From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 09:38:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA24872;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 09:35:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 09:35:10 -0700
Message-ID: <008b01c30ff6$e665ab60$5a10b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: <fstenger suite224.net>
Subject: Re: Static Electricity, Cosmic Rays, Hydrated Electrons and Free Energy
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 10:32:31 -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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a161d59ffb575cc7ec6472f7e13733e7e95bff31af8927e75a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"MkJMq2.0.Y46.zoKi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50396
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To Vortex:

If one argues that the ubiquitous "Static Electricity" (electrons) are uncommitted
electrons that permeate the atmosphere-hydrosphere are from solar or galactic cosmic
rays (about 500,000 "small ions"/liter at sea level) they could form Hydrated
Electrons.

Hydrated Electrons Might explain some of the Electrolysis Cell, Overunity/ CANR-LENR
effects, as well as the Yusmar/Sonoluminesence effects, and even Randy Mills'
Hydrino-Deuterino formation, and most importantly hurricane/vortex energy. :-)

Some of the reactions shown in this article should occur when "electrostatic
electrons" free, or attached to atmospheric gases such as O2 -  or H2O -  (or CO2 -)?
are injected, or serendipitously get into the water/chemicals -materials used in CF/OU
experiments.

http://www.tpub.com/doechem2/chem22.htm

IOW, if the O2 from the air is actually O2 -  the electron Hydrates and acts as a Free
Energy Catalyst forming hydrogen peroxide HO-OH which is seen in the analysis of the
gold-leaching liquid.

For the 125 year-old "Cyanide Process" for leaching gold from rocks, still in use in
Heap Leach Mining, to work, it is necessary to spray the aqueous leaching solution
into the air to aerate it to add O2, (probably to get the O2 -  ion)?

The overall reaction is given as:

4 Au + 8 NaCN + O2 + 2 H2O ---> 8 Na+  + 4AuCN- + 4 OH- .(plus hydrated e- and H or D,
+ (OH)x or ODx ).

Regards,

Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 12:26:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA17521;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 12:23:33 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:23:33 -0700
Message-ID: <005b01c31016$ddce0fe0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <008b01c30ff6$e665ab60$5a10b83f computer>
Subject: Re: Static Electricity, Cosmic Rays, Hydrated Electrons and Free Energy
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:21:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA17435
Resent-Message-ID: <"WEvqb.0.dH4.qGNi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50397
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

The beauty of the hydrated electron (for those on this forum) is that even without recourse to anything on the far fringes of science, like the hydrino or CANR, there is a proven (well, almost proven) gateway to what can only be described as "free energy"

> FS: IOW, if the O2 from the air is actually O2 -  the electron Hydrates and acts as a Free
> Energy Catalyst forming hydrogen peroxide HO-OH which is seen in the analysis of the
> gold-leaching liquid.

When the O2 in air "electro-hydrates" due to free electrons then a "virtual" oxygen ion can form. It is not usually written as O2- however, as it is not a "real" ion but is often written as O2((e-)aq ). I suppose this clerical adjustment is what keeps electro-chemists "within the law" (the 2nd law, that is). However, it appears clear that the result will often be the same as you mentioned above in that a certain amount of hydrogen peroxide WILL form naturally when O2 in air and water vapor is agitated in the presence of excess "free electrons."

H2O2 is one of the most powerful oxidizers known -- stronger than chlorine, chlorine dioxide, and potassium permanganate. PLUS, through catalysis, H2O2 can be easily converted into hydroxyl radicals (-OH) with reactivity second only to fluorine. 


Oxidant                        Oxidation Potential, V
Fluorine                                    3.0
Hydroxyl radical                       2.8
Ozone                                       2.1
Hydrogen peroxide                 1.8
Chlorine                                    1.4

So here, a hydroxyl radical can appear from nature - moist air, as in any thunderstorm, almost magically with little energy input other than wind. I'm convinced a fair proportion of the energy of hurricanes comes from this mechanism more directly than from the few degrees of ocean temperature differential - which is usually what is given as the powering mechanism of hurricanes.

But one thing you failed to mention. A big item, IMHO.

Even without cosmic rays and/or solar wind etc. a lot of free electrons, maybe even most of them, will appear from H2O *phase-change.* Since we are trying to stay within the bounds of accepted science, I will refrain from invoking "beta-aether" or ZPE at this particular time to explain how the electrons become separated during phase change ;-) but suffice it to say that sequential condensation and evaporization has been proven to accomplish the same thing, free electrons, as cosmic rays and solar wind.

At the bottom line, however, the hydroxyl radical alone, in perfect conditions -could provide almost as much energy, in theory, as burning gasoline in air which is normally a few thousand degree C. or a few eV.  The problem for the alternative energy inventor is getting enough peroxide to form with as little energy input as possible. Nature can help us there.

Pretty amazing, wouldn't you agree, that this methodology is not mentioned specifically in the literature? I'm sure it relates to probabilities and cross sections etc. which are presumed to be low, but perhaps that is what the experts have not gotten a good handle on the possibilities... for whatever reason.

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 13:41:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20765;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 13:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast earthlink.net>
Reply-To: rockcast earthlink.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: Black holes
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 16:28:19 -0400
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <um7spus8s70fgj6af8m4ves1kl579bgtii 4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <um7spus8s70fgj6af8m4ves1kl579bgtii 4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200305011628.19676.rockcast earthlink.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id NAA20694
Resent-Message-ID: <"arxKC2.0.K45.tDOi-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50398
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Friday 04 October 2002 19:21, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Consider matter being sucked into a black hole. It will almost always have 
some initial angular momentum. If angular momentum is conserved, then there 
must be a minimal radius at which the circumferential velocity equals the 
speed of light, for any given initial angular momentum. This radius would 
then be the minimum radius to which the matter involved could shrink, thus 
preventing it from collapsing into a singularity.
> Normal matter can't reach the speed of light, according to SR, so the radius 
for normal matter would be > than the radius for light itself.
> For light this is the Schwarzschild radius. That would seem to imply that 
nothing else can make it past the Schwarzschild radius, without being 
converted completely into energy, which even then can't get any closer.
> 
> My conclusion:- Black holes are empty circulating rings of pure EM energy.
> There is no singularity at the core, in fact there is no core at all.
> 
> Ok, so now please tell me why this reasoning is invalid. :)
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk
> 
> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
> 
> Competition provides the motivation,
> Cooperation provides the means.
> 
> 
IN the spirit of better late than never, our particle will never reach the 
center of rotation of the three dimensional conundrum colloquially refered
to as a black hole.  How do we know it is black anyway as no one has 
ever been inside one to see its true colors.  One way out of the impossibility
of it all is to call Einstein wrong about the speed of light.  I saw one of 
his old books published about 1905 or so at a yard sale near hear.  Yard
sale guy wanted 10 bucks for it and would not deal on the price, so like
a lummox I turned it down.

 Not before lookin inside though.  Seems that ole 'Al had more than one
extra term in his relativity equation.  Maybe a revisiting to this old man
will shed some more 'light' on the matter.

If the 'speed of light' were just another number in the continuing saga of
light's changing speeds depending on conditions, then the 'black hole'
could in fact be solid, supposedly.

However, if the universe came about from a 'big bang', a primordial point of
infinite density, would that not also be the mother of all  black holes.  Now
if THAT exploded and warped space in its expansion, then all black holes
are not truly black as they also could explode.....quite violently!

Sasha

Sasha 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 13:54:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26058;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 13:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Ball Lightning machine fm 1999
In-Reply-To: <005b01c31016$ddce0fe0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305011327060.16823-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"hTk7N.0.3N6.1VOi-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50399
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Electron Power Systems is apparently making small (1cm) BLs which take the
form of hollow plasma toroids with a large electron flow in the toroid
skin.  EPS has a paper on their website:

  http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Equalibrium%20and%20Stability%20Chen.pdf
  http://www.electronpowersystems.com/

Also some give and take with NASA over issues in the paper:

  http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Technology.htm


Perhaps their "EST" plasmas are an independant rediscovery of Shoulders'
"EV" Charge-Cluster phenomena?  How small can ESTs be?  But theirs is a
gas-confined plasma toroidial inductor, not a quantum stability effect
which lets electrons attract each other.


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 14:18:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA31439;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 14:15:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 14:15:59 -0700
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <102.2c9c694c.2be2e84f aol.com>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 17:14:55 EDT
Subject: Antigravity and vortex energy flexable space plane hull design process
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Antigravity@yahoogroups.com
CC: tom rhfweb.com, ConexTom@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_102.2c9c694c.2be2e84f_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"KmwhS1.0._g7.EwOi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50401
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_102.2c9c694c.2be2e84f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Here is the process specification of how to construct a multilayered flexible 
plastic-metal-hybird hull engineered to repair itself, layer by layer, which 
uses a balloon as the base upon which to apply each layer of flexible 
plastic, metal and nanotube particles:

First build a rubber balloon in the shape of the hull, with a door whole 
spacer in it, and fill it up with air.  Then apply to the balloon layers,  a 
strong metallic and plastic layer made of nanotubes and diamond like plastic 
crystals which are extra light and strong and slightly flexible to handle 
stress.  As the next layer then apply a plastic rubber like flexible 
fiberglass material, 6 inches thick, separated by vacuum spacers, to make a 
double vacuum seal.  Then apply a layer which is filled with a liquid plastic 
or metal in a balloon like material which when ruptured fills in wholes and 
hardens to repair a damage hull.  Then apply a layer of rubberized to be 
flexible and hardened for radiation, electronic sensors, and circuits, with 
cone like or Jacob's ladder like dual antennas every few feet, that reach to 
the outer last surface layer, to sense the outer atmosphere conditions and to 
apply antidrag, antigravity, and protective force fields on the outer layer, 
and to pull in cosmic energies by means of the antennas. Then next apply a 
layer of flexible metal or plastic which has tinny vortex tubes in it to pull 
in cosmic energies, and to make the ship levitate by gas vortexes which reach 
to the outer surface metallic layer ever few feet with tine vortex wholes.  
Lastly apply a strong flexible metallic layer made of nanotubes and diamond 
like crystals which are extra light and strong, that wraps around the 
antennas, and the vortex wholes, spaced every few feet.   This ships hull 
above can be made with a small miniballoon, 1/10 the normal size of the ship, 
as a prototype hull to test it before the main hull is built, and with radio 
electronics to fly the ship remote control for test fights, and to received 
experimental data by radio wave feed into a computer for modeling and 
testing.  Then the process can be sent to a factory to build the full size 
hull and mass produce it on perfected, if need be. 

Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\personal">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.com</A>


--part1_102.2c9c694c.2be2e84f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Here is the process specification of how to construct=20=
a multilayered flexible plastic-metal-hybird hull engineered to repair itsel=
f, layer by layer, which uses a balloon as the base upon which to apply each=
 layer of flexible plastic, metal and nanotube particles:<BR>
<BR>
First build a rubber balloon in the shape of the hull, with a door whole spa=
cer in it, and fill it up with air.&nbsp; Then apply to the balloon layers,&=
nbsp; a strong metallic and plastic layer made of nanotubes and diamond like=
 plastic crystals which are extra light and strong and slightly flexible to=20=
handle stress.&nbsp; As the next layer then apply a plastic rubber like flex=
ible fiberglass material, 6 inches thick, separated by vacuum spacers, to ma=
ke a double vacuum seal.&nbsp; Then apply a layer which is filled with a liq=
uid plastic or metal in a balloon like material which when ruptured fills in=
 wholes and hardens to repair a damage hull.&nbsp; Then apply a layer of rub=
berized to be flexible and hardened for radiation, electronic sensors, and c=
ircuits, with cone like or Jacob's ladder like dual antennas every few feet,=
 that reach to the outer last surface layer, to sense the outer atmosphere c=
onditions and to apply antidrag, antigravity, and protective force fields on=
 the outer layer, and to pull in cosmic energies by means of the antennas. T=
hen next apply a layer of flexible metal or plastic which has tinny vortex t=
ubes in it to pull in cosmic energies, and to make the ship levitate by gas=20=
vortexes which reach to the outer surface metallic layer ever few feet with=20=
tine vortex wholes.&nbsp; Lastly apply a strong flexible metallic layer made=
 of nanotubes and diamond like crystals which are extra light and strong, th=
at wraps around the antennas, and the vortex wholes, spaced every few feet.&=
nbsp;&nbsp; This ships hull above can be made with a small miniballoon, 1/10=
 the normal size of the ship, as a prototype hull to test it before the main=
 hull is built, and with radio electronics to fly the ship remote control fo=
r test fights, and to received experimental data by radio wave feed into a c=
omputer for modeling and testing.&nbsp; Then the process can be sent to a fa=
ctory to build the full size hull and mass produce it on perfected, if need=20=
be. <BR>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_102.2c9c694c.2be2e84f_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 14:22:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA31039;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 14:15:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 14:15:46 -0700
Message-ID: <00fe01c3101e$1a681d40$5a10b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: <fstenger suite224.net>
References: <008b01c30ff6$e665ab60$5a10b83f computer> <005b01c31016$ddce0fe0$0a016ea8@cpq>
Subject: Re: Static Electricity, Cosmic Rays, Hydrated Electrons and Free Energy
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 15:13:02 -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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a18c88b3709d8e785871da009c14e6ea8127b02ac19e33883a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"8zXdq1.0.ta7.2wOi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50400
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:


> The beauty of the hydrated electron (for those on this forum) is that even without
recourse to anything on the far fringes of science, like the hydrino or CANR, there is
a proven (well, almost proven) gateway to what can only be described as "free energy"

Actually it's Cosmic- Solar Energy.   :-)

>
> H2O2 is one of the most powerful oxidizers known -- stronger than chlorine, chlorine
dioxide, and potassium permanganate. PLUS, through catalysis, H2O2 can be easily
converted into hydroxyl radicals (-OH) with reactivity second only to fluorine.

H2O2 also decomposes around 100 C (which would occur in an internal combustion engine
using it as a fuel) :

2 H2O2 (68 grams) --->  2 H2O (36 grams) + O2 (32 grams) + ~ 477,000 joules,which is
comparable to burning H2:

2 H2 (4 grams) + O2 (32 grams) ---> 2 H2O (36 grams) + ~ 477,000 joules
>
> So here, a hydroxyl radical can appear from nature - moist air, as in any
thunderstorm, almost magically with little energy input other than wind. I'm convinced
a fair proportion of the energy of hurricanes comes from this mechanism more directly
than from the few degrees of ocean temperature differential - which is usually what is
given as the powering mechanism of hurricanes.

The  1.47 ev Electron Affinity of Oxygen and Carbon, is about half that of Fluorine
(3.44 ev) so the free electrons are going to be sequestered by carbon and oxygen
"compounds" :

The values are given at this url.

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch7/ie_ea.html#ea

Perhaps Willard's "Catalyst Activated Water" obtained by running water over lignite
coal has a lot of free energy in it.  :-)
http://www.choosecra.com/html%20pages/homepage/product%20info/willard60min.html

>
> At the bottom line, however, the hydroxyl (OH) radical alone, in perfect
conditions -could provide almost as much energy, in theory, as burning gasoline in air
which is normally a few thousand degree C. or a few eV.  The problem for the
alternative energy inventor is getting enough peroxide to form with as little energy
input as possible. Nature can help us there.

Well stated.
>
> Pretty amazing, wouldn't you agree, that this methodology is not mentioned
specifically in the literature? I'm sure it relates to probabilities and cross
sections etc. which are presumed to be low, but perhaps that is what the experts have
not gotten a good handle on the possibilities... for whatever reason.

The article on Hydrated Electrons was a DOE item.

http://www.tpub.com/doechem2/chem22.htm

Regards,

Frederick
>
> Jones
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 15:28:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA03916;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 15:26:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 15:26:48 -0700
Message-ID: <014f01c31028$04daf2e0$5a10b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Static Electricity, Cosmic Rays, Hydrated Electrons and Free Energy
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 16:24:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0148_01C30FFE.17B2A7C0"
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
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a18c88b3709d8e78587425af24d3da88e2666fa475841a1c7a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"zHf-5.0.vy.dyPi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50402
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_0148_01C30FFE.17B2A7C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Read this closely after seeing the Electron Affinity of the atoms in Doc Willard's
"brew".  :-)

 http://www.choosecra.com/html%20pages/homepage/product%20info/willard60min.html

REASONER:
So what's in it that could make so many things happen? Well, a little liquid road
salt, that's what melts snow and rots your car, and sodium silicate and magnesium
sulfate and sulfated castor oil and then Doc Willard mixes some of it with powdered
lignite. What you have finally are various mixtures called by different names: LA
Water, (it has nothing to do with that town in California, it means lignite activated
water) or CAW water, catalyst activated water. But it's all Willard Water, whatever it
is.

DOC WILLARD:
Well, it's the calcium magnesium, polysilicate polymer with a castor oil. ....

Electron Affinity:

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch7/ie_ea.html#ea

Carbon (Lignite Coal and Castor Oil)
Oxygen
Calcium   (Calcium Chloride antifreeze)
Magnesium
Chlorine
Sulfur (Epsom Salts and Sulfonated Castor Oil)
Silicon

Plus the kitchen sink.   :-)

Regards,

Frederick




------=_NextPart_000_0148_01C30FFE.17B2A7C0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Alternative Choices Healing Center - Health products - Catalyst altered water, from a 60 Minutes transcript.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Alternative Choices Healing Center - Health products - Catalyst altered water, from a 60 Minutes transcript.url"

[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=3Dhttp://www.choosecra.com/html%20pages/homepage/product%20info/w=
illard60min.html

[InternetShortcut]
URL=3Dhttp://www.choosecra.com/html%20pages/homepage/product%20info/willa=
rd60min.html
Modified=3DC0387D672510C301D5

------=_NextPart_000_0148_01C30FFE.17B2A7C0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  1 19:02:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA03118;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 19:01:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 19:01:48 -0700
Message-ID: <3EB1D1DF.7050003 cox.net>
Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 19:03:11 -0700
From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Organization: ISUS
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Ball Lightning machine fm 1999
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305011327060.16823-100000 eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"zlDwT.0.Im.A6Ti-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50403
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi,

If you want to see a picture of a really big version of this, see 
Aviation Week & Space Technology,
May 15, 1989, pp. 60-62.   They call it a "photon torpedo" generator.  

As with so many of their articles, I don't think it was ever mentioned 
again, as if it never existed :-) .

Hoyt Stearns,
Scottsdale, Arizona

William Beaty wrote:

>Electron Power Systems is apparently making small (1cm) BLs which take the
>form of hollow plasma toroids with a large electron flow in the toroid
>skin.  EPS has a paper on their website:
>
>  http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Equalibrium%20and%20Stability%20Chen.pdf
>  http://www.electronpowersystems.com/
>
>
>
>  
>


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 08:52:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA08911;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 08:49:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 08:49:47 -0700
Message-ID: <001e01c310c2$29bc1e00$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305011327060.16823-100000 eskimo.com> <3EB1D1DF.7050003@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Ball Lightning machine fm 1999
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 08:47:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA08800
Resent-Message-ID: <"UPyb71.0.-A2.REfi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50404
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hoyt Stearns wrote,
 
> If you want to see a picture of a really big version of this, see 
> Aviation Week & Space Technology... They call it a "photon torpedo" generator.  


Also, a number of other researchers have been doing spheromak stuff for years:

http://physics.swarthmore.edu/html/faculty/SSX/faq.html


Kind of makes you wonder about the credibility of this particular announcement...

....how Electron Power SystemsT (EPS) has "discovered a way to make a self-confined plasma toroid," 

....since, that is, grad students over at Swarthmore have been doing it for at least seven years...so how did EPS discover it? I guess they "discovered it" in a journal in the MIT library! Or is all they really discovered that a spheromak looks kinda like ball lightning?    Hey, waaay-to-go EPS!

Not to mention the little statement that they see, as a future application,  "A fusion-based car would cost 10% less to buy...than today's cars."  Whoa, cowboy, this isn't even dated April 1... who are they trying to fool? 

Ha, guess we all kind of suspected that a growing number of physicists over at MIT were a little on slime-bag side when it comes to credibility (following the faked cold-fusion study exposed by Mallove) and now this grossly excessive hyperbole and failure to credit others (prominently featuring the MIT name in the build-up*), we can only hope that is not sadly in keeping with a deteriorating reputation of that once proud institution....and hope that MIT takes some legal action to get their name off this company's site, as they are hardly a step of from the next version of the impending "Genesis" scam, it seems...

Jones


Easy money, you say I fool myself
But better me than being a fool for someone else
I got a hot machine of a system ready to go...
Easy money, I got a one-track mind
And a good reputation laying on the line

with apologies to Billy Joel

* They state "Working with the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion center as a subcontractor, we have developed a theoretical proof of concept for this technology. We confirmed this theory in our laboratory. And we have identified several key application areas." 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 11:33:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA02481;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 11:30:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 11:30:45 -0700
Message-ID: <007301c310d8$a6693940$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Is there a CF application?
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 11:28:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0070_01C3109D.F99E0AE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"ygs5H2.0.Yc.Kbhi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50405
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_0070_01C3109D.F99E0AE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just in time for the sequel. From the mother of all matrices (plural of =
matrix) department:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s832821.htm

Wonder if it comes in palladium?

Jones


BTW, even though it's not considered good form to have to explain one's =
failed puns, this one is a little arcane, so if you're not quite a =
cypherpunk-head and/or you failed to see the quirkiness of "mother of =
all matrices," and/or for those who are "latin-challenged" - let it be =
known that it is a bit of a holy redundancy, kinda like "deja vu all =
over again" on two levels...

I believe the cypherpunk forum dissolved into the great matrix in the =
sky a few years back, but maybe it will soon have its rebirthing, not =
quite immaculate, now that "the one" is being reloaded... be sure to =
catch it on the really big screen ( Imax )...
------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C3109D.F99E0AE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Just in time for the sequel. From the mother of all matrices =
(plural of=20
matrix) department:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s832821.htm">http://ww=
w.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s832821.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Wonder if it comes in palladium?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>BTW, even though it's not considered good form to have to explain =
one's=20
failed puns, this one is a little arcane, so&nbsp;if you're not quite a=20
cypherpunk-head and/or you failed to see the quirkiness&nbsp;of "mother =
of all=20
matrices," and/or for those who are "latin-challenged" -&nbsp;let =
it&nbsp;be=20
known that it&nbsp;is a bit of a holy redundancy, kinda like "deja vu =
all over=20
again" on two levels...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I believe the cypherpunk forum dissolved into the great matrix in =
the sky a=20
few years back, but maybe it will soon have&nbsp;its rebirthing, not =
quite=20
immaculate, now that&nbsp;"the one" is being reloaded... be sure to =
catch it on=20
the really big screen ( Imax )...</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C3109D.F99E0AE0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 12:46:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA05765;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 12:44:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 12:44:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030502153722.00aaaff8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 15:43:56 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: LENR-CANR.org downloads pass 80,000 / audio cassette
  conversion info needed
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"LcD2U1.0.vP1.6gii-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50406
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On May 1 the totals sailed past 80,000, to 81,601 today. I loaded updated 
totals and graphs here:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/Features.htm#Visitors

The last date on the first graph should be 4/26. Please let me know if you 
see the older version instead. In other words, let me know if the new one 
does not automatically redisplay. The second graph should show data through 
4/29. It seems the download rate has increased above the rate computed by 
Ed Storms last month, of 3.3 additions per day.

If anyone out there knows a lot about converting audio cassettes into 
compter .wav files (or some other format), please contact me by private e-mail.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 12:50:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA05929;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 12:44:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 12:44:16 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030502152608.02a96850 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 15:37:16 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Paper raises questions about peer-review system
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"EmFxq2.0.-P1.6gii-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50407
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

It's about time! See short Article describing paper:

http://bmj.com/cgi/reprint/326/7383/241/a.pdf

Paper itself:

http://www.update-software.com/Cochrane/MR000016.pdf

QUOTE:

"Learned societies and journal editors usually base their publication 
decisions on the views of researchers working on topics related to the 
study that has been submitted for publication. This system for deciding 
which research is presented at meetings or published in journals is known 
as peer-review. The use of peers to assess the work of fellow-scientists 
goes back at least 200 years (Kronick 1990). The use of peer-review is 
usually assumed to raise the quality of the end-product (i.e. the journal 
or scientific meeting) and to provide a mechanism for rational, fair and 
objective decision-making. However, these assumptions have rarely been
tested."

I think the author tries hard to find evidence that peer review works, but 
I do not think it does. If peer review itself were open, like a political 
primary, perhaps it would be less subject to corruption. That means signed 
reviews, to start with, and randomly chosen reviewers. I think it would be 
better to trash the whole system and use something like the Amazon.com 
system of rating book. Peer review is an obsolete relic of paper publishing.

It is funny how researchers do not apply the rules of science to their own 
activities. My mother once said that one of the sloppiest, worst designed 
questionnaires she saw was circulated to the members at a conference of the 
American Statistical Association. 'The cobbler's children wear no shoes.'

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 17:12:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA15558;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 17:09:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 17:09:50 -0700
Message-ID: <002001c31108$07dc6240$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Aspirin, HTP and water-fuel
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 17:07:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C310CD.5AE67A60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"KW50p.0.xo3.EZmi-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50408
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C310CD.5AE67A60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Fuel economist Joe Stronsick interviewed May 25, 2001 on CNN, on the =
subject of saving money on auto fuel =20

CNN Moderator: What are some of the most surprising things you =
discovered about saving money on gas?=20

Joe Stronsick: The most surprising thing I have found is that they do =
have vehicles that can run on water and hydrogen peroxide. These cars =
get 100+ miles per gallon, and have zero emissions...


YAWN  the silence is deafening. The interviewer changes the subject...=20

How did this kind of news item, along with its incredible implications, =
almost slip under the radar of the Vortex forum, and other alternative =
energy advocacy groups as well?

Is it oddly related to what I like to call the "aspirin syndrome"?=20

In a word, aspirin is the most effective drug on the planet for many =
differing kinds of human ailments, even cancer, but it isn't promoted by =
doctors, drug companies or special interests because it is too cheap, =
too un-glamorous, and would eliminate the expertise (and $250/hr billing =
rate) of those who know the truth - "take two aspirins..." is probably =
the best unwanted prescription in all of medicine.

For fifty years, it has been known that H-O-O-H, hydrogen peroxide or =
HTP (High Test Peroxide - as it was known after WWII by the Brits who =
used it extensively), has many advantages as a rocket and torpedo fuel.  =
When used as a monopropellant, it is only about half as energetic in =
terms of heat produced per pound as kerosene burned in oxygen.  It is =
possible, however, that HTP is even more efficient in producing torque =
in an auto engine than gasoline, especially if it drawn into an engine =
along with a solid that quickly expands (i.e. tiny ice crystals).=20

But even if the actual performance is less in practice than is gasoline, =
the huge (future) advantage of HTP over hydrocarbons is simply that it =
*isn't*- as they say. It isn't a fossil fuel, it isn't polluting, it =
isn't expensive, and it isn't controlled by our enemies in the middle =
east. OTOH it probably isn't going to pay taxes, so to hell with it...

Sad but true...

The actual ultimate cost that HTP can be produced for at home is not =
known, but it is probably extremely low. In principle HTP can be derived =
catalytically from water, air, and a static electric field plus =
agitation. You can buy fuel grade HTP now for about 60 cents a pound, =
but most of that is somebody else's profit. Electricity would still have =
to be consumed- at home or elsewhere, but is possible that HTP is OU to =
such an extent, particularly in an ICE that one can produce a lot more =
of it than is needed for the operation of the engine, so that the family =
car can double at night as the family power plant and fuel generator!

HTP isn't a limited resource that can be manipulated, and in fact, is =
almost as natural as the liquid that it forms from naturally - water.  =
The problem then, from the standpoint of our government, is that that it =
will be extremely difficult to tax, and so they will not be very =
interested in seeing it developed unless unbiased economists can =
convince them that it is the best overall strategy in the long run. But =
lets make it clear that there is probably NO organized conspiracy or =
suppression at work, at least yet... just INERTIA, ignorance, =
bureauracracy or whatever.

There have been a number of recent conferences that focused on the use =
of hydrogen peroxide as fuel, like the 2nd International Hydrogen =
Peroxide Propulsion Conference November 7-10, 1999 =95 Purdue University =
=95 West Lafayette, Indiana
http://aae.www.ecn.purdue.edu/AAE/conferences/hydrogenperoxide.html
There is also some interesting material on:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/
A cursory analysis of HTP costing can be found at:
http://www.iac.org.uk/pages/pospaper3.html

If the production of HTP is robustly OU, and there are real indications =
for this, then there are high incentives for developing a simple modular =
process for generating it at home, as both transportation fuel and for =
home heating. Small-scale plants, which could be run cost-effectively at =
the point of use, would avoid the problems and expense associated with =
transportation and the high profit margins of the producers. =
Fortunately, these "mini-plants" could also double as the family car !

I predict that we will know if HTP is massively OU in an ICE within the =
next 6 months. That is, we will have solid indications whether or not it =
can eventually be used as fuel in a converted auto engine to produce =
more fuel than is consummed. If it is OU, the in-situ home manufacture =
of hydrogen peroxide would soon follow and have the potential to =
revolutionize the whole economic structure of, not just the USA, but the =
world. That is, assuming that the former observation, that "there is =
probably no organized conspiracy or suppression at work, just inertia, =
ignorance, bureauracracy or whatever" is correct.

Jones


"We live in an extraordinarily debauched, interesting, savage world, =
where things really don't come out even. The purpose of true drama is to =
help remind us of that. Perhaps this does have an accidental, a =
cumulative social effect-to remind us to be a little more humble or a =
little more grateful or a little more ruminative."

- David Mamet, Writer of "The Water Engine" 1976

Plot Summary: In the 1930s, Charles Lang invents an engine that runs on =
water. But when he tries to get it patented and sold and produced, he is =
first offered a ridiculously low amount. When he refuses, he is suddenly =
cast into a world of hurt, and not just from the big oil companies...

My belated advice to Charlie would be, "the thing's just too big to =
sell, next time, just give it away..."  Who said that if every man just =
acted in his own best interests, this would be paradise on Earth?=20


------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C310CD.5AE67A60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Fuel economist Joe Stronsick interviewed May 25, 2001 on CNN, on =
the=20
subject of saving money on auto fuel&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>CNN Moderator: What are some of the most surprising things you =
discovered=20
about saving money on gas? </DIV>
<DIV><BR>Joe Stronsick: The most surprising thing I have found is that =
they do=20
have vehicles that can run on water and hydrogen peroxide. These cars =
get 100+=20
miles per gallon, and have zero emissions...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>YAWN&nbsp; the silence is deafening. The interviewer changes the=20
subject...&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>How did this kind of news item, along with its incredible=20
implications,&nbsp;almost slip under the radar of the Vortex forum, and =
other=20
alternative energy advocacy groups as well?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Is&nbsp;it oddly&nbsp;related to what I like to call the "aspirin=20
syndrome"? </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In a word, aspirin is the most effective drug on the planet for =
many=20
differing kinds of human ailments, even cancer, but it isn't promoted by =

doctors, drug companies or special interests because it is too cheap, =
too=20
un-glamorous, and would eliminate the expertise (and $250/hr billing =
rate) of=20
those who know the truth - "take two&nbsp;aspirins..." is probably the =
best=20
unwanted prescription in all of medicine.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>For fifty years, it has been known that H-O-O-H, hydrogen peroxide =
or HTP=20
(High Test Peroxide -&nbsp;as it was known after WWII by the Brits who =
used it=20
extensively), has many advantages as a rocket and torpedo fuel.&nbsp;=20
When&nbsp;used as a monopropellant, it is&nbsp;only about&nbsp;half=20
as&nbsp;energetic in terms of heat produced per pound as kerosene burned =
in=20
oxygen.&nbsp; It is possible, however, that&nbsp;HTP is even more =
efficient in=20
producing torque in an auto engine than gasoline, especially if it drawn =
into an=20
engine along with a solid that quickly expands (i.e. tiny ice crystals). =
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But even if the actual performance is less in practice than is =
gasoline,=20
the huge (future) advantage of HTP over hydrocarbons is simply that it =
*isn't*-=20
as they say. It isn't a fossil fuel, it isn't polluting, it isn't =
expensive, and=20
it isn't controlled by our enemies in the middle east. OTOH it probably =
isn't=20
going to pay taxes, so to hell with it...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Sad but true...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The actual ultimate cost that&nbsp;HTP can be produced for at home =
is not=20
known, but it is probably extremely low. In principle&nbsp;HTP can be =
derived=20
catalytically from water, air, and a static&nbsp;electric field plus =
agitation.=20
You can buy&nbsp;fuel grade&nbsp;HTP now for about 60 cents a pound, but =
most of=20
that is somebody else's profit. Electricity would still have to be =
consumed- at=20
home or&nbsp;elsewhere, but is possible that HTP is OU to such an =
extent,=20
particularly in an ICE that one can produce a lot more of it than is =
needed for=20
the operation of the engine, so that the family car can double at night =
as the=20
family power plant and fuel generator!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>HTP isn't a limited resource that can be manipulated, and in fact, =
is=20
almost as natural as the liquid that it forms from naturally -=20
water.&nbsp;&nbsp;The problem then, from the standpoint of our =
government, is=20
that that it will be extremely difficult to tax, and so they will not be =
very=20
interested in seeing it developed unless unbiased economists can =
convince them=20
that it is the best overall strategy in the long run. But lets make it =
clear=20
that there is probably NO organized conspiracy or suppression at work, =
at least=20
yet...&nbsp;just INERTIA, ignorance, bureauracracy or whatever.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>There have been a number of recent conferences that focused on the =
use of=20
hydrogen peroxide as fuel, like the 2nd International Hydrogen Peroxide=20
Propulsion Conference November 7-10, 1999 =95 Purdue University =95 West =
Lafayette,=20
Indiana<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://aae.www.ecn.purdue.edu/AAE/conferences/hydrogenperoxide.ht=
ml">http://aae.www.ecn.purdue.edu/AAE/conferences/hydrogenperoxide.html</=
A><BR>There=20
is also some interesting material on:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://science.howstuffworks.com/">http://science.howstuffworks.c=
om/</A></DIV>
<DIV>A cursory analysis of HTP costing can be found at:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.iac.org.uk/pages/pospaper3.html">http://www.iac.org.uk=
/pages/pospaper3.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If the production of HTP is robustly OU, and there are real=20
indications&nbsp;for this,&nbsp;then there are high incentives for =
developing a=20
simple modular process for generating&nbsp;it at home, as both =
transportation=20
fuel and for home heating. Small-scale plants, which could be run=20
cost-effectively at the point of use, would avoid the problems and =
expense=20
associated with transportation and the high profit margins of the =
producers.=20
Fortunately, these "mini-plants" could also double as the family car =
!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I predict that we will know if HTP is massively OU in an ICE within =
the=20
next 6 months. That is, we will have solid indications whether or not it =
can=20
eventually be used as fuel in a converted auto engine to produce more =
fuel than=20
is consummed. If it is OU, the in-situ home manufacture of hydrogen =
peroxide=20
would soon follow and have the potential to revolutionize the whole =
economic=20
structure of, not just the USA, but the world. That is, assuming that =
the former=20
observation, that&nbsp;"there is probably&nbsp;no organized conspiracy =
or=20
suppression at work, just inertia, ignorance, bureauracracy or whatever" =
is=20
correct.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><BR>"We live in an extraordinarily debauched, interesting, savage =
world,=20
where things really don't come out even. The purpose of true drama is to =
help=20
remind us of that. Perhaps this does have an accidental, a cumulative =
social=20
effect-to remind us to be a little more humble or a little more grateful =
or a=20
little more ruminative."<BR></DIV>
<DIV>- David Mamet, Writer of "The Water Engine" 1976</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Plot Summary: In the 1930s, Charles Lang invents an engine that =
runs on=20
water. But when he tries to get it patented and sold and produced, he is =
first=20
offered a ridiculously low amount. When he refuses, he is suddenly cast =
into a=20
world of hurt, and not just from the big oil companies...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>My belated advice to Charlie would be, "the thing's just too big to =
sell,=20
next time, just give it away..."&nbsp; Who said that if every man just =
acted in=20
his own best interests, this would be paradise on Earth? <BR></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C310CD.5AE67A60--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 17:43:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA32620;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 17:41:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 17:41:21 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Aspirin, HTP and water-fuel
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 21:00:44 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKELDDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
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)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <002001c31108$07dc6240$0a016ea8 cpq>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"ylaIq.0.Wz7.m0ni-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50409
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jones.

The stuff used for rocket work is >95% pure, and pretty
dangerous to handle. Having your oxidizer premixed
with your reducing agent is convenient but a bit
hazardous... What's fuel grade material?

This bit below has stymied many an erstwhile rocketeer
from blasting off for the moon.

//////////////////////
Hydrogen peroxide is sold in grades ranging from 3 to 86 wt %.
Concentrations over 8 wt % are classified as corrosive liquids by the US
Department of Transportation; solutions containing 20 wt % and over are
classified as oxidisers and corrosives by US Bureau of Explosives
regulations. Transportation from point of manufacture to point of use has
therefore become a costly exercise, with a high administrative overhead to
comply with the regulatory requirements.
//////////////////////

K.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9 pacbell.net]
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 8:08 PM
To: vortex
Subject: Aspirin, HTP and water-fuel


Fuel economist Joe Stronsick interviewed May 25, 2001 on CNN, on the subject
of saving money on auto fuel

CNN Moderator: What are some of the most surprising things you discovered
about saving money on gas?

Joe Stronsick: The most surprising thing I have found is that they do have
vehicles that can run on water and hydrogen peroxide. These cars get 100+
miles per gallon, and have zero emissions...


YAWN  the silence is deafening. The interviewer changes the subject...

How did this kind of news item, along with its incredible implications,
almost slip under the radar of the Vortex forum, and other alternative
energy advocacy groups as well?

Is it oddly related to what I like to call the "aspirin syndrome"?

In a word, aspirin is the most effective drug on the planet for many
differing kinds of human ailments, even cancer, but it isn't promoted by
doctors, drug companies or special interests because it is too cheap, too
un-glamorous, and would eliminate the expertise (and $250/hr billing rate)
of those who know the truth - "take two aspirins..." is probably the best
unwanted prescription in all of medicine.

For fifty years, it has been known that H-O-O-H, hydrogen peroxide or HTP
(High Test Peroxide - as it was known after WWII by the Brits who used it
extensively), has many advantages as a rocket and torpedo fuel.  When used
as a monopropellant, it is only about half as energetic in terms of heat
produced per pound as kerosene burned in oxygen.  It is possible, however,
that HTP is even more efficient in producing torque in an auto engine than
gasoline, especially if it drawn into an engine along with a solid that
quickly expands (i.e. tiny ice crystals).

But even if the actual performance is less in practice than is gasoline, the
huge (future) advantage of HTP over hydrocarbons is simply that it *isn't*-
as they say. It isn't a fossil fuel, it isn't polluting, it isn't expensive,
and it isn't controlled by our enemies in the middle east. OTOH it probably
isn't going to pay taxes, so to hell with it...

Sad but true...

The actual ultimate cost that HTP can be produced for at home is not known,
but it is probably extremely low. In principle HTP can be derived
catalytically from water, air, and a static electric field plus agitation.
You can buy fuel grade HTP now for about 60 cents a pound, but most of that
is somebody else's profit. Electricity would still have to be consumed- at
home or elsewhere, but is possible that HTP is OU to such an extent,
particularly in an ICE that one can produce a lot more of it than is needed
for the operation of the engine, so that the family car can double at night
as the family power plant and fuel generator!

HTP isn't a limited resource that can be manipulated, and in fact, is almost
as natural as the liquid that it forms from naturally - water.  The problem
then, from the standpoint of our government, is that that it will be
extremely difficult to tax, and so they will not be very interested in
seeing it developed unless unbiased economists can convince them that it is
the best overall strategy in the long run. But lets make it clear that there
is probably NO organized conspiracy or suppression at work, at least yet...
just INERTIA, ignorance, bureauracracy or whatever.

There have been a number of recent conferences that focused on the use of
hydrogen peroxide as fuel, like the 2nd International Hydrogen Peroxide
Propulsion Conference November 7-10, 1999 • Purdue University • West
Lafayette, Indiana
http://aae.www.ecn.purdue.edu/AAE/conferences/hydrogenperoxide.html
There is also some interesting material on:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/
A cursory analysis of HTP costing can be found at:
http://www.iac.org.uk/pages/pospaper3.html

If the production of HTP is robustly OU, and there are real indications for
this, then there are high incentives for developing a simple modular process
for generating it at home, as both transportation fuel and for home heating.
Small-scale plants, which could be run cost-effectively at the point of use,
would avoid the problems and expense associated with transportation and the
high profit margins of the producers. Fortunately, these "mini-plants" could
also double as the family car !

I predict that we will know if HTP is massively OU in an ICE within the next
6 months. That is, we will have solid indications whether or not it can
eventually be used as fuel in a converted auto engine to produce more fuel
than is consummed. If it is OU, the in-situ home manufacture of hydrogen
peroxide would soon follow and have the potential to revolutionize the whole
economic structure of, not just the USA, but the world. That is, assuming
that the former observation, that "there is probably no organized conspiracy
or suppression at work, just inertia, ignorance, bureauracracy or whatever"
is correct.

Jones


"We live in an extraordinarily debauched, interesting, savage world, where
things really don't come out even. The purpose of true drama is to help
remind us of that. Perhaps this does have an accidental, a cumulative social
effect-to remind us to be a little more humble or a little more grateful or
a little more ruminative."

- David Mamet, Writer of "The Water Engine" 1976

Plot Summary: In the 1930s, Charles Lang invents an engine that runs on
water. But when he tries to get it patented and sold and produced, he is
first offered a ridiculously low amount. When he refuses, he is suddenly
cast into a world of hurt, and not just from the big oil companies...

My belated advice to Charlie would be, "the thing's just too big to sell,
next time, just give it away..."  Who said that if every man just acted in
his own best interests, this would be paradise on Earth?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 17:46:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA03987;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 17:45:51 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 17:45:51 -0700
Message-ID: <3EB31083.A403803D ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 17:42:43 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW     Friday, 2 May 03]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gMFOF3.0.C-.-4ni-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50410
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, 2 May 03
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 16:42:57 -0400
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 2 May 03   Washington, DC

1. LOS ALAMOS: MANAGEMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS LAB OPEN FOR BIDS.  
How did the laboratory remain stimulating and creative year after
year when its location was chosen for its isolation?  It did what
great universities do.  It built a complete community of scholars
that can turn inward.  In the Manhattan Project, Los Alamos was
created in the image of the University of California, and UC has
managed the Lab ever since.  Wednesday, however, DOE Secretary
Spencer Abraham said that when the current contract runs out in
'05 the Department will seek competing bids.  Abraham based his
decision on a report by DOE Deputy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow and
Linton Brooks, acting head of the National Nuclear Security
Administration.  Their report suggests the Los Alamos culture,
which "exalted science and devalued business practice," must be
changed.  Attracting top scientists with these priorities
reversed could be difficult.  UC President Richard Atkinson
indicated the university will "compete hard" for the contract.

2. COLUMBIA: C. ELEGANS SURVIVES BREAK-UP OF THE SHUTTLE.  It was
reported yesterday that an experiment cannister from Columbia had
been found containing thousands of tiny nematode worms.  Not only
had they survived, they had reproduced several generations.  This
was exciting news, of course, but our Press Kit for STS-7 made no
mention of worms.  "Of course not," we were told many phone calls
later, "you were looking at the list of experiments issued at the
time of the flight, not the revised list."  When was it revised? 
"April 17."  That's six weeks after the accident; about the time
they found the container.  Only 1 mm long full grown, C. elegans
is used in hundreds of biology experiments to study basic animal
biology.  Usually it dines on bacteria and stuff; NASA, we were
told, was testing a new synthetic worm chow.  We are still trying
to find out why it had to be tested in microgravity.  In our
research, we were awed to learn that most of C. elegans is taken
up by its reproductive system.  Wow!  No wonder NASA is reluctant
to talk about it.  It must be that C. elegans is being fed the
stuff offered in the spam that's on our computers every morning,
promising to enlarge our reproductive equipment.

3. PRIVACY: "TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS" ISN'T AN EDUCATIONAL
PROGRAM.  It only goes the other way.  The Bush administration
yesterday sought to give the CIA and the Pentagon far-reaching
new powers to demand personal and financial records of Americans
as part of an intelligence authorization bill.  Like an earlier
attempt at "Total Information Awareness," it was beaten back(WN
24 Jan 03), but they won't stop trying.  Now let's see if we've
got this straight: while our leaders get to cover up everything
(WN 4 Apr 03), the rest of us are stripped naked (WN 11 Apr 03).

