy. But Infinite Energy's focus is much broader than the LENR field, as you know. > They are no longer listed. > Also there is no explanation of the now missing mention or activities of > New Energy Research Laboratory (NERL). What happened to it and Ken > Rauen? This was discussed in the an earlier IE devices and processes update. Perhaps you missed it. Until further notice -- or until some repeatable cold fusion (new hydrogen physics, LENR, call it what you will..) demonstration device or process appears, we are no longer in active pursuit of such devices -- these have consumed far too much effort in our facility already, without satisfactory outcome. We have continuing contact and cooperation with Les Case, however. Our interest is now mainly in other new energy devices and potential processes that work repeatably and predictably, e.g. the Correa PAGD reactor. > The recent Vortex crossfire between 'Gene and Jed over Correa may have > been staged in light of the changes occurring at the magazine. There was nothing "staged." Jed and I have had severe differences of opinion about his public utterances about Mills, Shoulders, Bearden, and the Correas, among others. We don't see eye to eye on many matters of tone and focus on frontier science -- except in our common interest in the need for LENR to succeed against the odds arrayed against it. > Why do I > say this? The publication position states that "Infinite Energy does not > independently verify the content, citation, validity . or paternity of > anything published herein by ousted authors." You mean by "outside" authors! This statement has been on our masthead for quite some time at the recommendation of legal specialists. >That being the case, why > the hubbub? What hubbub are you talking about? > The magazine still has Eugene Mallove as Editor-in-Chief and now > president of NEF, inc. All communication numbers and address remains the > same. Akira, I hope I have explained the transition to your satisfaction. We hope to broaden the base of IE benefactors and go beyond covering the expenses of the basic operations. New Energy Foundation, if it is successful, aims to fund critically needed experiments throughout the new energy field, including good work going on in LENR. > One other item. "The Scientific Advisory Board " listing of eight > scientists world-wide has been listed from the beginning of the magazine > and still remains unchanged and un-updated. It has never been explained > what their function to the magazine is/has been. They are called on from time to time to render opinions about a range of matters. Indeed, as with many publications, they hold honorary positions on the masthead for their well known scientific expertise. > I wonder if, only by > lending names, it only supposedly adds to the creditability of the > publication and nothing else. No, they do render opinions from time to time. > > -AK- Best wishes, Dr. Eugene F. Mallove Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine President, New Energy Foundation, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 www.infinite-energy.com Ph: 603-228-4516 Fx: 603-224-5975 ********** P.S. To anticipate any further comments concerning the above matter and an ad on page five of the current IE issue (www.aethera.org): Yes, this is a separate matter in which I am involved with Uri Soudak and the Correas and others. It is separate from NEF, pays for its ad space in IE, and has separate post office box and phone/fax number. Here is the announcement of today from Akronos: Akronos Publishing is pleased to announce the release, in DVD format, of a joint ABRI/Aethera documentary production "From Pulsed Plasma Power to the Aether Motor" This DVD provides an overview of both the PAGD and the ORgone/Aether Motor research efforts undertaken by Dr. Paulo Correa & Alexandra Correa at Labofex (1987-2002) and at the Aurora Biophysics Research Institute (ABRI) (1996-2002). It also includes a short review of the HYBORAC/Stirling Motor technology (2001-2002). Introduced by Dr. H. Aspden and Dr. E. Mallove - advisors to this production - the video documents the essential aspects of two distinct and benign technologies of power generation. Including original documentary footage filmed between 1987 and 2001, the video is a basic introduction to the auto-electronically pulsed plasma research at Labofex - Experimental and Applied Plasma Physics, which led to the identification of the autogenous PAGD regime and the invention of aPAGD inverter applications as well as the XS NRG (TM) Converter System. The second part of the video documents the basics of the ABRI effort to reproduce Reich's discovery of the ORgone Motor as well as the improved Aether Motor invented by the Correas. Filled with simple demonstrations of massfree aether energy - in vacua, in the ground and atmosphere, and in human beings - this video illustrates the existence of an energy realm which, until now, has been both ignored and grossly misunderstood. Most of this footage was first presented at the Second Berlin Conference on Innovative Energy Technologies, on June 15th, 2002. ISBN 1-894840-19-4, ~104 min. SPECIAL PRICE: $39.95 + shipping ($4 within US, $8 international) TO ORDER: http://www.aethera.org OR call 603-226-0837 to order via phone/fax OR send check/money order to: Aethera, PO. Box 181, Suncook, NH 03275 Include your name, phone number and shipping address. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 26 06:07:32 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA26411; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 06:06:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 06:06:10 -0800 Message-ID: <001301c2954c$5c826de0$5901bf3f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Hydrino Hydride Cold Fusion Connection? Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 07:03:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"uO_mT1.0.ZS6.H_tuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The fusion reaction: P + e + P ---> D + neutrino + ~ 2.05 Mev is an accepted fusion reaction. OTOH: P + e + P ---> "Hydrino Hydride" (D*) + ? Kev Or P + e + D ---> neutron + "Hydrino Hydride" (D*) + neutrino + ? Kev is possible, if the mass of the "Hydrino Hydride" or (D*) indicating it's similarity to a Deuteron with a mass of 2.0140 amu, is less than 2.01370 amu, from a Mass Defect standpoint, if the internal binding energy or quark arrangement allows it, whereas Mills' "fractional orbit hydrino" is discounted by the establishment as being "impossible". By the same token the reaction: D + e + D ---> 2 neutrons + "Hydrino Hydride" (D*) + neutrino + ? Kev is also possible, if the mass of the "Hydrino Hydride" (D*)is less than 2.0110 amu. In either case the reaction (D*) + (D*) ---> He4 + 18.5-23.1 Mev could occur. This would also account for the low energy deuteron stripping. Could these "Deuteron Isomers" be what Mills is claiming as Hydrino Hydride, and also be what is being produced in the Cold Fusion phenomena? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Nov 26 06:17:59 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA29933; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 06:16:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 06:16:37 -0800 Message-ID: <001e01c29556$9a99ec20$a09dcbc1 pc> From: "Noel Whitney" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021125145358.0390ec58 mail.DIRECTVInternet.com> Subject: Re: re 10 dollors Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 14:17:49 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"Rp0Na1.0.YJ7.59uuz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48398 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed - Thants a great idea - never heard of them, i will join up as im allways looking for easy ways to send small amounts worldwide. best wishes Noel Whitney Quantum Leap in Ireland. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 8:04 PM Subject: Re: re 10 dollors > RBR wrote: > > >hi how am I going to get 10 bucks to you ,I live in New Zealand?. > > very good site. > > regards Bruce > > I did not see the first message in this thread, so I am not sure what it is > in reference to, or who is asking for $10, but anyway, here is a > suggestion. A world-wide service called "PayPal" is becoming increasingly > popular. It allows private individuals with PayPal accounts to receive > credit card payments. (The person paying you does not have to have a PayPal > account.) The charge to individuals is about 5%, I think, which is > reasonable for a small transactions at low volume. > > See: > > https://www.paypal.com/ > > Come to think of it, perhaps Bill Beaty should get one of these accounts so > that we can more conveniently (and punctually) help him defray the cost of > this discussion group. > > - Jed > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 27 04:07:11 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA23885; Wed, 27 Nov 2002 04:05:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 04:05:32 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE4B4ED.F8BB28A9 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:05:01 +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: Generation of High Quality Laser Accelerated Ion Beams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"J8opT3.0.4r5.AKBvz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0211104 "In order to achieve a high quality, i. e. monoergetic, intense ion beam, we propose the use of a double layer target. The first layer, at the target front, consists of high-Z atoms, while the second (rear) layer is a thin coating of low-Z atoms. The high quality proton beams from the double layer target, irradiated by an ultra-intense laser pulse, are demonstrated with three dimensional Particle-in-Cell simulations." I Just saw this paper which could be a reference on the recent subject "Unusual interaction of a laser beam with a plasma". Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Nov 27 19:57:13 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA32718; Wed, 27 Nov 2002 19:55:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 19:55:44 -0800 Message-ID: <020101c29691$f9b75080$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: References: Subject: Re: Paypal: e-gold is better: re 10 dollars Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:55:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ymi9i2.0.4_7._EPvz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48401 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > If Bill would do an e-gold account > (the account is free and virtually instantaneous, > the payments fees are truly microscopic) > I would pay up tomorrow. Just for the record, I'll gladly pay through E-Gold, (immediately), as well. Craig (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 29 12:36:11 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA04960; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 12:34:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 12:34:43 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <126.1b9cd90c.2b192918 aol.com> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 15:33:28 EST Subject: determined all of the zero point properties of matter To: GeorgeHM aol.com, haisch@calphysics.org, HaraldReissHD@aol.com, JedRothwell infinite-energy.com (Jed Rothwell), Scottychubb@cs.com, storms2 ix.netcom.com (Edmund Storms), Puthoff@aol.