4. MARS ROVERS: ANTI-NUKES OBJECT TO PU-238 TOE WARMERS. The
nights get pretty cold on Mars (days too) and the twin rovers,
due to be launched in June, are equipped with radio-isotope
warmers.  Activists are concerned about an accident on launch,
and NASA's record of predicting catastrophes is not reassuring.

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: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  2 18:20:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA26497;
	Fri, 2 May 2003 18:19:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 18:19:30 -0700
Message-ID: <003601c31111$c2f8b020$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKELDDJAA.knagel gis.net>
Subject: Re: Aspirin, HTP and water-fuel
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 18:17:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA26440
Resent-Message-ID: <"jNf8l3.0.sT6.Xani-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50411
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote,

 
> The stuff used for rocket work is >95% pure, and pretty
> dangerous to handle. Having your oxidizer premixed
> with your reducing agent is convenient but a bit
> hazardous... What's fuel grade material?


Yes, as usual I have managed to confuse any number of separate issues by trying to cram too much into a single post.

My belief is that you can optimize water-fuel so it contains only a few percent (maybe ~5%) of HTP (HTP being the 97% variety) plus some hydronium and some oxides of nitrogen in-situ created, but most importantly, a precise mist of water vapor going through phase-change at the precise instant of combustion.

My feeling, based on thin but rapidly accumulating evidence, is that something approaching this  formula has been accomplished in "hit or miss" fashion many times in the past, but the actual mechanics underlying the phenomenon was not appreciated well enough to optimize the operation then, and it was not reproducible to the extent necessary for commercial use. And the mix is *extraordinarily* corrosive, like a repeating acid-base barrage that should require high grade stainless or better (Nichrome or Pt plated) in all exposed parts, so it has yet to be optimized.

More later,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May  3 20:56:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA25018;
	Sat, 3 May 2003 20:55:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 20:55:39 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast earthlink.net>
Reply-To: rockcast earthlink.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW     Friday, 2 May 03]
Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 23:55:33 -0400
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <3EB31083.A403803D ix.netcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <3EB31083.A403803D ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200305032355.33206.rockcast earthlink.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA24992
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q6WFC3.0.l66.xy8j-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50412
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Friday 02 May 2003 20:42, Akira Kawasaki wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: WHAT'S NEW     Friday, 2 May 03
> Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 16:42:57 -0400
> From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
> Reply-To: opa aps.org
> To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>
> 
> WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 2 May 03   Washington, DC
> 
> 1. LOS ALAMOS: MANAGEMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS LAB OPEN FOR BIDS.  
> How did the laboratory remain stimulating and creative year after
> year when its location was chosen for its isolation?  It did what
> great universities do.  It built a complete community of scholars
> that can turn inward.  In the Manhattan Project, Los Alamos was
> created in the image of the University of California, and UC has
> managed the Lab ever since.  Wednesday, however, DOE Secretary
> Spencer Abraham said that when the current contract runs out in
> '05 the Department will seek competing bids.  Abraham based his
> decision on a report by DOE Deputy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow and
> Linton Brooks, acting head of the National Nuclear Security
> Administration.  

Their report suggests the Los Alamos culture,
> which "exalted science and devalued business practice," must be
> changed. 

[[[ REALLY LIKE THAT PART ABOVE....BUSINESS USE OF
NUCLEAR WEAPONS]]]  !!!   Los Alamos also did some good
laser research before some of it got contracted to the Israelis
who promptly sold some of the technology to the Chinese.
.......now that's BUSINESS!!!  Next nuke that lands on your head
will have been engineered in right here at home....plans sold
to the Chinese through appropriate third parties (good 'business'
you know not to have blood tooooo plainly on your hands), and
delivered by 'North Korean' missile (Chinese missile design copy
of plans stolen from us  by Chinese double agent a couple of years
ago who was never prosecuted by the Bush Admin out of fear of
losing BUSINESS) that was 'slipped across the Yalu by moonlight'.
Real BUSINESS.......REAL FUN!!!!???	



 Attracting top scientists with these priorities
> reversed could be difficult.  UC President Richard Atkinson
> indicated the university will "compete hard" for the contract.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 08:28:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA03856;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 08:27:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 08:27:21 -0700
Message-ID: <003601c31251$a11896a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: "Grimer" <f.grimer grimer2.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Auto Bild article
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 08:27:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0033_01C31216.F40A44C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"8ZXsT2.0.Ay.P5Jj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50413
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_0033_01C31216.F40A44C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

For those who speak German, here is an article about the Dingle engine =
(from the Philippines) that runs on only water - one of many  that has =
been reported to be running on water in recent months on various =
"inventor" forums and elsewhere.=20

Problem is, most of these inventors (many from Asia) are too "ignorant" =
of Western superior know-how and proven American ingenuity to understand =
or appreciate that they are breaking our laws of physics...

What are we to do? ...arrest them?

BMW sent some engineers over (partly, one imagines, to escape the dismal =
winter in Bavaria) and is closely following the developments, BUT =
because the technology patents have expired (one US patent is from the =
'20s), will BMW also succumb to the "aspirin syndrome"?

The article (paste with no spaces):

http://www.autobild.de/suche/artikel.php?artikel_id=3D653&artikel_seite=3D=
1&A_SESS=3Dbf1edeed77b5ac6ffeeeccf9e63a6375

A weak translation: "The only outside test of the motor was undertaken =
in a BMW agency in Manila by domestic engineers.  The result: all =
engineers were convinced of the invention.  Why does therefore it =
hesitate with the further development?  "Because my invention is so =
simple, that anybody only would laugh, if I publish it.  It does not be =
based only upon healthy common sense, on Innovative engineer knowledge.  =
How should one patent let so something?"

Who's zooming who?

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0033_01C31216.F40A44C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>For those who speak German, here is an article&nbsp;about the =
Dingle engine=20
(from the Philippines) that runs on only water - one of many&nbsp; that =
has been=20
reported to be running on water in recent months on various "inventor" =
forums=20
and elsewhere. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Problem is, most of these inventors (many from Asia)&nbsp;are too=20
"ignorant" of Western superior know-how and proven American ingenuity to =

understand or appreciate that they are breaking our laws of =
physics...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What are we to do? ...arrest them?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>BMW sent some engineers over (partly, one imagines,&nbsp;to escape =
the=20
dismal winter in Bavaria) and is closely&nbsp;following the =
developments, BUT=20
because the technology patents have expired (one US patent is from the =
'20s),=20
will BMW also succumb to the "aspirin syndrome"?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The article (paste with no spaces):</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.autobild.de/suche/artikel.php?artikel_id=3D653&amp;art=
ikel_seite=3D1&amp;A_SESS=3Dbf1edeed77b5ac6ffeeeccf9e63a6375">http://www.=
autobild.de/suche/artikel.php?artikel_id=3D653&amp;artikel_seite=3D1&amp;=
A_SESS=3Dbf1edeed77b5ac6ffeeeccf9e63a6375</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A weak translation: "The only&nbsp;outside test of the motor was =
undertaken=20
in a BMW agency in Manila&nbsp;by domestic engineers.&nbsp; The result: =
all=20
engineers were convinced of the invention.&nbsp; Why does therefore it =
hesitate=20
with the further development?&nbsp; "Because my invention is so simple, =
that=20
anybody only would laugh, if I publish it.&nbsp; It does not be based =
only upon=20
healthy common sense, on Innovative engineer knowledge.&nbsp; How should =
one=20
patent let so something?"</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Who's zooming who?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0033_01C31216.F40A44C0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 15:21:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA02726;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 15:20:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:20:45 -0700
Message-ID: <002501c31282$ab66df00$6908bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:18:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a13cf67a2d33d282c5edaf0ce6012c354d1a036a86675380a6350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"dypX93.0.Qg.z8Pj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50414
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones,

My data for a 2.55 Hp ( 3600 RPM) 127 cm^3, 4 cycle Briggs&Stratton engine:

15 air intake strokes/sec at 3600 rpm = 2,000 cm^3 air intake/sec.
Air density, based on a molecular weight of 28.9 = 0.0013 grams per cm^3
Grams of air intake per second = 2,000*0.0013 = 2.6 grams.

2.55 HP = 2.55 * 746 watts/ Hp  = 2,000 joule/sec

Hydrogen power:

2 H2 (4 grams) + O2 (32 grams) ---> 2 H2O + 452,000 joule.

Required H2/sec =  (2,000/452,000)*4 = 0.18 grams/sec

Required H2 electolyzer energy at 55 kilowatt-hours per
kilogram or 55 watt-hours/gram = 198,000 watt-sec/gram = 198,000*0.18 = 35,640
watt-sec or joules or 2,851 amperes, with five 2.5 volt  electrolyzer cells in series
with a 12.5 volt battery/alternator power supply.

OTOH, aspirating the intake air through a lye (NaOH) water solution to create (OH) and
H free radicals that get entrained in the intake air due to action of Hydrated
Electrons from  the 500"small ions"/cm^3 present in air:

1, (Na+)aq + (OH-)aq + (O2-) ---> NaO2 + (OH-)aq

2, NaO2 + H2O ---> (Na+)aq + OH + O2 + (OH-)aq

With the OH free radicals entrained in the intake air:

4 OH (68 grams) ---> 2H2O + O2 + 218,000 joule

To get 2,000 joule/second:

(2,000/218,000)*68 = 0.625 grams per second, with 2 liters of air per second going
through the lye-water solution.

Free Energy in the air?  :-)

Regards,

Frederick







From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 15:41:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA10314;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 15:38:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:38:40 -0700
Message-ID: <00da01c3128d$e3d54740$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <002501c31282$ab66df00$6908bf3f computer>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:38:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA10277
Resent-Message-ID: <"KPFmN2.0.4X2.mPPj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50415
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Fred,

I'm not following. Are you saying just drawing the air through, with no added electric field is enough, if the air is fully hydrated?

BTW if one was to use NaOH, how much of the sodium would escape into the engine? That could be a problem. I wonder what could be done to limit this.

I think I might be able to get hold of a 4-stroke outboard engine to play around with but I wouldn't want to return it with sodium corrosion all over....

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 16:09:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA23941;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 16:08:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:08:23 -0700
Message-ID: <003101c31289$53f9b880$6908bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <002501c31282$ab66df00$6908bf3f computer> <00da01c3128d$e3d54740$0a016ea8@cpq>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 17:05:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a13cf67a2d33d282c50b34065597b580ba3553614b9f64653b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"hKjuC1.0._r5.drPj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50416
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2003 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines

Jones wrote:


> Fred,
>
> I'm not following. Are you saying just drawing the air through, with no added
electric field is enough, if the air is fully hydrated?

That's what the limits of my knowledge of wet chemistry suggests. Allowing the OH
radicals to combine into HO-OH (hydrogen peroxide) before they get into the engine
cylinder wastes potential engine energy.

However, some electrolysis to get enough hydrogen to get spark ignition might help
some.

BTW, the engine is providing the work for "bubbling" the air through the water, and
compressing the air- free radical vapor to about a 6:1 compression ratio resulting in
a pressure of about 150 psi and a temperature of several hundred F.

I'm reminded of Knuke Hoffman's early vortex post about
"diesel engines on a ship running like crazy when sea water got into them". I think
that was written about early in the Infinite-Energy Articles.
>
> BTW if one was to use NaOH, how much of the sodium would escape into the engine?

Probably a lot, however, the OH free radical is highly corrosive.

> That could be a problem. I wonder what could be done to limit this.

Materials selection.
>
> I think I might be able to get hold of a 4-stroke outboard engine to play around
with but I wouldn't want to return it with sodium corrosion all over....

The sodium will wash off, but the oxidation from the OH won't :

OH + Fe --- FeO + H etc.   :-)

Regards

Frederick
>
> Jones
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 16:54:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA10357;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 16:53:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:53:34 -0700
Message-ID: <011201c31298$59e95a20$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <002501c31282$ab66df00$6908bf3f computer> <00da01c3128d$e3d54740$0a016ea8@cpq> <003101c31289$53f9b880$6908bf3f@computer>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:53:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA10330
Resent-Message-ID: <"gTs2o2.0.lX2.-VQj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50417
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 
> I'm reminded of Knuke Hoffman's early vortex post about
> "diesel engines on a ship running like crazy when sea water got into them". I think
> that was written about early in the Infinite-Energy Articles.


Yes, it's like deja vu all over again  ;-)

Whatever happened to Knuke, and cavitation college, or whatever it was? I believe it was Huffman not Hoffman, and I can't find that in the Vortex archives. Do you have it handy?

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 17:05:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA15167;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 17:04:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 17:04:14 -0700
Message-ID: <003f01c31291$20cefda0$6908bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <002501c31282$ab66df00$6908bf3f computer> <00da01c3128d$e3d54740$0a016ea8@cpq> <003101c31289$53f9b880$6908bf3f@computer> <011201c31298$59e95a20$0a016ea8@cpq>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 18:01:36 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a18bf3ab468a24f0fddd03727587149acd7c7233ee4b332ceb350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"FWLXE3.0.ri3.zfQj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50418
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2003 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines

Jones wrote:
> Fred wrote:
>
> > I'm reminded of Knuke Hoffman's early vortex post about
> > "diesel engines on a ship running like crazy when sea water got into them". I
think
> > that was written about early in the Infinite-Energy Articles.
>
>
> Yes, it's like deja vu all over again  ;-)

I think he was talking about sea spray up near Alaska, getting into the air intake of
the diesel engines.
>
> Whatever happened to Knuke, and cavitation college, or whatever it was?

Last I heard he was in Florida. with the e-mail address of

Knuke LCIA.Com

CIA Maybe?   :-)

> I believe it was Huffman not Hoffman, and I can't find that in the Vortex archives.
Do you have it handy?

No, but I think his article was in the very first issue of Gene Mallove's
Infinite-Energy Magazine.

Regards,

Frederick
>
> Jones
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 19:35:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA10579;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 19:34:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 19:34:26 -0700
Message-ID: <00fc01c312a6$1b2cd560$6908bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 20:31:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a132fc1d5a0116b91e6a9b92492b79072e3ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"JN00O2.0.7b2.nsSj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50419
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones,

You can buy dry cans (1 lb) of NaOH "lye" at the store as "Drano" or the pre-mix with
water as "Liquid-Plumber" in plastic jugs.

CAUTION!: Mixing the dry "Drano" with tap water has a powerful exotherm and gives off
a choking vapor, possibly NaOH-H2O  or perhaps (OH) or other free radicals?

Eventually, the CO2 from the air-water will turn it to Na2CO3 (washing soda) or NaHCO3
(bicarbonate of soda).  Arm and Hammer comes to mind and is a lot safer than lye.

This poses some interesting wet chemistry, where the water fuel and Hydrated Electron,
Free Energy "Catalysts" has:

1,  (Na+)aq + (H+)aq + (CO3 =)aq + 2(O2-) ---> NaO2 + OOH + (CO3 =)

2, NaO2 + H2O ---> (Na+)aq + (OH-)aq + OH + O

And dozens of other possibilities for generating reactive free radicals that the
engine intake air can aspirate through the water solution and entrain them as it
"bubbles" through.

Even though the radicals (OOH, OH, H, and O) have a short lifetime before combining
with each other to form H2O, HO-OH , O2, or O3) the 78% N2 stream should be inert
toward them and may retard their energy-wasting recombination before they get into the
engine cylinder where you want them to recombine for the power stroke.

Dig out the Bicarbonate of Soda and the vacuum cleaner.  :-)

Regards,

Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 20:53:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA10079;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 20:52:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 20:52:46 -0700
Message-ID: <20030505035241.62055.qmail web20809.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 04:52:41 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?millennium?= <unamity yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: A "Once In The History of A Species" Event ...
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"4WcQ63.0.PT2.D0Uj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50420
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


...


VERY briefly, announcing three new discussion
groups to take our 'herstory' forward a thousand-fold:


 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AenertialAether/

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NuclearStructure/

   http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/SuperLuminal13


apologies for the email 'redundancy' -- born of the
necessity of contacting all of our global partners working
together for truth ... building a global economy, based
on technologies of peace!



millennium twain

http://freespeech.org/rapture/creation
http://unamity.com/YoniStar



now in our 30th day of global fasting
for world peace ...

http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/worldfast

...

satyagraha -- fasting protest ...

Gandhi named this concept of action: "satyagraha"
(combining the Hindu words for "truth"
and "holding firmly.")

..







.

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May  4 21:56:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA01902;
	Sun, 4 May 2003 21:54:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 21:54:41 -0700
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <131.1e1bd593.2be7484a aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 00:53:30 EDT
Subject: Re: [Antigravity] Re: Marcus Device and Worm Holes
To: Antigravity yahoogroups.com, aelewis@provide.net, mediator@mint.ocn.ne.jp,
        prj mail.msen.com, Roundtable7@yahoogroups.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
CC: tom rhfweb.com, ConexTom@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_131.1e1bd593.2be7484a_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"sVAxg1.0.bT.GwUj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50421
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_131.1e1bd593.2be7484a_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/4/2003 12:21:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
EMScan81 aol.com writes:

> I'm asking this because I have trouble believe in negative 
> space-
> >time 
> >>  energy's ability to "inflate" a wormhole.  How do you get into 
> a 
> >>  singularity in the first place?  How does that singularity 
> match 
> >up 
> >>  with another way across the Universe?  How do we make it more 
> >than a 
> >>  gravitational conveyor belt?
> 

Fred Alan Wolf in his book, Parallel Universes 1988, Simon & Schuster, 
discusses how to enter a singularity, in the chapter An Imaginary Journey 
Through a Black Hole, Page 165 to 169, How a Rotating Black Hole is a Bridge 
to Many Universes,

...."You can't cross the same event horizon (Surface of the Black Whole) 
twice ", Much as you can't enter the same river twice.  The reason is that 
the event horizon marks the boundary between different space-time 
orientations ... One event horizon per universe is allowed no more.  
.....Once you cross an event horizon, time and space reverse.   The space 
inside the horizon has a "timelike" characteristic, meaning that you must go 
with the flow, while the time has a "spacelike characteristic, meaning that 
you can flow in either direction.  Thus even though you, the traveler, 
experience a steady movement in time as you perceive it, those mapping you 
motion will see you move in time as you enter the event horizon, but then you 
will be perceived to sweep through space toward the hole's singularity while 
going back in time.  If the outside world could watch you while you where 
doing this, it would appear that you were going backward through time as they 
experience time. 
Thus crossing the event horizon causes a reversal. What was time in our 
universe becomes space inside the black hole.  Eventually you will run into 
the singularity. 
Now all of this is true for a whole that is not spinning.  .. How could a 
black hole have spin?  Most stars spin. If any of them are overweight, they 
two will collapse into black wholes and maintain their spins as they do so.   
 

And a spinning black whole has another weird characteristic, it has two event 
horizons, and outer and an inner. The outer event horizon is the same as the 
event horizon for a nonspinning black whole, but the inner event horizon is 
the reverse of the outer.  Thus when you cross over the inner event horizon, 
it's like passing into the eye of a hurricane, -time and space become normal 
once again.  You can play inside the inner event horizon and  need not crash 
into the singularity. 

Just as Martin Kruskal gave us a new map of a black whole, in 1961, and 
showed us that a nonspinning hole was a bridge to another parallel universe 
......Kerr's equations indicated that the existence of an infinite number of 
parallel universes, all connected with the spin of the hole. 

Because the structure of the honeycomb map... it is possible to travel to all 
other universes except one, without ever moving faster than the speed of 
light. The exceptional parallel universe is the one just adjacent to our own. 
 To reach it, you must exceed the speed of light ..."

Pg 205 Neutron Star Time Machines

Basically make a long enough cylinder out of already existing rapidly 
rotating neutron stars and you will have a time machine.   Such a cylinder 
contains in its immediate neighborhood concentric zones where time goes 
backward. 

Pg 210 Time Travel Paradox Resolution By Parallel Universe

You board the train in the present, go back in time and alter the event, havin
g direct and causal bearing on the existence of yourself, and return to the 
future.  The future where you are not is on another track. 

Pg 228 Wheeler's Choice

An undefined past that only becomes defined by our actions now.  Our choice 
now branches us onto a parallel universe where the radius of the universe at 
the beginning of time is determined. 

Building a Time Machine Pg 234

"In the movie Dune, the young princely hero, his father and mother and other 
loyal to the family move through space time by entering a large cylindrical 
space above their planet.."

..Tipler's experiment involves building a huge rapidly rotating cylinder.  
The space-time surrounding the cylinder turns out to be sinusoidally warped, 
so that time itself, instead of moving continuously from past to future, 
varies in an oscillating manner and, if carefully moved through, my not cause 
such as stretching of material bodies. 

The tipler cylinder was first completed on June, 15, 2583. Standing halfway 
between our own Milky Way and the nearest Galaxy, in a Galactic holding 
pattern know as a La Grange coordinate or G-5 station ( a place where the 
gravitational pulls exerted by all the galaxies canceled because they pulled 
in opposite directions), the Tipler cylinder was constructed. ... There are 
two major problems in building the cylinder. The first was finding a material 
dense enough, containing  enough matter super packed together, to create the 
necessary amount of mass that would set space time spinning.  The problem was 
solved by using nuclear matter, the densest substance in the universe.  One 
teaspoonful weighs more than a billion tons.  Such matter was to be found 
only in neutron stars. ... This machine required no less than one hundred 
neutron stars joined together, each about 12 1/2 miles in radius making a 
fused neutron star cylinder, about 40 kilometer across,  .... By making it 
this long, we were assured that there would be time-reversal zones far enough 
away from the crushing gravitational tidal forces in the immediate 
neighborhood of the cylinder's surface. 

The second problem we faced was aligning the spins of the stars so that the 
whole cylinder rotated with one rotational speed.  Typical neutron stars 
rotate at speeds between 1000 and 10,000 revolutions per second.  By herding 
out the faster rotating stars, all around 10,000 rps, and phasing them so 
that they rotated as one, the machine was finally created. "


All we have to do is take the above design of the tiplers time machine in 
terms of stars and shrink it down so that it will fit around a space ship as 
a force field by using subatomic particle beam accelerators on the ship to 
accelerate the space and time force fields, by changing the gravitational 
patterns with electrical magnetic waves, just as the Neutron Star model does, 
and the space ship will then be able to enter a wormhole, and travel to other 
parallel universes and back and forwards in time.   

Matching up singularities or doorways between parallel universes, may depend 
on the events changed in the universe that we are leaving from, as we enter a 
new universe, so that we have to look ahead, or plane ahead, and design the 
second doorway, to the new universe, so that it matches our goals, by 
changing events in the universe we have left while in the wormhole.   We 
would need a computer model of all of the events of the past history of the 
universe we are leaving, and project what the new universe may be like that 
we want to enter, by changing events in our present universe, until we reach 
the parallel universe desired.  We would then develop a logical chain of 
events leading to the new universe, which could define the characteristics of 
the singularity point of the new universe.  Also by traveling through the 
wormhole in a ship that follows the logical paths or decisions paths that 
change the past universe into the new desired parallel universe may also 
allow the ship to reach the proper singularity into the parallel universe.  

Eventually a map could be made on a computer by projecting all possible 
parallel universes and their logical interconnections with each other 
universe, where the singularities between each universe, are defined, 
precisely by logical and mathematical holographic descriptor's defined on a 
coordinate system, and then traveling from one universe to the next, would be 
just a matter of matching the coordinate system of the singularity for each 
universe, described in terms of holographic wave patterns that match the 
logical and mathematical models of each universe traveled from and to.  I 
believe that each object in each possible parallel universe has a unique 
holographic quantum, geometric, and gravitational descriptor, which would 
allow a wormhole to be created between each object in all possible parallel 
universes based on singularities, which match the holographic quantum, 
geometric, and gravitational imprint of each object in each parallel 
universe. 

I believe that all of the possible parallel universes are simply holographic 
energy patterns, which are defined by the mind of the beholder, so that we 
can redefine the holographic energy patterns in our own mind, body, and space 
ship, to allow us to reach a new holographic parallel universe which matches 
our desired goals in terms of logical, geometrical, quantum, and 
gravitational descriptors placed onto a computer model, which may change all 
of the spins, phases, and orientations of the matrix of positive matter atoms 
of a person in a space ship by means of a holographic force field matrix 
placed around the ship, while in an antimatter phase which is timeless, 
spaceless, and connects to all universes, to reach another universe, by 
exactly matching the image of the person and ship in the new universe 
holographically. 

Any object in our universe can be digitized and placed into a computer 
database as a holographic image, which can then be projected back onto a 
spaceship or person by means of holographic two force field projectors, to 
change the holographic properties of all of the atoms in the ship and person, 
to allow them to travel to a new universe which matches their new holographic 
image, defined on a computer model of the new universe.  In a sense we all 
enter a new universe every split second, but we do not always define or 
redefine the exact holographic properties of each atom of our body and 
environment mentally every split second, to allow us to reach our goals and 
ideal universe, so that we stay in the same universe based on the habits of 
our memories and genes.   But a computer model and holographic projector can 
change all of the memories of our atoms, genes and mind in a split second to 
allow us to travel to new predefined universes.   

A budhist monk or master Tai Chi artist, may be able to meditate and move the 
body in body motions to allow the mind to envision the atoms of the body, to 
change the each atom to reach a new place to teleport to naturally without 
the aid of a computer or holographic projector, but this would take a great 
deal of practice, concentration, and peace of mind, not hindered by modern 
technologies, media, and radio waves. 

I have a great deal of practice in this area.  I have studied Tai Chi and 
many other martial, mediative, and dance arts, I know that it is possible to 
teleprot naturally by using circular and symmetric tai chi motions.  

I also have a royal ancestry potentially relating me to Christ, so that my 
ancestors have been targeted throughout history, by time travlers and 
military thugs, atempting to change history for political reasons, by 
atempting to change my ancestors and historacle events with time travel 
remote sensing technologies, which in effect changes, the present, past, and 
future, each moment in time, and places me, and may ancestors, into a new 
parallel universe each day and moment in time, based on who I believe or 
discover my ancestors to be, and what historical events occurred in their 
lives, and in my memories of them.   So that in this sense, the spirit of 
Christ from my ancestors, which I have inherited, as have many other 
Christians,  may be defined as a time-space portal from the past to the 
present, defining our potential future, depending on how we interpret and 
define the past, present and future. 

Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\personal">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.com</A>


--part1_131.1e1bd593.2be7484a_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 5/4/2003 12:21:06 PM Eastern Daylig=
ht Time, EMScan81 aol.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I'm asking this because I have=20=
trouble believe in negative <BR>
space-<BR>
&gt;time <BR>
&gt;&gt;&nbsp; energy's ability to "inflate" a wormhole.&nbsp; How do you ge=
t into <BR>
a <BR>
&gt;&gt;&nbsp; singularity in the first place?&nbsp; How does that singulari=
ty <BR>
match <BR>
&gt;up <BR>
&gt;&gt;&nbsp; with another way across the Universe?&nbsp; How do we make it=
 more <BR>
&gt;than a <BR>
&gt;&gt;&nbsp; gravitational conveyor belt?<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Fred Alan Wolf in his book, Parallel Universes 1988, Simon &amp; Schuster, d=
iscusses how to enter a singularity, in the chapter An Imaginary Journey Thr=
ough a Black Hole, Page 165 to 169, How a Rotating Black Hole is a Bridge to=
 Many Universes,<BR>
<BR>
...."You can't cross the same event horizon (Surface of the Black Whole) twi=
ce ", Much as you can't enter the same river twice.&nbsp; The reason is that=
 the event horizon marks the boundary between different space-time orientati=
ons ... One event horizon per universe is allowed no more.&nbsp; .....Once y=
ou cross an event horizon, time and space reverse.&nbsp;&nbsp; The space ins=
ide the horizon has a "timelike" characteristic, meaning that you must go wi=
th the flow, while the time has a "spacelike characteristic, meaning that yo=
u can flow in either direction.&nbsp; Thus even though you, the traveler, ex=
perience a steady movement in time as you perceive it, those mapping you mot=
ion will see you move in time as you enter the event horizon, but then you w=
ill be perceived to sweep through space toward the hole's singularity while=20=
going back in time.&nbsp; If the outside world could watch you while you whe=
re doing this, it would appear that you were going backward through time as=20=
they experience time. <BR>
Thus crossing the event horizon causes a reversal. What was time in our univ=
erse becomes space inside the black hole.&nbsp; Eventually you will run into=
 the singularity. <BR>
Now all of this is true for a whole that is not spinning.&nbsp; .. How could=
 a black hole have spin?&nbsp; Most stars spin. If any of them are overweigh=
t, they two will collapse into black wholes and maintain their spins as they=
 do so.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
And a spinning black whole has another weird characteristic, it has two even=
t horizons, and outer and an inner. The outer event horizon is the same as t=
he event horizon for a nonspinning black whole, but the inner event horizon=20=
is the reverse of the outer.&nbsp; Thus when you cross over the inner event=20=
horizon, it's like passing into the eye of a hurricane, -time and space beco=
me normal once again.&nbsp; You can play inside the inner event horizon and&=
nbsp; need not crash into the singularity. <BR>
<BR>
Just as Martin Kruskal gave us a new map of a black whole, in 1961, and show=
ed us that a nonspinning hole was a bridge to another parallel universe ....=
..Kerr's equations indicated that the existence of an infinite number of par=
allel universes, all connected with the spin of the hole. <BR>
<BR>
Because the structure of the honeycomb map... it is possible to travel to al=
l other universes except one, without ever moving faster than the speed of l=
ight. The exceptional parallel universe is the one just adjacent to our own.=
&nbsp; To reach it, you must exceed the speed of light ..."<BR>
<BR>
Pg 205 Neutron Star Time Machines<BR>
<BR>
Basically make a long enough cylinder out of already existing rapidly rotati=
ng neutron stars and you will have a time machine.&nbsp;&nbsp; Such a cylind=
er contains in its immediate neighborhood concentric zones where time goes b=
ackward. <BR>
<BR>
Pg 210 Time Travel Paradox Resolution By Parallel Universe<BR>
<BR>
You board the train in the present, go back in time and alter the event, hav=
ing direct and causal bearing on the existence of yourself, and return to th=
e future.&nbsp; The future where you are not is on another track. <BR>
<BR>
Pg 228 Wheeler's Choice<BR>
<BR>
An undefined past that only becomes defined by our actions now.&nbsp; Our ch=
oice now branches us onto a parallel universe where the radius of the univer=
se at the beginning of time is determined. <BR>
<BR>
Building a Time Machine Pg 234<BR>
<BR>
"In the movie Dune, the young princely hero, his father and mother and other=
 loyal to the family move through space time by entering a large cylindrical=
 space above their planet.."<BR>
<BR>
..Tipler's experiment involves building a huge rapidly rotating cylinder.&nb=
sp; The space-time surrounding the cylinder turns out to be sinusoidally war=
ped, so that time itself, instead of moving continuously from past to future=
, varies in an oscillating manner and, if carefully moved through, my not ca=
use such as stretching of material bodies. <BR>
<BR>
The tipler cylinder was first completed on June, 15, 2583. Standing halfway=20=
between our own Milky Way and the nearest Galaxy, in a Galactic holding patt=
ern know as a La Grange coordinate or G-5 station ( a place where the gravit=
ational pulls exerted by all the galaxies canceled because they pulled in op=
posite directions), the Tipler cylinder was constructed. ... There are two m=
ajor problems in building the cylinder. The first was finding a material den=
se enough, containing&nbsp; enough matter super packed together, to create t=
he necessary amount of mass that would set space time spinning.&nbsp; The pr=
oblem was solved by using nuclear matter, the densest substance in the unive=
rse.&nbsp; One teaspoonful weighs more than a billion tons.&nbsp; Such matte=
r was to be found only in neutron stars. ... This machine required no less t=
han one hundred neutron stars joined together, each about 12 1/2 miles in ra=
dius making a fused neutron star cylinder, about 40 kilometer across,&nbsp;=20=
.... By making it this long, we were assured that there would be time-revers=
al zones far enough away from the crushing gravitational tidal forces in the=
 immediate neighborhood of the cylinder's surface. <BR>
<BR>
The second problem we faced was aligning the spins of the stars so that the=20=
whole cylinder rotated with one rotational speed.&nbsp; Typical neutron star=
s rotate at speeds between 1000 and 10,000 revolutions per second.&nbsp; By=20=
herding out the faster rotating stars, all around 10,000 rps, and phasing th=
em so that they rotated as one, the machine was finally created. "<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
All we have to do is take the above design of the tiplers time machine in te=
rms of stars and shrink it down so that it will fit around a space ship as a=
 force field by using subatomic particle beam accelerators on the ship to ac=
celerate the space and time force fields, by changing the gravitational patt=
erns with electrical magnetic waves, just as the Neutron Star model does, an=
d the space ship will then be able to enter a wormhole, and travel to other=20=
parallel universes and back and forwards in time.&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Matching up singularities or doorways between parallel universes, may depend=
 on the events changed in the universe that we are leaving from, as we enter=
 a new universe, so that we have to look ahead, or plane ahead, and design t=
he second doorway, to the new universe, so that it matches our goals, by cha=
nging events in the universe we have left while in the wormhole.&nbsp;&nbsp;=
 We would need a computer model of all of the events of the past history of=20=
the universe we are leaving, and project what the new universe may be like t=
hat we want to enter, by changing events in our present universe, until we r=
each the parallel universe desired.&nbsp; We would then develop a logical ch=
ain of events leading to the new universe, which could define the characteri=
stics of the singularity point of the new universe.&nbsp; Also by traveling=20=
through the wormhole in a ship that follows the logical paths or decisions p=
aths that change the past universe into the new desired parallel universe ma=
y also allow the ship to reach the proper singularity into the parallel univ=
erse.&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Eventually a map could be made on a computer by projecting all possible para=
llel universes and their logical interconnections with each other universe,=20=
where the singularities between each universe, are defined, precisely by log=
ical and mathematical holographic descriptor's defined on a coordinate syste=
m, and then traveling from one universe to the next, would be just a matter=20=
of matching the coordinate system of the singularity for each universe, desc=
ribed in terms of holographic wave patterns that match the logical and mathe=
matical models of each universe traveled from and to.&nbsp; I believe that e=
ach object in each possible parallel universe has a unique holographic quant=
um, geometric, and gravitational descriptor, which would allow a wormhole to=
 be created between each object in all possible parallel universes based on=20=
singularities, which match the holographic quantum, geometric, and gravitati=
onal imprint of each object in each parallel universe. <BR>
<BR>
I believe that all of the possible parallel universes are simply holographic=
 energy patterns, which are defined by the mind of the beholder, so that we=20=
can redefine the holographic energy patterns in our own mind, body, and spac=
e ship, to allow us to reach a new holographic parallel universe which match=
es our desired goals in terms of logical, geometrical, quantum, and gravitat=
ional descriptors placed onto a computer model, which may change all of the=20=
spins, phases, and orientations of the matrix of positive matter atoms of a=20=
person in a space ship by means of a holographic force field matrix placed a=
round the ship, while in an antimatter phase which is timeless, spaceless, a=
nd connects to all universes, to reach another universe, by exactly matching=
 the image of the person and ship in the new universe holographically. <BR>
<BR>
Any object in our universe can be digitized and placed into a computer datab=
ase as a holographic image, which can then be projected back onto a spaceshi=
p or person by means of holographic two force field projectors, to change th=
e holographic properties of all of the atoms in the ship and person, to allo=
w them to travel to a new universe which matches their new holographic image=
, defined on a computer model of the new universe.&nbsp; In a sense we all e=
nter a new universe every split second, but we do not always define or redef=
ine the exact holographic properties of each atom of our body and environmen=
t mentally every split second, to allow us to reach our goals and ideal univ=
erse, so that we stay in the same universe based on the habits of our memori=
es and genes.&nbsp;&nbsp; But a computer model and holographic projector can=
 change all of the memories of our atoms, genes and mind in a split second t=
o allow us to travel to new predefined universes.&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
A budhist monk or master Tai Chi artist, may be able to meditate and move th=
e body in body motions to allow the mind to envision the atoms of the body,=20=
to change the each atom to reach a new place to teleport to naturally withou=
t the aid of a computer or holographic projector, but this would take a grea=
t deal of practice, concentration, and peace of mind, not hindered by modern=
 technologies, media, and radio waves. <BR>
<BR>
I have a great deal of practice in this area.&nbsp; I have studied Tai Chi a=
nd many other martial, mediative, and dance arts, I know that it is possible=
 to teleprot naturally by using circular and symmetric tai chi motions.&nbsp=
; <BR>
<BR>
I also have a royal ancestry potentially relating me to Christ, so that my a=
ncestors have been targeted throughout history, by time travlers and militar=
y thugs, atempting to change history for political reasons, by atempting to=20=
change my ancestors and historacle events with time travel remote sensing te=
chnologies, which in effect changes, the present, past, and future, each mom=
ent in time, and places me, and may ancestors, into a new parallel universe=20=
each day and moment in time, based on who I believe or discover my ancestors=
 to be, and what historical events occurred in their lives, and in my memori=
es of them.&nbsp;&nbsp; So that in this sense, the spirit of Christ from my=20=
ancestors, which I have inherited, as have many other Christians,&nbsp; may=20=
be defined as a time-space portal from the past to the present, defining our=
 potential future, depending on how we interpret and define the past, presen=
t and future. <BR>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_131.1e1bd593.2be7484a_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 00:32:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA23180;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 00:31:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 00:31:29 -0700
Message-ID: <011d01c312cf$9b185820$6908bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: <little earthtech.org>
Subject: Re: Water Clusters and Hydrated Electrons
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 01:28:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C312A5.AC4C6F20"
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
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1c33166d2630cfceb7f8d8c1b3a3865053ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"DRQ3J.0.0g5.GDXj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50422
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C312A5.AC4C6F20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

According to the literature on The Electron Affinity of Water in the CRC "Bible"
(H2O)n, n is 1 to 19 no value given (as indicated by NMR measurements on water,
mentioned in other literature).

 http://www.psc.edu/science/Jordan/Jordan.html

IOW. a "Hydrated Electron" Might look like a very large negative ion [(1-19 H20) - ]
depending on how many layers of water molecules it has acquired around it?

Any connection to Ken Shoulders' "Charge Clusters" ?

Regards,

Frederick

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C312A5.AC4C6F20
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="MYSTERIES OF WATER Simulating Small Water Clusters.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="MYSTERIES OF WATER Simulating Small Water Clusters.url"

[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.psc.edu/science/Jordan/Jordan.html

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.psc.edu/science/Jordan/Jordan.html
Modified=00F97E01CD12C3011B

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C312A5.AC4C6F20--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 01:44:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA12272;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 01:44:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 01:44:05 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500badbb37d2fa6 [12.110.74.91]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 00:46:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: A PERSPECTIVE ON GAMBLING IN ALASKA
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ao1eb.0.f_2.LHYj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50423
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The original article contained some typos and serious but inadvertant
errors. The following contains corrections and summarizes what was said in
the thread, plus provides a more complete table of values for roulette
expectancies.


A PERSPECTIVE ON GAMBLING IN ALASKA

It is distressing and appalling that serious consideration is now being
given to a state lottery and to permitting gambling machines in Alaska.
Many people oppose such moves based on moral principles, based on fear of
attracting organized crime, or based on a history of negative experiences
with gambling in other localities.  Though these concerns may be valid, the
purpose here is to give consideration to a completely different perspective
on this issue.  That perspective is the issue of the potential deception
associated with gambling, a deception possibly so vile and yet so subtle,
veiled and unchallenged as to be comparable to cigarette advertising in
some prior decades.

The potential deception involved consists of advertising that implies, that
gives the gambler the impression, that he has any reasonable chance of not
losing all his money if he continues gambling, if he never stops gambling
forever at some early point.  By "reasonable" here I mean better than about
one chance in a billion, but you can substitute much smaller chances
without much change in results.  That's right.  A gambler who gambles
indefinitely will lose money with a quantity and a certainty that increases
astoundingly with time.  Many gamblers think it is just their bad luck that
they are continual losers.  They think if they could just get another stake
then they could redeem themselves, that their "bad luck" is overdue to
change.  They don't have a clue how completely false this outlook is, or
that losing all your money is normal luck, the expected.  The ultimate
outcome over time remains certain to an extreme degree, regardless of any
strategy that may be learned or employed, provided the house retains even a
small advantage.  You just don't see advertising for gambling
establishments that gives people even a clue as to exactly how fast they
can expect to lose all their money.  A small advantage applied to repeated
betting adds up over time to an amazingly large advantage for the house, to
very large probabilities of the gambler losing all the money he starts
gambling with, his "purse."

Careful analysis shows that the probability for going broke behaves in a
cruelly deceptive way over even brief time frames.  The probability of
being alive, still betting, stays flat for a while and then falls off a
cliff - so fast in fact that in a startlingly short time the odds for
having any money left at all are less than the odds of winning a major
lottery.

Video poker games often operate at a margin or "take" of 10 percent.  Many
people think that this means they can expect to lose 10 percent of the
money they start with, their "purse", when they go out to gamble.  This is
completely false.  The expected loss is 10 percent of the total amount bet,
which increases with every hour of betting, often at a rate of 100 bets per
hour or more. At 100 bets per hour you can expect to lose a net of 10 bets
per hour.  At $5 a bet you would then expect to lose about $50 per hour.
The house take is typically higher for machines that take small bets
quickly, like slot machines, and less for larger bet machines or games.

In a simple win/lose game, given a house margin of 10 percent, i.e. a house
excess probability of winning of 0.1, you expect the house to win (in
excess of fair odds) 1 in 10 bets on average, so the house should be
expected to take away a 100 bet purse in about 1000 bets.  You should
expect to be able to place about 1000 bets before going broke, loosing all
your 100 bet purse.  However, most people don't realize that even this is
an overestimate of the time you have to gamble, because it only applies to
someone with a larger purse.  If you actually have a finite purse of 100
bets, then at a 10 percent take there is only a 43.701 percent chance of
making it to 1000 bets before going broke.  This is because when you hit
bottom you have to quit, while a guy with a larger purse has a finite
though small chance for a comeback if he crosses the (100 bet loss) line.
In any event, with a large purse or small, the odds of loosing all you have
grow astronomical amazingly fast with time as you continue betting.

When the house take is only 5 percent, with a purse of 100 bets, you would
expect to have a 50/50 chance of making it to bet 2000, instead of only the
41.42 percent chance you do have.  More significant is the effect of
increasing the bet size, i.e. decreasing the purse size, on surviving a
given number of bets.  With a 10 bet purse, at a 5 percent house take, you
only have about 50.6 percent chance of making it to 100 bets, and only a
28.46 percent chance of making it to bet 200, and about 0.316 chances in
1000 of making it to 2000 bets.  With a 10 bet purse, at a 10 percent house
take, you only have about 32.74 percent chance of making it to 100 bets,
only a 11.29 percent chance of making it to bet 200, about 0.892 chances in
1,000,000 of making it to 2000 bets, and only about 0.684 chances in a
BILLION of making it to 3300 bets, and about 1 chance in a TRILLION to make
it to 4600 bets, and an expected purse value at that point of about
0.000000000011 bets.  This information is much more significant if
converted to hours.  In a typical game there might be 100 bets an hour, so
the number of bets above easily translate to approximate gambling hours by
knocking off the last two digits. Mathematically speaking, it is possible
to determine a minimum number of bets required to reach any desired
probability of being broke, no matter how small, regardless of the size of
a house take provided the take is larger than zero.

It's pretty easy to see why gamblers go broke with great certainty if they
keep gambling.  Also interesting is the way the probabilities tend to
"hook" the gambler.  If you have a 100 bet purse, then at 99 bets you have
a 100 percent probability of still being alive.  At a 10 percent house
take, this number diminishes very slowly at first, to 98 percent at bet
500, 84 percent at bet 700, 57 percent at bet 900.  But then it falls off a
cliff, reaching 1.22 percent at bet 1900, 1.87 in 1000 at bet 2300, 0.37 in
1,000,000 at 4000, and 2.246 chances in a BILLION of being alive at bet
5000, i.e. after 50 hours of play.  It is easy to see, at a 100 bets/hour,
why the gambler with a 100 bet purse of $500, bet at the typical minimum
house bet of $5, can be fleeced in a vacation of 3 days or less.  It is
also somewhat deceiving that, with a 100 bet purse, at a 10 percent take,
there is a 98 percent confidence of being alive at bet 500 and more than 98
percent confidence of being out of the game by bet 1800.  A tricky effect,
even with a comfortable 100 bet purse.  At 5 hours nearly everyone is still
plugging away with big hopes, but after 18 hours there is about no chance
of making it that far.

It takes roughly twice as long for the effects to take place if the house
take is 5 percent.  At differing house percentages the expected deceptive
qualities and expected final result, going broke, are similar - it simply
takes more bets to happen with smaller house percentages and less bets with
larger house percentages.