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_126.1b9cd90c.2b192918_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634 Resent-Message-ID: <"Oqhas2.0.MD1.Yzyvz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_126.1b9cd90c.2b192918_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I had a litte time and sat down and determined all of the zero point properties of matter. I did this with the idea that space has a limit to its elastisity. I think it is good work. Chapter 10 Revised Frank Znidarsic --part1_126.1b9cd90c.2b192918_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I had a litte time and sat down and determined all of the zero point properties of matter.  I did this with the idea that space has a limit to its elastisity.  I think it is good work.

Chapter 10 Revised


Frank Znidarsic
--part1_126.1b9cd90c.2b192918_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Nov 29 13:13:09 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19030; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 13:11:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 13:11:31 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.108.150 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:11:31 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Good News on Status of Infinite Energy magazine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"1j67y2.0.Gf4.3Wzvz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I was pleased to read the following good news about Infinite Energy Magazine: from >Dr. Eugene F. Mallove Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine: > >This was discussed in the an earlier IE devices and processes update. >Perhaps you missed it. Until further notice -- or until some repeatable >cold fusion (new hydrogen physics, LENR, call it what you will..) >demonstration device or process appears, we are no longer in active pursuit >of such devices -- these have consumed far too much effort in our facility >already, without satisfactory outcome. We have continuing contact and >cooperation with Les Case, however. Our interest is now mainly in other new >energy devices and potential processes that work repeatably and predictably, >e.g. the Correa PAGD reactor. I had allowed my subscription to IE Magazine to lapse because it contained too much cold fusion stuff in it. However, I had always thought, and made this opinion known, that IE Magazine was a very important and valuable source of information on other new energy devices. So I will now subscribe to it again. Could someone please post the subscription information. -- Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 614-6121 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 30 00:36:43 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA32068; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:35:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:35:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE87936.3B7A204F ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:39:18 -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: LENR-CANR.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"I2GhP3.0.uq7.3X7wz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nov. 29, 2002 Vortex, I see there are links being listed from the website. Will other links that are CF specific such as Mitchell Swartz's Cold Fusion Times be listed? That should be easier than loading in the papers. Why not incorporate the LENR- CANR. ORG website as a non-profit, tax deductible endeavor just as Infinite Energy finally been transformed? -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 30 00:48:53 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA03094; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:47:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:47:42 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE87C20.5541F6DF ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 00:51:44 -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-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ] EZE WEENIE MICRO POWER MOTOR 0.0509 Watts References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mGIc1.0.Gm.ki7wz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48405 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: November 29, 2002 Finally got around to finding the item. This is an available electric motor that is approx. 1/4" diam by 1/2" long with about 3/16" shaft. It runs on 1.5-3 volts DC using 65 milliams. It functions as a vibrator for cellphones running an imbalamced weight. -AK- John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Folks, > > On another note the motors that operate commercial devices > use very little power in some cases. > > Does anyone have any examples of very low power motors? > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Ben Thomas wrote: > > > Hi Gang > > > > I invite you to check out the latest on the EZE WEENIE Micro Power > > ADAMS type motor. If I hadn't made all the measurements myself, I > > wouldn't believe it! Notice all measurements are to at least 3 > > places and in some cases 5 places when calculated. > > > > http://www.geocities.com/k4zep/ > > > > It measures .0509 watts, DC input 50.9 mw. 6.82 X 10-5 HP! Enjoy > > and read the theory, it is VERY important. There is more energy > > there than from the battery, I just don't see how that kind of power > > can turn that wheel otherwise! > > > > To show how sensitive it is, increasing the voltage from 1.54 to > > 1.84 VDC will increase the RPM to 84 with only about 10% increase in > > power input. This appears to be the absolute bottom value for this > > setup that the motor will run not the best combo, but the least. > > The funny thing too is the bearings in the old bicycle wheel are > > noisy as an ol granny. They just grind away! > > > > Respectfully > > > > Ben > > > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 30 05:45:03 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA03408; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 05:43:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 05:43:51 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108 Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 08:44:44 -0800 Subject: Re: Good News on Status of Infinite Energy magazine From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "vortex l eskimo.com" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZgvLd1.0.Ar.M2Cwz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 11/29/02 1:11 PM, "Larry Wharton" wrote: > I had allowed my subscription to IE Magazine to lapse because it > contained too much cold fusion stuff in it. However, I had always > thought, and made this opinion known, that IE Magazine was a very > important and valuable source of information on other new energy > devices. So I will now subscribe to it again. Could someone please > post the subscription information. > > -- > Lawrence E. Wharton > NASA/GSFC code 913 > Greenbelt MD 20771 > (301) 614-6121 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov > > Thanks, Larry! It's still $29.95/year for North America, $49.95/year elsewhere. Infinite Energy Magazine New Energy Foundation, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fx: 603-224-5975 www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 30 07:54:18 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16909; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 07:52:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 07:52:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE8D343.6A1CE412 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 09:03:35 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: LENR-CANR.ORG References: <3DE87936.3B7A204F ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------50A23AA5535C330E1F8ED0A1" Resent-Message-ID: <"FL14H3.0.684.pwDwz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------50A23AA5535C330E1F8ED0A1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for the suggestions, Akira. Links will be added as Jed gets time. Right now emphasis is on making quality papers available in full text and adding useful features to the website. This alone is a full time job for Jed. Incorporating the website as a nonprofit organization was planned from the beginning and will be implemented in the future. Right now, the amount of money needed is too small to warrant the time and money needed to create such an organization. However, when the effort devoted to the site becomes more than we can handle, financial support will be sought. Success of the site depends on how much interest it creates and how much support it receives from people in the field. Sale of the CD has be underwelming and contributions of electronic versions of papers have been frustratingly small, requiring excessive time for scanning and OCR. This must change before the site can justify asking for financial support. We are creating a discussion section that is hoped will focus comments about the papers and allow creative exchanges between authors and skeptics. The intent is to allow mistakes to be acknowledged and corrected, to allow good suggestions to be added to publications, and to allow better communication between skeptics and supporters. This discussion forum will be in sharp contrast to what occurs on other forums. Success will depend on how useful this resource becomes. Ed Akira Kawasaki wrote: > Nov. 29, 2002 > > Vortex, > > I see there are links being listed from the website. Will other links > that are CF specific such as Mitchell Swartz's Cold Fusion Times be > listed? That should be easier than loading in the papers. > > Why not incorporate the LENR- CANR. ORG website as a non-profit, tax > deductible endeavor just as Infinite Energy finally been transformed? > > -AK- --------------50A23AA5535C330E1F8ED0A1 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="storms2.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="storms2.vcf" begin:vcard n:; tel;work:505 988 3673 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html org:Energy K. System adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html version:2.1 email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com x-mozilla-cpt:;1 fn:Edmund Storms end:vcard --------------50A23AA5535C330E1F8ED0A1-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Nov 30 13:06:29 2002 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08847; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 13:04:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 13:04:40 -0800 X-Sent: 30 Nov 2002 21:04:36 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021130160411.02c58700 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 16:04:21 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: New e-mail address Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"rmLlo1.0._92.eVIwz" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/48408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: My e-mail is now: JedRothwell mindspring.com or JedRothwell lenr-canr.org (for material relating to cold fusion). - Jed