It may be quite a job (miracle?) to make all this into a simple pamphlet
that explains in a clear way to the average person what inevitably happens
when one continues to gamble against even the slightest of house odds, and
just how amazingly inevitable it is that ALL will be lost.  However, the
state should have an obligation to properly inform its citizens in some
similar manner if it elects to take revenue from gaming machines or
casinos.  The mathematics of this subject may be suitable for a book, but I
think the crucial information must be made available and understandable to
the gambling public in some very simple fashion.  Perhaps a video or
advertising of some kind would be helpful.  It is going to take a real
marketing "grabber" to get enough gambler interest in the subject to make
it possible to communicate the subtleties.  Though the details are subtle,
the outcome and the degree of certainty is not subtle for the gambler who
will not permanently quit. The expected effects on him, and thus the
community, are dire.

One of the fundamental errors in thinking that gamblers make is to think of
every bet as a "new day", a chance to start over, to change luck, when in
fact this is not true at all.  Oddly, one of the first things taught in
probability theory is the nature of independent vs dependent events.  Most
gamblers think, and are taught to think, of each event, each roll of the
dice, as an independent event.  This is true only in an academic sense when
applied to human gambling, that a specific roll of the dice is an
"independent" event.   The successive rolls of the dice are not independent
if the gambler has a finite purse.  They are all made dependent by the
limits of what the gambler has available to bet.  This limitation changes
the nature of the situation into a random walk with boundaries, and when
there are such boundaries one will eventually always fall off an edge.  If
the house has any advantage at all, it can be expected to take the
gambler's purse given enough time.  At typical house percentages the amount
of time it takes the house to completely fleece a gambler is amazingly
short, and the odds for being fully fleeced grow rapidly and grow
arbitrarily large with gambling time.  Advertising that implies otherwise
is misleading.  Perhaps this insight offers a new means to fight the
apparent injustice, through the same means the cigarette industry was
attacked ... in the courts.  The gambling industry clearly knows the score,
so is its advertising fair?  Is the public properly informed?

Perhaps in Alaska the issue of revenue generation by gambling will
politically boil down to a choice of the lessor of two evils.  Given a
choice between a lottery and gambling machines, the lottery is by far the
most fair and least harmful to the public.  The consistent long term
gambler is more likely to win the lottery than to avoid losing all or the
majority of what he bets long term.  A lottery, due to the long time
between bets, and the fully advertised odds, lacks the deceptive quality
that is inherent in gambling machines and casino games.  The lottery would
be even less harmful to Alaskans for the benefit provided if designed to
attract out of state money.

It might be asked why a monthly lottery with a 50 percent take and less
than a chance in a million of winning could be considered far less harmful
and addictive than, say, betting red or black in roulette, which has an
bout 5.263 percent house take.  The answer is that the roulette player
typically places much more than a single bet.  Repeated betting increases
the expected house take by drastic amounts.

To see which is better take a look at the expected win amounts for the two
alternatives over the one month period of a lottery.  If a gambler has $100
to bet for that time he will likely gamble it all away.  His expected win
value over the 100 hours or so of roulette gambling time during the month
will be a tiny fraction of a cent.  If a roulette wheel has 38 slots then 2
will be without color (house take) and 18 will be black and 18 red. The
house take will be about 5.26 cents per dollar bet.  Due to a typical house
$5 minimum he will likely only have a 20 bet purse.  If allowed to make $1
bets the gambler will have a 100 bet purse and can expect to be broke in
less than 1900 bets, or less than 19 hours of betting.  He will probably
try to obtain even more money with which to vindicate himself.  The
following table shows in 100 bet intervals the probability of being broke
and the expected value of the purse for those who are not yet broke for
gamblers that start with a 20 bet purse.

Number of bets in better's starting purse 20
House percentage = 5.263  percent


 Bet  Prob. Alive       Expected Value
----  --------------    ---------------

 100  0.881083267382    14.891433066690
 200  0.619848498510    10.952448130541
 300  0.435274926086     8.199805170679
 400  0.313261560357     6.245178037378
 500  0.230621461565     4.823106110599
 600  0.172953704493     3.766782500054
 700  0.131661187234     2.968839773703
 800  0.101460741432     2.357798953737
 900  0.078985466025     1.884601395636
1000  0.062016797315     1.514700202615
1100  0.049050120581     1.223241021549
1200  0.039039715224     0.992019392076
1300  0.031243504260     0.807498416874
1400  0.025125433650     0.659481558370
1500  0.020292303060     0.540202885423
1600  0.016451848004     0.443690631714
1700  0.013384302800     0.365314000847
1800  0.010922730279     0.301455424168
1900  0.008939179997     0.249270299163
2000  0.007334798455     0.206508730270
2100  0.006032666535     0.171381854038
2200  0.004972548781     0.142460639690
2300  0.004107002105     0.118598619646
2400  0.003398463515     0.098872437165
2500  0.002817051137     0.082535784652
2600  0.002338890414     0.068983491611
2700  0.001944830683     0.057723365187
2800  0.001619454484     0.048353994087
2900  0.001350308136     0.040547169151
3000  0.001127300806     0.034033899035
3100  0.000942232720     0.028593240710
3200  0.000788423018     0.024043344820
3300  0.000660414894     0.020234251835
3400  0.000553741019     0.017042078093
3500  0.000464736226     0.014364309549
3600  0.000390387387     0.012115981598
3700  0.000328212717     0.010226570095
3800  0.000276164432     0.008637455039
3900  0.000232550024     0.007299846715
4000  0.000195968405     0.006173086380
4100  0.000165258006     0.005223251041
4200  0.000139454468     0.004422005751
4300  0.000117756092     0.003745657840
4400  0.000099495559     0.003174376230
4500  0.000084116740     0.002691546008
4600  0.000071155636     0.002283234019
4700  0.000060224699     0.001937745745
4800  0.000050999900     0.001645257386
4900  0.000043210050     0.001397509996
5000  0.000036627971     0.001187554885
5100  0.000031063181     0.001009541448
5200  0.000026355830     0.000858540177
5300  0.000022371666     0.000730394829
5400  0.000018997841     0.000621598863
5500  0.000016139435     0.000529192028
5600  0.000013716543     0.000450673759
5700  0.000011661855     0.000383930578
5800  0.000009918637     0.000327175175
5900  0.000008439031     0.000278895268
6000  0.000007182650     0.000237810615
6100  0.000006115382     0.000202836877
6200  0.000005208408     0.000173055195
6300  0.000004437359     0.000147686576
6400  0.000003781625     0.000126070307
6500  0.000003223760     0.000107645750
6600  0.000002748993     0.000091936987
6700  0.000002344810     0.000078539851
6800  0.000002000606     0.000067110976
6900  0.000001707388     0.000057358537

The roulette gambler at a 5.263 percent house take and a $100 to bet at $5
a bet can be expected to be broke in less than 3 hours.  In fact, from the
table, you can see that at bet 300, about 3 hours, he has a 43.5274926086
percent chance of being alive.  He has about 1.7 chances in a million of
lasting 6900 bets, or about 69 hours of betting during the month, and only
a small fraction of a cent expected purse value by that time.

At $5 a bet and 100 bets an hour he can be expected to lose 0.05263 *
$5/bet * 100 bets/hour = $26.32 per hour.  If he has 100 hours to gamble in
the month, and does so, he can be expected to lose about $2,632 per month.
The estimated 100 bets per hour may be high, and a lower bet rate will
reduce the expected loss per hour.

The lottery ticket buyer probably will not even spend the full $100 on
tickets, unless there are lots of quick turnaround small pots, which will
in fact act just like casino gambling.  A single large pot can be expected
to attract out of state money - especially when no winner shows up and the
expected win becomes positive on a subsequent "let it ride" round.  But
lets assume the lottery player does spend the full $100 on the lottery in
order to compare apples to apples.  Lotteries typically take about half the
proceeds.  The $100 provides about a $50 expected win, as opposed to the
small expected fraction of a cent for the roulette gambler that bets more
than 70 hours.

Typically both betters end up broke.  However, the lottery ticket buyer is
more likely to stay on budget, more likely to win, and will definitely be
provided the truth about his approximate odds.  If the lottery goes into a
"let it ride" round, he may even end up with more than fair odds.  Lastly,
the lottery ticket buyer really only needs to buy one ticket a month to
keep his dream alive. The machine gambler has to find a way to keep feeding
the beast to keep his dream alive.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 02:47:05 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA31469;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 02:46:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 02:46:28 -0700
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Wavecrest Hub Motor
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 04:51:13 -0500
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <3pccbv07im4o3qva2u6sbsqlnrlbsq9rtb 4ax.com>
References: <004a01c30e64$08c73fa0$0a016ea8 cpq> <006001c30eb5$2eb26ae0$9e56ccd1@asus>
In-Reply-To: <006001c30eb5$2eb26ae0$9e56ccd1 asus>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030212) (MidIowa1.midiowa.net)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id CAA31436
Resent-Message-ID: <"Xh-GP.0.Zh7.qBZj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50424
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:09:31 -0400, "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
wrote:

>Putting the motor inside the wheel isn't that novel either, for I think that many 
>of the electric vehicle designs in the US do something very similar in building 
>induction motors into the wheels. In that case, specialized electronic design is 
>necessary to make it all feasible.

A major problem with putting motors in the wheels is the extra weight
involved.  Car makers are always looking for ways to reduce wheel
weight to improve bump handling and steering.  Note the trend to
larger wheel sizes with smaller (and lighter) tires.

-- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 05:40:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA21785;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 05:39:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 05:39:36 -0700
Message-ID: <3EB65B8D.2070205 pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 08:39:41 -0400
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <slawrence pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
References: <00fc01c312a6$1b2cd560$6908bf3f computer>
In-Reply-To: <00fc01c312a6$1b2cd560$6908bf3f computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"zSh0B3.0.IK5.7kbj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50425
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Frederick Sparber wrote:
> Jones,
> 
> You can buy dry cans (1 lb) of NaOH "lye" at the store as "Drano" or the pre-mix with
> water as "Liquid-Plumber" in plastic jugs.

Not exactly.

Drano has several ingredients, and is a mix of lye, sodium nitrate, and 
bits of aluminum metal, IIRC.  The aluminum reacts with the other 
ingredients when it gets wet, which is where a lot of the heat comes 
from.  Dunno what the fumes are.

Liquid Plumber is concentrated sulfuric acid, IIRC.

If you want to purchase lye, try a paint store or hardware store. 
Supermarkets don't generally carry it.  Sodium carbonate (aka "washing 
soda" -- baking soda's stronger cousin) used to be available in camera 
stores, as well as hardware and paint stores.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 06:29:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA08825;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 06:28:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 06:28:03 -0700
Message-ID: <001b01c31301$6939da40$4011b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <00fc01c312a6$1b2cd560$6908bf3f computer> <3EB65B8D.2070205@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 07:24:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1f128e3ed1096e42c897882de157b3fd0bd6355a4fd6b880e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"m-zNM2.0.o92.ZRcj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50426
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <slawrence pobox.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:


>
>
> Frederick Sparber wrote:
> > Jones,
> >
> > You can buy dry cans (1 lb) of NaOH "lye" at the store as "Drano" or the pre-mix
with
> > water as "Liquid-Plumber" in plastic jugs.
>
> Not exactly.

Thanks.

The older cans that I used were NaOH with some KOH.
>
> Drano has several ingredients, and is a mix of lye, sodium nitrate, and
> bits of aluminum metal, IIRC.  The aluminum reacts with the other
> ingredients when it gets wet, which is where a lot of the heat comes
> from.  Dunno what the fumes are.

Aluminum in warm water with aqueous NaOH forms AL(OH)3 + H2:

2Al + 6 H2O + (NaOHaq Catalyst) ---> 2 Al(OH)3 + 3 H2.

An expensive way to make Hydrogen from water and aluminum cans  in an iron/steel pot.
:-)
>
> Liquid Plumber is concentrated sulfuric acid, IIRC.

I disagree. Concentrated H2SO4 is only sold to qualified plumbers at hardware stores.
Nasty Stuff that will eat the Chrome off fixtures. It costs about $10.00 quart, where
anhydrous H2SO4 is about $10.00/ton shipped in tanker trucks from plants near
coal-burning power plants.
>
> If you want to purchase lye, try a paint store or hardware store.
> Supermarkets don't generally carry it.

Walmart carries the Alkaline "Liquid Plumber" water mix
(with additives)in plastic jugs for consumer use.

>Sodium carbonate (aka "washing
> soda" -- baking soda's stronger cousin) used to be available in camera
> stores, as well as hardware and paint stores.

Right.  :-)

Regards,

Frederick
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 07:16:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA29367;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 07:14:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 07:14:40 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 10:34:07 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGELKDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <3EB65B8D.2070205 pobox.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"DWihd1.0.mA7.F7dj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50427
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Steve & All.

Red Devil brand lye is just that, pure sodium hydroxide.
And most hardware stores and groceries carry it. As you
say, Drano is some horrible mix of stuff that's no good
for our purposes.

I just bought some sodium carbonate from the arts supply
store, it was sold for use in dyeing cloth. It is claimed
you can also buy it at a pool supply store, but I have not
checked.

As Fred points out, lye and aluminum is a good way to
generate H2 on demand, with a substantial amount of
hot water vapor besides.

Another great use for lye is as a scrubber for CO2,
which you will discover when you try this engine
experiment and you quickly end up with a solution
of (bi)carbonate...

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:slawrence pobox.com]
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 8:40 AM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines




Frederick Sparber wrote:
> Jones,
>
> You can buy dry cans (1 lb) of NaOH "lye" at the store as "Drano" or the
pre-mix with
> water as "Liquid-Plumber" in plastic jugs.

Not exactly.

Drano has several ingredients, and is a mix of lye, sodium nitrate, and
bits of aluminum metal, IIRC.  The aluminum reacts with the other
ingredients when it gets wet, which is where a lot of the heat comes
from.  Dunno what the fumes are.

Liquid Plumber is concentrated sulfuric acid, IIRC.

If you want to purchase lye, try a paint store or hardware store.
Supermarkets don't generally carry it.  Sodium carbonate (aka "washing
soda" -- baking soda's stronger cousin) used to be available in camera
stores, as well as hardware and paint stores.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 07:20:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA31545;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 07:19:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 07:19:35 -0700
Message-ID: <007d01c31311$54c9f800$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <011d01c312cf$9b185820$6908bf3f computer>
Subject: Re: Water Clusters and Hydrated Electrons
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 07:19:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA31508
Resent-Message-ID: <"iSOpf.0.ki7.sBdj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50428
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Fred,
 
> IOW. a "Hydrated Electron" Might look like a very large negative ion [(1-19 H20) - ]
> depending on how many layers of water molecules it has acquired around it?
> 
> Any connection to Ken Shoulders' "Charge Clusters" ?


Don't know think there is a connection to charge clusters but there could be a connection to:
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html


Where the most natural structure for water is the 280-Molecule expanded icosahedral water cluster  based on the regular arrangement of 14-molecule units ...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 09:01:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA21802;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 08:59:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 08:59:01 -0700
Message-ID: <20030505155854.66677.qmail web20805.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 16:58:54 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?millennium?= <unamity yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: RE: Re: 'distributed acceleration' -- magnetic whorls and antigravity explained ...
To: alternatepropulsion yahoogroups.com, anti-gravity@yahoogroups.com,
        alternatescienceforum yahoogroups.com
Cc: aerospaceengineersclub yahoogroups.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com,
        aNewKindofScience yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"wi1OS3.0.aK5.5fej-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50429
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



re: Bill Swan, "Rotating, pulsating and coordinated magnetic fields
creating a "gravity" effect."


Good description.  Somewhere between a radio wave,
and a sound wave.

Now, how do we create same?  Short of rocket acceleration?

Phase-Coordinated molecular Nanoscale surface wave emission?

Phase-Coordinated molecular Nanoscale surface electrodynamic
(plasma) emission?

Or down to Pico-Scale Atomic surface frequency and magnetic
orientation surface modulation?

Anyone here familiar with proton conductors?  Metals and
biologicals and other materials which conduct single protons
or single ions through the lattice?

Do we need to do the same, and eject protons from the surface
of the vehicle, in coordinated phase frequencies, and direction,
to create the impedance match with our surrounding medium
and the background aether passing through us?

Sounds like it is not sufficient to create a surface effect,
as THE AETHER WHICH WE NEED TO MATCH IMPEDANCE WITH PASSES
THROUGH THE WHOLE OF OUR VESSEL AND CARGO AND PASSENGERS!

We need to be able to coordinate the phase stimulation of
our entire bodies and structures to 'negate gravity' or
accelerate against the background aether and medium.
Not just the surfaces of our bodies and vehicles, but
all the cells and molecules of our interiors.

Perhaps an order of magnitude simpler to do propulsion
via 'quasi-traditional' acceleration?

Still, no need why we cannot consider 'distributed acceleration'
over the whole aeroshell of the body.  Perhaps 'sucking' in
protons on the leading, positive slope, front of the vehicle --
and ejecting them from the lagging, negative slope, rear
of the vehicle.

Trying to create a more complete, and detailed picture
here ....




Millennium



now in our 31st day of global fasting
for world peace ...

http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/worldfast

...

satyagraha -- fasting protest ...

Gandhi named this concept of action: "satyagraha"
(combining the Hindu words for "truth"
and "holding firmly.")


...






..

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 09:38:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA12042;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 09:37:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 09:37:06 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030505123530.02b81d48 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 12:37:03 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: DMOZ CF links
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Se4tx2.0.4y2.nCfj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50430
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have never heard of DMOZ until just now. It came up in the list of 
referrals shown by Urchin for LENR-CANR.org. Anyway, here it is:

http://dmoz.org/Science/Physics/Nuclear/Fusion/Cold_Fusion/

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 09:51:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA18878;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 09:50:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 09:50:15 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500badc456a2a60 [12.21.211.234]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 08:52:48 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"_qIPc2.0.uc4.7Pfj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50431
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:39 AM 5/5/3, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

>If you want to purchase lye, try a paint store or hardware store.
>Supermarkets don't generally carry it.  Sodium carbonate (aka "washing
>soda" -- baking soda's stronger cousin) used to be available in camera
>stores, as well as hardware and paint stores.


"Red Devil" lye (pure lye) for plumbing problems is available in small cans
at some department stores, home building stores, and hardware stores.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 11:07:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA16730;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 11:04:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 11:04:29 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030505133325.02b95650 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 13:38:14 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"kGpGY3.0.554.jUgj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50432
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a document by Thomas Jefferson from 1818. It is still vital and 
topical, because it describes an unfinished revolution:

http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=132&parent=50

QUOTES:

. . . Indeed, we need look back half a century, to times which many now 
living remember well, and see the wonderful advances in the sciences and 
arts which have been made within that period. Some of these have rendered 
the elements themselves subservient to the purposes of man, have harnessed 
them to the yoke of his labors, and effected the great blessings of 
moderating his own, of accomplishing what was beyond his feeble force, and 
extending the comforts of life to a much enlarged circle, to those who had 
before known its necessaries only. That these are not the vain dreams of 
sanguine hope, we have before our eyes real and living examples . . .

. . . And how much more encouraging to the achievements of science and 
improvement is this, than the desponding view that the condition of man 
cannot be ameliorated, that what has been must ever be, and that to secure 
ourselves where we are, we must tread with awful reverence in the footsteps 
of our fathers. This doctrine is the genuine fruit of the alliance between 
Church and State; the tenants of which, finding themselves but too well in 
their present condition, oppose all advances which might unmask their 
usurpations, and monopolies of honors, wealth, and power, and fear every 
change, as endangering the comforts they now hold. . . .



I think I will incorporate this quote in an updated version of my essay, 
"Comparisons from the History of Technology," and I will post that essay in 
LENR-CANR.org. I am not happy to be adding my own papers to LENR-CANR, but 
here they are, fully available in electronic format on my disk. It is a lot 
more fun writing essays then slogging through OCR conversions. Frankly, I 
am not sure what else to add to the site. I welcome suggestions and 
electronic copies of published papers. I am less enthusiastic about paper 
copies.

Downloads and visits continue to increase even though I have not added much 
material lately. Today's grant totals are just over 83,000.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 11:38:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA02263;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 11:36:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 11:36:20 -0700
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 14:34:48 EDT
Subject: Re: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: tom rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"ClY-W.0.GZ.aygj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50433
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/5/2003 2:15:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
JedRothwell mindspring.com writes:

> . . Indeed, we need look back half a century, to times which many now 
> living remember well, and see the wonderful advances in the sciences and 
> arts which have been made within that period. Some of these have rendered 
> the elements themselves subservient to the purposes of man, have harnessed 
> them to the yoke of his labors, and effected the great blessings of 
> moderating his own, of accomplishing what was beyond his feeble force, and 
> extending the comforts of life to a much enlarged circle, to those who had 
> before known its necessaries only. That these are not the vain dreams of 
> sanguine hope, we have before our eyes real and living examples . . .
> 
> . . . And how much more encouraging to the achievements of science and 
> improvement is this, than the desponding view that the condition of man 
> cannot be ameliorated, that what has been must ever be, and that to secure 
> ourselves where we are, we must tread with awful reverence in the footsteps 
> 
> of our fathers. This doctrine is the genuine fruit of the alliance between 
> Church and State; the tenants of which, finding themselves but too well in 
> their present condition, oppose all advances which might unmask their 
> usurpations, and monopolies of honors, wealth, and power, and fear every 
> change, as endangering the comforts they now hold. . . .

Thank you for the above post.  I do not believe that history and religion 
will repeat itself for the worse but remake or transform iteslf for the 
better, due in part to the just and peacefull use of science and ethics, and 
in part to the ability of the individual and group to transform and ugrade 
the social cycles of history and belief from the past, with new and more 
peacefull and just scientific data and ideals of society, religion, and 
government.  Many of the older Christian religious beliefs have been 
modernized, upgraded and transformed, in the West, with modern Christian 
science, and with constitutionally free, just and peaceful societies.   
Neither past religious beliefs nor social and governmental beliefs, should be 
repeated in the future but rather upgraded and transformed for the better of 
all.

Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\personal">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.com</A>


--part1_17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 5/5/2003 2:15:16 PM Eastern Dayligh=
t Time, JedRothwell mindspring.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">. . Indeed, we need look back h=
alf a century, to times which many now <BR>
living remember well, and see the wonderful advances in the sciences and <BR=
>
arts which have been made within that period. Some of these have rendered <B=
R>
the elements themselves subservient to the purposes of man, have harnessed <=
BR>
them to the yoke of his labors, and effected the great blessings of <BR>
moderating his own, of accomplishing what was beyond his feeble force, and <=
BR>
extending the comforts of life to a much enlarged circle, to those who had <=
BR>
before known its necessaries only. That these are not the vain dreams of <BR=
>
sanguine hope, we have before our eyes real and living examples . . .<BR>
<BR>
. . . And how much more encouraging to the achievements of science and <BR>
improvement is this, than the desponding view that the condition of man <BR>
cannot be ameliorated, that what has been must ever be, and that to secure <=
BR>
ourselves where we are, we must tread with awful reverence in the footsteps=20=
<BR>
of our fathers. This doctrine is the genuine fruit of the alliance between <=
BR>
Church and State; the tenants of which, finding themselves but too well in <=
BR>
their present condition, oppose all advances which might unmask their <BR>
usurpations, and monopolies of honors, wealth, and power, and fear every <BR=
>
change, as endangering the comforts they now hold. . . .</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Thank you for the above post.&nbsp; I do not believe that history and religi=
on will repeat itself for the worse but remake or transform iteslf for the b=
etter, due in part to the just and peacefull use of science and ethics, and=20=
in part to the ability of the individual and group to transform and ugrade t=
he social cycles of history and belief from the past, with new and more peac=
efull and just scientific data and ideals of society, religion, and governme=
nt.&nbsp; Many of the older Christian religious beliefs have been modernized=
, upgraded and transformed, in the West, with modern Christian science, and=20=
with constitutionally free, just and peaceful societies.&nbsp;&nbsp; Neither=
 past religious beliefs nor social and governmental beliefs, should be repea=
ted in the future but rather upgraded and transformed for the better of all.=
<BR>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 13:08:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA27426;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 13:06:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 13:06:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030505145703.02b95af8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 16:04:13 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
In-Reply-To: <17d.1a76a8ae.2be808c8 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hsk_K3.0.Hi6.kGij-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50434
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

ConexTom aol.com wrote:

>Thank you for the above post.  I do not believe that history and religion 
>will repeat itself for the worse but remake or transform iteslf for the 
>better, due in part to the just and peacefull use of science and ethics, 
>and in part to the ability of the individual and group to transform and 
>ugrade the social cycles of history and belief from the past, with new and 
>more peacefull and just scientific data and ideals of society, religion, 
>and government.

Well, I hope so. But the history of the 20th century proves it may go 
either way. Just and peaceful uses of science mainly won out, but only by a 
very narrow margin. It might as easily have gone the other way. If the 
German armies had made one more push in Stalingrad, or the English Channel 
weather had been better on June 6, 1944 . . . in that case, as Churchill 
put it, we would have sunk, "into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more 
sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science." 
Even the winning side used science to perpetrate some of the worst horrors 
imaginable, in Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki and elsewhere.

There is much to be hopeful about. I feel that in general, the trends of 
recent history should make us cautiously optimistic. Arthur Clarke thinks 
so too. Other people who are smarter than me, such as Ed Storms and Martin 
Fleischmann, have a pervasive sense that things are going to hell in a hand 
basket. While I am optimistic, I think only a fool would be sanguine, or 
certain that the future must be happy. We have free will. Mankind possess 
growing, unchecked power and little sense of responsibility. The world 
population is still skyrocketing. We may yet destroy the earth or enslave 
humanity.

In another century or two the outcome will probably be clearer. We will 
know whether our species and the planet will survive as a garden spot in a 
growing solar civilization, or whether it will be reduced to a constricted, 
miserable, nearly lifeless sewer. It is up to us. We get to decide. I do 
not think it would be technically difficult for us to reshape the world and 
make things far better. But I cannot tell yet whether people as a whole are 
smart enough, sane enough, or wise enough to do what should be done.

This is a planet-wide experiment to find out whether an intelligent 
predator species can survive, or whether intelligence is a dead-end trait 
that leads to extinction. This is the greatest question of our age, just as 
the struggle between democracy and tyranny was the great issue of the 20th 
century. Human nature is all that stands between us and safety. But human 
nature is the best have to work with, so there is no point in complaining 
about it. When an engineer must build with available materials, it makes no 
sense for him to complain about the limits of tensile strength or 
load-bearing capability. We must find a way to make do with what we have -- 
what we are, in this case. This generation has the greatest opportunity and 
what may be the most awesome responsibility in history. Our vantage point 
is not enviable, and our job is not easy, but it sure makes life interesting!

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 14:57:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA28215;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 14:54:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 14:54:39 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030505175329.02b94dc0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 17:54:33 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Analog publishes LENR Part II
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KgTJZ.0.nu6.Vsjj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50435
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.analogsf.com/0306/altview.shtml


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 15:12:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA06500;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 15:10:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 15:10:21 -0700
Message-ID: <20030505221014.36450.qmail web20808.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 23:10:14 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?millennium?= <unamity yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: 'AfterGravity' Article Just Posted on WorkShop page ...
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Cc: aNewKindofScience yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5f16D.0.Ub1.C5kj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50436
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



...


'AfterGravity' article just posted:


http://unamity.com/WorkShop/AfterGravity.jpg !!




millennium

http://unamity.com/YoniStar




...





..

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 15:26:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA12344;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 15:24:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 15:24:04 -0700
Message-ID: <004c01c31354$f16d0420$5e7accd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <004a01c30e64$08c73fa0$0a016ea8 cpq> <006001c30eb5$2eb26ae0$9e56ccd1@asus> <3pccbv07im4o3qva2u6sbsqlnrlbsq9rtb@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: Wavecrest Hub Motor
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 15:43:04 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"U8Z7d3.0.R03.2Ikj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50437
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:09:31 -0400, "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Putting the motor inside the wheel isn't that novel either, for I think
that many
> >of the electric vehicle designs in the US do something very similar in
building
> >induction motors into the wheels. In that case, specialized electronic
design is
> >necessary to make it all feasible.
>
> A major problem with putting motors in the wheels is the extra weight
> involved.  Car makers are always looking for ways to reduce wheel
> weight to improve bump handling and steering.  Note the trend to
> larger wheel sizes with smaller (and lighter) tires.
>
> -- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF
>
Dean's point is very well taken, and correct. What can be done is direct
coupling between the motor and the wheel through gimbals, so the wheel
does not carry the motor's weight.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May  5 19:09:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA21026;
	Mon, 5 May 2003 18:39:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 18:39:38 -0700
Message-ID: <00a801c31370$4395edf0$5e7accd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030505145703.02b95af8 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 21:38:48 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"JjzPL.0.M85.Q9nj-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50438
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed, you wrote:
>
> There is much to be hopeful about. I feel that in general, the trends of
> recent history should make us cautiously optimistic. Arthur Clarke thinks
> so too. Other people who are smarter than me, such as Ed Storms and Martin
> Fleischmann, have a pervasive sense that things are going to hell in a
hand
> basket. While I am optimistic, I think only a fool would be sanguine, or
> certain that the future must be happy. We have free will. Mankind possess
> growing, unchecked power and little sense of responsibility. The world
> population is still skyrocketing. We may yet destroy the earth or enslave
> humanity.
>
> In another century or two the outcome will probably be clearer. We will
> know whether our species and the planet will survive as a garden spot in a
> growing solar civilization, or whether it will be reduced to a
constricted,
> miserable, nearly lifeless sewer. It is up to us. We get to decide. I do
> not think it would be technically difficult for us to reshape the world
and
> make things far better. But I cannot tell yet whether people as a whole
are
> smart enough, sane enough, or wise enough to do what should be done.
>
> This is a planet-wide experiment to find out whether an intelligent
> predator species can survive, or whether intelligence is a dead-end trait
> that leads to extinction. This is the greatest question of our age, just
as
> the struggle between democracy and tyranny was the great issue of the 20th
> century. Human nature is all that stands between us and safety. But human
> nature is the best have to work with, so there is no point in complaining
> about it. When an engineer must build with available materials, it makes
no
> sense for him to complain about the limits of tensile strength or
> load-bearing capability. We must find a way to make do with what we
have --
> what we are, in this case. This generation has the greatest opportunity
and
> what may be the most awesome responsibility in history. Our vantage point
> is not enviable, and our job is not easy, but it sure makes life
interesting!
>
> - Jed

I think this is well said, like many points in your essays which I have
enjoyed. You are of a younger generation, with a longer span of time ahead,
although I'm not about to quit and may have another 15-20 years to go. I am
also cautiously optimistic, but also aware of many bad turns ahead. Dr. X is
in a position to know something of the thinking of people in the black
projects, who also see a narrow window of opportunity.

I think it clear the future will be *different* and the US may not be
dominant. However, the US has left an indelible imprint on the world. As a
history buff, I strongly recommend to you Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and
Steel, The Fates of Human Societies". It won a Pulitzer prize and Phi Beta
Kappa's award for best science book in its first edition.

Mike

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May  6 09:22:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA04382;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 09:17:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:17:42 -0700
Message-ID: <005101c313ea$f8db4320$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Free Radical Hydrogen and Water-fuel
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:17:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA04333
Resent-Message-ID: <"xzChR2.0.M41.b0-j-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50439
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


I think Fred Sparber has "hit the nail on the head..." in providing at least for one added insight to the complex water-fuel conundrum, with this reference to research done for the JPL Advanced Propulsion Concepts:
http://www.islandone.org/APC/Chemical/06.html

which focuses on the use of atomic hydrogen, where it has been found that to compete equally with current rocket propulsion H2 + O2, it would require only 15 percent by weight of atomic, versus molecular hydrogen. In other words, to the extent one can delay nascent Hydrogen from forming the H2 molecule, the advantage is over 6-to1 in terms of reduced fuel required to achieve the same propulsive power! 

Since only 15% by weight of atomic H will provide equal thrust to molecular H2, then by extrapolation in an auto engine where electrolysis is used to self-generate the fuel, remarkable things can occur. A cell that could normally only produce about 20% of the H2 needed to self-sustain, becomes far more viable if a percentage of that nascent hydrogen is temporarily bound to N2 in atomic form, or to water vapor as hydronium, both of which molecules have a polar end or a negative electron affinity (and presumably a positive ion affinity). Now you can, in theory, self-sustain the engine on its own self-produced electrolysis without recourse to hydrinos, sonoluminescence or any other fringe science things that the skeptics like to jump on - IOW with relatively complete scientific proof, water fuel IS theoretically viable. 

Of course, it is not that simple in practice and you would never preserve all or even most of the H as atomic hydrogen, only a small percentage, and that's where the other side of the coin, the OH radical, and the most important factor of all: the explosiveness of phase-change in ice particles, comes into play...

So the bottom line of this 3 or 4 part technique, as I see it, of being able to use water effectively as a fuel, is to modify an ICE so that it:

1) Uses the vacuum of the engine to draw intake air through an electrolysis cell
2) Uses a very high amperage low voltage current in the cell
3) Uses an alkaline additive to the water to optimize hydroxyl radicals
4) Uses cold water rather than warm or hot
5) Uses an ultrasoinc transducer to insure small uniform water spheres, which when an outer layer flashes off, takes away about a megajoul per gallon of heat, freezing the small core of ice that remains, which expands violently to 1000 times its volume upon combusion and provides, I would suspect over half of the resultant gas pressure to drive the piston.

IOW the problem is complex on two fronts. One needs to modify the products of electrolysis for a few milliseconds at the intake manifold so that these chemical intermediaries, which are incredibly reactive, can retain that extra reactivity long enough to expand an *explosive* solid, which has been entrained in the air intake. And Catch-22, once the intake mix gets over a few percent hydronium or N2(H+), or if it gets too hot, it can violently explode before its time....

I am certain that, because of the complexity of these mechanics, there is plenty here to disagree with. Feel free because this is all a work-in-progress. But please experiment. I hope that any tinkerers on this forum who have access to a simple 4-cycle portable generator, like the one Naudin is using, will attempt to apply some of all of these techniques, or those of your own ingenuity. 

BTW "Home Depot," the most amazing store in the universe, has a unit like Naudin's on special for $399, but a "used" one is better for this work as it will already have plenty of oil impregnated into the metal - and this electro-hydrated water-fuel stuff is more corrosive than anything you have ever experienced.

The rewards and advantages of being able to use water, or at least a very high proportion of water, as the main transportation fuel in the future economy, cannot be overestimated. And please, share your results freely... most of this water-fuel concept has been patented years ago except this current theoretical modification, but success in this effort is too important and complicated to hoard parts of the puzzle, even it wasn't already in the public domain...

If you want some modicum of reward, do what I intend to do... and claim that million buck prize from that self-righteous luddite known as "Randi"....

Jones

In keeping with the previous sentiment, I will reattach a little dramatic wisdom...

"We live in an extraordinarily debauched, interesting, savage world, where things really don't come out even. The purpose of true drama is to help remind us of that. Perhaps this does have an accidental, a cumulative social effect-to remind us to be a little more humble or a little more grateful or a little more ruminative."

- David Mamet, Writer of "The Water Engine" 1976
 
Plot Summary: In the 1930s, Charles Lang invents an engine that runs on water. But when he tries to get it patented and sold and produced, he is first offered a ridiculously low amount. When he refuses, he is suddenly cast into a world of hurt, and not just from the big oil companies...
 
My belated advice to Charlie would be, "the thing's just too big to sell, next time, just give it away..."  Who said that if every man just acted in his own best interests, this would be paradise on Earth? 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May  6 10:02:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA25902;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 09:54:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:54:30 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b09badd0d029d45 [64.61.198.155]>
In-Reply-To: <004601c30cea$dfac56c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <010801c30cdf$43151000$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <00e701c30cdf$09f690a0$4e10b83f computer>
 <004601c30cea$dfac56c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 11:55:46 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm in an teapot and hydrogen peroxide
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"fsPcl1.0.eK6.5Z-j-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50440
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I'm wondering about the Beta-Aether. I visited the Genesis World 
Energy website the other day. They claim that they have developed an 
electrolyzer that causes water break apart with almost no energy. 
Hum, sounds like lifting your self up by your shoe laces. I'm 
reminded of that Meyer, his first name excapes me now. Unless the 
surplus energy could be accounted for by the Beta-Aether. I'm just 
wondering if any of you can explain the nature of this force.

Then there was the Jones Breene (?) post about using H2O2 as a fuel 
and somehow having it go over unity. What's that all about? I'm sure 
that it would make an excellent oxidizer, and it would densify the 
charge in the cylinder, but over unity?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May  6 14:24:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA23675;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 14:22:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 14:22:28 -0700
Message-ID: <3EB82765.FD5CED43 att.net>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 17:21:42 -0400
From: WWWqWWW = Thunderbird <d-choma att.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ZV VORTEX-l <vortex-l eskimo.com>, hydrino@yahoogroups.com
Subject: A little help from our friends on the nature of reality
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"TpDqG1.0.jn5.JU2k-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50441
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Laugh if you must, but try to keep an open mind.
<p>I wouldn't go to all this trouble if I didn't think
<br>that there might be something of some value here.
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Quite a debate has been raging within the Hydrino Study Group (HSG).
<br>With all the verbiage that has been posted, I hope that Luke Setzer
<br>will allow this contribution just for the benefit of those few who
<br>will invest a little extra time that could save them years of effort.
<br>I will try to keep it brief.
<br>&nbsp;
<p>My objective is get open minded people to examine
<br>"The New Science" book (1964) for insights that might just
<br>help with understanding physics. Emphasis is on the
<br>underlying simplicity of everything and the fact
<br>that when things don't fit smoothly, simply, and perfectly
<br>then there is a flaw in our understanding. The author of
<br>that book has said in relation to alien technology ---
<p>"I must say that in general they are much simpler,
<br>more direct and ever so much more efficient than ours.
<br>It all stems from a better knowledge of physics,
<br>which we just kid ourselves that we have and don't."
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Here is a sample from the book that I find quite interesting ---
<p>"Having seen that the divergence of spin results from
<br>the mathematical operation of the scalar product of
<br>del and spin, we may next look at the vector product of
<br>these two quantities. This produces the curl of spin,
<br>and again the detailed mathematical developments will be
<br>deferred until we study the properties of the magnetic field,
<br>because the curl of spin is the magnetic field.
<p>This may come as something of a shock, particularly in the
<br>light of certain of our preconceived ideas regarding the
<br>structure of magnetic fields. However, skepticism has never yet
<br>made a fact go away, and the magnetic field is still the curl of a
spin.
<p>Incidentally, at this point we may inject a comment that was
<br>directed at our science and in particular of our knowledge of
<br>magnetism: "Scientists of Earth know an amazing number of things
<br>about magnetism which are not so!", and in the light of the understanding
<br>of the true nature of magnetism this statement is most appropriate.
<br>The two things that are possibly closest to our daily lives of the
entire
<br>physical science are magnetism and gravitation, and these are
<br>the things about which we have the wildest misconceptions.
<p>One of our queer ideas about magnetic fields is that they are made up
<br>of lines of force that loop around and close on themselves.
<br>Undoubtedly we got this idea from playing with iron filings and a magnet.
<br>What we didn't see, however, was what happened inside the magnet.
<br>In fact, the field does not close on itself and inside the magnet
<br>it has exactly the same sense of direction as outside.
<p>These and many more features of the magnetic field
<br>will be demonstrated later. "
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Fundamental questions are addressed such as "What is the nature
<br>of The Particle?" These same questions have come up in the recent
<br>HSG discussion. I suggest that we at least consider the wisdom
<br>of two little know sources. One is Wilbert Brockhouse Smith, a Canadian
<br>engineer who headed Project Magnet for the Department of Transport.
<br>That was in the 1950s. He died in 1962. The second source is the
<br>knowledge derived from the extra terrestrials with whom he was
<br>finally able to have some limited communications.
<p>His 40 year old book, based upon what he could discern
<br>from his government project and his communications
<br>with the extra terrestrials is relatively short (160 KB)
<br>and is available for free at this URL ---
<p><A HREF="http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm">http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm</A>
<br>&nbsp;
<p>To motivate people to actually look at this book I will
<br>provide some interesting background. Forty five years
<br>ago Wilbert Smith gave a speech in which he explains
<br>the multi-dimensional nature of reality and tells
<br>of the need to stop trying to force things into our
<br>currently inadequate models. In that eighteen minute speech
<br>he spends the first ten minutes on his project's methodology
<br>and the last eight minutes on the nature of reality.
<br>It is worth downloading this 6.5 MB MP3 ZIP file to hear his speech.
<p><font color="#3333FF">[<b>sorry, I can no longer find this MP3 on the
web]</b></font>
<br><b><font color="#3333FF"></font></b>&nbsp;
<p>And I find this article worth reading for its insights.
<br>Among other things, it has maps and information on
<br>aircraft crashes and nuclear testing related this subject ---
<p><A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/2546/smith.html">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/2546/smith.html</A>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>I have prevailed upon Science Reporter Linda Moulton Howe to
<br>make her archived article on Smith available without subscription.
<br>It contains fascinating detail and historical insights like
<br>the information about plate tectonics prior to that being an
<br>accepted scientific fact. There are many other mind bending specifics.
<br>One of these two links should work with Internet Explorer.
<p><A HREF="http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=335&category=Real+X-Files">http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=335&amp;category=Real+X-Files</A>
<p><A HREF="http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2EE12674">http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2EE12674</A>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (much
longer download time)
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Finally, I know that there was a Project Magnet. In the summer
<br>of 1962 I attended the Calgary Stampede as a tourist. Just after
<br>sunrise and to the west of the city I observed and noted details
<br>of a 'green fireball'. Later that day when I encountered a Mountie
<br>at Banff, I told him what I knew. He seemed nonplused and
<br>simply said, "Oh yeah! The Department of Transport has a trailer
<br>set up just to look for those things."
<p>It turns out that the 1947 UFO sightings around the New Mexico
<br>atomic sites were almost exclusively green fireballs. There is
<br>a long, detailed chapter with specifics in Clark's
<br>The UFO Encyclopedia. Also, The UFO FBI Connection which is
<br>based entirely on FOIA material contains much information on
<br>green fireballs. From that material it is obvious that the
<br>government was telling the public something very different
<br>from what they actually knew.
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Thank you, Wilbert Smith&nbsp;&nbsp; :-)
<p>Greg Salyards
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May  6 19:28:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA16381;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 19:26:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 19:26:25 -0700
Message-ID: <001a01c31437$4c99a3c0$d810b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 20:23:34 -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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a19f5cb6b975032cbd34cc6e4c4182a33da2d4e88014a4647c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"qApFX1.0.n_3.Hx6k-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50442
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Before getting smitten by an I.C. Engine-Genset that has a 15 volt D.C.
Battery-Charger outlet on it, idling such that it is aspirating 2 liters/minute of
intake air and getting enough entrained energy from H,  OH, and OOH radicals produced
by 1.0 ampere-second going through 5 electrolyzer cells hooked in series, plus the
some of the wet chemical reactions occurring in a NaHCO3aq water bath for the intake
air.

One Ampere-Second at 15 volts = 15 watt-seconds or joules, equal 15/746 = 0.02
horsepower

One Ampere-second will produce 6.25e18 nascent hydrogen (H) radicals plus 6.25e18
hydroxyl (OH)radicals and possibly some OOH radicals.

If these are burned in the engine cylinder forming H2 + H2O, plus 4 HO ---> H2O + O2 ,
Or H + OOH going to H2O2 etc.,

The H-H bond energy given by the CRC "Bible" is 436,000 joules per mole or 6.02e23
bonds = 7.24e-19 joules per H-H bond:

6.25e18* 7.24e-19 = 4.526 joules

The H-OOH bond is given as 369,000 joule per mole or 6.13e-19 joules per bond:

6.25e18*6.13e-19 =  3.831 joules

The HO-OH bond is given as 213,000 joule per mole or
3.58e-19 joules per bond:

6.25e18*3.58e-19 = 2.21 joules

The H-OH bond is given as 498,000 joule per mole or 8.272e-19 joules per bond:

6.25e18*8.272e-19 = 5.17 joules

Would they add up to enough energy (15 joules) to let the engine self-sustain idle and
run the generator, or would some free energy have to come from somewhere?

Regards Frederick
......................................................................................
From: Frederick Sparber

Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:21:

My data for a 2.55 Hp ( 3600 RPM) 127 cm^3, 4 cycle Briggs&Stratton engine:

15 air intake strokes/sec at 3600 rpm = 2,000 cm^3 air intake/sec.
Air density, based on a molecular weight of 28.9 = 0.0013 grams per cm^3
Grams of air intake per second = 2,000*0.0013 = 2.6 grams.

2.55 HP = 2.55 * 746 watts/ Hp  = 2,000 joule/sec

Hydrogen power:

2 H2 (4 grams) + O2 (32 grams) ---> 2 H2O + 452,000 joule.

Required H2/sec =  (2,000/452,000)*4 = 0.18 grams/sec

Required H2 electolyzer energy at 55 kilowatt-hours per
kilogram or 55 watt-hours/gram = 198,000 watt-sec/gram = 198,000*0.18 = 35,640
watt-sec or joules or 2,851 amperes, with five 2.5 volt  electrolyzer cells in series
with a 12.5 volt battery/alternator power supply.

OTOH, aspirating the intake air through a lye (NaOH) water solution to create (OH) and
H free radicals that get entrained in the intake air due to action of Hydrated
Electrons from  the 500"small ions"/cm^3 present in air:

1, (Na+)aq + (OH-)aq + (O2-) ---> NaO2 + (OH-)aq

2, NaO2 + H2O ---> (Na+)aq + OH + O2 + (OH-)aq

With the OH free radicals entrained in the intake air:

4 OH (68 grams) ---> 2H2O + O2 + 218,000 joule

To get 2,000 joule/second:

(2,000/218,000)*68 = 0.625 grams per second, with 2 liters of air per second going
through the lye-water solution.

Free Energy in the air?  :-)

Regards,

Frederick



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May  6 19:36:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA20699;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 19:35:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 19:35:05 -0700
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <1cb.916c609.2be9caa1 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 22:34:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1cb.916c609.2be9caa1_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"NOeb2.0.H35.O37k-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50443
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_1cb.916c609.2be9caa1_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/5/2003 4:09:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
JedRothwell mindspring.com writes:

> If the 
> German armies had made one more push in Stalingrad, or the English Channel 
> weather had been better on June 6, 1944 . . . in that case, as Churchill 
> put it, we would have sunk, "into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more 
> sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science." 
> 
> Even the winning side used science to perpetrate some of the worst horrors 
> imaginable, in Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki and elsewhere.
> 
> 

I also believe like you, that there will be a very bright future ahead for 
the West for sure, especially if we can curb the United Nations Asian fascist 
and communistic dark agendas and global goals.  The best way to defeat 
globalism is by encouraging regionalism, based on true local regional 
constitutionalism and not fascism, globalism or communism.   Most secret 
organizations are regionalized, and most nations need to have not one leader 
or president but at least 2 to 4 regional leaders who act as one leader, to 
make constitutional democracy truly work.  The European Union will have at 
least 2 Prime Ministers, though 4 would be better.   The USA would do better 
if it had 4 regional presidents, instead of just one. 

I disagree about Churchill.  Churchill politics lead to communistic ideals 
world wide, and to the United Nations which usees nuclear weapons and threats 
as a means of terrorism to keep its global power.   The Germans if they had 
won the war and united Europe, would have prevented the Communist cold wars 
world wide, and would have unified Europe all the sooner to stop communism, 
just as General Patton had wanted to finish of the communists, after he had 
finished of the socialists in Germany.    

Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\personal">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.com</A>


--part1_1cb.916c609.2be9caa1_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 5/5/2003 4:09:06 PM Eastern Dayligh=
t Time, JedRothwell mindspring.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">If the <BR>
German armies had made one more push in Stalingrad, or the English Channel <=
BR>
weather had been better on June 6, 1944 . . . in that case, as Churchill <BR=
>
put it, we would have sunk, "into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more <BR=
>
sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science."=20=
<BR>
Even the winning side used science to perpetrate some of the worst horrors <=
BR>
imaginable, in Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki and elsewhere.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
I also believe like you, that there will be a very bright future ahead for t=
he West for sure, especially if we can curb the United Nations Asian fascist=
 and communistic dark agendas and global goals.&nbsp; The best way to defeat=
 globalism is by encouraging regionalism, based on true local regional const=
itutionalism and not fascism, globalism or communism.&nbsp;&nbsp; Most secre=
t organizations are regionalized, and most nations need to have not one lead=
er or president but at least 2 to 4 regional leaders who act as one leader,=20=
to make constitutional democracy truly work.&nbsp; The European Union will h=
ave at least 2 Prime Ministers, though 4 would be better.&nbsp;&nbsp; The US=
A would do better if it had 4 regional presidents, instead of just one. <BR>
<BR>
I disagree about Churchill.&nbsp; Churchill politics lead to communistic ide=
als world wide, and to the United Nations which usees nuclear weapons and th=
reats as a means of terrorism to keep its global power.&nbsp;&nbsp; The Germ=
ans if they had won the war and united Europe, would have prevented the Comm=
unist cold wars world wide, and would have unified Europe all the sooner to=20=
stop communism, just as General Patton had wanted to finish of the communist=
s, after he had finished of the socialists in Germany.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR=
>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_1cb.916c609.2be9caa1_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 11:42:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA06389;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 11:39:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:39:23 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500badef8bab53c [12.21.209.6]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 10:41:54 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"XVcze3.0.bZ1.QBLk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50444
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Some more food for thought:

At 8:23 PM 5/6/3, Frederick Sparber wrote:

>The H-H bond energy given by the CRC "Bible" is 436,000 joules per mole or
>6.02e23
>bonds = 7.24e-19 joules per H-H bond:


That represents 4.52 eV energy per H2 bond.  If a closed loop method exists
to create monatomic hydrogen using sub-eV electrons [see PHYSICS NEWS
UPDATE article below] then the mere recombination of H + H -> H2 generates
substantial energy.  This H + H -> H2 process typically occurs naturally to
some degree in solution but might be encouraged by a catalyst. In
electrolysis, according to Bockris, electronation occurs across a surface
potential boundary via electron tunneling.  Electrons are literally
injected into solution at the cathode via tunneling, and, due to the
(additional) potential increase across the barrier this tunneling requires
an added potential of about 1.4 volts.

Now, if we have a carbon compound that can reform itself in solution from
the reformed H2, say using a catalyst,then we have closed the loop right
there at the cathode region.  Ordinary electrolysis would produce excess
energy right at the cathode.  Most H + C type reactions are happily
exothermic.  It merely remains to find a hydrocarbon that conveniently
releases monatomic hyrogen upon electonation.

Perhaps such a hydrocarbon forms naturally from CO2 in the air, especially
in the presence of nickel or platinum electrodes, and/or in the presence of
various electrolytes (lithium sulfate, potassium hydroxide, etc.) used in
the investgation of cold fusion.  This would explain a lot, both in terms
of some "random" and delayed onset CF excess heat results, and in terms of
total energy imbalances in water gas type experiments, etc.

So here is the process in a nutshell:

e- + X + catalyst1 + (fraction of eV) + (1.4 eV) -> H + Y-  (at the cathode)

H + H + catalyst2 -> H2  + (4.52 eV)  (in the region of the cathode)

H2 + Z- + catalyst3 -> Y + e-  + (some eV)  (proably at an anode)

So, the problem is to find the best hydrocarbons X and Y, and the best 3
catalysts, which might actually be all the same catalyst or just two
catalysts.

Some hydrogen gas management may be required to reinject it into solution
through or near the anode.  To avoid this it may actually be best to run
the process using AC current!  All three catalysts would then have to be in
solution in the vicinity of the electrodes or be in both the electrodes
themselves.

Since the electron is merely a catalyst in this process, perhaps the
process should occur at a huge ambient negative potential, like on the
surface of a van deGraff generator.  A small number of excess electrons is
then guaranteed, so it is then "merely" a matter of running the reaction at
a high temperature?

This closed loop process may not result in an I.C. engine, but maybe enough
excess heat or steam to run a generator to sustain the process.


At 11:48 AM 5/7/3, physnews aip.org wrote:
>PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE
>The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News
>Number 636 May 7, 2003   by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein, and James Riordon
>
>ULTRA-LOW-ENERGY ELECTRONS CAN BREAK UP URACIL, a new study shows.  How
>injurious is radiation (alpha, beta, and gamma rays or heavy ions) to
>living cells?  This important question has been addressed in many ways.
>Much attention has centered on the secondary particles produced in the
>wake of the intruding primary radiation, especially electrons (about
>40,000 electrons are produced for each MeV of energy deposited) with
>typical energies of tens of electron volts.  Many of these secondary
>particles quickly lose their energy and become attached (solvated) to
>water molecules in the cell.   What is the general effect of electron
>energies below 20 eV?  A report from three years ago (Boudaiffa et al.,
>Science 287, 1658, 2000) showed that electrons in the 3-20 eV range are
>able to produce substantial genotoxic damage, including breakin
>g single- and double-stranded DNA?  What about secondary electrons with
>even smaller energies?
>To look at this energy range for the first time, Tilmann Maerk and his
>colleagues at the Universitat Innsbruck (Austria) and the University
>Claude Bernard Lyon (France) scattered a beam of sub-eV electrons from a
>beam of gaseous uracil molecules.  Uracil is one of the base units of RNA
>molecules, and is thus a crucial component in cells.  These scientists
>found that uracil is efficiently fragmented by electrons with energies as
>small as milli-electron-volts.

[NOTE ABOVE STATEMENT]

>It's not the electron's kinetic energy that causes the disruption, but the
>electron's charge, which changes the uracil's internal potential energy
>environment. Furthermore, in the process a very mobile  atomic hydrogen
>can be

[NOTE REF TO ATOMIC HYDROGEN BEING FREED]

freed, which on its own, as a radical (a free chemical unit by itself), can do
> damage to biomolecules (see a movie of this process at
>http://info.uibk.ac.at/ionenphysik/ClusterGroup/Uracil.html; schematic at
>http://www.aip.org/mgr/png/2003/187.htm ).  Maerk
>(tilmann.maerk uibk.ac.at, 43-512-507-6240) says that this low-energy
>damage seems to be a general result since his group has since performed
>similar work with thymine (a DNA base) and have seen similar
>fragmentation.  (Hanel et al., Physical Review Letters, 9 May 2003;
>Innsbruck website, http://info.uibk.ac.at/c/c7/c722/e-index.html )

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 11:43:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA07358;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 11:41:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:41:20 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030507142821.00aac7f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 14:41:09 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Jefferson: science & technology as forces for revolution
In-Reply-To: <1cb.916c609.2be9caa1 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"gRezE2.0.lo1.EDLk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50445
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

ConexTom aol.com wrote:

>I also believe like you, that there will be a very bright future ahead for 
>the West for sure . . .

I do not mean to be petty or argumentative, but this very different from 
what I wrote, and what I believe. NOTHING about the future is "for sure." 
As Arthur Clarke says, I am only 51% convinced things will turn out okay. 
Also I would not limit potential future brightness to "the West."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 12:36:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA10855;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 12:33:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 12:33:25 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500badf0c494d91 [12.21.209.64]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:36:03 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"3K2-01.0.Mf2.3-Lk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50446
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The OU electrolytic process I suggested (here with typos removed):

e- + X + catalyst1 + (fraction of eV) + (1.4 eV) -> H + Y-  (at the cathode)

H + H + catalyst2 -> H2  + (4.52 eV)  (in the region of the cathode)

H2 + Y- + catalyst3 -> X + e-  + (some eV)  (probably at an anode)

may actually look more like the folowing in a high frequency AC
environment, where the cathode interface barrier can not fully form:

e- + X + (fraction of eV) -> H + Y-  (at the cathode)

H + H -> H2  + (4.52 eV)  (in the region of the cathode)

H2 + Y- + catalyst3 -> X + e-  + (some eV)  (proably at an anode)


Where the anode itself may possibly provide "catalyst3".  Catalyst2 may or
may not be useful.  The main problem may be reducing "monatomic
recombination" in an AC environment of the form:

4 H + O2 -> 2 H2O

and a catalyst might shift the balance away from that.  However, this
recombination should recover the full excess 4.52 eV from the monatomic
hydrogen anyway, so maybe does not actually have to be avoided.

So where does the energy miracle occur?  It is probably not surprising that
the first reaction can occur, that the mere presence of an electron can
break the weak H bond with the carbon compound.  So the miracle reaction
has to be:

H2 + Y- + catalyst3 -> X + e-  + (some eV)  (probably at an anode)

Perhaps, rather than a carbon compund, X might be something like a finely
divided or collagen form of cuprous oxide, and Y may contain *multiple*
lightly bound H atoms?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 12:52:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA22537;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 12:49:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 12:49:50 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530503badf13ef19c3 [12.21.208.59]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:52:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"ARycS3.0.3W5.TDMk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50447
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Perhaps the electrolysis electonation process could be improved by using an
underwater arc as the cathode.  An isolation transformer could be used to
drive the arc, and the arc then maintained negative by a separate DC power
supply.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 13:50:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA28130;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 13:43:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 13:43:56 -0700
Message-ID: <014801c314d9$55bfd580$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500badef8bab53c [12.21.209.6]>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 13:43:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA28080
Resent-Message-ID: <"0J3hl.0.Nt6.B0Nk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50448
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote,

>From PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE Number 636 May 7, 2003  

ULTRA-LOW-ENERGY ELECTRONS CAN BREAK UP URACIL
"These scientists found that uracil is efficiently fragmented by electrons with energies as small as milli-electron-volts."

"It's not the electron's kinetic energy that causes the disruption, but the electron's charge, which changes the uracil's internal potential energy environment. Furthermore, in the process a very mobile  atomic hydrogen can be freed, which on its own, as a radical (a free chemical unit by itself), can do damage..."

Horace,

As it appears from this and the other references mentioned previously, the goal of using the hydrated electron to free atomic hydrogen from either water or other sources is clearly met in theory, and because one can invest only "energies as small as milli-electron-volts" and end up with something approaching 13.6 eV, the accepted ionization energy of the hydrogen atom, which could also be interpreted to mean a bare proton with an equivalent temperature of 157,700 degrees Celsius, the process can be massively OU. Again, that's in theory...

One could say that it is now become just a "numbers game," the aim of which is finding ways to use hydrated electrons from nature or "cheaply implanted," through electrolysis to get the most bang for the buck...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 16:28:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA18761;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 16:26:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 16:26:50 -0700
Message-ID: <3EB99624.5290AB7B att.net>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 19:26:29 -0400
From: WWWqWWW = Thunderbird <d-choma att.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: That missing MP3 link
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------94E922CDAD713CFAD6B5A599"
Resent-Message-ID: <"u8nZv1.0.la4.vOPk-" mx1>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50449
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--------------94E922CDAD713CFAD6B5A599
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I found the link to download that 18 minute Wilbert Smith
speech from 1958. It should work with anything that can
play MP3s.

http://www.disclosureproject.org/WilbertSmithSpeech1958.mp3

Greg Salyards

--------------94E922CDAD713CFAD6B5A599
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<font size=+1>I found the link to download that 18 minute Wilbert Smith</font>
<br><font size=+1>speech from 1958. It should work with anything that can</font>
<br><font size=+1>play MP3s.</font><font size=+1></font>
<p><font size=+1><A HREF="http://www.disclosureproject.org/WilbertSmithSpeech1958.mp3">http://www.disclosureproject.org/WilbertSmithSpeech1958.mp3</A></font><font size=+1></font>
<p><font size=+1>Greg Salyards</font></html>

--------------94E922CDAD713CFAD6B5A599--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May  7 22:23:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA21414;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 22:22:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 22:22:23 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500badf85c4d879 [12.21.208.59]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 21:25:02 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"4rIVo1.0.VE5.FcUk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50450
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 1:43 PM 5/7/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote,
>
>>From PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE Number 636 May 7, 2003
>
>ULTRA-LOW-ENERGY ELECTRONS CAN BREAK UP URACIL
>"These scientists found that uracil is efficiently fragmented by electrons
>with energies as small as milli-electron-volts."
>
>"It's not the electron's kinetic energy that causes the disruption, but
>the electron's charge, which changes the uracil's internal potential
>energy environment. Furthermore, in the process a very mobile  atomic
>hydrogen can be freed, which on its own, as a radical (a free chemical
>unit by itself), can do damage..."
>
>Horace,
>
>As it appears from this and the other references mentioned previously, the
>goal of using the hydrated electron to free atomic hydrogen from either
>water or other sources is clearly met in theory, and because one can
>invest only "energies as small as milli-electron-volts" and end up with
>something approaching 13.6 eV, the accepted ionization energy of the
>hydrogen atom, which could also be interpreted to mean a bare proton with
>an equivalent temperature of 157,700 degrees Celsius, the process can be
>massively OU. Again, that's in theory...


Well, 13.6 eV seems a bit high as that is the ionization potential, true?
In solution the "free" proton is actually in an H3O+ radical.  I am not
sure what the energy is associated with the H3O+ ionic bond, but I think it
is not too far from the 4.52 eV you get from H + H -> H2.  In other words:

   H2O + p+ -> H3O+ + energy1

and energy1 is positive.  I'll have to see if I can dig that value up but
it will probably take a while.

The electronation of the H3O+, which is the basic cathodic reaction in
hydrogen producing electrolysers is:

   e- + H3O+ -> H + energy2

and here energy2 I think is neagative in conventional hydrogen
electrolysers.  This is the principle cost of hydrogen generation.  A
significant part of this energy cost comes from the electrode "interface"
to the solution, which creates a potential barrier.  My suggestion of using
an underwater arc as a cathode was intended to be a method to avoid to some
degree the formation of this interface and thus the potential barrier.

One interesting fact is that water creates H3O+ SPONTANEOUSLY from ambient
heat, and thereby reduces the water temperature, i.e. takes that energy
from the ambient environment.  For this reason hydrogen electrolysers
operate with less electrical energy when operated at high temperatures.
If you could electronate the H3O+ radicals using low enough energy, e.g. by
using an arc cathode, and then using some kind of catalyst get the H + H ->
H2 reaction preferred over say the recombinant reaction H + OH- -> H2O-
then you have free energy via a Maxwell's demon in the form of liberated
hydrogen, a MOST useful process.

The main thing of interest in the quoted article is the existence of
molecules with such low hydrogen bonding energy that the mere PRESENCE of
the electron charge breaks the bond, as opposed to requiring electron
kinetic energy.  The electron merely acts as a catalyst in the hydrogen
freeing reaction.  The mere existence of such a class of molecules,
provided at least one of them can be recycled back into existence from H2
with a net yielding of energy, provides hope for finding a Maxwell's demon.

Another issue is the bond energy of the hydrated electron.  In other words
the water electronation process must also be exothermic:

   e- + H2O -> H2O- + energy3

otherwise no bond can be formed and a stable H2O- can not be formed.  The
main problem is getting the electron in the vicinity of the right point on
the H2O across the potential barrier at the cathode interface.

The hydrogen freeing reaction using hydrated electrons is then:

   H2O- + H3O+ -> 2 H2O + H + energy4

where I do not know if energy4 is positive or negative.  However, for the
reaction to go spontaneously at all energy4 must be zero or positive, or
else the source must be ambient kinetic energy, for there is no other
energy source to drive this reaction.  If there exists in the literature
any evidence that such a process can made to happen in large quantity
without an external driving energy then we have something here.

Another issue is the balance of charge issue on the electrolyte.  If we
have an efficient H2O electronation process, then there must be some kind
of corresponding anodic reaction going on to balance the charges.  At the
cathode we have:

  e- + H2O -> H2O- + energy3

Is there any reason the anodic reaction will be any different from the
ordinary anode reaction that creates H3O+ and O2?  In hydrogen
electrolysers there is a potential drop at the anode interface as well, and
this is about half the problem.  An electrolyte might be used that does not
free up O2 and that would eliminate gas bubble formation at the anode.
There is then an oxygen recycling problem to get the oxygen back into H2O.

If an electronation method can be found that preferentially creates H2O-
instead of the conventional cathodic reaction that creates H2 and OH-
radicals, then significant efficiency gains might be achieved by mixing the
H2O- and H3O+ radicals at a point away from the electrodes.  This would
prevent the bubble formation problem that reduces effective plate area and
increases cell resistance.

On the other hand, perhaps the original strategy of closing the energy loop
right at the electrodes by using HF AC may work to produce excess heat.
This strategy will obviously fail if the source of the excess heat is a
Maxwell's demon!


>
>One could say that it is now become just a "numbers game," the aim of
>which is finding ways to use hydrated electrons from nature or "cheaply
>implanted," through electrolysis to get the most bang for the buck...
>
>Jones

"Cheap implantation" is a problem due to the requirement for maintenance of
balance of charge.  Large numbers of amperes are desirable.  An ampere is a
coulomb per second. A tiny fraction of a coulomb spread over a 100 meter
radius sphere creates a voltage of over 100,000,000 volts.   To obtain
large current flow there must at the same time be created radicals of a
positive charge so as to maintain a neutral electrolyte.  If those radicals
are H3O+ then the hydrated electron plays no role whatsoever, because all
you have happening at the cathode is ordinary H3O+ electronation, the basic
process in electrolysis.

I find it most amazing that Bockris says that maintenance of neutral charge
in the electrolyte is obtained principly through ordinary diffusion between
the plates and not through electrostatic field caused drifting.  This is
because the major potential drops in the elecrolyte occur right at the
electrode interfaces, a boundry only a few molecules thick.  A typical
electrolyser cell voltages there is no significant potential drop remaining
to cause the ion drift in the interplate region.

I think it is most important to focus on the fact that power is amps times
volts.  It seems to me the H3O+ radical should spontaneously take up an
electron in its vicinity.  The electrons should in effect be drawn to the
H3O+ radicals.  If that is true, an electrolyser should act like a battery!
The fundamental problem is the added voltage the electron must hop over
in the first few angstroms from the electrode in order to get to the H3O+
in order to free the hydrogen.  That is why I think the focus must be on
eliminating this overhead, the interface potential barrier.

In the past I have posted a lot of junk on AC electrolysis, with the idea
that it may be possible jump the interface barrier by simply using it as a
capacitor in an AC circuit.  One problem with this idea is avoiding fast
recombination at at the plate, which might be done catalytically or even
mechanically.  Or... if the source of free energy is not a Maxwell's demon
then the recombination can simply be encouraged and the free energy taken
as heat.

I hope I have at least some of the above right as it is off the top of my
head and I have had little sleep.  Oh well, its food for thought anyway.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 04:05:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id EAA28235;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 04:04:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 04:04:20 -0700
Message-ID: <3EBA3A47.A67DF839 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 14:06:47 +0300
From: hamdix <hamdix verisoft.com.tr>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: Onur Alver <onur verisoft.com.tr>
Subject: Re: That missing MP3 link
References: <3EB99624.5290AB7B att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"_Y11B1.0.3v6.pcZk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50451
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dear Greg,

Thank you for the link. Indeed, his text is quite impressive. Sometime, I wrote on vortex my opinion on dimensions, which is saying basically dimensions are property or behavior of the matter. This text induce me the possibility (may be wrong) the basic dimensions 3+1 are macroscopic or statistical behavior of the matter. That is matter, in more smaller or fundamental scale have dimensions different numbers and also in different characters. 

There are numerous theories, like String theories, based on different number of dimensions, I do not noticed a theory radically changing our perception of dimensions and how they are originated.

Organization of the matter may determine its dimensionally, like atoms organize themselves in one dimensional chains, two and three dimensional lattices. The difference from classical view is requirement of no dimensions exists prior to this organization.

Maybe it would be easier to think mathematically, one can arrange data in arrays in various dimensions or even in complex structures. No predefined number of dimensions or data structures exist in mathematical space. Arrays of arbitrary dimensions and structures can be made for our convenience and develop operators.

This would be a serious challenge if possible to constitute a mathematical frame where above idea can take place.
If matter is structured by itself by more fundamental rules than we observe, it may behave in various shapes (dimensional characters) where the common 3-1 dimensions appears as case of the general solution.

May a crude example could be: The universe appears in 3+1 dimensions similar to mixing paints of different colors mostly appears as brown.


WWWqWWW = Thunderbird wrote:
> 
> I found the link to download that 18 minute Wilbert Smith
> speech from 1958. It should work with anything that can
> play MP3s.
> 
> http://www.disclosureproject.org/WilbertSmithSpeech1958.mp3
> 
> Greg Salyards


Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 09:31:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA03210;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 09:29:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 09:29:25 -0700
Message-ID: <00f201c31576$bb4fcfc0$7d11b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:30:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1b694c272a98b2cf94faba6139d8f05c3c6b317bf5bc479bb350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"6-MNF3.0._n.bNek-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50452
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This Tutorial on the Born-Haber Cycle, Hydration Energies, and the Electron Affinity
of Atoms, is of paramount interest for Ou/Free Energy calculations.

When one looks at the (H+)aq ion, (H3O+) and the (Na+)aq and the Anions (Cl-)aq,
(OH-)aq and the Thermodynamics of the reactions which can occur during electrolysis
when "Static Electricity" (Uncommitted Electrons) from the atmosphere-hydrosphere are
introduced into a cell during electrolysis (and Hydrated), things get interesting.

http://users.argonet.co.uk/users/hoptonj/assets/A5DH.PDF

Electron Affinity Tables Etc.,:

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch7/ie_ea.html#ea

Horace likes this kind of "accounting".  :-)

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 09:59:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA21387;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 09:58:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 09:58:27 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508124939.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 12:58:25 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Oiu1A1.0.tD5.noek-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50453
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This discussion of extracting energy from the formation of H2 molecules 
reminds of me of Robert Forward's proposal to use metastable helium atoms 
as rocket fuel. These are stand-alone He atoms, which are somehow kept from 
forming molecules. When they form He2 they release 19.8 eV (114 kcal/gm) 
according to Forward's notes. I have no idea how he intended to make the 
stuff. That is far more energy per unit of mass than any other chemical 
fuel. Ordinary automotive or jet fuel is 43 kcal/gm. I think some exotic 
rocket fuel produces ~60 kcal/gm.

I have a scan of some pages from an Air Force study he wrote in 1983. It 
does not have much detail. I can e-mail the images to anyone who is interested.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 10:32:22 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA09022;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 10:30:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:30:21 -0700
Message-ID: <010201c3157f$3a56c1e0$7d11b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water and High Purity O2
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 11:29:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C31555.097A0160"
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
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1b694c272a98b2cf960ef9418f8752411350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"b4cam.0.pC2.jGfk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50454
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C31555.097A0160
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Spin-off of Fuel Cell Technology?

 http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf

http://www.ceramatec.com/o2/

Regards,

Frederick

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C31555.097A0160
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="mulvihill.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="mulvihill.url"

[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf
Modified=000BD1527E15C30185

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C31555.097A0160--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 10:40:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA14017;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 10:38:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:38:43 -0700
Message-ID: <011301c31580$6ab43ce0$7d11b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508124939.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 11:38:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1b694c272a98b2cf945e40abecaabaa2aa7ce0e8f8d31aa3f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"w6eiU3.0.xQ3.ZOfk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50455
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 11:58 AM
Subject: Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal

Jed,

This JPL report touches on Robert Forward's proposal:

http://www.islandone.org/APC/Chemical/07.html

He talked about this (and other ideas) while we were having lunch in 1983.

Frederick


> This discussion of extracting energy from the formation of H2 molecules 
> reminds of me of Robert Forward's proposal to use metastable helium atoms 
> as rocket fuel. These are stand-alone He atoms, which are somehow kept from 
> forming molecules. When they form He2 they release 19.8 eV (114 kcal/gm) 
> according to Forward's notes. I have no idea how he intended to make the 
> stuff. That is far more energy per unit of mass than any other chemical 
> fuel. Ordinary automotive or jet fuel is 43 kcal/gm. I think some exotic 
> rocket fuel produces ~60 kcal/gm.
> 
> I have a scan of some pages from an Air Force study he wrote in 1983. It 
> does not have much detail. I can e-mail the images to anyone who is interested.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 11:28:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA10064;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 11:25:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 11:25:16 -0700
Message-ID: <011101c3158f$218b74c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508124939.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 11:24:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA10028
Resent-Message-ID: <"SNx121.0.AT2.C4gk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50456
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


> This discussion of extracting energy from the formation of H2 molecules 
> reminds of me of Robert Forward's proposal to use metastable helium atoms 
> as rocket fuel. These are stand-alone He atoms, which are somehow kept from 
> forming molecules. When they form He2 they release 19.8 eV (114 kcal/gm) 
> according to Forward's notes. 


Inasmuch as Helium atoms do not bond to each other to form He2 and the "molecule" is represented by a single helium atom, I wonder what exactly is meant by Forward's proposal. The lowest level IP of the atom is indeed 19.8 eV, so he must be referring to storing He+ but that ion is not exactly what you would call metastable, is it? I mean it is no more, nor less, stable than any other equally charged ion.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 12:42:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA25716;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 12:40:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 12:40:09 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508153358.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 15:40:05 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal
In-Reply-To: <011101c3158f$218b74c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508124939.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"s8Db61.0.kH6.OAhk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50457
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Inasmuch as Helium atoms do not bond to each other to form He2 and the 
>"molecule" is represented by a single helium atom, I wonder what exactly 
>is meant by Forward's proposal.

Oops! I made exactly the same mistake some years ago describing this. I 
used the word "molecule" here incorrectly. I can't blame Forward; he did 
not use that term. His notes are difficult to reproduce without 
superscripts and subscripts, but he describes something resembling a 
molecule, with a helium atom plus as "helium asterisk" atom:


Atomic He* = He (2 3S1)

Molecular He* 2 = He + He* = He 2 [Subscript 2, which I read "molecule" but 
of course it isn't.]

Easily made by 24 KeV electron beam in liquid helium. 500 He * per electron.

[End quote]

I think the paper Fred referenced explains this.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 13:28:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA23173;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 13:26:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 13:26:27 -0700
Message-ID: <015101c315a0$07c1d500$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Naudin: Mizuno: replication of sorts
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 13:25:52 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_014E_01C31565.58FF1C60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"zSlGE2.0.qf5.nrhk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50458
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_014E_01C31565.58FF1C60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm

Notes from Jean-Louis Naudin : The tests are very encouraging, this is =
only the beginning and the Cold Fusion Reactor can be greatly improved. =
The tests are not finished...

" A real-time heat calibration system was designed for detecting the =
amount of heat generated during plasma electrolysis. The measured heat =
exceeded the input power substantially, and in some cases 200% of the =
input power. "

The heat calibration system seems a little suspect to me - I hope Ed or =
Jed will comment on how accurate this appears to them... (if anything it =
looks like it would underestimate the actual energy output)...

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_014E_01C31565.58FF1C60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm">http://jlnlabs.onlin=
e.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Notes from Jean-Louis Naudin : The tests are very encouraging, this =
is only=20
the beginning and the Cold Fusion Reactor can be greatly improved. The =
tests are=20
not finished...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>" A real-time heat calibration system was designed for detecting =
the amount=20
of heat generated during plasma electrolysis. The measured heat exceeded =
the=20
input power substantially, and in some cases 200% of the input power. =
"</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The heat calibration system&nbsp;seems a little suspect to me - I =
hope Ed=20
or Jed will comment on how accurate this appears to them... (if anything =
it=20
looks like it would underestimate the actual energy output)...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_014E_01C31565.58FF1C60--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 13:44:54 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA03012;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 13:42:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 13:42:31 -0700
Message-ID: <014d01c3159a$171e1460$7d11b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030508124939.02cec0c0 pop.mindspring.com> <011101c3158f$218b74c0$0a016ea8@cpq>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:43:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1cca272c47fb938d5213fbe80d78abc8cb5548f7b21afc86f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"ton7w.0.xk.s4ik-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50459
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed's mention of " Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal", begs the question,
does the aeration of an water-alkaline solution result in the dumping of Possible
Metastable States in water result in OU/Free-Energy i.e.., Solar Energy stored up by
"pumping" the H-O-H and/or even the bonds between the water molecules with photons ???

Jones?  :-)

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 14:05:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA16643;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 14:02:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:02:54 -0700
Message-ID: <016601c3159c$ec122740$7d11b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 15:03:20 -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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a1cca272c47fb938d54629577d5eb304c7d10a8cb42d4530e6350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"z0t4X3.0.j34.yNik-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50460
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I forgot to paste in the link.  :-(

http://www.islandone.org/APC/Chemical/07.html

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines


> Jed's mention of " Robert Forward's metastable helium proposal", begs the question,
> does the aeration of an water-alkaline solution result in the dumping of Possible
> Metastable States in water result in OU/Free-Energy i.e.., Solar Energy stored up by
> "pumping" the H-O-H and/or even the bonds between the water molecules with photons
???
>
> Jones?  :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Frederick
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 14:27:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA32624;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 14:25:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:25:19 -0700
Message-ID: <016101c315a8$45cc1ec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500badf85c4d879 [12.21.208.59]>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:24:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA32573
Resent-Message-ID: <"xIo1v2.0.fz7._iik-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50461
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote,

> >One could say that it is now become just a "numbers game," the aim of
> >which is finding ways to use hydrated electrons from nature or "cheaply
> >implanted," through electrolysis to get the most bang for the buck...

> "Cheap implantation" is a problem due to the requirement for maintenance of
> balance of charge.  

I  wouldn't rule out a highly imbalanced net negative charge, at least for the necessary few microseconds, so long as the effective potential of the negative charge carriers is low. 

The problem is that you can't easily pump in a big excess of electrons into liquid water and especially not a big charge imbalance without recourse to much higher voltage than is desirable.

This problem does not appear to be nearly as difficult at a partial vacuum, especially with lots of N2 and O2 present, and particularly during water phase-change. Basically these are the ingredients of a thunder-storm. N2 has negative electron affinity and O2 has substantial affinity, as does water. Under these circumstance very large charge imbalances can created at very low potential and can be maintained for a few microseconds prior to ignition.

Thus the water-engine has a "carburetor" that is in reality an unusual kind of electrolysis cell designed so that all the intake air is drawn through liquid in the cell at a partial vacuum. It is an open question as to whether or not one must float the whole engine slightly negative wrt ground but certainly one should not assume that electrolysis itself requires a balance of charge. I submit you can easily prove that it doesn't.  Your typical power supply might prefer a balanced charge, but that problem can be easily re-engineered.

Of course, if your vacuum was .5 bar, it would stand to reason that the effective displacement of the engine has been nearly halved... but that's a small price to pay for using water as fuel...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May  8 20:02:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA17430;
	Thu, 8 May 2003 20:00:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 20:00:46 -0700
Message-ID: <000e01c315ce$ee072dc0$f300bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <000201c315c9$21a55900$f300bf3f computer>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 21:00:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e4cfc6917dc64f65d5a5d155865bf1ca350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"icibZ2.0.CG4.Udnk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50462
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:
>
> The problem is that you can't easily pump in a big excess of electrons into liquid
> water and
> especially not a big charge imbalance without recourse to much higher voltage than
is
> desirable.

I'm not so sure about that for several liters of electrolyte, Jones.

The capacitance (C) of a sphere with a dielectric shell:

http://www.iue.tuwien.ac.at/publications/PhD%20Theses/wasshuber/node76.html

Or self capacitance of a sphere:

http://www.iue.tuwien.ac.at/publications/PhD%20Theses/wasshuber/node75.html

suggests that small water droplets containing a hydrated electron (e-)aq  or
(O2-,CO2-, H2O-)aq, interspersed in liters of an agitated alkaline/saline electrolyte
with some dielectric constant (K) might not build up a high potential, if you sum up
all of the droplets with a radius R and a Voltage (V) =  n (C*q) for "uncommitted"
charges with their charge conjugates scattered throughout the solar system ?
>
> Thus the water-engine has a "carburetor" that is in reality an unusual kind of
electrolysis cell....

Yes indeed!   :-)

Regards,

Frederick
>
> Jones
>


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 01:20:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA15985;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 01:18:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:18:46 -0700
Message-ID: <20030509081813.11808.qmail web41511.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harvey Norris <harvich yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <014d01c3159a$171e1460$7d11b83f computer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Uz2RP1.0.hv3.cHsk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50463
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Frederick Sparber <fjsparber earthlink.net> wrote:
> Jed's mention of " Robert Forward's metastable
> helium proposal", begs the question,
> does the aeration of an water-alkaline solution
> result in the dumping of Possible
> Metastable States in water result in OU/Free-Energy
> i.e.., Solar Energy stored up by
> "pumping" the H-O-H and/or even the bonds between
> the water molecules with photons ???
> 
> Jones?  :-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Frederick
Part of the problem with measuring a bonding angle
change of water is the claim of a differing
"refractive index?" I once noticed an strange angle of
a siphon hose viewed above surface water, with
simultaneous view of that below the surface, and this
has something to do with refraction, the bending of
incident and leaving angles of  light waves. This was
in the making of "ozonated water by UV ozone bulb
steam condensation", where I thought the angle shown
by the phenomenon merited a picture, but I thought
this just a common phenomenon.
     Investigating this "ellis process water", a most
unusual claim is made. The changed bonded angle water:
like keys fitting into locks of other water molecules
may also change that water's bonding angles, when
mixed as a concentrate to other supplies. Thus a
"small change" can bring about a great change.
    I seemed to be able to measure close to 1%
difference in capacity with a primitive (one sided
insulated) water axial capacity of 5 inch O.D./2.5
inch  I.D copper tube set up. Not a very good test for
the changed angle water.
    However smaller models of  testing for water axial
capacity of (city)tap water, vs ozonated showed a more
marked 5% difference, but here a great problem
presents itself from the tap water source, containing
minerals, and the differences of capacity  here were
noted by Wavetech LCR meter.
    Thus I have decided to try the ellis process on
distilled water itself, where the distilled will be a
better "control" sample. for comparisons of effects
"before and after".
    Ellis claims are at
http://www.johnellis.com/
    The info is a bit off topic, however this ellis
device has a powerful bulb that produces ozone and UV,
that goes into the steam condensation chamber. It is
said that just bubbling ozone through water itself
only has a half life of 45 minutes. But here you are
talking about subjecting a steam /water phase change
to high UV influence. The said water has most unusual
qualities of staying clear when added to aquariums,
and effecting water (earth) wells itself.

   Since the devices to measure the hypothetical phase
angle change of water seeem so slim, perhaps an effort
measure the currents though DC silver electrodes might
hope to show a more profound experimental difference
for these cases. 

    In fact a simple remedy should be to freeze equal
distance large area plates in both types of water, and
to then get a better caparisons of capacity change
between samples, as then we are not so limited by the
error introduced by the insulating poly barrier used
for mesuring water capacity. Ice also has a higher
dielectric constant.
HDN
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 01:35:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA22535;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 01:34:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:34:11 -0700
Message-ID: <20030509083338.29605.qmail web41502.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harvey Norris <harvich yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <016101c315a8$45cc1ec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"JHalH2.0.rV5.2Wsk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50464
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net> wrote:
> Horace Heffner wrote,
> 
> > >One could say that it is now become just a
> "numbers game," the aim of
> > >which is finding ways to use hydrated electrons
> from nature or "cheaply
> > >implanted," through electrolysis to get the most
> bang for the buck...
> 
> > "Cheap implantation" is a problem due to the
> requirement for maintenance of
> > balance of charge.  
> 
> I  wouldn't rule out a highly imbalanced net
> negative charge, at least for the necessary few
> microseconds, so long as the effective potential of
> the negative charge carriers is low. 
> 
> The problem is that you can't easily pump in a big
> excess of electrons into liquid water and especially
> not a big charge imbalance without recourse to much
> higher voltage than is desirable.
A typical fine colloid of siver water sample is 4
times more conductive than the measurement  from
distilled made at beginning. Perhaps certain
"catalysts" could be added to the water in this manner
to find a better combustion. There was something about
aluminum some tinme ago... But I guess all metals cant
make water colloids.
HDN

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 01:59:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA00640;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 01:58:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:58:10 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b09bae1048d4303 [209.23.136.23]>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 03:59:33 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: energy from water
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1162; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vw-zV1.0.w9.Yssk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50465
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Can someone tell me what Uracil is?

I'm also wondering about the production of monoatomic hydrogen, it 
would seem to me that since H's preferred state is H2, energy would 
be required inorder to pull them apart. I also noted with interest 
the mention of the hydronium ion, H3O and the addition of alkaline 
metals, since, as I recall, one destroys the other.

Lets suppose that someone came up with an electrolyzer that was able 
to split water with less energy than the recombination of H2 and O2 
into H2O liberated, would the existence of the Beta-Aether account 
for the surplus energy? IMHO, there are no free lunches.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 05:24:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA18970;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 05:23:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 05:23:40 -0700
Message-ID: <001501c3161d$90529620$9400bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <a05111b09bae1048d4303 [209.23.136.23]>
Subject: Re: energy from water
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 06:24:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c12fccc2157f8e8240eb9d8ef8f170ab350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"YpExJ2.0.Je4.Btvk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50466
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 3:59 AM
Subject: energy from water

Thomas Malloy wrote:


> Can someone tell me what Uracil is?

Google Search can. :-)

http://www.ksu.edu/chem/personnel/faculty/grad/jvo/Ortiz/topics_uracil-water.html

Free Energy from RNA molecules?
> 
> I'm also wondering about the production of monoatomic hydrogen, it 
> would seem to me that since H's preferred state is H2, energy would 
> be required in order to pull them apart.

Yes. 436,000 joule/mole to "pull" them apart. 


>I also noted with interest 
> the mention of the hydronium ion, H3O and the addition of alkaline 
> metals, since, as I recall, one destroys the other.

Nope.  One supplants the other.
> 
> Lets suppose that someone came up with an electrolyzer that was able 
> to split water with less energy than the recombination of H2 and O2 
> into H2O liberated, would the existence of the Beta-Aether account 
> for the surplus energy? 

If you want to be picky?


>IMHO, there are no free lunches.

Only if you're swinging through trees in the jungle, eating a banana, Tom .  :-)
> 

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 06:20:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA13574;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 06:19:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 06:19:19 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae1538c4d63 [12.21.211.97]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 05:22:03 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"613jQ2.0.-J3.Mhwk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50467
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:24 PM 5/8/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote,
>
>> >One could say that it is now become just a "numbers game," the aim of
>> >which is finding ways to use hydrated electrons from nature or "cheaply
>> >implanted," through electrolysis to get the most bang for the buck...
>
>> "Cheap implantation" is a problem due to the requirement for maintenance of
>> balance of charge.
>
>I  wouldn't rule out a highly imbalanced net negative charge, at least for
>the necessary few microseconds, so long as the effective potential of the
>negative charge carriers is low.


Potential is a function of the number of imbalanced chanrges and the volume
in volved, or more specifically, the surface area containing the volume.
You simply can not have a large imbalanced net charge (i.e. small fraction
of a coulomb) and a small volume without having an astronomical potential.


>
>The problem is that you can't easily pump in a big excess of electrons
>into liquid water and especially not a big charge imbalance without
>recourse to much higher voltage than is desirable.
>
>This problem does not appear to be nearly as difficult at a partial vacuum,


With regard to the amount of unbalanced charge there is no significant
difference in potential between a small vacuum volume and a small
electrolyte volume for a given amount of net charge.   "Potential" in
electron volts is the amount of energy required per electron to pump that
electron into the volulme against the unbalanced charge that is there.  If
one hydrated electron must be created for each proton converted to
monatomic hydroge, H, then huge currents are required.  Huge current
translate into large imbalanced charge, unless some other (positive)
species is manufactured at the same time.

The principle advantage to a vacuum over an electrolyte is a high mean free
path, a fast diffusion rate.  The probelm with vacuums is electorlysing
enough volume of H.  There simply isn't that much "there" to work with.
High currents are required to generate the required amount of hydrogen.

Suppose the required current is 50 amps.  Using your lifetime of 1
microsecond that represents the flow of (50 coulombs/sec)(1x10^6 sec) =
0.00005 coulombs.  Is we want the process to occur in a few liters volume
then we have approximately a sphere fo radis 9 cm.  The potential of that
0.00005 coulombs in a 9 cm sphere is:

   phi = (9x10^9)(0.000005)/(0.09) = 500,000 V

This of course is going to be an infeasible task.

In electrolysis there ia always an anode, and this naturally generates the
species that balance the charges in the electrolyte.  To inject electrons
into something then then either must be an attracting anode surface
somewhwere or the electrons must be ejected in a beam with significant
kinetic energy - enough to overcome the resulting charge imbalance.  If
there is an anode, then there is a natural charge balance created there via
electrochemistry of the anode.

What I was attempting to address was the principle barrier to having anodes
and cathodes - namely the potential drops at the anode and cathode
interfaces.  I was suggesting this might be achieved by making those
elecrodes from (AC or DC) isolated arcs, and laterally ejecting the charge
species into the electrolyte by maintaining a net charge on the arc via
high current low voltage DC power supply.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 08:00:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA05465;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 07:57:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 07:57:42 -0700
Message-ID: <003f01c3163b$4a73f220$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <a05111b09bae1048d4303 [209.23.136.23]>
Subject: Re: energy from water
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 07:57:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA05405
Resent-Message-ID: <"QwAHA3.0.GL1.c7yk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50468
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Tom,

> I'm also wondering about the production of monoatomic hydrogen, it 
> would seem to me that since H's preferred state is H2, energy would 
> be required in order to pull them apart.

Yes, of course...if you wait too long. 

But if one wanted to maximize the energy potential from electrolysis,  the goal would be to get the nascent H to form hydronium first, or to bind to N2 before it "finds" another H to form H2. To do this you must have a situation where there is a lot more molecules of N2 from the air or water vapor, than there is nascent hydrogen, "looking" to bind to whatever is available at that instant. 

A traditional water-based electrolysis cell won't help here because all the nascent H is drawn to the same plate. This is one reason that Horace's AC idea, combined with air entrainment is intriquing.

Fortunately the numbers for creating hydronium vs H2 will work out pretty well theoretically for a short time frame, if you can keep the protons down to a few molar percent of the intake gas. It is a double good fortune, really, of this concept in that hydronium will still ignite at that very low level of dilution. Over time, of course, you will get all H2 but we are only concened with the time it takes the gas to get into a combustion chamber, and at 3000 RPM you have 20 millisec to play around with.

The problem with any kind of traditional energy conversion, even the fuel cell, is that the H2 or other molecular fuel must be pulled apart before it can be used. This requires as much or more energy input as burning gasoline will deliver. That limitation may not necessarily be the case with water fuel, but even if it is, most of the net effective energy of water-fuel IMHO does not derive from hydrogen combustion itself but from a bootstrapping process.

>IMHO, there are no free lunches.

Oh, well. No cold fusion, no hydrino, no ZPE. Guess we're wasting our time here on vortex...Certainly Bob Park would heartily agree with you.

> would the existence of the Beta-Aether account 
for the surplus energy?

That is the hypothesis that I personally am working under, but I'm not sure that many others are yet convinced of this.

They important fact to me is that reliable sources say, without any expectation of gain, that using water-as-fuel IS being accomplished now, in several different places, and other anecdotal sources indicate that this has been accomplished for at least eighty years in hit-or-miss fashion, but because nobody could comprehend how it could be true, the phenomenon was never optimized, and because petroleum has been relatively cheap till recently, there has been little incentive for investigation of these older claims.

Given all that, one could:
1) Label all the claims as fraud
2) Ignore them as self-deceptive ignorance, and move on
3) Try to actively discourage those who are seeking to understand the claims
4) Try to analyze the situation in a different theoretical light so that the phenomenon can be first understood and then optimized.

I see the purpose of Vortex as in exploring the last option, but if you want to claim no free lunch, then please, don't burden us with more of the same banal verbiage that Robert Park and others have been so quick to serve up - give us your real insight as to why there is no free lunch in this particular case, or preferably your own negative experimental results.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 08:23:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA17863;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 08:20:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 08:20:04 -0700
Message-ID: <006101c3163e$689cdd40$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae1538c4d63 [12.21.211.97]>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 08:19:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA17762
Resent-Message-ID: <"7kLbj.0.oM4.aSyk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50469
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote,

> Potential is a function of the number of imbalanced chanrges and the volume
> in volved, or more specifically, the surface area containing the volume.
> You simply can not have a large imbalanced net charge (i.e. small fraction
> of a coulomb) and a small volume without having an astronomical potential.

Fred has assured me ;-)

The self capacitance of a sphere:
http://www.iue.tuwien.ac.at/publications/PhD%20Theses/wasshuber/node75.html
suggests that small water droplets containing a hydrated electron (e-)aq  or
(O2-,CO2-, H2O-)aq, interspersed in liters of an agitated alkaline/saline electrolyte
with some dielectric constant (K) might not build up a high potential, if you sum up
all of the droplets with a radius R and a Voltage (V) =  n (C*q) for "uncommitted"
charges with their charge conjugates

A "Hydrated Electron cluster" might look like a very large negative ion with a charge of (-14) or about one extra electron per 20 molecules of H2O. See the structure at:
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html
Where the most natural structure for water is the 280-Molecule expanded icosahedral water cluster  based on the regular arrangement of 14-molecule units ...

I suspect when these go through the microscale-violence of phase-change, as they transform into flash steam, you will get a fair amount of self-generated temporary water-splitting? This could add to whatever hydronium and H2 is already present?

 
> In electrolysis there ia always an anode, and this naturally generates the
> species that balance the charges in the electrolyte.  To inject electrons
> into something then then either must be an attracting anode surface
> somewhwere or the electrons must be ejected in a beam with significant
> kinetic energy - enough to overcome the resulting charge imbalance.  If
> there is an anode, then there is a natural charge balance created there via
> electrochemistry of the anode.
> 
> What I was attempting to address was the principle barrier to having anodes
> and cathodes - namely the potential drops at the anode and cathode
> interfaces.  I was suggesting this might be achieved by making those
> elecrodes from (AC or DC) isolated arcs, and laterally ejecting the charge
> species into the electrolyte by maintaining a net charge on the arc via
> high current low voltage DC power supply.

Yes, I like this idea very much.  Can you conjure up a hypothetical design that would accomplish this in an air/water mix ? Could it be as simple as closely spaced plates at AC with a negative DC bias?

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 09:29:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA25327;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 09:27:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 09:27:14 -0700
Message-ID: <009301c31647$cd8d8980$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Did you make the connection?
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 09:26:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0090_01C3160D.20A9F120"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"hQnCG3.0.fB6.YRzk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50470
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_0090_01C3160D.20A9F120
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yesterday, mention was made here of J.L. Naudin's new work on =
reproducing the Mizuno cell:
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm

This comes right on the heels of Naudin's Bingo- fuel conversion.

Did you make the connection between the two projects?

If you did not, let me once again throw up *water-fuel* as the hot topic =
of the day for alternative energy research...=20

...you see, Naudin quotes Mizuno ( "Confirmation of anomalous hydrogen =
generation by plasma electrolysis.") Mizuno,  Akimoto, and  Ohmori. in =
4th Meeting of Japan CF Research Society.=20

"Although only a few observations of excess hydrogen gas production have =
been made, production is sometimes 80 times higher than normal Faradic =
electrolysis gas production."

That's right *80 times* higher at times. If the "average" increase can =
be sustained at 5 times higher, folks, we have the makings of a =
revolution on our hands...

I hope by now you realize that Naudin's next project will be to combine =
the Mizuno cell to replace the Bingo cell and close the loop with no =
carbon, only H2O....

And still, I would venture to suggest that JNL has NOT gone about it =
from the most efficient standpoint...pity... nevertheless, I am awaiting =
his success with a great deal of enthusiasm...

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0090_01C3160D.20A9F120
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Yesterday, mention was made here of J.L. Naudin's new work on =
reproducing=20
the Mizuno cell:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm">http://jlnlabs.onlin=
e.fr/cfr/html/cfr10.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>This comes right on the heels of&nbsp;Naudin's&nbsp;Bingo- fuel=20
conversion.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Did you make the connection between the two projects?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If you did not, let me once again throw up *water-fuel* as the hot =
topic of=20
the day for alternative energy research... </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>...you see, Naudin quotes Mizuno ( "Confirmation of anomalous =
hydrogen=20
generation by plasma electrolysis.") Mizuno,&nbsp; Akimoto, and&nbsp; =
Ohmori. in=20
4th Meeting of Japan CF Research Society. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Although only a few observations of excess hydrogen gas production =
have=20
been made, production is sometimes 80 times higher than normal Faradic=20
electrolysis gas production."</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>That's right *80 times* higher at times. If the "average" =
increase&nbsp;can=20
be sustained at 5 times higher, folks, we have the makings of a =
revolution on=20
our hands...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I hope by now you realize that Naudin's next project will be to =
combine the=20
Mizuno cell to replace the Bingo cell and close the loop with no carbon, =
only=20
H2O....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>And still, I would venture to suggest&nbsp;that JNL has&nbsp;NOT =
gone about=20
it from the most efficient standpoint...pity... nevertheless, I am =
awaiting his=20
success with a great deal of enthusiasm...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0090_01C3160D.20A9F120--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 09:55:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA07281;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 09:52:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 09:52:36 -0700
Message-ID: <004801c31643$20e36820$9400bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae1538c4d63 [12.21.211.97]> <006101c3163e$689cdd40$0a016ea8@cpq>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 10:51:55 -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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409f3c28e9c1ddbe10956ffd3dc549b85e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"WRsGB.0.hn1.Jpzk-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50471
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:
>
> I suspect when these go through the microscale-violence of phase-change, as they
transform into flash steam, you will get a fair amount of self-generated temporary
water-splitting? This could add to whatever hydronium and H2 is already present?

As I see it, you can get as many as 9.0e9 "uncommitted electrons" as (O2-, or CO2-, or
H2O-)aq or Hydrated Electrons (e-)aq from the air (or indigenous in water) into the
Alkaline or Saline water per volt of potential buildup, and the Hydronium (H3O+)aq ion
is insignificant-irrelevant in comparison to the (Na+)aq ion:

Proposed Cycle:

1, (Na+)aq + (OH-)aq + (O2-)aq ---> Na + O2

2, Na + H2O ---> (Na+)aq + (e-)aq + H + OH

3, (Na+)aq + (e-)aq ---> Na

4, Na + H2O --->  (Na+)aq + (e-)aq + H + OH

The role of the electrolysis is to "stir"/align the electrolyte and possibly provide
some initial H and O2 for ignition.

Thus, Bicarbonate of Soda (Baking Soda) NaHCO3 or Sea Water/Salt-Water (loaded with
NaCl) ought to provide the (Na+)aq ions.

Regards,

Frederick
>
>
> Jones
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 13:48:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA21502;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 13:46:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 13:46:07 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae1b7c1c3f0 [12.21.208.239]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 12:48:46 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"9hdi-2.0.mF5.EE1l-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50472
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:19 AM 5/9/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote,
>
>> Potential is a function of the number of imbalanced chanrges and the volume
>> in volved, or more specifically, the surface area containing the volume.
>> You simply can not have a large imbalanced net charge (i.e. small fraction
>> of a coulomb) and a small volume without having an astronomical potential.
>
>Fred has assured me ;-)
>
>The self capacitance of a sphere:
>http://www.iue.tuwien.ac.at/publications/PhD%20Theses/wasshuber/node75.html
>suggests that small water droplets containing a hydrated electron (e-)aq  or
>(O2-,CO2-, H2O-)aq, interspersed in liters of an agitated alkaline/saline
>electrolyte
>with some dielectric constant (K) might not build up a high potential, if
>you sum up
>all of the droplets with a radius R and a Voltage (V) =  n (C*q) for
>"uncommitted"
>charges with their charge conjugates
>
>A "Hydrated Electron cluster" might look like a very large negative ion
>with a charge of (-14) or about one extra electron per 20 molecules of
>H2O. See the structure at:
>http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html
>Where the most natural structure for water is the 280-Molecule expanded
>icosahedral water cluster  based on the regular arrangement of 14-molecule
>units ...


I have provided an example with concrete numbers.  If you have an
unbalanced in a small volume a high potetnial develops. PERIOD. The only
way to avoid this is if you are spraying electrons into the volume is to
provide a means to complete the ciruit.  This means providing an anode, and
thus in an electrolytic cell, providing a set of electrochemical reactions
that result in a postive species in the electrolyte.




>
>I suspect when these go through the microscale-violence of phase-change,
>as they transform into flash steam, you will get a fair amount of
>self-generated temporary water-splitting? This could add to whatever
>hydronium and H2 is already present?


I don't see any reason to think this is so for water as this could only
apply to molecules where the electron can act in a purely catalytic way by
its wery presence.  The bond energhy for water is simply too high.  There
has to be some other as yet unaccounted for mecahnism involved for the
above kind of action to occur.



>> What I was attempting to address was the principle barrier to having anodes
>> and cathodes - namely the potential drops at the anode and cathode
>> interfaces.  I was suggesting this might be achieved by making those
>> elecrodes from (AC or DC) isolated arcs, and laterally ejecting the charge
>> species into the electrolyte by maintaining a net charge on the arc via
>> high current low voltage DC power supply.
>
>Yes, I like this idea very much.  Can you conjure up a hypothetical design
>that would accomplish this in an air/water mix ? Could it be as simple as
>closely spaced plates at AC with a negative DC bias?

Yes, that's one approach that was tried much in the early days of CF, and
with some success in improving COP over the straight DC electrolysis.  This
was especially done in the light water nickle cathode expoeriments, for
which there was really not much reason to think CF would occur.  Perhaps
that success was merely in improving the electrolysis itself.  this
probably would not provide a breakthrough device, but investigation may
lead to some insights.

Actually, Mizuno has (inadvertantly?) beat the interface problem to an
extent, by providing a plasma sheath around his cathode.  The problem is
that this takes too high a voltage.  The high voltage and current is all
recovered as heat though, but the energy for heating the sheath is high
compared to the energy available from the evolved hydrogen.   As you quote
in another thread, Mizuno says he observes more hydrogen than would be
expected: "Although only a few observations of excess hydrogen gas
production have been made, production is sometimes 80 times higher than
normal Faradic electrolysis gas production."   HOWEVER, this Faradaic ratio
ONLY refers to the ampere/hydrogen ratio, not to the energy/hydrogen ratio.
There is thus no immediate implication for a self sustaining process that
can drive an I.C engine.  Mizuno's cells are high voltage DC.  This result
DOES somehow imply to me that there is a catalytic use of the current, and
this is good news, even though we don't really have a handle on how that
might happen.  Each electron must be somehow reused?

An experiment I would try is to make two arcs right above and skimming the
electrolyte  surface.  The arcs would be driven by transformer secondaries
and thus would be electrically isolated.  The electrode circut for each arc
would then be connected to a variable voltage but ultra low voltage high
current DC power supply.  (Ultimately, it would be interesting to see the
arcs be in CO2 and CO gas which could be supplied through the electrodes
themselves, and possibly recylced from the I.C. engine.)  The objective
would be to meassure evolved gas as a function of current at various
voltages, not necessarily to produce a working gas supply for an engine.

BTW, one idea I posted was to use thinly separated plates and an
electrolyte that has properly sized insulator particles in it, diameter
maybe about a quarter of the plate separation, to scrub bubbles from
between the plates.  The particle/electrolyte slurry is pumped between the
plates to carry the evolved gas away from the plates.  The current used can
then be AC, as recombination at the plates is avoided.  The product would
essentially be Brown's gas.  The plate size would have to be fairly small
in the direction of the electrolyte flow, so that individual scrubber
particles would tend carry away a single type of gas.  One side advantage
to using AC is that a resonant ciruit can be used that increases the
effective amperage.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 15:04:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA04440;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 15:02:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 15:02:50 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae1c915d618 [12.21.209.57]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 14:05:36 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"F1eKe1.0.H51.AM2l-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50473
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:19 AM 5/9/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>... Could it be as simple as
>closely spaced plates at AC with a negative DC bias?

Yes, that's one approach that was tried much in the early days of CF, and
with some success in improving COP over the straight DC electrolysis.  This
was especially done in the light water nickle cathode experiments, for
which there was really not much reason to think CF would occur.  Perhaps
that success was merely in improving the electrolysis itself.

Perhaps the AC frequency used was not high enough.  The interface is only a
few atoms thick and the molecules can rotate very fast. Puharich had some
luck improving electrolysis at specific frequencies in the megahertz range,
so maybe  that suggests an ideal frequency for interface disruption.
Possibly microwaves could be useful.

Also, I suspect air not to be the ideal medium, but possibly CO2 and water
vapor may have something special to offer. It may be easier to break carbon
from oxygen.  Perhaps in a sense we are looking at this all wrong.  The
real "fuel" of the closed process is oxygen.  It is the common denomenator.
Retrieving the oxygen simultaneously retrieves the H or C.  Just some
slightly zennish food for thought.  You don't typically hear an equal focus
on measuring the evolved oxygen.  If we lived in a world with a hydrogen
atmosphere then oxygen would be the fuel sought.

In HF AC electrolysis, if there is a "getter" of some kind in the
electrolyte that can momentarily carry the oxygen away from the plates,
then the H2 would be left behind to bubble up.  It would then be a matter
of releasing the O2 from the getter using a low energy, or simply burning
the oxidized getter with the hydrogen.  The problem is to avoid
recombination at the plates when the polarity changes.

In a gas environment, the ideal cathode would be a proton conductor.  Then
the protons are carried away, leaving the oxygen behind and unable to
follow the protons.  Voila!  No interface problem.  Some proton conductors
are ceramics that conduct only at high temperatures.  Palladium might be
used but it would have to be thin and supported by a hydrogen diffusin
lattice.  Perhaps it is possible to efficiently electrolyse directly from
steam using a proton conductor as a cathode.  Unfortunately, unlike the
case of the electrolyte, there is not much in the way of "spontaneous"
ionization in steam.  Ionization might be carried out using high frequency
tesla coil discharge, microwaves, arc, or other typical means.  The proton
conductor could have a high voltage high frequency signal imposed on its DC
in order to ionize a thin sheath on its surface.  Possibly, the hydrogen
could be conducted to the I.C.E. combustion chamber during the appropriate
stroke directly through the proton conductor by cycling its voltage in
synchronization with the motor revolution.  A very fancy fuel injector! If
the engine valve closed prior to the proton injection then the cylinder
would be heated by the 2 p+ + 2e- -> H2 reaction at the proton conductor
surface.  In other words the full energy of the oxydizing of the protons,
more than 20 eV per proton, would be delivered directly to the engine
compartment.  This amounts to transfering heat from a low pressure gas to
an arbitrarily high pressure gas at a fixed energy cost.  I posted some
info. on this in relation to my "Atomic Expansion Hypothesis", in which the
source of free energy is clearly ZPE.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 15:31:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA21307;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 15:30:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 15:30:11 -0700
Message-ID: <3EBC2BE2.DB76EFAA ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 15:29:54 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW      Friday, 9 May 03]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"9HDEP.0.iC5.ol2l-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50474
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, 9 May 03
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 16:39:16 -0400
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 9 May 03   Washington, DC

1. THINK SMALL: "GREY GOO" OR NOT, NANOTECHNOLOGY IS HOT.   The
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, H.R. 766, authorizes
a national nanotechnology research and development program that
involves NSF, DOE, DOC, NASA and EPA.  It is the Administration's
highest science and technology priority in the FY'04 budget and
passed the House this week with overwhelming bipartisan support. 
It is intended to keep the US at the forefront of technology
based on manipulation of individual atoms.  Meanwhile in the UK,
Prince Charles is doing his part to keep America number one.  He
has launched a crusade against nano, much like his efforts to ban
genetically modified foods.  His concern is that Earth will be
turned into "grey goo" by self-replicating nanorobots.  This is
the theme of Michael Crichton's recent novel, "Prey," which was,
in turn, inspired by K. Eric Drexler's vision of self-replicating
nanorobot "assemblers" turning everything into more assemblers. 
Could it really happen?  It already has; we call them "bacteria." 

2. SARS: WALL STREET JOURNAL HEADLINE DESERVES NO RESPECT.  Even
though the spread of the epidemic is much more serious in China
than anywhere else, the Marketplace section of yesterday's WSJ
carried the banner headline, "SARS Brings New Respect to Chinese
Herbal Medicine."  Nothing in the article that followed, however,
came close to justifying the headline.  The article merely points
out that many traditional Chinese doctors combine the use of
Western drugs with things like cow-urine extract and melon peels. 
It can come as no surprise that traditional doctors "report some
success treating patients with the combination."  Maybe.  Could
it be the modern drugs?  It sure as hell wasn't the cow urine.

3. MATH: FORMER EDUCATION SECRETARY IS MATHEMATICALLY CHALLENGED. 
Secretary of Education under Ronald Reagan, William J. Bennett
makes a lot of money from speeches about family values and moral
clarity, and from best-selling books, with titles like "Childrens
Book of Virtues."  He needs a lot to cover gambling loses, which
are put above $1M.  It's not a moral issue, Bennett says.  WN
agrees; it's about intelligence.  He favors high-stakes slots,
where you're guaranteed to lose if you play long enough.  Bennett
played long enough.  "There's a term in the trade for this kind
of gambler," a casino source said, "We call them losers."

4. HIRING: HOUSE VOTES TO ALLOW RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. In a
vote along party lines, the House yesterday passed the Workforce
Investment Act, H.R. 1261, a $4B federally funded job training
and literacy program that allows religious charities receiving
federal funding to hire and fire based on religious belief.  The
bill is likely to run into trouble in the Senate, and it should. 
Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), who led the fight against Bush's initial
faith-based initiative, is determined to fight this one too. "Our
position is based upon a very simple premise: Individuals should
not be discriminated against on religious grounds in a program
that receives federal funds," Reed declared.

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: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May  9 16:11:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA17573;
	Fri, 9 May 2003 16:09:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 16:09:44 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 19:29:17 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEENDDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bae1b7c1c3f0 [12.21.208.239]>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"NTPHj2.0.TI4.tK3l-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50475
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace writes:
>An experiment I would try is to make two arcs right above and skimming the
>electrolyte  surface.  The arcs would be driven by transformer secondaries
>and thus would be electrically isolated.

I've tried this sort of thing in the past. It's hard
to get the arc to go directly into the pool of electrolyte.
Electrons are a bit like cats, when you throw them at
a body of water, they just somehow sort of manage to
be moving parallel to the waters surface, and the arc
doesn't really penetrate. I was using an RF arc; and
I seem to remember seeing pictures of lightning strikes
on water that looked the same way, L shaped.

But my intent was as you describe, a way of getting
a different sort of electrolysis. 

K.

PS: That's why electrons are stored in "cat"pacitors.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 10 02:23:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA28523;
	Sat, 10 May 2003 02:21:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:21:04 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae26f80efc7 [12.21.211.199]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:23:53 -0800
To: <knagel gis.net>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"0X1NR3.0.az6.0ICl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50476
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:29 PM 5/9/3, Keith Nagel wrote:
>Horace writes:
>>An experiment I would try is to make two arcs right above and skimming the
>>electrolyte  surface.  The arcs would be driven by transformer secondaries
>>and thus would be electrically isolated.
>
>I've tried this sort of thing in the past. It's hard
>to get the arc to go directly into the pool of electrolyte.


That is exactly why I suggest the arc be between two electrodes and
parallel to the surface of the water, but touching the water.  This permits
maintaining the arc with low voltage current.  An directly arc to water is
damped by the steam and requires over 100 volts to sustain.  The means I
suggest may provide a plasma-water interface at comparatively low energy
cost. At least that is the idea behind the suggestion.  It may not work
well due to a thin layer of steam forming right above the electrolyte.
Even so, the device would at worst be back to a Mizuno type 100 volt plus
steam sheath regime, but without concern about cathode damage.


>Electrons are a bit like cats, when you throw them at
>a body of water, they just somehow sort of manage to
>be moving parallel to the waters surface, and the arc
>doesn't really penetrate.


My experience is that the electrons penetrate OK (consider electrocution to
wet ground) but it is difficult to sustain an arc.   There is also or
course a major difference between a maximally condutive electrolyte and
pure water.


>I was using an RF arc; and
>I seem to remember seeing pictures of lightning strikes
>on water that looked the same way, L shaped.


Well that IS interesting.  Perhaps this is because the high humidity near
the water surface increases air conductivity?


>
>But my intent was as you describe, a way of getting
>a different sort of electrolysis.
>
>K.
>
>PS: That's why electrons are stored in "cat"pacitors.


Not sure what you mean here.


One thought I did not mention was to test an arc used as a cathode above a
very shallow electrolyte pool with a flat metal bottom as anode.  A better
alternative to the shallow pool might be to use a rotating disk with a thin
layer of outwardly flowing  electrolyte maintained on it.  This would
provide a low resistance electrolyte, but would have the disadvantage of
still having the potential drop at the anode interface.  The good part is
that oxygen bubble scrubbing of the anode disk surface could then be done
by a stationary wiper blade, though the water flow would also tend to scrub
the blade.  I posted this wiper blade scrubber idea here on vortex some
years ago, but it seems to work nicely in this context.   I think the
energy for mechanical bubble scrubbing is far less than that used for
electrolysis, and is more than offset by reduced cell resistance and
increased effective plate area.  Unfortunately, the blade could not rotat
very fast or the arc would be extinguished.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 10 02:42:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA03535;
	Sat, 10 May 2003 02:40:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 02:40:43 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae2792032a0 [12.110.74.105]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 01:43:34 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water and High Purity O2
Resent-Message-ID: <"_IAvW.0.9t.RaCl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50477
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:29 AM 5/8/3, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>Spin-off of Fuel Cell Technology?
>
> http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf


I just happened to find this post buried in spam in my infile.  (Messy! 8^)

This is quite amazing - oxygen coming from BOTH cathode and anode.  The
obvious question then is: where does the hydrogen go?  SOMETHING has to be
getting hydrogenated, and that something can thus be used as fuel.

It would be very nifty to make the reaction go the other way, i.e. produce
H2 at both electrodes, but then the energy for the electrolysis would
probably not be reduced as it is in the above O2 producing process.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 10 11:12:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA20111;
	Sat, 10 May 2003 11:10:51 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 11:10:51 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae2ef3db20d [12.110.74.105]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 10:13:25 -0800
To: <knagel gis.net>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"HEd0X.0.0w4.g2Kl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50478
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a hopefully novel idea.  Inject steam entrained with the catalysts
of choice into a glass T tube wrapped with an RF exciter coil.  At either
end of the T circle the glass pipe with insulated circular electrodes
charged with high voltage DC.  In the center of the pipe, nut not
protruding from the external high voltage DC electrodes, include low
voltage electrodes of the same polarity as the high voltage insulated ones.

The idea is to separate over a long distance the OH-, O--, O-, H3O+, and H+
ions, and then rely on comapartively short distance diffusion and
entrainment at the DC electrode ends of the T to separate the H2 and O2.

One main difficulty with this approach is that the O2 and H2 would be mixed
with water vapor, but cooling and thus distillation of the water should
take care of that.

Don't know if it is energy efficient, but it seems somewhat novel.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 10 18:20:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA22758;
	Sat, 10 May 2003 18:19:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 18:19:03 -0700
Message-ID: <20030511011825.43156.qmail web41506.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 18:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harvey Norris <harvich yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bae26f80efc7 [12.21.211.199]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"f_TbH2.0.WZ5.6KQl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50479
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Horace Heffner <hheffner mtaonline.net> wrote:
> At 7:29 PM 5/9/3, Keith Nagel wrote:
> >Horace writes:
> >>An experiment I would try is to make two arcs
> right above and skimming the
> >>electrolyte  surface.  The arcs would be driven by
> transformer secondaries
> >>and thus would be electrically isolated.
> >
> >I've tried this sort of thing in the past. It's
> hard
> >to get the arc to go directly into the pool of
> electrolyte.
I show a water skimming high voltage AC arc on my
Yahoo Teslafy homepage shown below as signature page.
What becomes fascinating however is the much better
continuity of DC induction arcs. All one needs is a
suitable high induction coil. One can also "tune" such
an arc by a principle of "DC resonance" One merely
uses a resonant capacity in the 120 hz range, instead
of the 60 hz, and use that capacity as the filter from
the 4 diode full wave rectification system to
initially produce the pulsed DC. This will be a
capacity 4 times smaller than the 60 hz AC capacity
that would resonate the induction coil. The advantage
here is that the DC induction arc, is "ballasted" by
the resistance of the coil be used to establish a
"current limited" DC induction arc, so then we dont
need to worry about using "current limited" high
voltage transformers, such as the NST, (Neon sign
transformer) for obtaining the high voltage necessary
as the source for the induction arc. I was thinking
about using 4 60 henry coils in parallel and in mutual
inductance to form a Powerful DC induction arc, from
only a 440 volt 1.5 kva transformer; attached to the
end of a teapot spout set to boiling. In this case we
could also use the teapot itself as one electrode, and
a needle in the steam path for ignition. Hopefully
this could ignite the steam into a sort of miniture
Browns gas generator. Doubtful, but interesting
nevertheless.
HDN


=====
Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 04:47:54 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id EAA14388;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 04:45:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 04:45:56 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530501bae3e47a506d [12.21.211.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 03:48:37 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: A PERSPECTIVE ON GAMBLING IN ALASKA
Resent-Message-ID: <"3PQOe2.0.kW3.pVZl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50480
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I am having no luck finding anyone who will publish this.  Any suggestions
or help would be appreciated.

The original article even as last posted contained some typos and serious
but inadvertant errors. The following contains corrections to those serious
erros and other additions, thus I am compelled to repost.  Hopefully this
will be the last need to correct and repost.


A PERSPECTIVE ON GAMBLING

Serious consideration is now being given in Alaska to a state lottery and
to taxing and permitting gambling machines and casino gambling in Alaska.
Many people oppose such moves based on moral principles, based on fear of
attracting organized crime, or based on a history of negative experiences
with gambling in other localities.  Though these concerns may be valid, the
purpose here is to give consideration to a completely different perspective
on this issue.  That perspective is the issue of the potential deception
associated with gambling, a deception possibly so vile and yet so subtle,
veiled and unchallenged as to be comparable to cigarette advertising in
some prior decades.  This perspective brings clarity to the nature of
gambling not only in Alaska but to gambling in general.  Further, when the
public is invited by slick advertising to come "try its luck" or to use
some special set of strategies to improve its odds, it should be fully
informed as to the near inevitability of the final outcome.

The potential deception involved consists of advertising that implies, that
gives the gambler the impression, that he has any reasonable chance of not
losing all his money if he continues gambling, if he never stops gambling
forever at some point.  "Reasonable" here means better than one chance in a
billion, but much smaller chances can be substituted without much change in
the final results.  That's right.  A gambler who gambles indefinitely will
lose money with a quantity and a certainty that increases astoundingly with
time.  Many gamblers think it is just their bad luck that they are
continual losers.  They think if they could just get another stake then
they could redeem themselves, that their "bad luck" is overdue to change.
They don't have a clue how completely false this outlook is, or that going
broke is normal luck, the expected.  The ultimate outcome over time remains
certain to an extreme degree, regardless of any strategy that may be
learned or employed, provided the house retains even a small advantage.
You just don't see advertising for gambling establishments that gives
people even a clue as to exactly how fast they can expect to lose all their
money.  A small advantage applied to repeated betting adds up over time to
an amazingly large advantage for the house, to very large probabilities of
the gambler "going broke", which is to say losing all the money he starts
gambling with, his "purse."

Careful analysis shows that the probability for going broke behaves in a
cruelly deceptive way over even brief time frames.  The probability of
being "alive", not going broke, stays flat for a while and then falls off a
cliff - so fast in fact that in a startlingly short time the odds for being
alive are less than the odds of winning a major lottery.

Video poker games often operate at a margin or "take" of 10 percent.  Many
people think that this means they can expect to lose 10 percent of the
money they start with, their purse, when they go out to gamble.  This is
completely false.  The expected loss is 10 percent of the total amount bet,
which increases with every hour of betting, often at a rate of 100 bets per
hour or more.  At 100 bets per hour, assuming here all bets are the same
size, you can expect to lose a net of 10 bets per hour.  At $5 a bet you
would then expect to lose about $50 per hour.  The house take is typically
higher for machines that take smaller bets quickly, like slot machines, and
less for larger bet machines or games.

In a simple win/lose game, given a house margin of 10 percent, i.e. a house
excess probability of winning of 0.1, you expect the house to win (in
excess of fair odds) 1 in 10 bets on average, so the house should be
expected to take away a 100 bet purse in about 1000 bets.  You should
expect to be able to place about 1000 bets before going broke, loosing all
your 100 bet purse.  However, most people don't realize that even this is
an overestimate of the time you have to gamble, because it only applies to
someone with a larger purse.  If you actually have a finite purse of 100
bets, then at a 10 percent take there is only a 43.701 percent chance of
making it to 1000 bets before going broke.  This is because when you hit
bottom you have to quit, while a person with a larger purse has a finite
though small chance for a comeback if the 100 bet loss line is crossed.  In
any event, with a large purse or small, the odds of going broke grow
astronomical amazingly fast with time as you continue betting.

When the house take is only 5 percent, with a purse of 100 bets, you would
expect to have a 50/50 chance of making it to bet 2000, instead of only the
41.42 percent chance you do have.  More significant is the effect of
increasing the bet size, i.e. decreasing the purse size, on surviving a
given number of bets.  With a 10 bet purse, at a 5 percent house take, you
only have about 50.6 percent chance of making it to 100 bets, and only a
28.46 percent chance of making it to bet 200, about 3.167 chances in 1000
of making it to 2000 bets, and 1.39 chances in a million of making it to
6900 bets.  With a 10 bet purse, at a 10 percent house take, you only have
about 32.74 percent chance of making it to 100 bets, only a 11.29 percent
chance of making it to bet 200, about 0.892 chances in 1,000,000 of making
it to 2000 bets, about 0.648 chances in a BILLION of making it to 3300
bets, and about 1 chance in a TRILLION to make it to 4600 bets, with an
expected purse value at that point of about 0.000000000011 bets.  This
information is possibly more meaningful converted to hours.  In a typical
game there might be 100 bets an hour, so the number of bets above easily
translate to approximate gambling hours by knocking off the last two
digits.  Mathematically speaking, it is possible to determine a minimum
number of bets required to reach any desired probability of being broke, no
matter how small, regardless of the size of a house take provided that take
is larger than zero.

It's pretty easy to see why gamblers go broke with great certainty if they
keep gambling.  Also interesting is the way the probabilities tend to
"hook" the gambler.  If you have a 100 bet purse, then at 99 bets you have
a 100 percent probability of still being alive.  At a 10 percent house
take, this number diminishes very slowly at first, to 98 percent at bet
500, 84 percent at bet 700, 57 percent at bet 900.  But then it falls off a
cliff, reaching 1.22 percent at bet 1900, 1.87 in 1000 at bet 2300, 0.37 in
1,000,000 at 4000, and 2.246 chances in a BILLION of being alive at bet
5000, i.e. after 50 hours of play.  It is easy to see, at a 100 bets/hour,
why the gambler with a 100 bet purse of $500, bet at the typical minimum
house bet of $5, can lose his purse in a vacation of 3 days or less.  It is
also somewhat deceiving that, with a 100 bet purse, at a 10 percent take,
there is a 98 percent confidence of being alive at bet 500 and more than 98
percent confidence of being out of the game by bet 1800.  A tricky effect,
even with a comfortable 100 bet purse.  At 5 hours nearly everyone is still
plugging away with big hopes, but after 18 hours there is about no chance
of making it that far.

It takes roughly twice as long for the effects to take place if the house
take is 5 percent.  At differing house percentages the expected deceptive
qualities and expected final result, going broke, are similar - it simply
takes more bets to happen with smaller house percentages and less bets with
larger house percentages.

It may require a miracle to make all this into a simple pamphlet that
explains in a clear way to the average person what inevitably happens when
one continues to gamble against even the slightest of house odds, and just
how amazingly inevitable it is that all will be lost.  However, the state
has a duty to see that its citizens are fully informed in some similar
manner if it elects to take revenue from gaming machines or casinos.  The
consequences are too dire, too predictable, and yet too hidden from the
common consumer to excuse less than full disclosure.  The mathematics of
this subject may be suitable for a book, but the crucial information must
be made available and understandable to the gambling public in some very
simple fashion.  Perhaps a video or advertising of some kind would be
helpful.  A marketing miracle is required to get enough gambler interest in
the subject to make it possible to communicate the subtleties.  Though the
details are subtle, the outcome and the degree of certainty is not subtle
for the gambler who will not permanently quit, and this affects the
community as a whole.

The idea that past losses mean soon to be realized wins is called the
"gambler's fallacy".  It is well known that this is an addictive fallacy to
entertain, for it justifies continued betting in the face of steady losses.
Even so, it is ironic that the numbers presented here, developed through
random walk analysis, show that yet another of the fundamental errors in
thinking that people make is to think of every bet as a "new day", a chance
to start over, to change luck, when in fact this also is not true at all.
It is further ironic that one of the first things taught in probability
theory is the nature of independent vs dependent events.  Most well
educated gamblers are taught to think of each event, each roll of the dice,
as an independent event.  This is true only in an academic sense when
applied to human gambling, that a specific roll of the dice is an
independent event.   The successive rolls of the dice are not independent
if the gambler has a finite purse.  They are all made dependent by the
limits of what the gambler has available to bet.  This limitation changes
the nature of the situation into a random walk with boundaries, and when
there are such boundaries they will eventually be crossed.

The numbers presented here are tedious, but necessary to this article.
They  are the prima facie indicators of what is really happening in casinos
today, and the fundamental facts for this article. No field investigation
of other facts is essential to the understanding of the principle points
here. It is the accuracy of the numbers that is essential to the basic
truth being presented.  Unfortunately, the common person has no access to
random walk analysis.  Only the derived odds thus have real meaning, and
some of the most meaningful of these odds or expectancies are presented and
interpreted here for the first time.

If the house has any advantage at all, it can be expected to take the
gambler's purse given enough time.  It is not commonly known just how short
a time that is.  At typical house percentages and bettor purses of about
100 bets the amount of time it takes the house to cause the gambler to go
broke, to "fleece" the gambler, is astonishingly short.  The odds for being
fleeced grow rapidly and grow arbitrarily large with gambling time.
Advertising that does not accurately and fully communicate this is
misleading.

Perhaps this insight, this perspective on gambling, offers a new means to
fight the apparent injustice, through the same means the cigarette industry
was fought ... in the courts.  The gambling industry clearly knows the
score, so is its advertising fair?  Is the public properly informed?

In Alaska the issue of revenue generation by gambling could politically
boil down to a choice of the lessor of two evils.  Given a choice between a
lottery and gambling machines or casinos, a monthly lottery is by far the
most fair and least harmful to the public.  The consistent long term
gambler is more likely to win the lottery than to avoid losing all or the
majority of what he bets long term.  A lottery, due to the long time
between bets, and the fully advertised odds, lacks the deceptive quality
that is inherent in gambling machines and casino games.  The lottery would
be even less harmful to Alaskans for the benefit provided if designed to
attract out of state money.

It might be asked why a monthly lottery with a 50 percent take and less
than a chance in a million of winning could be considered far less harmful
and addictive than, say, betting red or black in roulette, which has an
about 5.263 percent house take and nearly even chances of winning each bet.
The answer is that the roulette player typically places much more than a
single bet.  According to Ian B William's "Slot Machines: Fun Machines or
Tax Machines", $51 billion a year is spent in the US on casino gambling,
and about 70 percent of that on slot machines.  If the typical gambler bet
only a few times, then each slot machine and table would have lines of
people going out the door and down the street.  This is not what you see at
casinos.  People bet repeatedly for long periods. Repeated betting
increases the expected house win amount drastically.

To see which is better, a monthly lottery or roulette, take a look at the
expected purse amounts for the two alternatives over the one month period
of the lottery.  If a gambler has $100 to bet for that time he will likely
gamble it all away.  His expected purse value after the 100 hours or so of
roulette gambling time possible during the month will be a tiny fraction of
a cent.  If a roulette wheel has 38 slots then 2 will be without color (or
green, house take) and 18 will be black and 18 red. The house take will be
about 5.26 cents per dollar bet.  Due to a typical house $5 minimum the
gambler's $100 will likely only be a 20 bet purse.  If allowed to make $1
bets the gambler will have a 100 bet purse and can expect to be broke in
less than 1900 bets, or less than about 19 hours of betting.  He will
probably try to obtain even more money with which to vindicate himself.
The following table shows in 100 bet intervals the probability of being
broke and the expected value of the purse for roulette color bettors that
start with a 20 bet purse.

Number of bets in better's starting purse 20
House percentage = 5.263  percent

 Bet  Prob. Alive       Expected Value
----  --------------    ---------------

 100  0.881083267382    14.891433066690
 200  0.619848498510    10.952448130541
 300  0.435274926086     8.199805170679
 400  0.313261560357     6.245178037378
 500  0.230621461565     4.823106110599
1000  0.062016797315     1.514700202615
2000  0.007334798455     0.206508730270
3000  0.001127300806     0.034033899035
4000  0.000195968405     0.006173086380
5000  0.000036627971     0.001187554885
6000  0.000007182650     0.000237810615
6900  0.000001707388     0.000057358537

The roulette gambler at a 5.263 percent house take and a $100 to bet at $5
a bet can expect to be broke in less than 3 hours.  In fact, from the
table, you can see that at bet 300, about 3 hours, he has a 43.5274926086
percent chance of being alive.  He has about 1.7 chances in a million of
lasting 6900 bets, or about 69 hours of betting during the month, and only
a small fraction of a cent expected purse value by that time.

At $5 a bet and 100 bets an hour he can be expected to lose 0.05263 *
$5/bet * 100 bets/hour = $26.32 per hour.  If he has 100 hours to gamble in
the month, and does so, he can be expected to lose about $2,632 per month.
The estimated 100 bets per hour may be high, and a lower bet rate will
reduce the expected loss per hour.

The lottery ticket buyer probably will not even spend the full $100 on
tickets, unless there are lots of quick turnaround small pots, which will
in fact act just like casino gambling.  A single large pot can be expected
to attract out of state money - especially when no winner shows up and the
expected win becomes positive on a subsequent "let it ride" round.  But
lets assume the lottery player does spend the full $100 on the lottery in
order to compare apples to apples.  Lotteries typically take about half the
proceeds.  The $100 provides about a $50 expected purse at the end, as
opposed to the small expected fraction of a cent purse for the roulette
gambler that bets more than 70 hours.

Typically both betters end up broke.  However, the lottery ticket buyer is
more likely to stay on budget, more likely to win, and will definitely be
provided the truth about his approximate odds.  If the lottery goes into a
"let it ride" round, the ticket buyer may even end up with more than fair
odds.  Lastly, the lottery ticket buyer really only needs to buy one ticket
a month to keep his dream alive. The machine gambler has to find a way to
keep feeding the beast to keep his dream alive.

The National Gambling Impact Study Commission Report of June 18, 1999
states: "... government decisions regarding the introduction and regulation
of legalized gambling would best be made according to a well defined
policy, one formulated with specific goals and limits in mind.  While
governments have established a variety of regulatory structures, it is not
at all clear that these have been guided a coherent gambling policy or even
that those making the decisions have had a clear idea of the larger purpose
they want to promote. ... Instead, much of what exists is far more the
product of incremental and disconnected decisions, often taken in reaction
to the pressing issues of the day, than one based on sober assessments of
long term needs, goals, and risks."

The numbers presented here clearly show that the need for prevention of
deceptive advertising and the need for full disclosure and public education
with regard to expected gambling outcomes together provide a much needed
focus to government gambling policy.  The issues being addressed are
clearly far more fundamental than those being considered only in Alaska,
but rather affect and involve the entire country.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 08:03:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA09369;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 08:02:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 08:02:57 -0700
Message-ID: <003d01c317ce$59da81e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <20030511011825.43156.qmail web41506.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 08:02:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA09298
Resent-Message-ID: <"YwPSp2.0.CI2.WOcl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50481
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Harvey Norris wrote

> What becomes fascinating however is the much better
> continuity of DC induction arcs. 

It would be interesting to try this with your "ellis process water"
to determine how much H2 can be produced that way... or the minimum energy input that it takes to sustain a flame...

HN: "a most unusual claim is made. The changed bonded angle water: like keys fitting into locks of other water molecules may also change that water's bonding angles, when mixed as a concentrate to other supplies. Thus a "small change" can bring about a great change."

To be honest, I think this explanation is way off-base. The bonding angle of water is extremely flexible and can change + or - 25% in microseconds. It does so constantly. When you read that hydrogen has a 106 degree angle that is just an average measured over billions of molecules at a given temp and very few will actually have that exact angle at any given time. If a permanent change occured, however, it would probably be due to one of the protons having a reduced or greater charge (ala the hydrino) and that would be another story.

HN " Hopefully this could ignite the steam into a sort of miniture Browns gas generator. Doubtful, but interesting nevertheless."

Maybe not that doubtful. I believe that your idea is similar and just as probably as the Mizuno device and there is a real application for a mixed gas electrolysis stream - which is really the focus of this thread anyway - using that mixed gas stream quickly in a converted IC engine ! You only have to keep the gas stream from igniting for about 20 milliseconds for it to be useful.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 11:03:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA17803;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 11:01:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 11:01:58 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500bae439f4e133 [12.21.208.67]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 10:04:50 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"mxzwB2.0.0M4.L0fl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50482
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following is an idea for a high efficiency electrolyser, especially
those where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a mixed
product.  This requires no free energy magic, but can be used in
combination with free energy magic ideas to greatly improve gas evolution
efficienciy in electrolytic processes.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currenty rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement forces.

The method suggested here to solve this problem is to place the plates in a
centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  The plates are thus in circular form
with annular holes with radial spokes, with insulating spacers and/or axial
bolts included to hold tha plate array together.  This permits the
effectivness of gravity in removing bubbles to be increased by two or more
orders of magnitude.  The process is made continuous by replenishing the
electrolyte and retrieving the evolved gas through a central open space in
the centrifuge and/or through a hollow central rotor shaft.  The
electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical plate
containing tank.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrigual Electrolysis Device


The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.

Using this technique, plate separation can be made almost arbitrarily
close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need for plate
structural strength.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 11:19:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA27249;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 11:18:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 11:18:10 -0700
Message-ID: <002501c317e9$9f017ec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae439f4e133 [12.21.208.67]>
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 11:17:45 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA27199
Resent-Message-ID: <"iYAAE.0.bf6.YFfl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50483
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Just a wild idea...

If you are going to use rotating plates to greatly improve gas evolution
efficiency, and  - given that you only need a few volts anyway - at very high amperage, why not sandwich thin disc magnets between the plates and make the whole cell into a kind of self-contained homopolar generator?

Jones

Oh, almost forgot...

"This requires no free energy magic, but can be used in
combination with free energy magic ideas"

Lets see...that would be in aspitating the whole thing at the intake port of an ICE so that air is carrying the mix immediately into a combustion chamber...

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 12:13:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA31954;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 12:11:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 12:11:16 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530502bae44f5fe979 [12.21.211.52]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 11:14:08 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: High efficiency electrolyser, improved
Resent-Message-ID: <"gFcbf2.0.2p7.J1gl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50484
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following is an idea for a high efficiency electrolyser, especially
those where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a mixed
product, or gas only evolves from one plate.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currenty rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement forces.

The method suggested here to solve this problem is to place the plates in a
centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  The plates are thus in circular form
with annular holes with radial spokes, with insulating spacers and/or axial
bolts included to hold tha plate array together.  This permits the
effectivness of gravity in removing bubbles to be increased by two or more
orders of magnitude.  The process is made continuous by replenishing the
electrolyte and retrieving the evolved gas through a central open space in
the centrifuge and/or through a hollow central rotor shaft.  The
electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical plate
containing tank.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrigual Electrolysis Device


The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.

Using this technique, plate separation can be made almost arbitrarily
close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need for plate
structural strength.

When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous
(essentially transparent to hydrogen)  but structually strong material as a
supporting structure for a  Pd surfaced anode in the centrifuge.  Such a
material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size
required for the support of the Pd.  A gradation of granularity can be made
to occur, wwith the fines granularity at the anode surface.  The Pd coated
anode's interior would then either be hollow or very porous, so as to
conduct the H2 gas away from the electrolyser directly through the plate
interior and then through a hollow supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for
the plate, and to a hollow central rotor.  In this manner, only O2 would
evolve between the plates.

H2 flows easily through Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g force
of the centrifuge certainly provides the required pressure.

If such a hollow or porous anode technique proves viable in practice,
especially as combined with high g electrolysis, it could have major
signifcance on wordlwide energy supplies and the building of a hydrogen
infrastructure in particular.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 12:37:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA15065;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 12:35:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 12:35:50 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 15:35:54 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-Tyba2.0.Jh3.MOgl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50485
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Yesterday was record day, and last week a record week:

5/10/2003: 2,928 downloads

Week of 5/4 - 5/10: 9,057 downloads, 3,586 visitors (also a record)

Grand total downloads: 91,656

The previous record was 3 weeks ago: 7,059 downloads. As I have mentioned, 
these things seem to come in recurring waves. A peak is followed by a week 
or two of lower activity, which build up to a new peak. I have not uploaded 
much new material lately, so I did not cause it.

I thought perhaps these waves occur because it takes new readers a few 
weeks to absorb the material and recommend it to a new batch of friends. 
But that does not makes sense. There are many behaviors that require pauses 
for individuals. For example, for humans to reproduce there is a 20 year 
pause (a generation). For a disease to probagate there may be a 1 week 
incubation period. But these pauses occur on an individual basis. With a 
large group of people, there is a steady flow of new children or new cases 
of SARs, with no trace of the pause, except for things such as the baby 
boom, and the baby-boom echo 1 and 2 generations later.

Perhaps people reading LENR-CANR imitate the 17-year locusts (cicadas, 
actually), and act in waves periodically for some reason. Apparently they 
do. Perhaps our readers are actually mutant pod people?!?

I have noticed the peak days have often shifted from midweek to weekends. I 
am not sure what to make of that, either. Also, the distribution of 
documents downloaded has broadened. Single authors no longer dominate as 
much. Finally, the hourly histogram may indicate a slight increase in 
visitors from the North American time zones, as opposed to people who read 
at 2:00 a.m.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 13:43:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA28159;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 13:41:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:41:40 -0700
Message-ID: <3EBEB569.3060607 cox.net>
Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:41:13 -0700
From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Organization: ISUS
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
References: <v01530500bae439f4e133 [12.21.208.67]> <002501c317e9$9f017ec0$0a016ea8@cpq>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xrHv92.0.vt6.3Mhl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50486
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I think rotating the plates is an excellent idea.  This reminds me of 
several other experiments I did on
my Pons-Flesichmann cell.

(Early picture:  http://www.turbotip.webhop.net/fusion.jpg )

I put a 40KHz ultrasonic transducer inside the cell.  The results were 
fewer but much larger bubbles,
probably not what you want. Combined with rotation, though, it may be 
what you want.

I also passed a large current (10A)  lengthwise through the palladium 
rod in addition to the voltage difference between
it and the platinum wrapping.  I didn't notice anything spectacular from 
that.  It would, I think, tend to make
the ion path longer, again, probably not what you want.

I put a large coil around the cell and tried both DC, AC, a combination 
of both, and large pulse discharge currents
through it.  Except for the explosive noises, I didn't notice anything 
spectacular either :-( .

(I don't have the instrumentation to notice anything but large effects, 
which is really what I wanted anyway.)

I don't recall trying a 3-phase rotating magnetic field around the cell, 
but wanted to.

I wanted to rotate the entire apparatus, and have theoretical reasons 
why that might help (not centrifugal force),
but the difficulty in doing that was too great.

The most bizarre result was when I raised the entire apparatus to -40KV. 
 I have theoretical reasons
why that will help too.  We always treat voltage as a "potential 
difference", but really, it's an absolute,
e.g. if the two plates of a capacitor have a potential difference, the 
capacitor is "charged", but if both
plates are absolutely positive for example they will repel instead of 
attract.  Based on Larson's reciprocal system
of physics, injecting an excess of electrons into the apparatus should 
increase the D packing in Pd. When the
polarity is reversed, the effective compression should be enhanced. ( 
see: http://www.rsystem.org/ce/ )

What I noticed that was bizarre, though, was that the rubber stopper in 
the jar moved down an inch or two into
the neck.   It was no easy job getting the stopper in even a quarter 
inch to start, and I feared the stresses with
that were close to breaking the glass.  The cell had been running for 
weeks before that with no movement
of the stopper, and it was a near vacuum inside the cell (due to a 
Hydrocap recombiner). I was sure startled to
see it in so far.  I'll never be able to get it out!  Do you know what 
effect that was? Maybe piezoelectric expansion
of the glass or compression of the stopper?

The most spectacular result was discharging the 2000Volt 200 microfard 
caps directly into the cell
(about once a second for weeks).   It may not do anything for energy 
production, but is sure is a loud sounding
explosion, and yields a beautiful red (from Li)  1" dia sphere of plasma 
:-) . I initially thought that was close to
shattering the glass, but it is ~1/4" thick pyrex and didn't break.

Another thing I'd like to try is to mount the Pd in two bearings one at 
a slight angle and rotate it. That
would create alternating compression and expansion of the rod.

Does somebody want to try all these things at once?   If there's a large 
crater where your lab used to be,
the experiment was successful :-) .

( Hitting a D  loaded piece of palladium with a sledgehammer also yields 
a fairly spectacular explosion -- kids,
don't do that at home :-) ).


Hoyt Stearns,
Scottsdale Arizona




Jones Beene wrote:

>Just a wild idea...
>
>If you are going to use rotating plates to greatly improve gas evolution
>efficiency, and  - given that you only need a few volts anyway - at very high amperage, why not sandwich thin disc magnets between the plates and make the whole cell into a kind of self-contained homopolar generator?
>
>  
>


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 14:00:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA08352;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 13:59:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:59:17 -0700
Message-ID: <3EBEB9A1.3000808 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 16:59:13 -0400
From: Terry Blanton <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"47R2k3.0.J22.achl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50487
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> For a disease to probagate there may be a 1 week incubation period. 
> But these pauses occur on an individual basis. With a large group of 
> people, there is a steady flow of new children or new cases of SARs, 
> with no trace of the pause, except for things such as the baby boom, 
> and the baby-boom echo 1 and 2 generations later.


Assuming a single source of the infection and a rapid distribution, 
would not there be a natural pause or wave to the propagation of SARS? 
 With a incubation period of one week, I should expect a pause in new 
cases every week.  Of course, this wave would disperse quickly in a 
large population.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 11 15:52:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA16313;
	Sun, 11 May 2003 15:50:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 15:50:24 -0700
Message-ID: <009301c3180f$a41f5a00$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae439f4e133 [12.21.208.67]> <002501c317e9$9f017ec0$0a016ea8@cpq> <3EBEB569.3060607@cox.net>
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 15:49:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA16238
Resent-Message-ID: <"RFyaB3.0.g-3.lEjl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50488
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Wow, Hoyt all I can say about your range of P&F experiments is that you are indeed a brave man...and let's hope your insurance policy is current  ;-)

Are you working on improved electrolysis now? 

If so, I will try to raise the ante on Horace's improved cell idea with this one...which is maybe a little simpler and is also designed for a mixed gas output (that will explosively recombine if not put to use immediately). Of course, if the cell were OU, I have in mind the ultimate aim of either using its output in a converted IC engine or burning it immediately for heat.

You have seen Naudin's Bingo-fuel project, right? OK imagine that the plastic cell part of that design has been completely modified with an AC motor drive on top of it with an extended hollow shaft into the plastic vessel, maybe 1.5 in dia.. The hollow shaft is completely riddled with holes, as is the part of the shaft extends a ways outside of the vessel - so that air can be drawn through the hollow shaft as it is rotating. The motor is driven by the output of the genset.

There is no other electrical connection going into the cell ! It is all to be self-generated by the homopolar arrangement that follows. This will be the modified version of the homopolar that has both the magnets and the plates spinning. This guy has taken credit for it:
http://www.geocities.com/reactor1967/nmach.htm
But the same arrangement has been known for a long time and I think it is on Bill B's site. It is pretty amazing that you get the same or greater current even when both the magnets and the conductors spin!

Along the length of the shaft will be spaced-apart layers of nickel plated washers alternating with disc magnets and some kind of notched spacers so that air/water can be circulated through the shaft and across the plates as the whole shebang is rotating. The gases created by electrolysis will be expelled axially and will rise and are then drawn off the top into the engine intake manifold, while the electrolyte is recirculated by gravity dropping down and then back to the hollow tube.

I envision NO wiring whatever!! The electrolysis will take place on every plate individually, not on facing plates, and the voltage gaps will be the variation between the inside diameter and the outside diameter of each disk itself . Actually I have reason to believe (and some results to prove it) that a voltage difference of as little as one volt maybe less, will be enough to electrolyze when you have a rapidly moving flow of water plus hydrated electrons undergoing phase-change.

I know this is hard to follow without some kind of image, so perhaps I will leave the verbosity on hold at this time and try to draw up a JPEG to better express the idea. Or maybe I'll just wander over to Home Depot and start looking for parts.

At least with this design, one won't be floating 40,000 volts with a fair amount of combustible gas in a glass beaker! 

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 08:25:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA18089;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 08:21:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 08:21:54 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>, "Horace Heffner" <hheffner@mtaonline.net>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 11:40:58 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCENLDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bae26f80efc7 [12.21.211.199]>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZUnRk1.0.YQ4.Imxl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50489
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Horace.

I should be more precise; I used a single elevated
electrode above the electrolyte pool, which was
grounded with a large surface area electrode.
The driver was an induction coil, resonant in
the low AM band. The result was a radial pattern
of discharge, making a 90 degree turn at the
electrolytes surface. Your two elevated electrodes
sound interesting, but if I couldn't get
a single electrode circuit to penetrate I
feel less sanguine about the two electrode system.

Thanks to the wonders of the internet, I found
a nice article describing this phenomena ( had
I only known when I did the experiment... )

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/Radials.pdf

Figure three in the paper shows exactly what I
saw, albeit at a MUCH larger scale than I attempted.
My arc was about 1-2cm, the electrolyte pool being
no more than 100ml or so. I found my notes on the
subject, if you want more details, it seems I
did this in april of '95.

Horace writes:
>My experience is that the electrons penetrate OK (consider electrocution to
>wet ground) but it is difficult to sustain an arc.   There is also or
>course a major difference between a maximally condutive electrolyte and
>pure water.

What is your experience here???? What experimental technique
did you use to get the arc to go into the electrolyte???

I wrote:
>PS: That's why electrons are stored in "cat"pacitors.

and you replied
>Not sure what you mean here.

Jeeze, I realize what a bad pun that was, but come on Horace... (grin).

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net]
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 5:24 AM
To: knagel gis.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines


At 7:29 PM 5/9/3, Keith Nagel wrote:
>Horace writes:
>>An experiment I would try is to make two arcs right above and skimming the
>>electrolyte  surface.  The arcs would be driven by transformer secondaries
>>and thus would be electrically isolated.
>
>I've tried this sort of thing in the past. It's hard
>to get the arc to go directly into the pool of electrolyte.


That is exactly why I suggest the arc be between two electrodes and
parallel to the surface of the water, but touching the water.  This permits
maintaining the arc with low voltage current.  An directly arc to water is
damped by the steam and requires over 100 volts to sustain.  The means I
suggest may provide a plasma-water interface at comparatively low energy
cost. At least that is the idea behind the suggestion.  It may not work
well due to a thin layer of steam forming right above the electrolyte.
Even so, the device would at worst be back to a Mizuno type 100 volt plus
steam sheath regime, but without concern about cathode damage.


>Electrons are a bit like cats, when you throw them at
>a body of water, they just somehow sort of manage to
>be moving parallel to the waters surface, and the arc
>doesn't really penetrate.


My experience is that the electrons penetrate OK (consider electrocution to
wet ground) but it is difficult to sustain an arc.   There is also or
course a major difference between a maximally condutive electrolyte and
pure water.


>I was using an RF arc; and
>I seem to remember seeing pictures of lightning strikes
>on water that looked the same way, L shaped.


Well that IS interesting.  Perhaps this is because the high humidity near
the water surface increases air conductivity?


>
>But my intent was as you describe, a way of getting
>a different sort of electrolysis.
>
>K.
>
>PS: That's why electrons are stored in "cat"pacitors.


Not sure what you mean here.


One thought I did not mention was to test an arc used as a cathode above a
very shallow electrolyte pool with a flat metal bottom as anode.  A better
alternative to the shallow pool might be to use a rotating disk with a thin
layer of outwardly flowing  electrolyte maintained on it.  This would
provide a low resistance electrolyte, but would have the disadvantage of
still having the potential drop at the anode interface.  The good part is
that oxygen bubble scrubbing of the anode disk surface could then be done
by a stationary wiper blade, though the water flow would also tend to scrub
the blade.  I posted this wiper blade scrubber idea here on vortex some
years ago, but it seems to work nicely in this context.   I think the
energy for mechanical bubble scrubbing is far less than that used for
electrolysis, and is more than offset by reduced cell resistance and
increased effective plate area.  Unfortunately, the blade could not rotat
very fast or the arc would be extinguished.

Regards,

Horace Heffner



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 08:57:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA05098;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 08:53:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 08:53:56 -0700
Message-ID: <001101c3189e$abaf5600$5c92cbc1 pc>
From: "Noel Whitney" <quantum iol.ie>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae439f4e133 [12.21.208.67]> <002501c317e9$9f017ec0$0a016ea8@cpq> <3EBEB569.3060607@cox.net>
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 16:53:40 +0100
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: <"bVwL03.0.aF1.JEyl-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50490
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

HOYT - i HOPE MY MAIL REACHES YOU BEHIND THE 10 FOOT REINFORCED CONCRETE
WALLS OF YOUR BUNKER??

man you are either brave or a honary member of Jackass!

I tried to get to  http://www.turbotip.webhop.net/fusion.jpg  but had no
luck , coming up - "Web page not available - have you access to this or has
the address changed??

Appreciate yr help/

Noel Whitnet
Quantum leap , Watson road , dublin Ireland.
----- Original Message -----
From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 9:41 PM
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser


> I think rotating the plates is an excellent idea.  This reminds me of
> several other experiments I did on
> my Pons-Flesichmann cell.
>
> (Early picture:  http://www.turbotip.webhop.net/fusion.jpg )
>
> I put a 40KHz ultrasonic transducer inside the cell.  The results were
> fewer but much larger bubbles,
> probably not what you want. Combined with rotation, though, it may be
> what you want.
>
> I also passed a large current (10A)  lengthwise through the palladium
> rod in addition to the voltage difference between
> it and the platinum wrapping.  I didn't notice anything spectacular from
> that.  It would, I think, tend to make
> the ion path longer, again, probably not what you want.
>
> I put a large coil around the cell and tried both DC, AC, a combination
> of both, and large pulse discharge currents
> through it.  Except for the explosive noises, I didn't notice anything
> spectacular either :-( .
>
> (I don't have the instrumentation to notice anything but large effects,
> which is really what I wanted anyway.)
>
> I don't recall trying a 3-phase rotating magnetic field around the cell,
> but wanted to.
>
> I wanted to rotate the entire apparatus, and have theoretical reasons
> why that might help (not centrifugal force),
> but the difficulty in doing that was too great.
>
> The most bizarre result was when I raised the entire apparatus to -40KV.
>  I have theoretical reasons
> why that will help too.  We always treat voltage as a "potential
> difference", but really, it's an absolute,
> e.g. if the two plates of a capacitor have a potential difference, the
> capacitor is "charged", but if both
> plates are absolutely positive for example they will repel instead of
> attract.  Based on Larson's reciprocal system
> of physics, injecting an excess of electrons into the apparatus should
> increase the D packing in Pd. When the
> polarity is reversed, the effective compression should be enhanced. (
> see: http://www.rsystem.org/ce/ )
>
> What I noticed that was bizarre, though, was that the rubber stopper in
> the jar moved down an inch or two into
> the neck.   It was no easy job getting the stopper in even a quarter
> inch to start, and I feared the stresses with
> that were close to breaking the glass.  The cell had been running for
> weeks before that with no movement
> of the stopper, and it was a near vacuum inside the cell (due to a
> Hydrocap recombiner). I was sure startled to
> see it in so far.  I'll never be able to get it out!  Do you know what
> effect that was? Maybe piezoelectric expansion
> of the glass or compression of the stopper?
>
> The most spectacular result was discharging the 2000Volt 200 microfard
> caps directly into the cell
> (about once a second for weeks).   It may not do anything for energy
> production, but is sure is a loud sounding
> explosion, and yields a beautiful red (from Li)  1" dia sphere of plasma
> :-) . I initially thought that was close to
> shattering the glass, but it is ~1/4" thick pyrex and didn't break.
>
> Another thing I'd like to try is to mount the Pd in two bearings one at
> a slight angle and rotate it. That
> would create alternating compression and expansion of the rod.
>
> Does somebody want to try all these things at once?   If there's a large
> crater where your lab used to be,
> the experiment was successful :-) .
>
> ( Hitting a D  loaded piece of palladium with a sledgehammer also yields
> a fairly spectacular explosion -- kids,
> don't do that at home :-) ).
>
>
> Hoyt Stearns,
> Scottsdale Arizona
>
>
>
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
> >Just a wild idea...
> >
> >If you are going to use rotating plates to greatly improve gas evolution
> >efficiency, and  - given that you only need a few volts anyway - at very
high amperage, why not sandwich thin disc magnets between the plates and
make the whole cell into a kind of self-contained homopolar generator?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 10:57:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA28858;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 10:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 10:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030512130725.02d893b0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 13:29:01 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
In-Reply-To: <3EBEB9A1.3000808 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"rDFPf1.0.i27.a_zl-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50491
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>>For a disease to probagate there may be a 1 week incubation period. But 
>>these pauses occur on an individual basis. With a large group of people, 
>>there is a steady flow of new children or new cases of SARs, with no 
>>trace of the pause, except for things such as the baby boom, and the 
>>baby-boom echo 1 and 2 generations later.
>
>Assuming a single source of the infection and a rapid distribution, would 
>not there be a natural pause or wave to the propagation of SARS? With a 
>incubation period of one week, I should expect a pause in new cases every week.

Right. When there is only a single source of infection, you should see a 
step-shaped graph, with discrete increases, or quanta -- I guess you might 
call them.


>   Of course, this wave would disperse quickly in a large population.

Exactly. And after it does that, the steps smooth out. Suppose the 
incubation period varies from 4 to 10 days, depending on the patient and 
severity of the attack. (I just made up those numbers.) After a while, with 
many people spreading the disease at different rates, the upticks blend 
into a solid curve. On the individual level it is still a quantum change. 
If you look closely at detailed data following up on individual patients 
who are known to have spread the disease, you will still see discrete 
points, separated 4 to 10 days apart. But there will be so many people 
infecting so many others at varying rates, the overall curve will be smooth.

Suppose an imaginary, science-fiction disease has an incubation period of 
precisely 95 hours, 14 minutes, 32 seconds; every patient manages to infect 
an average of two people the moment he becomes contagious; and he drops 
dead an hour later, so he is not longer contagious. Then you would see 
discrete steps all the way along, even when there were thousands of 
carriers. The world would end in . . . 140 days. The graph would look 
somewhat like the 1918 pandemic, when some people thought the world *was* 
coming to an end. See:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/virus/uda/flustat.html

What is frightening about SARS in China, as of last Friday, is that health 
officials can no longer trace every patient back to the source of 
infection. (The previous patient, I mean.) About half the patients have 
unknown sources of infection. That is the sign of an epidemic going out of 
control; health officials can no longer tell who should be quarantined. 
This was described on the Japanese NHK national television news on Friday. 
(NHK tends to be more technical than U.S. news, somewhat like the BBC.) NHK 
also reports good news on SARS. When doctors and nurses take suitable 
precautions, their own infection rate falls by a factor of 17.


Getting back to the LENR-CANR stats, Ed Storms thinks we are now seeing an 
exponential increase. I hope so! I hope no one tries to quarantine us. I 
doubt they will. Entrenched establishments seldom recognize a serious new 
threat until it is too late.

I wondered whether LANR-CANR is acting as a single source of infection, 
analogous to a contaminated well that causes an cholera outbreak. Perhaps 
this might explain the periodicity? As of now, as far as I know, LENR-CANR 
is the only "source of infection" for CF papers. Of course people may be 
passing copies around without our knowledge. Mirror sites may later be set 
up. However, I think this has no bearing on the "infection rate." It would 
with a real disease such as cholera, but the Internet allows frictionless 
access from anywhere on earth. Anyone can be "infected" with the knowledge 
of CF anywhere, with equal ease.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 11:19:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA29423;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 11:17:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 11:17:07 -0700
Message-ID: <3EBFE548.4060503 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:17:44 -0400
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030512130725.02d893b0@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"wXLoI.0.bB7.ZK-l-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50492
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Getting back to the LENR-CANR stats, Ed Storms thinks we are now 
> seeing an exponential increase. I hope so! I hope no one tries to 
> quarantine us. I doubt they will. Entrenched establishments seldom 
> recognize a serious new threat until it is too late. 


I have also noted decreased activity by sceptics on various fora.  Of 
course, this could be a totally independent phenomenon.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 13:22:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA29229;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 13:19:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 13:19:08 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030512155117.02d84ff0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 16:16:42 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
In-Reply-To: <3EBFE548.4060503 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030512130725.02d893b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"jggpS2.0.b87.y60m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50493
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>I have also noted decreased activity by sceptics on various fora.  Of 
>course, this could be a totally independent phenomenon.

Do you mean sci.physics.fusion? I have not been following it closely, but I 
think the number of messages over there is declining, and I have not seen 
any extended discussion of the papers on LENR-CANR. This surprised me. I 
thought posting papers on Internet would be like waving red meat at 
starving wolves. I thought those people would post hundreds of angry 
messages ridiculing the papers. I was hoping they would, because it would 
attract attention to the field. As they say in show business, any publicity 
is good publicity.

This reminds me of an amusing and telling incident described in the book, 
"Soul of a New Machine." Soon after Data General started up it began to 
hurt DEC's business. DEC salesmen began warning their customers not to deal 
with this unscrupulous new upstart company. Shrewd DP managers soon began 
calling Data General's sales department saying, "tell me about this 
dangerous new company of yours, that DEC keeps warning me about."

Sigh . . . How the mighty have fallen. It is amazing how a tiny, 
incremental change like the transition from mini to microcomputers had a 
drastic effect on giant companies like DEC and Data General. They never 
even tried to compete. They just gave up, and vanished. For that matter, C. 
Christensen describes how the transition from 14" hard disks to 8" ones 
wiped out a tier of industry players, and then the transition from 8" to 
5.25" wiped out *that* group, and then the next transition to 3.5" disks 
bankrupted most 5.25" makers! They never seemed to learn! Imagine what a 
difference CF will make if ever it materializes. It is a far larger jump 
than the mini => micro transition. It will probably destroy the oil 
companies and the DoE even before they even begin to respond -- before they 
know what hits them.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 14:01:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA17359;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 13:59:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 13:59:18 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC00B51.9030206 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:00:01 -0400
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030512130725.02d893b0@pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030512155117.02d84ff0@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jcG1V3.0.zE4.ai0m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50494
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>> I have also noted decreased activity by sceptics on various fora.  Of 
>> course, this could be a totally independent phenomenon.
>
>
> Do you mean sci.physics.fusion? 


Certainly the most prominent.  I have also seen skeptic silence on other 
sites.  It's almost like the doomsayers on the Iraq war, most are simply 
silent.  A few have admitted they were wrong.  Although, I have not seen 
any CF skeptics admit they were wrong . . . yet!  :-)

> Sigh . . . How the mighty have fallen. It is amazing how a tiny, 
> incremental change like the transition from mini to microcomputers had 
> a drastic effect on giant companies like DEC and Data General. They 
> never even tried to compete. 


You know what is really funny about that one?  We're turning full circle 
with the advent of thin clients (no hard drive PC w/ applications on the 
server).  The recent concept was really started by Citrix when they 
purchased the source code for Windows NT for a song; but, you have to 
hand it to Microsoft.  They recognized the potential quickly.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 14:34:54 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA03023;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 14:31:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:31:31 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030512142814.03610f30 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:33:14 -0700
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: OFF-TOPIC Re: Record week at LENR-CANR.org
In-Reply-To: <3EC00B51.9030206 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030511152017.02d20cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030512130725.02d893b0 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030512155117.02d84ff0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"mfPXh1.0.9l.pA1m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50495
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>
>You know what is really funny about that one?  We're turning full circle 
>with the advent of thin clients (no hard drive PC w/ applications on the 
>server).  The recent concept was really started by Citrix when they 
>purchased the source code for Windows NT
>for a song; but, you have to hand it to Microsoft.  They recognized the 
>potential quickly.


And then hand it to MS again for getting some of the best features of 
Citrix and putting it into Server 2003!


Steve 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 15:47:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA10909;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 15:45:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 15:45:09 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b01bae48b064070 [209.23.136.23]>
In-Reply-To: <003601c31251$a11896a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <003601c31251$a11896a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:46:16 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Bild article
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"zBCME3.0.Lg2.rF2m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50497
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I printed the website and had Leon read it. The car works well enough 
that the engineers who have looked at it have recommended that their 
backers purchase it.

This is basically the same story that Stan Meyer, and now Genesis 
World Energy have been telling. They have an electrolyzer that 
magically unhooks the two H's from the O, with almost no electrical 
energy. I assume that it would be necessary in order to get the 
justify the cost of the machinery.

The problem with the car mentioned in Teh Auto Bild article, is that 
there is no patent. As I told this guy who emailed me about his 1000 
HP magnetic car, no patent, no investment. The Inventor says that the 
"secret" behind his electrolyzer is so simple that it can't be 
patented. Dumb question, if this is so simple, why haven't you people 
figured it out? Perhaps Genesis World Energy has, we shall see.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 15:48:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA10851;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 15:45:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 15:45:04 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b00bae47f5e8329 [209.23.136.23]>
In-Reply-To: <003f01c3163b$4a73f220$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <a05111b09bae1048d4303 [209.23.136.23]>
 <003f01c3163b$4a73f220$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:46:16 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: energy from water
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"MBbMr2.0.Tf2.mF2m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50496
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>Tom,
>
>  > I'm also wondering about the production of monoatomic hydrogen, it
>
>Yes, of course...if you wait too long.
>
>But if one wanted to maximize the energy potential from 
>electrolysis,  the goal would be to get the nascent H to form 
>hydronium first, or to bind to N2 before it "finds" another H to 
>form H2. To do this you must have a situation where there is a lot 
>more molecules of N2 from the air or water vapor, than there is 
>nascent hydrogen, "looking" to bind to whatever is available at that 
>instant.

You're saying that the monoatomic hydrogen could bind with one N 
pulling it away from the other N? I remember from college chemistry 
that the N to N bond has a lot of energy, that's why nitrate based 
explosives work so well.

>
>A traditional water-based electrolysis cell won't help here because 
>all the nascent H is drawn to the same plate. This is one reason 
>that Horace's AC idea, combined with air entrainment is intriquing.



>  >IMHO, there are no free lunches.
>
>Oh, well. No cold fusion, no hydrino, no ZPE. Guess we're wasting 
>our time here on vortex...Certainly Bob Park would heartily agree 
>with you.

What I met was there has to be some explanation of were the energy is 
coming from, The three sources that you mentioned are just that. How 
does the Beta Aether differ from the ZPE?
>
>>  would the existence of the Beta-Aether account
>for the surplus energy?
>
>That is the hypothesis that I personally am working under, but I'm 
>not sure that many others are yet convinced of this.
>
>been relatively cheap till recently, there has been little incentive 
>for investigation of these older claims.
>
>Fuel still is cheap, and getting cheaper. However, the market is so 
>huge that efforts to find a new source of it are worthwhile.



>4) Try to analyze the situation in a different theoretical light so 
>that the phenomenon can be first understood and then optimized.
>
>I see the purpose of Vortex as in exploring the last option, but if 
>you want to claim no free lunch, then please, don't burden us with 
>more of the same banal verbiage that Robert Park and others have 
>been so quick to serve up - give us your real insight as to why 
>there is no free lunch in this particular case, or preferably your 
>own negative experimental results.
>
>Jones

I agree. However, I've yet to see any experimental evidence that 
either the second law, or the conservation law gotten around. That's 
why I'm skeptical of the claims of Genesis World Energy. Unless the 
Beta Aether could be used to account for the surplus energy which is 
realized when they magically decouple the H's from the O.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 16:01:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA19546;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 16:00:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 16:00:29 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530504bae5cd49a46d [12.21.211.52]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 15:03:15 -0800
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Water Fuel & And I.C. Engines
Resent-Message-ID: <"ma2gW2.0.Kn4.DU2m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50498
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:40 AM 5/12/3, Keith Nagel wrote:

>
>Thanks to the wonders of the internet, I found
>a nice article describing this phenomena ( had
>I only known when I did the experiment... )
>
>http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/Radials.pdf
>
>Figure three in the paper shows exactly what I
>saw, albeit at a MUCH larger scale than I attempted.
>My arc was about 1-2cm, the electrolyte pool being
>no more than 100ml or so. I found my notes on the
>subject, if you want more details, it seems I
>did this in april of '95.


Yes, I would like to know what voltage and current you used.  It could be
that you simply weren't driving enough current through the water to get an
arc.


>
>Horace writes:
>>My experience is that the electrons penetrate OK (consider electrocution to
>>wet ground) but it is difficult to sustain an arc.   There is also or
>>course a major difference between a maximally condutive electrolyte and
>>pure water.
>
>What is your experience here???? What experimental technique
>did you use to get the arc to go into the electrolyte???


I have not obtained an arc from an electrode away from the water surface
except by using about 15,000 V.  That made some stam, but not as much as I
would have expected from the power being supplied.  The water remained
cool.  I did not take any steam volume measurements because I saw no reason
to belileve it was abnormally high.  Maybe I should have measured it
because a low steam evolution would be as anomalous as a high one.  If
there was much in hydrogen evolution  it should have been taken care of by
recombination in the arc.

In collaboration with others, I have done a fair number of electrospark and
Mizuno like experiments, both AC and DC, where the cathode is dipped into
the electrolyte (as opposed to hung over the electrolyte) and a steam
sheath arc or arc spots form on or about the cathode.  I did the
experiments but consulted heavily with my collaborators via internet.  Most
of these experiments were run at well over 100 volts and with currents of
over 100 milliamps.  A sample is appended to this post.


>
>I wrote:
>>PS: That's why electrons are stored in "cat"pacitors.
>
>and you replied
>>Not sure what you mean here.
>
>Jeeze, I realize what a bad pun that was, but come on Horace... (grin).


Oh.... OK, joke is on me! Slow uptake.  8^)  Also gullible enough to think
there might be some new kind of feline related capacitors or something.
Could be a hair raising proposition!  8^)


My earlier thinking was that it takes very little power or voltage to
maintain a carbon arc in air.  In the right atmosphere, and possibly with
an indirectly electrically heated metal cathode, it might be possible to
sustain an arc with very low power but without destroying the arc
electrodes.  In any event, the idea was to move the arc laterally downward
until the edge of the arc touched the electrolyte.  I did something along
these lines years ago in a carbon dioxide and water vapor environment in
the hopes of making diamonds in a low pressure environment.  I don't recall
much about the experiment.

One problem with this idea is that the two electrolysis electrode arcs
would have to be fairly far apart, probably separated by a gas barrier in
order to separate out the hydrogen.  One solution to that is using the
suggested rotating disk with a thin layer of electrolyte.  That reduces the
electrolyte resistance. However, since Mizuno noticed anomalous gas
evolution in his much higher voltage much higher resistance cells, maybe
this configuration would not be necessary. The other problem is getting a
low flame resisitance.

Another idea is to direct a blowtorch like flame against the surface of the
electrolyte, and place a thus hot cathode tip into the flame.  This would
provide some amount of pre-heating and pre-ionization for the
cathode-to-electrolyte arc path.  I don't have high hopes for this approach
due to the fact that I vaguely recall that flame resistances I measured
(long ago) were too high to sustain an arc at low voltages.  However, I
don't know what would happen if you used a brown's gas flame due to the
high mobility of protons.  If a Brown's gas flame conducts well enough it
might even pay to channel all the Brown's gas back into the cathode flame
and use the excess heat and steam for heating or for driving an external
combustion engine.

This is of course all loose speculation and brainstorming.

A copy of one of my experiment reports follows.

Na2SiO3 Experiment #15  - 12/29/1997

The purpose of this experiment was to test a 0.5 g/l Na2SiO3 with Zr
electrodes using the new boiloff protocol.  The total COP derived for this
run was 1.00, with Ein = 196548 J, and Eout =   196798 J.  No compensation
was made for H2 + O2 creation energy, nor for Zr electrode oxidation, nor
for a phase difference of 25.92 deg. (power factor .899).  What is most
interesting about this test is that the COP is 1.11 if the power fator is
taken into account.

The protocol and foam box used were as described in Exp. #14.

The electrodes were the Zr electrodes you supplied. The electrode weights
in grams were:

Electrode  Before   After
     1      4.72    7.72
     2      4.08    4.04

Despite the lack of increase in electrode weight, a thick white coating
appeared on the electrodes.  One of the electrodes (2) was left in
distilled weater overnight and re-weighed. It weighed 4.03 g after sitting
overnight, indicating the coating on the electrodes is not very water
soluble.  A small amount of black powder or precipitate was noted on the
bottom of the cell after the run.  It may have been zirconium compound.

"Vol." is only known at the begining and end of the experiment, so a (not
very well) weighted average of volume consumption (steam generation) was
spread across the time of the experiment to permit an estimate of COP per
measurement interval.  The measurement intervals were chosen so as to keep
a good estimate of input power.

At the start of the experiment the sparks did not turn on immediately
despite the long prior conditioning of the electrodes, and the high
starting electrolyte temperature (100 C).  This may be partially due to the
very high insulatng quality of the film.  It appeared that, from the z-y
plot on the TDS200 scope that the breakdown voltage (either positive or
negative) was initially 320 V dropping eventually to about 280 V.  current
lead voltage on the y-t plot by 2 msec initially, then settled down to 1.2
msec during the high power portion of the run. This gives a minimum phase
angle of 25.92 deg. (power factor .899). However, the x-y I vs V curve was
very distorted.  It was basically a Z shape, with some hysteresis on top
from the capacitance.  Kind of like so:

                /|
               / /
    ----------/ /
   / /---------/
  / /
  |/

Any assesment of overunity (or not) depends on determining the true input
power in this wave form.

The electrodes glittered during the high power portion of the run, and
clearly most of the steam was generated then.

The basic data follows:

Time    V rms   I rms   Temp. C P in    P out   Tare    Amb.    Vol.    t

0       293     0.1210  100.00  0.00    0.00    0.00    25.03   418.0   0
2       293     0.1210  100.00  35.10   -0.38   9.15    25.03   418.0   2
4       302     0.0984  100.00  32.26   13.71   9.16    24.85   417.3   2
6       306     0.0860  100.00  27.74   13.71   9.18    24.70   416.5   2
8       309     0.0781  100.00  24.97   13.71   9.19    24.59   415.8   2
10      311     0.0716  100.00  22.97   13.71   9.21    24.49   415.1   2
12      312     0.0683  100.00  21.57   13.71   9.22    24.44   414.4   2
14      312     0.0636  100.00  20.37   13.71   9.22    24.38   413.6   2
16      312     0.0606  100.00  19.18   13.71   9.23    24.33   412.9   2
18      314     0.0588  100.00  18.50   13.71   9.23    24.28   412.2   2
20      315     0.0571  100.00  18.04   13.71   9.24    24.26   411.5   2
21      421     0.2110  100.00  52.87   27.42   9.25    24.15   410.7   1
22      423     0.2050  100.00  86.90   27.42   9.25    24.13   410.0   1
24      418     0.2190  100.00  88.24   83.24   9.26    24.08   405.6   2
26      419     0.2170  100.00  90.32   83.24   9.26    24.09   401.2   2
28      422     0.2100  100.00  88.87   83.24   9.26    24.07   396.8   2
30      424     0.2040  100.00  86.68   83.24   9.27    24.00   392.3   2
32      425     0.2000  100.00  84.89   83.24   9.26    24.24   387.9   2
34      425     0.2000  100.00  84.15   83.24   9.23    24.41   383.5   2
36      424     0.2010  100.00  84.26   83.24   9.21    24.58   379.1   2
38      424     0.2040  100.00  85.00   83.24   9.29    23.16   374.7   2
40      423     0.2090  100.00  86.58   83.24   9.37    23.16   370.3   2
42      421     0.2150  100.00  88.57   83.24   9.37    23.16   365.8   2
44      418     0.2180  100.00  89.91   83.24   9.37    23.16   361.4   2
46      418     0.2220  100.00  91.04   83.24   9.37    23.16   357.0   2
48      416     0.2240  100.00  92.06   83.24   9.37    23.16   352.6   2
50      416     0.2270  100.00  92.87   83.24   9.37    23.16   348.2   2
52      414     0.2300  100.00  93.88   83.24   9.37    23.16   343.8   2


Corrected "P out" and energies follows:


P in    P out   Tare    Amb.    Vol.    t       Cor     COP     E in    E out
                                                P out           joules  joules
0.00    0.00    0.00    25.03   418.0   0       0       0.00    0       0
35.10   -0.38   9.15    25.03   418.0   2       8.77    0.25    4212    1052
32.26   13.71   9.16    24.85   417.3   2       22.87   0.71    8083    3796
27.74   13.71   9.18    24.70   416.5   2       22.89   0.83    11411   6543
24.97   13.71   9.19    24.59   415.8   2       22.90   0.92    14408   9291
22.97   13.71   9.21    24.49   415.1   2       22.92   1.00    17164   12041
21.57   13.71   9.22    24.44   414.4   2       22.92   1.06    19753   14792
20.37   13.71   9.22    24.38   413.6   2       22.93   1.13    22197   17543
19.18   13.71   9.23    24.33   412.9   2       22.94   1.20    24499   20296
18.50   13.71   9.23    24.28   412.2   2       22.94   1.24    26719   23049
18.04   13.71   9.24    24.26   411.5   2       22.95   1.27    28884   25803
52.87   27.42   9.25    24.15   410.7   1       36.67   0.69    32056   28003
86.90   27.42   9.25    24.13   410.0   1       36.67   0.42    37270   30203
88.24   83.24   9.26    24.08   405.6   2       92.50   1.05    47858   41303
90.32   83.24   9.26    24.09   401.2   2       92.50   1.02    58697   52404
88.87   83.24   9.26    24.07   396.8   2       92.50   1.04    69362   63504
86.68   83.24   9.27    24.00   392.3   2       92.51   1.07    79764   74605
84.89   83.24   9.26    24.24   387.9   2       92.50   1.09    89950   85705
84.15   83.24   9.23    24.41   383.5   2       92.47   1.10    100048  96802
84.26   83.24   9.21    24.58   379.1   2       92.45   1.10    110160  107897
85.00   83.24   9.29    23.16   374.7   2       92.53   1.09    120360  119000
86.58   83.24   9.37    23.16   370.3   2       92.62   1.07    130749  130114
88.57   83.24   9.37    23.16   365.8   2       92.62   1.05    141377  141228
89.91   83.24   9.37    23.16   361.4   2       92.62   1.03    152166  152342
91.04   83.24   9.37    23.16   357.0   2       92.62   1.02    163091  163456
92.06   83.24   9.37    23.16   352.6   2       92.62   1.01    174139  174570
92.87   83.24   9.37    23.16   348.2   2       92.62   1.00    185283  185684
93.88   83.24   9.37    23.16   343.8   2       92.62   0.99    196548  196798
                                                        1.00


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 17:48:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA17477;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 17:46:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:46:31 -0700
Message-ID: <001801c318e8$e969a500$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: "vortex-L" <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Subject: solid phase sonoluminescence
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 20:45:11 -0400
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: <"hIUyb.0._G4.d14m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50499
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Good evening, gentlemen,

On my explorations through the wonderful fractal universe of porous crystal
lattices, I happened upon a thought.  One that I have ordered some crystals
to experiment with, but in foresight I wanted to tender this one to the
group to see if any prior art exists.

In sonoluminescence, we find that the rapidly collapsing dielectric boundary
of a bubble produces an energetic plasma and photon emission.  I am still up
in the air as to the prevailing opinion about SBSL - whether it is founded
in classical electrodynamics or is a vacuum interaction. At any rate, as I
was staring at zeolite lattice plots, it occured to me that if a lattice was
piezo-electric and / or could be acoustically stressed in such a way as to
vary the pore dimensions periodically (and rapidly) perhaps a solid phase SL
effect could be produced.  Two abundant natural zeolites are analcime and
stilbite, and I have ordered samples of both.  Another lattice that
fascinates me is beryl, with its Al2O3 - SiO4 tetrahedral staggered rings,
producing long hollow molecular sized channels (good for lurking ions).  By
compressing the channel dimensions of beryl acoustically, could a linearly
oriented plasma or photon release be triggered?  Maybe even like a beam,
that would shine out the ends of the c- axis.  A very powerful beam?

The Emerald Laser!

So... what say the august minds of the group?  I ordered an aquamarine and a
low grade emerald crystal as well, to play with.  If it doesn't work, well
all the special ladies in my life will have homemade jewelry for the next
couple of years.

NR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 21:25:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA22427;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 21:23:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 21:23:56 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae619719589 [12.21.211.52]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 20:26:44 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"N8_YJ3.0.JU5.SD7m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50500
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:49 PM 5/11/3, Jones Beene wrote:

>There is no other electrical connection going into the cell ! It is all to
>be self-generated by the homopolar arrangement that follows. This will be
>the modified version of the homopolar that has both the magnets and the
>plates spinning. This guy has taken credit for it:
>http://www.geocities.com/reactor1967/nmach.htm
>But the same arrangement has been known for a long time and I think it is
>on Bill B's site. It is pretty amazing that you get the same or greater
>current even when both the magnets and the conductors spin!


This is really not so amazing once you realize that magnetic lines of force
are all closed loops. The potential generated is simply a constant times
the number of conductor cuts per second times the number of lines of force.
If the homopolar had no brushes then there would be no potential because
every line of force cutting the circuit would cut it in the opposite
dirrection and thus the net circuit cuts would be zero.  It does not matter
how the magnetic field moves.  It matters only that a cut segment of the
circuit moves at an angular velocity that differs from the rest of the
circuit.  It therefore does not matter how or if the magnets move.  It also
does not matter whether the armature moves or the external circuit as long
as there is relative motion of the two.

It is apparent from the nmach.htm article that the author Clark is
absolutely clueless about homopolar theory or operation.  Based on the fact
the formula he uses to describe the generated voltage, which does not even
produce units of potential, e.g. volts, it appears he is even clueless
about basic electromagnetics as well.  It further appears that he is
clueless about the expected torque the device should produce as a motor.


[snip]
>
>I envision NO wiring whatever!! The electrolysis will take place on every
>plate individually, not on facing plates, and the voltage gaps will be the
>variation between the inside diameter and the outside diameter of each
>disk itself . Actually I have reason to believe (and some results to prove
>it) that a voltage difference of as little as one volt maybe less, will be
>enough to electrolyze when you have a rapidly moving flow of water plus
>hydrated electrons undergoing phase-change.


The most basic problem with this design is that, without brushes, there can
be no current generated.  Did I miss something in your specification?

I believe a very good way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the
electrolysis is to make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the
central shaft of the centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage
to it being magnetic from a stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on
it.  A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the segment of the core
that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of the central
centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core.  The secondary coil
output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates.  Assuming a
stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100 V, that gives about 2 V
per plate for electrolysis current.  There need be no wiring to the
individual plates, only the outermost two.  If it is desired to superimpose
a HF signal on the high current electrolytic current, then a circuit to do
so can be powered by the secondary coil or by another secondary coil in the
same location.  The rectifiers, circuitry and wiring can all be located
inside the centrifuge shaft.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 12 22:26:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA21235;
	Mon, 12 May 2003 22:25:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 22:25:43 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530502bae62778e147 [12.21.211.37]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 21:28:30 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"7x3372.0.eB5.M78m-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50501
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following is a consolidation and also includes minor corrections to the
text describing the suggested electrolyser design.

The following is an idea for a high efficiency electrolyser, especially one
where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a mixed product, or
gas only evolves from one plate.  Further, a means is provided to place
ordinary hydrogen electrolysis in these categories by extracting the
hydrogen directly by diffusion through the cathode.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement
forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure.

The method suggested here to solve the bubble problem is to place the
plates in a rotatable centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  (Fixed
proportion font required for viewing Fig. 1)  The plates are thus in
annular coaxial form with central circular holes with radial spokes
connected to a central shaft, with insulating spacers and/or axial bolts
included to hold the plate array together.  This use of a centrifugal force
on the rotating plates permits the effectiveness of removing bubbles to be
increased by two or more orders of magnitude over the use of gravity.  The
process is made continuous by replenishing the electrolyte and retrieving
the evolved gas through a central open space in the centrifuge and/or
through piping in a hollow central rotor shaft.  During rotation, the
electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical tank by
centrifugal force.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrifugal Electrolysis Device


By placing the entire apparatus inside a pressure vessel, with appropriate
plumbing and electrical connections, and temperature control, operation can
occur at high temperatures and pressures currently in use with high
efficiency electrolysers.

The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.  The largest dimension of such
particles should be about one forth the plate separation distance.

Using the methods described here, plate separation can be made almost
arbitrarily close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need
for plate structural strength and diffusion requirements.

When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous
(essentially transparent to hydrogen)  but structurally strong material as
a supporting structure for a Pd surfaced anode in the centrifuge.  Such a
material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size
required for the support of the Pd.  A gradation of granularity can be made
to occur, with the finest granularity located at the anode surface, just
below the palladium surface.  The Pd coated anode's interior would then
either be hollow or very porous, so as to conduct the H2 gas away from the
electrolyser directly through the plate interior and then through a hollow
supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for the plate, and to a hollow central
rotor.  In this manner, only O2 would evolve between the plates.  The
hydrogen principally is driven into the cathode interior by the high
operating pressure, but also by the electrolytic potential.

If momentary reverse emf pulses are used in order to disrupt the
electrolyte interface, then a high enough pressure will have to be used to
avoid significant outgassing of the hydrogen from the cathode during those
brief periods.  It is not known if this specific outgassing prevention
method is workable.  However, any outgassing at all can be expected to
momentarily disrupt the interface, so may assist in providing the intended
effect.  Operating at high temperatures and nearly boiling conditions
further places the interface under disruptive stresses, thus reducing the
electrical energy required to achieve electrolysis.

H2 flows easily through thin Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g
force of a centrifuge certainly provides sufficient pressure.

One way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the electrolysis is to
make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the central shaft of the
centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage to it being magnetic
from an external stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on it.  The
linkage between core segments can be achieved by utilizing a small gap
between the core containing segment of the shaft and holes in the C core of
a size to accept the shaft. A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the
segment of the core that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of
the central centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core.  The
secondary coil output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates.
As an example, assume a stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100
V, which gives about 2 V per plate for electrolysis current.  There need be
no wiring to the individual plates, only to the outermost two.  If it is
desired to superimpose a HF signal on the high current electrolytic
current, then a circuit to do so can be powered by the secondary coil or by
another secondary coil in the same location.  The rectifiers, circuitry and
wiring can all be located inside the centrifuge shaft.

If the hollow or porous anode technique described here proves viable in
practice, especially as combined with high g electrolysis, it could have
major significance on worldwide energy supplies and the building of a
hydrogen infrastructure in particular.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 00:55:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA01521;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 00:54:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 00:54:12 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.1.20030513092529.00aa1ea0 pop.onlinehome.de>
X-Sender: cc8592609-688 pop.onlinehome.de
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 09:57:15 +0200
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Michael Huffman <knuke sumosound.de>
Subject: Re: solid phase sonoluminescence
In-Reply-To: <001801c318e8$e969a500$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"t9PWw.0.cN.aIAm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50502
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 20:45 12.05.2003 -0400, you wrote:
>In sonoluminescence, we find that the rapidly collapsing dielectric boundary
>of a bubble produces an energetic plasma and photon emission.  I am still up
>in the air as to the prevailing opinion about SBSL - whether it is founded
>in classical electrodynamics or is a vacuum interaction. At any rate, as I
>was staring at zeolite lattice plots, it occured to me that if a lattice was
>piezo-electric and / or could be acoustically stressed in such a way as to
>vary the pore dimensions periodically (and rapidly) perhaps a solid phase SL
>effect could be produced.

Ahoy Nick!

     My thinking about SL is that it is a combination of both vacuum 
interaction and electrostatic phenomena. Your idea for an engineering 
approach is an excellent one, and it is a form of one that I suggested to 
Ross Tessien on this forum some years back, albeit mine was a bit more 
crude.  You might want to check with Ross to see if he actually did any 
experimental work along these lines.  Ross had a patent on a spherical 
cavitation reactor that, I believe, was able to achieve very high internal 
pressures, which he claimed enhanced the performance greatly.  The reactor 
was piezoelectrically driven.  My suggestion to him was that he fill the 
sphere with a lattice and sonically drive the lattice itself, hopefully 
producing far more bubble formation sites.


>   Two abundant natural zeolites are analcime and
>stilbite, and I have ordered samples of both.  Another lattice that
>fascinates me is beryl, with its Al2O3 - SiO4 tetrahedral staggered rings,
>producing long hollow molecular sized channels (good for lurking ions).  By
>compressing the channel dimensions of beryl acoustically, could a linearly
>oriented plasma or photon release be triggered?  Maybe even like a beam,
>that would shine out the ends of the c- axis.  A very powerful beam?
>
>The Emerald Laser!

   You have done more homework on this that I have, but it is obvious that 
there is a great deal of material available with which to play around in 
terms of the choice of lattice material.  The number of working fluids that 
can be experimented with is also quite large, and the mixing and matching 
of working fluids with various lattice materials could keep you amused for 
some years.  My only reservation about this technique is that, like most of 
the current CF approaches, I would guess that lattice material would not be 
able to withstand the stresses that occur when the bubbles collapse.  In 
other words, the lattice material would probably have to be changed 
periodically to maintain an optimal performance level.  What the working 
life of the lattice material may be could only be found by experiment.

   If you found a lattice material that could keep the bubbles from 
collapsing on the material surfaces - in situ, as it were - then you may 
have a winner.  There are materials that do repel bubbles, but again, I 
would have to do some research as to what they are and exactly why they work.

   In any event, good luck with your research, and please keep us 
posted.  It is especially gratifying for me to see that this 
particular  field is still alive and doing so well.  I still believe that 
it has enormous potential.

Knuke

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 05:47:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA14050;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 05:46:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 05:46:30 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500bae6936f9fd3 [12.21.208.204]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 04:49:26 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"CUTU42.0.SR3.caEm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50503
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:26 PM 5/12/3, Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
> ... Based on the fact
>the formula he uses to describe the generated voltage, which does not even
>produce units of potential, e.g. volts, it appears he is even clueless
>about basic electromagnetics as well.

This is incorrect.  My error.  The formula given, though incorrect, does
produce units of potential.  Clark does make an error in the formula,
however, in not accounting for the inner radius of the magnets.  This is
because the magnetic flux in the magnet hole goes the wrong way, i.e.
generates a counter-potential.  The situation can be improved by inclusion
of a flux directing core on the outside of the cylindrical magnets that
directs the flux away from the hole, and which also greatly increases the
magnetic flux created by the magnets by closing the magnetic circuit.  This
amplifies what Clark calls the "gauss of the magnets" by inducing magnetic
flux in the auxillary magnetic ciruit.  Again it does not matter that part
of the magnetic circuit rotates and part does not.  The total net flux
cutting per second is still dependent on the *relative* movement of the
conductor path between the brushes to the external circuit.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 06:09:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA24815;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 06:08:02 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 06:08:02 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae69e382882 [12.21.209.174]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 05:10:58 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"m9FVC1.0.Y36.ouEm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50504
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

As a matter of general interest in homopolar generators, appended is a
5/4/1997 vortex post of mine.  It may also be of interest that a similar
approach was used in a generator patented by the US military some years
alter.


                         HYBRID HOMOPOLAR


It is not possible to understand or account for the operation of a
homopolar without taking into consideration the action of the magnetic
field on both parts of the circuit.  The reference frame of the magnet is
unimportant.  There can even be multiple magnets in multiple reference
frames and their effects will still add.  It is even possible to adjust the
geometry of stator and aramture so that there is no magnet at all, the only
fields being from the stator and armature currents. You can also create
hybrid designs with mutliple mutually interacting elements, where one
armature is both the stator and magnet for the next armature, for example.


Magnetic isolation seems to me to be a completely unfruitful concept in
designing homopolars. The homopolar works by interlocking flux loops with
the circuit loop and then breaking that interlock without a cut, or vice
versa.  It is largely a topological phenomenon.  All sheilding will do is
move the cut points, and make the homopolar larger than it needs to be.  On
the other hand, use of ferrous material to close the magnetic loop and to
increase flux densities, however, provides much advantage in many homopolar
designs.

Here is a cross section of one of my designs for a hybrid homopolar:



      ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----       -----
      |   {o)   | |   (o)   | |   {o)   |      o)   |
      |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   |
      |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S|       |N S|
 (+)  |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | ...   |   |  (-)
  |   |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   |   |
  --- |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   | ---
  | (o)   | |   (o)   | |   (o)   | |   (o)     |   (o) |
  --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----       -----


  --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----       ----- ---
  | (o)   | |   (o)   | |   (o)   | |   (o)     |   (o) |
  --- |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   | ---
      |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   |
      |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | ...   |   |
      |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S| |N S|       |N S|
      |   | |   | |   | |   | |   | |   |       |   |
      |   {o)   | |   (o)   | |   (o)   |      o)   |
      ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----       -----

The central shaft and bearings, which are electrically insulated from the
above, and may even not be conductive, are not shown.  The configuration
(o) represents a ball bearing raceway. The ball bearings in the raceway
have the dual function of acting as brushes.  Any conducitve brush/bearing
combination can be substituted. The rotating circular magnets with circular
central holes are neodymium or other conductive material, or might be
plated or metallic disk clad ceramic magnets.  The important thing to the
design is that adjacent segments rotate relative to each other, which can
be achieved by having the central shaft attached to alternate segments and
having the others held steady in mounts, or by driving adajacent pairs in
opposite directions via friction wheel, belt, gear, or other mechanical
means, or any combination of means.  It is also possible to move the inner
set of bearings to interface with the shaft, and to make the shaft
conductive in segments.  There are many variations.  The important thing to
note is that adjacent segments rotate relative to each other.

To get the greatest amount of mutual rotation for the least amount of g
forces and bearing friction, the wheels should rotate in opposite
directions to each other.  So, it becomes unclear as to which is the stator
and which the armature, and in fact the role can be reversed by changing
which rotate at what rate and at what direction. It is even possible, by
eliminating one rotating element, to have an odd number of stators, and
even number of armatures, or vice versa.

The power takeoff for the unit above is at the final bearings/brushes.  If
====== represents the above segments as a unit, and II represents a
magnetic flux conduit, then it is possible to place these units in series
to achieve any kind of generator dimensions, and to preserve or close the
magnetic circuit, for example:



   (+)    --------
    |     | -    | series
  II=======II    | electrical
  II       II    | connection
  II=======II    | between
    |     | +    | units
   (-)    --------

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 08:55:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA22239;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 08:54:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 08:54:04 -0700
Message-ID: <005f01c31967$ce428e20$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bae619719589 [12.21.211.52]>
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 08:53:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA22164
Resent-Message-ID: <"TIYCd.0.PR5.SKHm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50505
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Horace Heffner wrote,

> The most basic problem with this design is that, without brushes, there can
> be no current generated.  Did I miss something in your specification?

Just a little haste... on further contemplation, it makes more sense to use stronger, fixed magnets anyway, top an bottom...that way you can get more and thinner plates along the shaft...there are a number of advantages to using as little wiring or brush interconnection as possible as this would be a very corrosive environment...

The prospect of using a cylindrical proton membrane, external to the shaft, as you suggest, also raises the possibility, if you were to somehow achieve OU in the electrolysis itself, of having a combined electrolyzer/fuel cell in one unit...but it seems to me that if OU is achieved in electrolysis itself, not in the combustion, it will somehow involve "natural" hydrated electrons...and those are found in air...

But again, my best guess on how an engine is able to sustain operation on water-fuel does NOT depend on OU electrolysis as being the key - I see electrolysis itself as only supplying a small fraction (~20 % or less) of the energy necessary to achieve OU using water-as-fuel.

The bulk of OU arises in creating high gas pressure at lower temperature than combustion, at the same time avoiding (to some extent) the normal thermodynamic and Carnot limitations of combustion. The main purpose of the modified electrolysis cell, then, is to supply the necessary chemical intermediaries to create *extremely fast* flame spread, in order to quickly raise a compressed mixture of solid particulates above the instability range.

As I have been posting previously, it appears most likely that a bootstrapping mechanism, eventually involving Beta-aether, is involved in about 80% or more, of achieving the necessary gas pressure to pull-off OU using water-as-fuel.

For convenience, I will post part of that continuing speculation below:


*Explosive Ice Instability and Water-Fuel*

Getting small ice crystals to explode violently is not an easy thing to accomplish, and there is only one study on the internet that is relevant to this process:
"Explosive Ice Instability,"  E. G. Fateev
http://www.udman.ru/sotrud/fat/Stat/432.pdf

The chart on the second page shows a critical point for Explosive Ice Instability at T ~ 225 K and P ~ 0.03 GPa. Would you ever get this in a combustion chamber of a converted ICE, when a "cold fog" of water mist mixed with H2, hydronium, HO-OH and O2 were to be drawn into the combustion chamber of a converted ICE, through an adjoining electrolysis cell, at say .5 bar of partial vacuum?

Perhaps. 

If (and only if)  that combustion mix was quickly raised in pressure to over 4,350 psi so quickly that small crystals of ice at an effective temp. of  -50 C. were still intact. This could NEVER work with any carbon containing fossil fuel mix, because of the low critical pressure of CO2, and also the slow flame spread of hydrocarbon fuel. The necessary parameters are even above the critical pressure of flash steam, but not very far above.

However, if one employed the extremely high specific impulse of atomic hydrogen combined with the high specific impulse of regular steam and the necessary "Explosive Ice Instability,"  did result, what would be the payoff?

Ever hear of bootstrapping? In this case using a small fast explosion to ignite a much larger slower explosion

Well the effective beta-aether pressure of ice on sublimation has just now been calculated by my colleague Frank Grimer.

This is preliminary, but it appears that the effective beta-aether pressure of ice on sublimation is about 2300 bar, or perhaps 30,000 psi. 

Not a bad little gain, I'd say. Use a few milligrams of electrolysis gas: hydrogen, hydronium, etc. to raise the pressure and explosively sublimate a few milligrams of finely particulated ice and you get a massively OU explosion. 

In the final analysis, this IC engine is a steam engine, and the combustion process requires a few percent of hydrogen and hydronium in the intake mix, but the bulk of the steam is created by the explosive instability of ice sublimation, and NOT by the electrolysis gases.

Jones



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 11:05:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA02817;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 11:03:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:03:21 -0700
Message-ID: <008b01c31979$dde7d080$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Pd surface interface
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:02:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3193F.310A52A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"6t5Wi3.0.xh.eDJm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50506
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_0088_01C3193F.310A52A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This reference appeared on another forum. It has relevance to LENR-CANR

http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-catalyst-surface.html


"Dissociative hydrogen adsorption on palladium requires aggregates of =
three or more vacancies," by T. Mitsui, M. K. Rose, E. Fomin, D. F. =
Ogletree, and M. Salmeron, Nature, 17 April 2003 
------=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3193F.310A52A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>This reference appeared on another forum. It has relevance to=20
LENR-CANR</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-catalyst-surfac=
e.html">http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-catalyst-surfac=
e.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Dissociative hydrogen adsorption on palladium requires aggregates =
of three=20
or more vacancies," by T. Mitsui, M. K. Rose, E. Fomin, D. F. Ogletree, =
and M.=20
Salmeron, Nature, 17 April 2003 </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3193F.310A52A0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 11:38:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA22594;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 11:35:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:35:45 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030513143225.02d64890 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:35:32 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Pd surface interface
In-Reply-To: <008b01c31979$dde7d080$0a016ea8 cpq>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"vqA2G3.0.xW5.1iJm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50507
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

That is an interesting article. The photographs from the STM are 
remarkable. I did not know they could take pictures in a fraction of a 
second with those things. I'll bet they would be useful in CF research.

I like this quote:

"This paper is a call to theorists," says Miquel Salmeron, a physicist with 
Berkeley Lab's Materials Sciences Division. "It reveals that we don't fully 
understand catalysis, even in simple systems."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 14:37:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA32722;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 14:35:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:35:18 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030513171224.00aae330 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:35:10 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: 2002 Wind Power report
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"VPwB6.0.7_7.MKMm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50508
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.awea.org/pubs/documents/GlobalWEMarketReport2003.pdf

Some interpretation of these numbers, from my spreadsheet.

Total world capacity nameplate at the end of 2002: 31,128 MW

Actual capacity (conservatively; 28% capacity factor): 8,716

The capacity factor is probably somewhat higher than this now, with taller 
towers and offshore locations, which are usually ~35%.

Average U.S. nuclear reactor size; actual, not nameplate: 920 MW

Worldwide wind capacity U.S. nuclear reactor equivalent: 9.5 reactors

Note that the U.S. has 103 reactors producing about 20% of total 
electricity, so the U.S. total is equal to ~515 nuclear reactors. Thus, 
wind power worldwide produces ~2% of U.S. total production.

Wind power production has been increasing 16 to 28% per year for the last 
10 years. Assuming it continues to expand at 23%, at the low end of recent 
growth, worldwide it will reach the equivalent of the entire present day 
U.S. production in the year 2018. By the year 2024 it will reach 100% of 
world-wide production. Actually, these projections are unrealistic for a 
couple of reasons:

1. When wind reaches about half of all production, it must compete with 
recently constructed gas and nuclear plants, which are very cheap and would 
not be cost effective to scrap in the year 2018.

2. Wind power cannot reach many people in North America, Japan and other 
high consumption areas. It could serve all of Europe.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 15:25:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA30361;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 15:22:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:22:55 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC17033.4030705 cox.net>
Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:22:43 -0700
From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Organization: ISUS
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
References: <v01530501bae69e382882 [12.21.209.174]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"nrPGZ1.0.IQ7.-0Nm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50509
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Horace Heffner wrote:

>As a matter of general interest in homopolar generators, appended is a
>5/4/1997 vortex post of mine.  It may also be of interest that a similar
>approach was used in a generator patented by the US military some years
>alter.
>
>
>  
>
Hi Horace,

It seems you're an expert on homopolar generators.  Does what you are 
saying mean that it doesn't matter if the
magnets are glued to the rotor or in the stator?  It always seemed to me 
that was a mystery, as where is the torque
generated if there is no stator?

BTW:
One derivation of Larson's Reciprocal system of physics ( 
http://www.rsystem.org/ce/dimmot.htm ) is that
if the brushes are not symmetrically surrounding the rotor, such that 
the current flows asymetrically over the periphery,
because the mass is reduced in the rotor due to the magnetic field 
generated by the current, then there should be a
reactionless force generated due to the mass reduction of the rotor over 
a fraction of 360o.  I think Graneau at MIT has demonstrated that
effect with rail guns.   I'd really like to try that experiment.

Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 16:18:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA28899;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 16:17:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:17:10 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae728a30e55 [12.21.209.174]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:20:03 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"ApeOD3.0.T37.rpNm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50510
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:22 PM 5/13/3, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>>As a matter of general interest in homopolar generators, appended is a
>>5/4/1997 vortex post of mine.  It may also be of interest that a similar
>>approach was used in a generator patented by the US military some years
>>alter.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Hi Horace,
>
>It seems you're an expert on homopolar generators.


I am only a low level amateur physicist.  Most of what I know now I have
learned from vortex people.  However, I have written an EM finite element
analsis program and now have more than just a few years experience with EM
at an amateur level, both with experimentation and computational theory.



> Does what you are
>saying mean that it doesn't matter if the
>magnets are glued to the rotor or in the stator?


That's right, or even if both combinations are used, or if they rotate at a
differing rate from either the stator or the armature, or are even free to
rotate on their own.  In fact, in my design as posted you can not tell
which is which.  In typical practical homopolars, there are no magnets at
all, just two current segments, one including a power supply.  The armature
is one of the current segments, and the stator is the other current
segment.  The two current segments are separated by brushes.  The armature
is typically a disk or cylinder that rotates, the stator is merely the
circuit that includes the power supply.  The portions of the stator that
are close to the armature are typically structurally strong and further
designed to maximize local field strength, as is the armature.


> It always seemed to me
>that was a mystery, as where is the torque
>generated if there is no stator?


There are two segments to the homopolar circuit, separated by brushes.  The
stator force is generated by action of the current in the stator segment
upon the magnetic field (and vice versa) generated by the magnet and the
other current segment.   In the case of free floating magnets, free to
rotate independently of either stator or armature, the force would be
indirectly transfered from the armature current segment to the stator
current segment by the magnet and its field.  The magnet is then neither
armature nor stator, but rather an intermediary force carrier.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 17:02:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA21825;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 17:01:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:01:50 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae72edf8565 [12.21.209.170]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:04:47 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Pd surface interface
Resent-Message-ID: <"QnSLK2.0.xK5.jTOm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50511
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:02 AM 5/13/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>This reference appeared on another forum. It has relevance to LENR-CANR
>
>http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-catalyst-surface.html
>
>
>"Dissociative hydrogen adsorption on palladium requires aggregates of
>three or more vacancies," by T. Mitsui, M. K. Rose, E. Fomin, D. F.
>Ogletree, and M. Salmeron, Nature, 17 April 2003

This is a most amazing and interesting thing!  It does not appear that this
experiment employed in an actual electrolytic environment, but perhaps
rather a gas environment?   Certainly the adsorbtion observed can not
account for ordinary electrolysis cathodic reactions because there would be
oxygen evolved at the cathode, which is of course not in evidence in
ordinary electrolysis.  Further, such electrolytic reactions are not highly
catalytic, any conductive surface will work as cathode in Faradaic ratios,
even copper, which is higly resistant to adsorbtion. Adsorbtion and
electrolysis are not necessarily the same thing.

It would be very unusual in water electrolysis for a water molecule to
orient itself in the flat orientation required for all three atoms to "fit"
the catalysic site.  Bockris measured about a 0.6 V potential drop across
the interface, which is only a few angstoms thick.  That amounts to a
millions of volts per meter electrostatic field.  The water molecule is
highly polarized.  Only the positive hydrogen end would tend to fit into
the catalyst sites, because the interface is constructed of water molecules
that are all tightly aligned, all ligned up in tight rows, so to speak.  It
has been observed that by the time CF initiates that various cathode
materials have formed tiny dendrites, and it may be the action of catalytic
sites in the extreme field intensites near dendrite tips, as well as the
disruption of the interface orderliness near the dendrite tips, that
somehow fosters or ignites the CF reaction.

Another notable fact is that loaded palladium is naturally *desorbtive.*
At atmosphereic pressure, when the field is turned off, the H2 is emitted.
One would think from the proposed model that, once the PD volume was even
partially loaded that the catalytic surface sites would rapidly dry up.
However, if memory serves [and I am seomewhat unsure about this], that does
not happen. As long as the potential is maintained adsorbtion takes place
at a fairly constant rate until a loading ratio of at least 0.5 is
achieved.  At a loading ratio of 1.0, significant distortion of the lattice
results, but still, loading continues at a reduced rate.  However, hydrogen
is still created in the Faradaic ratio.  You would think that at a loading
ratio of 1.0 that all the catalytic surface sites would be gone!

One thing this might help explain is why Pd is comparatively so transparent
to ordinary H2 gas, even at pressures of only a few atmospheres.  That is
because H2 has only two atoms, thus would [under the author's assumed
model] be adsorbed using only two adjacent catalystic sites.  Assuming
typical Brownian style random walk motion, and a site density as shown, the
probability of a pair of close sites seems to be much greater than the
probability of three close sites.

Now, here is a thing I think is amazing and which may have enormous
practical value.  IF Pd can in fact in gas state take two hydrogen atoms
from a water molecule, leaving an oxygen on the surface, then it would
appear to involve a free energy process.  In fact, it would seem that
applying a potential to the Pd surface could even hinder the process by
aligning the H2O in a non-useful direction that prevents the catalysis.
Further, it would seem that the hydrogen, being monatimic, could desorb at
a single site, thus desorbtion would take place with high probability.  If
there is an energy free method to split the water molecule, and then the H
and O can be reunited upon spontaneous desorbtion, then the energy gained
from the catalytic breaking of the water bonds would be returned in the
form of recombination heat.  Maybe this could account for some of the
excess heat observed in various Pd-laced carbon catalyst in gas regime
experiments, like those by Les Case?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 17:12:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA27626;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 17:11:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:11:11 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530502bae7395efc8d [12.21.209.170]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:14:08 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"OH4Sv3.0.Ul6.UcOm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50512
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:53 AM 5/13/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote,
>
>> The most basic problem with this design is that, without brushes, there can
>> be no current generated.  Did I miss something in your specification?
>
>Just a little haste... on further contemplation, it makes more sense to
>use stronger, fixed magnets anyway, top an bottom...that way you can get
>more and thinner plates along the shaft...there are a number of advantages
>to using as little wiring or brush interconnection as possible as this
>would be a very corrosive environment...


This will not work, assuming I read the above correctly.  Consider a small
sector of the electolyte to also be a conductor, as are similar sectors of
metal plates above and below the electrolyte.  The voltage generated over
the sectors of lenght L is given by:

   E = B L V

where B is the field intensity in tesla, L is lenght in meters, and V is
relative speed between B and L in m/s.  The same formula applies to both
the electrolyte and conductor segments.  They all remain at exactly the
same potential at the same locations.  No electrolysys can occur.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 17:49:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA16732;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 17:47:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:47:53 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530503bae7401b91d5 [12.21.209.170]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:50:49 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: More complete electrolyser design
Resent-Message-ID: <"r1WON2.0.M54.v8Pm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50513
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following is a proposed design for a high efficiency electrolyser,
especially one where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a
mixed product, or gas only evolves from one plate.  Further, a means is
provided to place ordinary hydrogen electrolysis in these categories by
extracting the hydrogen directly by diffusion through the cathode.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement
forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure.

The method suggested here to solve the bubble problem is to place the
plates in a rotatable centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  (Fixed
proportion font required for viewing Fig. 1)  The plates are thus in
annular coaxial form with central circular holes with radial spokes
connected to a central shaft, with insulating spacers and/or axial bolts
included to hold the plate array together.  This use of a centrifugal force
on the rotating plates permits the effectiveness of removing bubbles to be
increased by two or more orders of magnitude over the use of gravity.  The
process is made continuous by replenishing the electrolyte and retrieving
the evolved gas through a central open space in the centrifuge and/or
through piping in a hollow central rotor shaft.  During rotation, the
electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical tank by
centrifugal force.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrifugal Electrolysis Device


By placing the entire apparatus inside a pressure vessel, with appropriate
plumbing and electrical connections, and temperature control, operation can
occur at high temperatures and pressures currently in use with high
efficiency electrolysers.

The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.  The largest dimension of such
particles should be about one fourth the plate separation distance.

Using the methods described here, plate separation can be made almost
arbitrarily close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need
for plate structural strength and diffusion requirements.

When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous
(essentially transparent to hydrogen)  but structurally strong material as
a supporting structure for a Pd surfaced anode in the centrifuge.  Such a
material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size
required for the support of the Pd.  A gradation of granularity can be made
to occur, with the finest granularity located at the anode surface, just
below the palladium surface.  The Pd coated anode's interior would then
either be hollow or very porous, so as to conduct the H2 gas away from the
electrolyser directly through the plate interior and then through a hollow
supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for the plate, and to a hollow central
rotor.  In this manner, only O2 would evolve between the plates.  The
hydrogen principally is driven into the cathode interior by the high
operating pressure, but also by the electrolytic potential.

The electrolytic plates in the suggested use act as cathode on one side and
anode on the other.  Therefore a sandwich style construction is suggested.
The anode side might be stainless steal, possibly with an exterior platinum
plating for longer anode life.  A space between anode side an cathode side
of the electrode can be made by using conductive spacers that permit free
flow of hydrogen through the electrode to the central shaft.  A seal zone
around the perimeter of the electrode, and between the anode and cathode
portion, can seal out electrolyte and seal in the hydrogen.  Bolts parallel
to the main shaft that hold the electrode array together have to be
insulated and their entry and exit points sealed from the interior hydrogen
space.

If momentary reverse emf pulses are used in order to disrupt the
electrolyte interface, then a high enough pressure will have to be used to
avoid significant outgassing of the hydrogen from the cathode during those
brief periods.  It is not known if this specific outgassing prevention
method is workable.  However, any outgassing at all can be expected to
momentarily disrupt the interface, so may assist in providing the intended
effect.  Operating at high temperatures and nearly boiling conditions
further places the interface under disruptive stresses, thus reducing the
electrical energy required to achieve electrolysis.  It is not known what
percentage of the hydrogen can be adsorbed, because a film of water between
the hydrogen bubble and the electrode could prevent adsorption.  Even
though full adsorption may not take place, it would be very useful if
enough could be adsorbed that the remaining mixed gas is difficult to
ignite or explode.

H2 flows easily through thin Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g
force of a centrifuge certainly provides sufficient pressure.

One way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the electrolysis is to
make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the central shaft of the
centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage to it being magnetic
from an external stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on it.  The
linkage between core segments can be achieved by utilizing a small gap
between the core containing segment of the shaft and holes in the C core of
a size to accept the shaft. A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the
segment of the core that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of
the central centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core.  The
secondary coil output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates.
As an example, assume a stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100
V, which gives about 2 V per plate for electrolysis current.  There need be
no wiring to the individual plates, only to the outermost two.  If it is
desired to superimpose a HF signal on the high current electrolytic
current, then a circuit to do so can be powered by the secondary coil or by
another secondary coil in the same location.  The rectifiers, circuitry and
wiring can all be located inside the rotating centrifuge shaft.  Thus no
brushes are necessary.  It may, however, be cheaper and easier to simply
use brushes.  Such brushes would not be located in the electrolyte, but
would be located within an outer pressure vessel, so should work in a
normal fashion.  If an explodable hydrogen/oxygen mixture evolves from the
plates, then brushes are highly undesirable.

If the hollow or porous cathode technique described here proves viable in
practice, especially as combined with high g electrolysis, it could have
major significance on worldwide energy supplies and the building of a
hydrogen infrastructure in particular.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 13 19:07:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA22786;
	Tue, 13 May 2003 19:07:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 19:07:01 -0700
Message-ID: <00f301c319bd$6c40b840$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502bae7395efc8d [12.21.209.170]>
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 19:06:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA22737
Resent-Message-ID: <"oPRIh.0.sZ5.4JQm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50514
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 
> This will not work, assuming I read the above correctly.  Consider a small
> sector of the electolyte to also be a conductor, as are similar sectors of
> metal plates above and below the electrolyte.  The voltage generated over
> the sectors of lenght L is given by:
> 
>    E = B L V
> 
> where B is the field intensity in tesla, L is lenght in meters, and V is
> relative speed between B and L in m/s.  The same formula applies to both
> the electrolyte and conductor segments.  They all remain at exactly the
> same potential at the same locations.  No electrolysys can occur.


Whoa. What, no way Jose....

You can get a pretty significant voltage, using that formula, for the conductor and for the electrolyte - this formula is incorrect for that situation as its motion vector is orthogonal of that of the conductor...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 00:06:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA13680;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 00:05:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 00:05:44 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bae78f3a28ba [12.21.209.170]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 23:08:40 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"nlRTv3.0.gL3.7hUm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50515
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:06 PM 5/13/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> This will not work, assuming I read the above correctly.  Consider a small
>> sector of the electolyte to also be a conductor, as are similar sectors of
>> metal plates above and below the electrolyte.  The voltage generated over
>> the sectors of lenght L is given by:
>>
>>    E = B L V
>>
>> where B is the field intensity in tesla, L is length in meters, and V is
>> relative speed between B and L in m/s.  The same formula applies to both
>> the electrolyte and conductor segments.  They all remain at exactly the
>> same potential at the same locations.  No electrolysys can occur.
>
>
>Whoa. What, no way Jose....
>
>You can get a pretty significant voltage, using that formula, for the
>conductor and for the electrolyte - this formula is incorrect for that
>situation as its motion vector is orthogonal of that of the conductor...


Notice that I said *small sector* of the disk.  This is a radial extent.
The formula given provides an approximation that is to be used for small
segments of conductor.  The distance L lies on a radius.  The motion is
perpendicular to L and to B.  B, L and V are thus orthogonal.  (I think at
least we agree on that!)  This IS why the formula works.  The radial sector
cuts through the flux perpendicularly as it moves.  Note, however, the v is
a function and is dependent on the distance from the axis.  The voltage
induced per incremental radial distance increases with radius, thus the
total voltage ends up proportional to R^2.  The voltage for a segment
length dL at radius L is B*omega*L*dL, where omega is the angular velocity
at radius L.  That is because both the area of flux cut and the velocity
increase with radius. When you integrate voltage increments for L=0 to R,
you find that the total voltage of the generator is E=0.5*B*omega*R^2.

The most relevant point here is that, with no current flow, at every radius
every point in either the electrolyte or the disk will be at exactly the
same potential.  There will be no migration of ions, no current.  When the
disk starts spinning, or accelerates or decellerates, the ions will move
slightly radially to adjust to the new potential gradient and then stop.
If there are no brushes then there is no current.   There will be no
current in the conductors, no current in the electrolyte.

Another way to look at this is to note that electrolye IS a conductor.  The
stacked plates along with the electrolyte is really the same as an all
copper cylinder.  It is the same as the armature of a Farady homopolar
generator.  Now, if you  disconnect the brushes, the potential gradient as
described by the above formulas will exist on the disk.  However, no
current flows because points on every radius r are at the exactly the same
potential, namely 0.5*B*omega*r^2. The disk can freewheel. The charges free
to move do not do so (radially) because their density, as adjusted when the
armature began motion or the brushes were disconnected, places them all in
equilibrium within the disk.  They do not move circumferentially, because
they are also all in equlibrium at the same potential about any radius.
When you disonnect the homopolar's circuit, no current flows. It is really
that just simple.

If the magnetic field is nonuniform across the disk, then eddy currents can
exist, but that is another matter.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 00:22:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA19939;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 00:21:33 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 00:21:33 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae79d677d59 [12.21.209.105]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 23:24:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: High efficiency electrolyser
Resent-Message-ID: <"YDn-A2.0.St4.yvUm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50516
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a very rough analogy that may help.  Suppose we have a straight and
vertical piece of copper wire, well insulated all around.  It is intially
neutral.  We then postion a van de Graff terminal above the wire.  A strong
electric field then protrudes through the length of the wire and on to
ground.  What happens inside the wire?  If any potential gradient exists,
then current flows.  What happens is that the electrons redistribute their
density so that internal to the wire, no gradient exists.  External to the
wire, every point on the wire matches the external potential.  The top of
the wire is at high potetnial, the bottom of the wire is at low potential.
However, no current flows in the wire.

Similar things coud be said about an insulated annular ring surrounding the
van de Graaff generator terminal. This is more analagous.  The inside is at
a higher negative potential than the outside, but no current flows.

With the Faraday generator, the radial electric field is the result of
rotating motion of the idsk relative to the magnet, not a charge.  However,
the lack of current in the disk, even in face of the imposed gradient, is
analagous.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 00:49:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA00766;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 00:44:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 00:44:18 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030514004204.0366ec70 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 00:46:10 -0700
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: lenr-canr stats
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"WkLbe1.0.uB.HFVm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50517
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed:

A google of "cold fusion"  seems to bring up many more lenr-canr CF hits 
than in previous months and years.
My reccolection is that there were far fewer, if any of these types of CF 
on the first page, rather,  they were for the Macromedia Cold Fusion software.





Steve 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 06:23:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA26902;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 06:21:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 06:21:36 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500bae7ef0aabae [12.21.209.105]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 05:24:33 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: More complete electrolyser design
Resent-Message-ID: <"XsotC3.0.Ca6.VBam-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50518
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The following is a proposed design for a high efficiency electrolyser,
especially one where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a
mixed product, or gas only evolves from one plate.  Further, a means is
provided to place ordinary hydrogen electrolysis in these categories by
extracting the hydrogen directly by diffusion through the cathode.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement
forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure.

The method suggested here to solve the bubble problem is to place the
plates in a rotatable centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  (Fixed
proportion font like "courier" is required for viewing Fig. 1)  The plates
are thus in annular coaxial form with central circular holes with radial
spokes connected to a central shaft, with insulating spacers and/or axial
bolts included to hold the plate array together.  This use of a centrifugal
force on the rotating plates permits the effectiveness of removing bubbles
to be increased by two or more orders of magnitude over the use of gravity.
The process is made continuous by replenishing the electrolyte and
retrieving the evolved gas through a central open space in the centrifuge
and/or through piping in a hollow central rotor shaft.  During rotation,
the electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical tank by
centrifugal force.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrifugal Electrolysis Device


By placing the entire apparatus inside a pressure vessel, with appropriate
plumbing and electrical connections, and temperature control, operation can
occur at high temperatures and pressures currently in use with high
efficiency electrolysers.

The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.  The largest dimension of such
particles should be about one fourth the plate separation distance.

Using the methods described here, plate separation can be made almost
arbitrarily close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need
for plate structural strength and diffusion requirements.

When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous
(essentially transparent to hydrogen)  but structurally strong material as
a supporting structure for a Pd surfaced cathode in the centrifuge.  Such a
material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size
required for the support of the Pd.  A gradation of granularity can be made
to occur, with the finest granularity located at the cathode surface, just
below the palladium surface.  The Pd coated cathode's interior would then
either be hollow or very porous, so as to conduct the H2 gas away from the
electrolyser directly through the plate interior and then through a hollow
supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for the plate, and to a hollow central
rotor.  In this manner, only O2 would evolve between the plates.  The
hydrogen principally is driven into the cathode interior by the high
operating pressure, but also by the electrolytic potential.

The electrolytic plates in the suggested use act as cathode on one side and
anode on the other.  Therefore a sandwich style construction is suggested.
The anode side might be stainless steal, possibly with an exterior platinum
plating for longer anode life.  A space between the anode side and cathode
side of the electrode can be made by using conductive spacers that permit
free flow of hydrogen through the electrode to the central shaft.  A seal
zone around the perimeter of the electrode, and between the anode and
cathode portion, can seal out electrolyte and seal in the hydrogen.  Bolts
parallel to the main shaft that hold the electrode array together have to
be insulated and their entry and exit points sealed from the interior
hydrogen space.

If momentary reverse emf pulses are used in order to disrupt the
electrolyte interface, then a high enough pressure will have to be used to
avoid significant out gassing of the hydrogen from the cathode during those
brief periods.  It is not known if this specific out gassing prevention
method is workable.  However, any out gassing at all can be expected to
momentarily disrupt the interface, so may assist in providing the intended
effect.  Operating at high temperatures and nearly boiling conditions
further places the interface under disruptive stresses, thus reducing the
electrical energy required to achieve electrolysis.  It is not known what
percentage of the hydrogen can be adsorbed, because a film of water between
the hydrogen bubble and the electrode could prevent adsorption.  Even
though full adsorption may not take place, it would be very useful if
enough could be adsorbed that the remaining mixed gas is difficult to
ignite or explode.

H2 flows easily through thin Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g
force of a centrifuge certainly provides sufficient pressure.

It may be that a porous cathode surface provides the best alternative for
removing hydrogen directly at the cathode surface, or a combination of
adsorption and porous extraction can be used.  In this mode, a negative
pressure must be applied to the interior of the cathode via the spokes via
the central shaft. This negative pressure then sucks both hydrogen and to
some degree electrolyte and water vapor or steam through the pores and out
the spokes and out the central shaft. Appropriate bearings and fittings are
then needed on the shaft to send the hydrogen-electrolyte mixture sucked
through the cathode interior to an external separator. Alternatively,
separation can occur centrifugally in a separator included on a segment of
the shaft, and the electrolyte returned to the main electrolyte level via
siphoning.  In any event, appropriate bearings and fillings are required to
continually deliver hydrogen from the shaft to atmospheric pressure.  The
negative pressure applied to the interior of the shaft can be simply the
ambient pressure of one atmosphere, thus the negative pressure is really
supplied by operation of the centrifuge at high pressure.  This technique
limits the centrifugal force that can be obtained, because the negative
pressure must be sufficient to extract the hydrogen against the centrifugal
force.  It may be that gas-electrolyte separation can be achieved in the
interior of the cathode if there is a break in the seal provided on the
outermost tip of the electrode for the electrolyte to escape.  Operation is
then dependent upon a good balance of centrifugal force and operating
pressure.

One way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the electrolysis is to
make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the central shaft of the
centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage to it being magnetic
from an external stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on it.  The
linkage between core segments can be achieved by utilizing a small gap
between the core containing segment of the shaft and holes in the C core of
a size to accept the shaft. A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the
segment of the core that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of
the central centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core.  The
secondary coil output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates.
As an example, assume a stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100
V, which gives about 2 V per plate for electrolysis current.  There need be
no wiring to the individual plates, only to the outermost two.  If it is
desired to superimpose a HF signal on the high current electrolytic
current, then a circuit to do so can be powered by the secondary coil or by
another secondary coil in the same location.  The rectifiers, circuitry and
wiring can all be located inside the rotating centrifuge shaft.  Thus no
brushes are necessary.  It may, however, be cheaper and easier to simply
use brushes.  Such brushes would not be located in the electrolyte, but
would be located within an outer pressure vessel, so should work in a
normal fashion.  If an explodable hydrogen/oxygen mixture evolves from the
plates, then brushes are highly undesirable.

If the hollow or porous cathode technique described here proves viable in
practice, especially as combined with high g electrolysis, it could have
major significance on worldwide energy supplies and the building of a
hydrogen infrastructure in particular.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 06:40:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA04253;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 06:39:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 06:39:42 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae7f831d231 [12.21.208.110]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 05:42:31 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: More complete electrolyser design
Resent-Message-ID: <"EApPe3.0.I21.TSam-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50519
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following is a proposed design for a high efficiency electrolyser,
especially one where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a
mixed product, or gas only evolves from one plate.  Further, a means is
provided to place ordinary hydrogen electrolysis in these categories by
extracting the hydrogen directly by diffusion through the cathode.

It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement
forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure.

The method suggested here to solve the bubble problem is to place the
plates in a rotatable centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1.  (Fixed
proportion font like "courier" is required for viewing Fig. 1)  The plates
are thus in annular coaxial form with central circular holes with radial
spokes connected to a central shaft, with insulating spacers and/or axial
bolts included to hold the plate array together.  This use of a centrifugal
force on the rotating plates permits the effectiveness of removing bubbles
to be increased by two or more orders of magnitude over the use of gravity.
The process is made continuous by replenishing the electrolyte and
retrieving the evolved gas through a central open space in the centrifuge
and/or through piping in a hollow central rotor shaft.  During rotation,
the electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical tank by
centrifugal force.


    ---------  I  ---------     KEY:
    |  <-   .  I  .  ->   |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     -|  - rotating electrolyser tank
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ..  - rotating electrolyte level
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ==  - rotating electrolytic plates
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |      I  - central rotor shaft
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |     ->  - direction of electrolyte flow
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    | ===== .  I  . ===== |
    |  <-   .  I  .   ->  |
    -----------I-----------

  Fig. 1 - Centrifugal Electrolysis Device


By placing the entire apparatus inside a pressure vessel, with appropriate
plumbing and electrical connections, and temperature control, operation can
occur at high temperatures and pressures currently in use with high
efficiency electrolysers.

The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is
feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte
through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles.  The
electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and
the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor
shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1.  The largest dimension of such
particles should be about one fourth the plate separation distance.

Using the methods described here, plate separation can be made almost
arbitrarily close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need
for plate structural strength and diffusion requirements.

When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous
(essentially transparent to hydrogen)  but structurally strong material as
a supporting structure for a Pd surfaced cathode in the centrifuge.  Such a
material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size
required for the support of the Pd.  A gradation of granularity can be made
to occur, with the finest granularity located at the cathode surface, just
below the palladium surface.  The Pd coated cathode's interior would then
either be hollow or very porous, so as to conduct the H2 gas away from the
electrolyser directly through the plate interior and then through a hollow
supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for the plate, and to a hollow central
rotor.  In this manner, only O2 would evolve between the plates.  The
hydrogen principally is driven into the cathode interior by the high
operating pressure, but also by the electrolytic potential.

The electrolytic plates in the suggested use act as cathode on one side and
anode on the other.  Therefore a sandwich style construction is suggested.
The anode side might be stainless steal, possibly with an exterior platinum
plating for longer anode life.  A space between the anode side and cathode
side of the electrode can be made by using conductive spacers that permit
free flow of hydrogen through the electrode to the central shaft.  A seal
zone around the perimeter of the electrode, and between the anode and
cathode portion, can seal out electrolyte and seal in the hydrogen.  Bolts
parallel to the main shaft that hold the electrode array together have to
be insulated and their entry and exit points sealed from the interior
hydrogen space.

If momentary reverse emf pulses are used in order to disrupt the
electrolyte interface, then a high enough pressure will have to be used to
avoid significant out gassing of the hydrogen from the cathode during those
brief periods.  It is not known if this specific out gassing prevention
method is workable.  However, any out gassing at all can be expected to
momentarily disrupt the interface, so may assist in providing the intended
effect.  Operating at high temperatures and nearly boiling conditions
further places the interface under disruptive stresses, thus reducing the
electrical energy required to achieve electrolysis.  It is not known what
percentage of the hydrogen can be adsorbed, because a film of water between
the hydrogen bubble and the electrode could prevent adsorption.  Even
though full adsorption may not take place, it would be very useful if
enough could be adsorbed that the remaining mixed gas is difficult to
ignite or explode.

H2 flows easily through thin Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g
force of a centrifuge certainly provides sufficient pressure.

It may be that a porous cathode surface provides the best alternative for
removing hydrogen directly at the cathode surface, or a combination of
adsorption and porous extraction can be used.  In this mode, a negative
pressure must be applied to the interior of the cathode via the spokes via
the central shaft. This negative pressure then sucks both hydrogen and to
some degree electrolyte and water vapor or steam through the pores and out
the spokes and out the central shaft. Appropriate bearings and fittings are
then needed on the shaft to send the hydrogen-electrolyte mixture sucked
through the cathode interior to an external separator. Alternatively,
separation can occur centrifugally in a separator included on a segment of
the shaft, and the electrolyte returned to the main electrolyte level via
siphoning.  In any event, appropriate bearings and fillings are required to
continually deliver hydrogen from the shaft to atmospheric pressure.  The
negative pressure applied to the interior of the shaft can be simply the
ambient pressure of one atmosphere, thus the negative pressure inside the
electrodes is really supplied by operation of the centrifuge at high
pressure.  This technique limits the centrifugal force that can be
obtained, because the negative pressure must be sufficient to extract the
hydrogen against the centrifugal force.  It may be that gas-electrolyte
separation can be achieved in the interior of the cathode if there is a
break in the seal provided on the outermost tip of the electrode for the
electrolyte to escape.  Operation is then dependent upon a good balance of
centrifugal force and operating pressure.

A similar technique of sucking the evolved oxygen into the interior of the
anode might be used as well. A barrier between the O2 and H sides of the
interior them must be supplied as well as separate paths and liquid-gas
separators within or upon the central shaft, and delivery means from the
rotating shaft to ambient conditions. If gasses are directly extracted by
both cathode and anode surfaces, then no scrubber particles are necessary,
and very limited centrifugal force is useful for the gas-liquid separation.
Perhaps a useful version requiring no centrifugal force at the plates at
all can be implemented!

One way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the electrolysis is to
make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the central shaft of the
centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage to it being magnetic
from an external stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on it.  The
linkage between core segments can be achieved by utilizing a small gap
between the core containing segment of the shaft and holes in the C core of
a size to accept the shaft. A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the
segment of the core that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of
the central centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core.  The
secondary coil output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates.
As an example, assume a stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100
V, which gives about 2 V per plate for electrolysis current.  There need be
no wiring to the individual plates, only to the outermost two.  If it is
desired to superimpose a HF signal on the high current electrolytic
current, then a circuit to do so can be powered by the secondary coil or by
another secondary coil in the same location.  The rectifiers, circuitry and
wiring can all be located inside the rotating centrifuge shaft.  Thus no
brushes are necessary.  It may, however, be cheaper and easier to simply
use brushes.  Such brushes would not be located in the electrolyte, but
would be located within an outer pressure vessel, so should work in a
normal fashion.  If an explodable hydrogen/oxygen mixture evolves from the
plates, then brushes are highly undesirable.

If the hollow or porous cathode technique described here proves viable in
practice, as combined with high g electrolysis or not, it could have major
significance on worldwide energy supplies and the building of a hydrogen
infrastructure in particular.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 06:58:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA16037;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 06:57:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 06:57:40 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030514095000.02d85980 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 09:57:16 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: lenr-canr stats
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030514004204.0366ec70 mail.dlsi.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"AEpAs2.0.Ow3.Jjam-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50520
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

stevek wrote:

>A google of "cold fusion"  seems to bring up many more lenr-canr CF  hits 
>than in previous months and years. My reccolection is that there were far 
>fewer, if any of these types of CF on the first page, rather,  they were 
>for the Macromedia Cold Fusion software.

Interesting. I didn't think to check for that. Google must keep track of 
referrals from Google only. There has not been a huge increase in them, and 
I suppose many people look for Macromedia software links. Referrals from 
Google are as follows:

11/2002, 227
12/2002, 623
1/2003, 630
2/2003, 785
3/2003, 758
4/2003, 937
5/2003, 395 (so far this month)

Compare this to the most common category, "no referral." This month so far 
there have been 1839 no referral accesses.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 14 12:14:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA01081;
	Wed, 14 May 2003 12:11:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 12:11:42 -0700
Message-ID: <006501c31a4c$90bf5200$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501bae7f831d231 [12.21.208.110]>
Subject: Complete adiabatic electrolyzer/ SOFC design
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 12:11:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA01048
Resent-Message-ID: <"O3AIr2.0.pG.kJfm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50521
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is another bit of follow-on speculation to the advanced electrolyzer design, such as one that which Horace has provided. His design envisions rotation of disc electrodes for the purpose of reducing cell resistance and bubble formation:
 
> It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell
> resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency.  It is also
> known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the
> reduction of plate area and effective current path area.  Electrolysers
> currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement
> forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure.

Or better yet, use the steam phase only and eliminate all possibility of bubbles!

Horace's design does try to capitalize on higher temperature and high pressure, both of which are known to increase the efficiency of electrolysis. But if you combine all of that, using very high temps, along with an SOFC, or solid oxide fuel cell, would an additional synergy emerge?

If you look at the graph on p6 of  HIGH-EFFICIENCY STEAM ELECTROLYZER
by Pham, See, Lenz, Martin and Glass   Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
you will see that at T=750 C and P=35 psi, one can electrolyze about 125 ml/min using only 2 tenth of a volt at 25 amps or 5 watts! Considering the source, we should be able to assume that this is fact.

It is conceivable that this design could be made to be vastly OU if it were not necessary to continually raise seam to 750 degrees C, as you could ideally return about 35 watts electrical output for the 5 watts of electrical input, if the high temperature steam were effectively "free". Considering the source (me), we should not necessarily assume that this is also fact, but my preliminary numbers show it to be true.

Is there any circumstance (other than a geyser) where the steam is essentially free?

Yes, perhaps. If you are familiar with the operation of SOFC, which can in principle be designed to expel spent steam at this temperature, after having already derived about 1.5 volts out of the H2+O2 recombination, then the question above ceases to become as ridiculous as you may have first thought.

Lets say for arguments sake, that a combined high-temperature, well-insulated adiabatic electrolysis process is feasible in theory which will employ a recalculating amount of steam that is never allowed to cool much below 750 C except for whatever amount of blackbody radiation is unavoidable. Some amount of internal pressure gradient would still be required to insure a net flow across several membranes, and therein lies the challenge and beauty of this very complex design, incorporating rotating electrodes, a ceramic proton membrane (Protonetics), and an SOFC.

Of course, anything that rotates has the inherent capability to also "pump," in order to create that needed pressure gradient, and in fact if you are fairly conversant with the inventions of N. Tesla (and who on vortex is not?)  then it shouldn't take a great leap of imagination to realize that Horace's rotating electrodes also serves as a kind of "Tesla Pump". Hydrogen combustion itself, even across a solid electrolyte can provide its own pressure gradient and lost-heat replenishment.  Is that enough?

Adiabatic processes are tricky to maintain, thermodynamically, and this idea will require much further scrutiny. Also, most insulators, even ceramics, become quite conductive at 750 degrees C (white hot). Maybe there are too many demanding engineering problems to even waste time on...

Jones 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 15 02:50:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA07853;
	Thu, 15 May 2003 02:48:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 02:48:45 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bae9130f3471 [12.110.74.108]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 01:51:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Complete adiabatic electrolyzer/ SOFC design
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ip7oc1.0.Zw1.y9sm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50522
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:11 PM 5/14/3, Jones Beene wrote:

>
>If you look at the graph on p6 of  HIGH-EFFICIENCY STEAM ELECTROLYZER
>by Pham, See, Lenz, Martin and Glass   Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
>you will see that at T=750 C and P=35 psi, one can electrolyze about 125
>ml/min using only 2 tenth of a volt at 25 amps or 5 watts! Considering the
>source, we should be able to assume that this is fact.


These are impressive numbers.  Is this a book?  Do you have more info on
where to obtain this?

Do you know how separation of the H2 is accomplished?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 15 07:17:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA04175;
	Thu, 15 May 2003 07:13:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 07:13:48 -0700
Message-ID: <001901c31aec$1fac5ea0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501bae9130f3471 [12.110.74.108]>
Subject: Re: Complete adiabatic electrolyzer/ SOFC design
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 07:13:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA04135
Resent-Message-ID: <"QGBFe3.0.911.R2wm-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50523
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>

> >If you look at the graph on p6 of  HIGH-EFFICIENCY STEAM ELECTROLYZER
> >by Pham, See, Lenz, Martin and Glass   Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> >you will see that at T=750 C and P=35 psi, one can electrolyze about 125
> >ml/min using only 2 tenth of a volt at 25 amps or 5 watts! Considering the
> >source, we should be able to assume that this is fact.
> 
> 
> These are impressive numbers.  Is this a book?  Do you have more info on
> where to obtain this?


Sorry I overlooked putting in the URL. It is PDF format:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/28890y.pdf

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 05:59:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA04747;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 05:57:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 05:57:53 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530502baea8d89e571 [12.21.211.81]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 05:00:58 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Maxwell's Demon?
Resent-Message-ID: <"XimoI.0.5A1.H1En-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50525
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Pehaps a room temperature but intentionally low pressure Maxwell's Demon
can be constructed if Pd actually can catalyse adsorption of hydrogen from
H2O, as noted in the article referenced by Jones Bean: "Dissociative
hydrogen adsorption on palladium requires aggregates of three or more
vacancies," by T. Mitsui, M. K. Rose, E. Fomin, D. F. Ogletree, and M.
Salmeron, Nature, 17 April 2003, see:
<http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-catalyst-surface.html>

This would be done by making a sealed device at the partial pressure of
water at room temperatue (i.e near vacuum).  The device would then be
essentially toroidal in nature, with two seals between two isolated
volumes.  The first seal would be made of thin Pd, the second seal would be
a fuel cell that recombined hydrogen with oxygen and water vapor.   One
volume of the toroid would contain steam and oxygen left behind when
adsorption takes place.  The other volume would contain and would be
continually replensihed with desorbing hydrogen coming from the back side
of the Pd seal.  A flexible membrane might also be used to accomodate
changes in gas volume between the two sides, while maintaining both sides
at about the same pressure.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 05:59:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA04721;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 05:57:51 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 05:57:51 -0700
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530501baea871c631c [12.21.211.81]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 05:00:54 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Complete adiabatic electrolyzer/ SOFC design
Resent-Message-ID: <"WKDXB.0.b91.F1En-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50524
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:11 PM 5/14/3, Jones Beene wrote:

>
>If you look at the graph on p6 of  HIGH-EFFICIENCY STEAM ELECTROLYZER
>by Pham, See, Lenz, Martin and Glass   Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
>you will see that at T=750 C and P=35 psi, one can electrolyze about 125
>ml/min using only 2 tenth of a volt at 25 amps or 5 watts! Considering the
>source, we should be able to assume that this is fact.


Unfortunately the one of the principle energy inputs to this electrolyser
is natural gas.

Something I don't understand is the reverse potential of 0.8 to 0.9 volts
that is said to appear across open circuit electrodes when an air anode is
used (instead of methane) with a steam and hydrogen cathode.  (I assume
this means steam plus any hydrogen that naturally is separated from the hot
steam, the O2 escaping into the air electrode.  It makes no sense to supply
hydrogen to an electrolyser?)  This back potential is basically the
equivalent to the interface potetnial drop, and is where nature extracts
her electrical cost of separating the H and O from water.  However, what
happens if you close the circuit?  It would seem that you input steam and
air and heat and out comes elecrical energy.  Yet there is no chemical
reaction, as steam is already fully oxidized.  It would thus appear that
the device is capable of directly turning heat energy (not a thermal
difference!) into electricity.

Now, if we were on a planet where the ambient temperature were 750 C, would
his device represent a Maxwell's demon?  If so, it is then just a matter of
designing a similar device that operates at very low pressure and
temperature to make a practical Maxwell's demon?

I notice that the "HOT ELLY" steam electrolyser which is in commerciual
production in Germany produces hydrogen from water at an amazing 92 percent
efficiency, but unfortunately, 80 percent of its energy requirement is from
electricity, which has a high value.

It economically seems to make a big difference as to the form of energy
input. In that case, the use of a brushless transformer interface to the
centrifuge electrolyser could simply be replaced by a generator, with the
output delivered directly to the (armature) shaft circuitry - thus
elminating the need for brushes, and making the input to the process purely
mechanical, as from a wind mill.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 08:44:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA23727;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 08:42:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 08:42:24 -0700
Message-ID: <002a01c31bc1$a59be000$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502baea8d89e571 [12.21.211.81]>
Subject: Re: Maxwell's Demon?
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 08:41:40 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA23423
Resent-Message-ID: <"xbsPc1.0.Xo5.WRGn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50526
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The devil is in the details...

Whether this would work or not depends on whether you get mostly gaseous H2 on one side, instead of mostly protons which then form neg. ions. and whether you get O2 on the other side, or mostly hydroxyl  > hydrogen peroxide. Moreover, are these various ratios  controllable?

BTW this Russian chap has an interesting theory of how a positive energy balance might possibly occur:
http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/water/index.html

If one side of this hypothetical satanic tank segment becomes essentially acidic (excess protons) and the other side, essentially basic (excess hydroxyl), it would seem that the effect would be quickly self-quenched. Or if both sides formed mostly gaseous  H2 and O2, then gravity would interfere and the vertical geometry of the membranes would severely limit recombination on the PEM membrane.

If H2 can be induced to form preferentially - gas over ions, however, then it might be a candidate demon as no great charge imbalance would quench the process.  This would seem to be expected, since Pd is a good electron conductor as well as a proton conductor but the problem then shifts to the hydroxyl/O2 side - and then you would need the preferential formation of hydrogen peroxide over O2, as peroxide is slightly more dense than water, therefore, you could utilize gravity rather than being impeded by it -then it would seem the ideal geometry is many stacks....

...by using stacked plates of many pairs of alternating membranes, parallel to earth, alternating PEM with Pd, so that the lighter species, hydrogen goes up using gravity to displace water and then encounters the PEM with peroxide preferentially on the other side - then the demon rules !  And then the process repeats vertically, with a return line at the top, which would suffice to recycle the water.

Of course, the ultimate problem is the incredibly high cost of Pd - now down from a recent high of over $700/ounce but it would go even higher if this kind of thing worked....

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 09:44:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA28587;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 09:42:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 09:42:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030516123615.02d2a758 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:42:00 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: LENR-CANR goes over 100,000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"MVUQJ1.0.b-6.UJHn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50527
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

As of today, grand totals Acrobat file downloads at LENR-CANR are: 100,359.

Downloads have been running hot and heavy this week:

5/11: 1057
5/12: 1813
5/13: 2023
5/14: 2522
5/15: 1388

Totals this week through Thursday: 8,803. The weekly totals will exceed 
last week's record of 9,057. This will be the first time we see 
consecutive, or back-to-back record weeks.

I have two commemorative screen shoots showing the totals, which I may upload.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 11:19:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA23028;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 11:16:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:16:57 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030516141627.02e49360 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 14:16:55 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: LENR-CANR goes over 100,000
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030516123615.02d2a758 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"V5GL62.0.gd5.PiIn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50528
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I updated the graphs and uploaded the commemorative screen shots here:

http://lenr-canr.org/Features.htm#Visitors

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 11:25:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA26983;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 11:22:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:22:50 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Berry and the Geometric phase
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 14:42:24 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEOODJAA.knagel gis.net>
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: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"3AmaS2.0.Sb6.vnIn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50529
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

I stumbled across this link, 

http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/research/theory/Berry/publications.html

which contains the collected PDF formatted papers of Michael
Berry. His work on anholonomy and the geometric phase is
thought provoking, well worth the reading. This'll burn up
your friday...

K.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 13:35:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA06780;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 13:33:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 13:33:11 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501baeaf59d6da2 [12.21.209.48]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:36:10 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Maxwell's Demon?
Resent-Message-ID: <"ACdBd1.0.af1.6iKn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50530
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 8:41 AM 5/16/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>The devil is in the details...
>
>Whether this would work or not depends on whether you get mostly gaseous
>H2 on one side, instead of mostly protons which then form neg. ions. and
>whether you get O2 on the other side, or mostly hydroxyl  > hydrogen
>peroxide. Moreover, are these various ratios  controllable?
- - - - - - -

There is plenty of chemical energy available from H2O2 + H2 -> 2 H2O to run
a fuel cell, or to simply regain the energy from recombination on a
catalyst.

I keep thinking about the case experiment and wondering if water vapor was
not the source of the excess heat.  The carbon catalyst had flakes of Pd
bonded to it.  The desorbing hydrogen would evolve on the carbon side.
That carbon could thus act like a secod compartment, with its exposed
surface being the recombination surface.

- - - - - - -
>
>BTW this Russian chap has an interesting theory of how a positive energy
>balance might possibly occur:
>http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/water/index.html
- - - - - - -


Hey!  Old vorts will be surprised to see the Yusmar is still for sale!

If this Kanarev article has it right, then  excess heat should be produced
by hot steam all by itself, or any process where water breakdown and
recombination occur.  Steam in a resonant microwave chamber, or stimulated
by RF, or by a tesla coil, should produce net energy.  Maybe this is where
the net energy production that is required to sustain ball lightning comes
from.  It is always observed in nature in wet conditions.


- - - - - - -
>
>If one side of this hypothetical satanic tank segment becomes essentially
>acidic (excess protons) and the other side, essentially basic (excess
>hydroxyl), it would seem that the effect would be quickly self-quenched.

Or if both sides formed mostly gaseous  H2 and O2, then gravity would
interfere and the vertical geometry of the membranes would severely limit
recombination on the PEM membrane.
- - - - - - -


The device would be operating at too low a pressure for this to happen.
That low operating pressure might make for animpractical device however,
due to a low reaction rate.  However, breaking the Second Law would still
be a coup!


- - - - - - -
>
>If H2 can be induced to form preferentially - gas over ions, however, then
>it might be a candidate demon as no great charge imbalance would quench
>the process.
- - - - - - -

H2 is the product that desorbs to form Pd.  In fact, a matching electron to
the adsorbed proton is carried along with it in its vicinity to mantain
charge balance within the Pd.  There is thus an "ionic bond" to the
adsorbed proton.  The proton and electron rebond at the surface upon
desorbtion.  This releases heat energy.  Loaded Pd can be used as a
cigarette lighter.



- - - - - - -
>This would seem to be expected, since Pd is a good electron conductor as
>well as a proton conductor but the problem then shifts to the hydroxyl/O2
>side - and then you would need the preferential formation of hydrogen
>peroxide over O2, as peroxide is slightly more dense than water,
>therefore, you could utilize gravity rather than being impeded by it -then
>it would seem the ideal geometry is many stacks....
- - - - - - -

Yes, maybe hydrogen peroxide would even be the preferred product.  It is
certain that both H2O2 and O2 would be present, it is just a matter what
the natural equilibrium is and how the equilibrium is manipulated.


- - - - - - -
>
>...by using stacked plates of many pairs of alternating membranes,
>parallel to earth, alternating PEM with Pd, so that the lighter species,
>hydrogen goes up using gravity to displace water and then encounters the
>PEM with peroxide preferentially on the other side - then the demon rules
>!  And then the process repeats vertically, with a return line at the top,
>which would suffice to recycle the water.
- - - - - - -

Nice!  And in series a useable voltage would be produced.

- - - - - - -
>
>Of course, the ultimate problem is the incredibly high cost of Pd - now
>down from a recent high of over $700/ounce but it would go even higher if
>this kind of thing worked....
>
>Jones
- - - - - - -

A thin Pd film with porous backing is probably all that is required.  I
think getting any net energy at all would literally be scientifically
miraculous and well worth the effort.  Economics are a small worry at this
point, though it is good to keep that optimism!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 16 16:33:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA23202;
	Fri, 16 May 2003 16:32:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:32:55 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC574BA.CD53339F ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:31:06 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "vortex-L eskimo.com" <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW    Friday, 16 May '03]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"LtgSn2.0.Sg5.cKNn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50531
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, 16 May '03
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:43:53 -0400
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 16 May '03   Washington, DC
                                                       
1. BABY NUKES: DO WE REALLY NEED A NEW LOW-YIELD NUCLEAR WEAPON? 
US policy has been to maintain existing weapons with the Science-
Based Stockpile Stewardship Program.  But a year ago, The Nuclear
Posture Review, a classified Pentagon report, sprang a massive
leak (WN 15 Mar 02). The report outlined a plan to use the war on
terrorism to justify development of a new class of small nuclear
weapons.  "Low-yield" weapons, defined as less than 5 kilotons,
would still be powerful enough to blow up the Non-Proliferation
Treaty.  Super hawks have always longed for such weapons as a way
to make the use of nuclear weapons seem acceptable.  But first, a
decade-old ban on R&D of low-yield nuclear weapons has to be
lifted.  Last Friday, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted
by a narrow margin to end the ban, but Democrats vowed to take
the fight to the Senate floor.  By Tuesday night, a Dilbertesque
compromise in the House severed R&D: research is allowed, while
development is still banned.  Both sides are claiming victory. 
Democrats insist that a ban on development preserves the test
moratorium, while Republicans shrug that research can get started
now and the issue revisited when its time to test.  From outside
Congress, it looks more like everybody lost.                

2. TIAA-CREF: CAN ANTIGRAVITY KEEP YOUR RETIREMENT FROM FALLING?
A lot of us in this business are relying on TIAA-CREF to sustain
us in our declining years.  They must be pretty savvy to manage
all that money, huh?  In the May issue of Participant: Quarterly
News and Performance from TIAA-CREF,"a leading researcher in the
cutting-edge field of gravity control," Ning Li, is profiled.  A
Ph.D physicist, she did research for NASA's Marshall Space Flight
Center and now has her own company, AC Gravity.  The article,
Will Antigravity Change the World?, begins: "Imagine a world in
which cars fly, oil is obsolete, and space travel is effortless
as the flight of birds."  Yes, it's the famous Podkletnov gravity
shield again (WN 2 Aug 02); you can't keep a good man down.  WN
revised the beginning: "Imagine a world in which the impossible
claims of an obscure Russian physicist fail every test, the laws
of physics are obsolete, and bull shit flies effortlessly."  So,
who wanted to retire anyhow?

3. COLUMBIA: INVESTIGATION BOARD FOCUSES ON ACCOUNTABILITY.  The
much delayed Senate Commerce and Science Committee hearing on The
Space Shuttle Columbia Investigation and Future Space Policy was
held Wednesday, without testimony from the panel on space-based
research.  The chief investigator, Adm. Harold Gehman Jr.
testified that the refusal to seek photographs of the damaged
shuttle in orbit was a grave error.  He speculated that a rescue
mission could have been launched.  NASA Administrator O'Keefe
agreed, and said he was infuriated by the way it turned out.  The
Committee Chair, John McCain said, "it's equally infuriating that
no one is responsible."  O'Keefe vowed to determine who was at
fault. But Congress seems to have little interest in determining
responsibility for the decision to send Columbia's crew into
space on a mission of questionable scientific importance. 

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: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 17 03:52:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id DAA23751;
	Sat, 17 May 2003 03:51:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 03:51:28 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530505baebc46001e3 [12.21.211.168]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 02:54:34 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Maxwell's Demon?
Resent-Message-ID: <"Yednm3.0.yo5.mGXn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50532
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:36 PM 5/16/3, Horace Heffner wrote:

[snip]
>H2 is the product that desorbs to form Pd.  In fact, a matching electron to
>the adsorbed proton is carried along with it in its vicinity to mantain
>charge balance within the Pd.  There is thus an "ionic bond" to the
>adsorbed proton.  The proton and electron rebond at the surface upon
>desorbtion.  This releases heat energy.  Loaded Pd can be used as a
>cigarette lighter.
[snip]

The first sentence should read: "H2 is the product that desorbs from the Pd."

Wow!  My typos are getting much worse and more strange with age!  Really
unfortunate when they have some kind of confusing meaning.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 03:38:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id DAA19769;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 03:37:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 03:37:06 -0700
Message-ID: <001c01c31d29$229bb400$fbf0fc3e f7t8y3>
From: "Mike Butcher" <thebends ntlworld.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 11:34:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"T-pUR.0.oq4.I9sn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50533
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>From Todays British Telegraph.


Take water and potash, add electricity and get - a mystery
By Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent
(Filed: 18/05/2003)

British researchers believe that they have made a groundbreaking scientific
discovery after apparently managing to "create" energy from hydrogen atoms.
In results independently verified at Bristol University, a team from Gardner
Watts - an environmental technology company based in Dedham, Essex - show a
"thermal energy cell" which appears to produce hundreds of times more energy
than that put into it. If the findings are correct and can be reproduced on
a commercial scale, the thermal energy cell could become a feature of every
home, heating water for a fraction of the cost and cutting fuel bills by at
least 90 per cent.
The makers of the cell, which passes an electric current through a liquid
between two electrodes, admit that they cannot explain precisely how the
invention works. They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat
of the notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two
scientists claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a
similar-looking device at room temperature. The findings were widely
challenged and the scientists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, accused
of incompetence, fled America to set up labs in France.


"We are absolutely not saying this is cold fusion, or that we have found a
way round the law of energy conservation," said Christopher Davies, the
managing director of Gardner Watts.

"What we are saying is that the device seems to tap into another, previously
unrecognised source of energy."
According to Mr Davies, the cell is the product of research into the
fundamental properties of hydrogen, the most common element in the universe.
He argues that calculations based on quantum theory, the laws of the
sub-atomic world, suggest that hydrogen can exist in a so-called metastable
state that harbours a potential source of extra energy.
This theory suggests that if electricity were passed into a mixture of water
and a chemical catalyst, the extra energy would be released in the form of
heat.
After some experimentation, the team found that a small amount of
electricity passed through a mixture of water and potassium carbonate -
potash - released an astonishing amount of energy.

"It generates a lot of heat in a very small volume," said Christopher
Eccles, the chief scientist at Gardner Watts.
The findings of the Gardner Watts team were tested by Dr Jason Riley of
Bristol University, who found energy gains of between three and 26 times
what had been put in.
In a written report, Dr Riley concluded: "Using the apparatus supplied by
Gardner Watts and the procedure of analysis suggested by the company, there
appears to be an energy gain in the system."

In tests performed for The Telegraph, the cell heated water to near-boiling,
apparently producing more than three times the amount of energy fed into it.
Scientists admit to being astonished by the sheer size of the energy
increase produced by the cell. "I've never seen a claim like this before,"
said Prof Stephen Smith of the physics department at Essex University.

"In the case of cold fusion, people talked about getting a 10 per cent
energy gain or so, which could be explained away quite easily but this is
much too big for that."
Prof Smith said he was sceptical about the theory put forward by the
company. He conceded, however, that scientists had also been baffled by the
source of energy driving radioactivity, as the key equation involved -
Einstein's famous E=MC2 - had yet to be discovered.

According to Prof Smith, if there is a flaw in the company's claims, it lies
in the measurement of the amount of electrical energy pumped into the cell.
It is possible that, as sparks pass between the electrodes, there is an
energy surge which would not be picked up by the instruments measuring the
electrical input.
Prof Smith said: "This needs to be very carefully checked, as there could be
far more energy going in than the makers think."
Prof Smith's views were echoed by Dr Riley, who said: "There's no doubt that
there was a heat rise but I'd like to see a more thorough investigation of
the electrical energy supplied into the cell."

While many scientists are trying to solve the mystery of the thermal energy
cell, its huge commercial potential has already caused interest.
Cambridge Consultants, one of Britain's most prestigious technology
consultancies, has teamed up with Mr Davies and his colleagues to develop a
working prototype. "We've had a multi-disciplinary team working on this, and
we're perplexed," said Duncan Bishop, head of process development at
Cambridge Consultants.
"We are offering to risk-share on it, as it will need about £200,000 to
prove the principle behind it."
According to the Gardner Watts team, it will take about six months to carry
out tests putting the reality of the effect beyond all doubt. The company
then plans to develop a prototype capable of turning less than one kilowatt
of electrical power into 10 kilowatts of heat.
Mr Davies said: "The technology could be licensed by a company making
household boilers for the domestic market. " He added that the plan is to
have the first thermal energy cell devices on the market within two years.


Mike Butcher

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 04:25:05 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id EAA03634;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 04:24:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 04:24:30 -0700
Message-ID: <001f01c31d27$bea63700$9e01bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: "gesrebspar" <gesrebspar juno.com>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 05:23:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d001eb36ec0a3f5965e55fb0164a4453350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"K45uH.0.du.krsn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50534
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Energy cell creates heat, Mike Butcher, Sun, 18 May 2003 03:37:38


>After some experimentation, the team found that a small amount of
>electricity passed through a mixture of water and potassium carbonate -
>potash - released an astonishing amount of energy.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm

5,273,635  Electrolytic heater  (Thermacore Lancaster, Pa)
Abstract
A heater which uses the electrolysis of a liquid to produce heat from electricity and
transfers the heat from the electrolyte by means of a heat exchanger. One embodiment
includes electrodes of nickel and platinum and an electrolyte of potassium carbonate
with a heat exchanger immersed in and transferring heat from the electrolyte

6,024,935  Lower-energy hydrogen methods and structures (Randel Mills Lancaster, Pa)

Abstract
Methods and apparatus for releasing energy from hydrogen atoms (molecules) by
stimulating their electrons to relax to quantized lower energy levels and smaller
radii (smaller semimajor and semiminor axes) than the "ground state" by providing
energy sinks or means to remove energy resonant with the hydrogen energy released to
stimulate these transitions. An energy sink, energy hole, can be provided by the
transfer of at least one electron between participating species including atoms, ions,
molecules, and ionic and molecular compounds.

Deja vu  all over again.  :-)

Regards,

Frederick




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 05:30:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA27831;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 05:30:02 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 05:30:02 -0700
Message-ID: <003f01c31d30$e6fecd80$9e01bf3f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: "gesrebspar" <gesrebspar juno.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 06:30:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b13d892971390f696ca6d2a6eb9866e1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"0ZK1H.0.Yo6.8ptn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50535
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hey Jones,

Snookered by a thermodynamic quirk involving "Hydrated Electrons" (Uncommitted
Electrons from the Atmosphere)?

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/molecule/boneng.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/chemical/bondd.html#c2

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/chemical/bondd.html#c1

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch7/ie_ea.html#ea

IOW, a Water Fuel connection?  :-)

Regards,

Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 07:30:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA11607;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 07:29:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 07:29:23 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baed4808cdc1 [12.21.208.11]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 06:32:31 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA11583
Resent-Message-ID: <"qeV6X.0.Hr2.2Zvn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50536
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:34 AM 5/18/3, Mike Butcher wrote:
[snip]
>"We are offering to risk-share on it, as it will need about £200,000 to
>prove the principle behind it."
[snip]

The above is the REAL take on it.  They can get this thing checked out for
free without any "risk taking".  One place that will test for free:

<HTTP://www.earthech.com>


Any investor that would put that much money into this without free
independent checking is pretty darn gullible.

The unmeasured energy source is probably, as the article says, in
improperly measured input spikes, but also in unaccounted for electrode
oxydation.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 10:59:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA08405;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 10:58:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 10:58:03 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135517.027356d0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:58:01 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Record week at LENR-CANR
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"zB3uM2.0.932.hcyn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50537
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Totals for the week of 5/11 - 5/17: 12,243 downloads, 3,294 visitors.

Grand total downloads: 103,899.

This is the first time we have had record weeks back-to-back.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 11:04:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA08499;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 10:58:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 10:58:11 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:55:08 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
In-Reply-To: <001c01c31d29$229bb400$fbf0fc3e f7t8y3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"6ICBb2.0.d42.pcyn-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50538
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mike Butcher wrote:

>. . .  They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat of the 
>notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two scientists 
>claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a 
>similar-looking device at room temperature.

Obviously it is the same thing! Or very similar. I do not know what these 
people hope to accomplish by trying to clouding the issue this way. In any 
case, it was not a debacle. Mike: can you please tell the editors, or the 
reporter, the researchers or SOMEONE that this is a gross misrepresentation 
of the facts? Tell them hundreds of researchers replicated P&F, including 
researchers from some of the world's most prestigious labs. Tell them they 
can find the facts at LENR-CANR.org.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 13:44:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA26315;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 13:41:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:41:36 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530502baed9d37af97 [12.21.208.85]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 12:44:39 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Resent-Message-ID: <"gl4Wh1.0.3R6.00_n-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50539
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 1:55 PM 5/18/3, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Mike Butcher wrote:
>
>>. . .  They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat of the
>>notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two scientists
>>claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a
>>similar-looking device at room temperature.
>
>Obviously it is the same thing! Or very similar. I do not know what these
>people hope to accomplish by trying to clouding the issue this way. In any
>case, it was not a debacle. Mike: can you please tell the editors, or the
>reporter, the researchers or SOMEONE that this is a gross misrepresentation
>of the facts? Tell them hundreds of researchers replicated P&F, including
>researchers from some of the world's most prestigious labs. Tell them they
>can find the facts at LENR-CANR.org.



Though similar in form to some early experiments, the claim of repeatable
"energy gains of between three and 26 times what had been put in" is way
off the chart for lightwater electrolysis using potash.

Though the existence of LENR-CANR should not be in doubt, the existence of
a reliable 3X nuclear energy source from protium electrolysis is in my
opinion highly dubious.  The regime claimed was tested many ways and may
have even been patented years ago.  There is no water heater on sale yet at
Sears.

BTW, the author was Robert Matthews.  If I recall correctly, some years
back you, Chris Tinsley, and I among other vorts haranged him via email
about his postion on CF, Fleischmann and Ponns.  Unfortunately,
LENR-CANR.org did not exist then.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 14:00:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA02872;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 13:58:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:58:12 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC7F401.8000509 cox.net>
Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:58:41 -0700
From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns cox.net>
Organization: ISUS
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
References: <v01530502baed9d37af97 [12.21.208.85]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"fMVqK3.0.ii.ZF_n-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50540
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

I had thought that "Potash" is K20, not K2CO3 and referencing:

http://www.clevelandpotash.ltd.uk/index1.htm         implies that is so.

It's always been a source of confusion to me because so many references 
say otherwise.
What's going on? What is pure K20 or Na2O like physically?  Is it stable 
in air?

Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona US

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 14:46:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA02754;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 14:42:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 14:42:20 -0700
Message-ID: <3EC7F0F5.28C23B86 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 14:51:59 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Record week at LENR-CANR
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135517.027356d0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------1AF73EE1529108912F1E598F"
Resent-Message-ID: <"rTxpS3.0.xg.yu_n-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50541
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.
--------------1AF73EE1529108912F1E598F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As the attached graph shows, we seem to have entered a different
behavior pattern.  If this behavior keeps up, we may hit 500,000 on the
birthday of the site.

Ed

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Totals for the week of 5/11 - 5/17: 12,243 downloads, 3,294 visitors.
>
> Grand total downloads: 103,899.
>
> This is the first time we have had record weeks back-to-back.
>
> - Jed

--------------1AF73EE1529108912F1E598F
Content-Type: image/jpeg; x-mac-type="4A504547"; x-mac-creator="474B4F4E";
 name="download.jpg"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Description: Unknown Document
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="download.jpg"
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==
--------------1AF73EE1529108912F1E598F
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

--------------1AF73EE1529108912F1E598F--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 18 20:46:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA18340;
	Sun, 18 May 2003 20:45:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 20:45:03 -0700
Message-ID: <001001c31db8$f1f4dc10$0e57ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 23:43:35 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"FSTWe1.0.HU4.-C5o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50542
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed wrote:

> Mike Butcher wrote:
>
> >. . .  They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat of the
> >notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two scientists
> >claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a
> >similar-looking device at room temperature.
>
> Obviously it is the same thing! Or very similar. I do not know what these
> people hope to accomplish by trying to clouding the issue this way. In any
> case, it was not a debacle. Mike: can you please tell the editors, or the
> reporter, the researchers or SOMEONE that this is a gross
misrepresentation
> of the facts? Tell them hundreds of researchers replicated P&F, including
> researchers from some of the world's most prestigious labs. Tell them they
> can find the facts at LENR-CANR.org.
>
> - Jed

No, it's not quite the same thing. If you read the rest of Mike Butcher's
post, he quotes the Watts group as stating that the results flow from a
fundamental study of the hydrogen atom, including what they call a
metastable state releasing a lot of energy. This points very directly to the
work of Mills because of the presence of potassium, which is a known
BlackLight Power catalyst. Mills got excess energy in electrolytic cells
with potassium-bearing electrolytes in the early 90s. This is very probably
the BlackLight Power reaction at work. Tom Stolper, a member of the HSG
forum said:
------------------
The world patent is an interesting document.  Eccles and his team used a
plasma electrolysis cell with pulsed power.  Pulsed power raises questions
about the input power.  The only way I see to resolve the question of input
beyond doubt is to use as many cells as the duty cycle requires.  That is to
say, if the duty cycle is 10% (only 10% of input into the power supply going
into the cell itself and the rest dumped), then one would have to set up 10
different cells, so that all the input power was used, and then measure the
total heat output of all 10 cells combined.  I wonder if Cambridge
Consultants is planning to do that.

Eccles and Gardner Watts are ten years behind Mills and BLP, who have
priority for electrolytic potassium carbonate cells but found that they
lacked durability.

The problem with electrolytic cells as far as power or heat production is
concerned is that electrolytic cells tear the hell out of materials.  That's
what electrolytic cells do, and the more you turn up the current, the worse
the problem gets.  Swimming against the current, as it were.  With a plasma
electrolysis cell, the problem of durability gets even worse.  Eccles found
an ingenious way to extend the life of his plasma electrolysis cell by using
two cathodes, but it still won't last out a day.

Translation:  they'll never be able to commercialize this with a plasma
electrolysis cell for heat or hot water.  Hot water heaters have to last for
years, not hours or days.  But Eccles and Gardner Watts have got something
that makes a great demo and will make a convincing proof of principle.
----------------------

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 07:31:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA15894;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 07:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 07:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530500baee99023b68 [12.21.208.85]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 06:31:48 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Resent-Message-ID: <"Pip002.0.yt3.geEo-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50543
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 1:58 PM 5/18/3, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I had thought that "Potash" is K20, not K2CO3 and referencing:
>
>http://www.clevelandpotash.ltd.uk/index1.htm         implies that is so.


If you take the "potash" pointer off that page you will see that they
define: "Potash is the common name for any materials containing the plant
food potassium."


Much of the early CF oriented Ni and light water work used potassium
carbonate.  If you start off with a dissolved potassium salt like KOH, thus
with K+ ions,  you end up with some carbonate anyway if the solution is
exposed to air because the carbon dioxide in the air reacts with it.



>
>It's always been a source of confusion to me because so many references
>say otherwise.
>What's going on? What is pure K20 or Na2O like physically?  Is it stable
>in air?
>
>Hoyt Stearns
>Scottsdale, Arizona US

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 08:13:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA18235;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 08:12:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 08:12:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 10:57:19 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
In-Reply-To: <001001c31db8$f1f4dc10$0e57ccd1 asus>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Nz_7o3.0.gS4.6HFo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50544
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell wrote:

>No, it's not quite the same thing. If you read the rest of Mike Butcher's
>post, he quotes the Watts group as stating that the results flow from a
>fundamental study of the hydrogen atom, including what they call a
>metastable state releasing a lot of energy. This points very directly to the
>work of Mills because of the presence of potassium, which is a known
>BlackLight Power catalyst.

Well, assuming it works as advertised, I still think it would be fantastic 
coincidence if this discovery (and Mills') had nothing to do with cold 
fusion. It seems unlikely to me that two similar revolutionary energy 
producing reactions remain undiscovered until circa 1990.

Horace Heffner writes:

"Though the existence of LENR-CANR should not be in doubt, the existence of 
a reliable 3X nuclear energy source from protium electrolysis is in my 
opinion highly dubious.  The regime claimed was tested many ways and may 
have even been patented years ago.  There is no water heater on sale yet at 
Sears."

I do not usually care for that argument, but it has some merit. Certainly, 
the effect should be easy to confirm if it is anywhere near as large as 
claimed in this case. The people at Thermacore expressed no doubts about 
the heat they measured from the giant Mills gadgets. Their calorimetry was 
crude, but they are experts after all.


"BTW, the author was Robert Matthews.  If I recall correctly, some years 
back you, Chris Tinsley, and I among other vorts haranged him via email 
about his postion on CF, Fleischmann and Ponns.  Unfortunately, 
LENR-CANR.org did not exist then."

Well, now that we have LENR-CANR let's hit him again! Someone in the U.K. 
may be well positioned to contact him, his editors or the researchers. The 
researchers may not want to hear about previous work or priority. I do not 
know whether LENR-CANR has had a positive effect anywhere, loosening up 
research funding or bringing new people into the field, but I have observed 
that it makes a darn good club to bash skeptics with. In the past they 
always tried to "personalize" the debate, framing it as one supporter (me 
for example) versus them (the entire assembled Establishment, by their 
lights). Now I tell them, "it isn't me, is it all these authors. Argue with 
them, not me. Click here to read their stuff."

For example, the other day I noticed an upsurge in "referrals" (hyperlink 
jumps) to LENR-CANR from some right wing discussion group I have never 
heard of. I went over there and posted a plug for CF:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/906692/posts?page=20

When inevitable hard-nosed skeptic posted this message:

"Of course to get a paper published one would actually need results. 
Getting results is a hurdle that the pseudo-scientists do have trouble 
leaping over . . ."

I responded in a way I could not have before LENR-CANR, effectively 
shutting him up:

"I think the results available on line at LENR-CANR.org are actual results. 
I think they are valid papers that deserve publication. I invite you to 
read them and evaluate them yourself. Perhaps you will find that all of 
them are sloppy, invalid, and not worth publishing. In that case, I invite 
you to write a critique, which, if you like, I will upload to LENR-CANR, 
assuming it meets a reasonable standard of academic rigor. We have uploaded 
a few papers that claim cold fusion does not exist . . ."

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 09:13:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA02283;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 09:11:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:11:32 -0700
Message-ID: <008901c31e21$34620920$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:10:44 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA02201
Resent-Message-ID: <"KDlaD3.0.aZ.q8Go-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50545
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

As Fred mentioned earlier, the Potassium electrolytic heat cell idea and patent is not owned nor invented by Mills/ BLP, not do Eccles/ Watts have even the remotest claim to originality.  The anouncement by the Watts group was gravely deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and their callous plea for funding is abhorent and disgusting under circumstances of what must surely be *intentional non-disclosure* on their part.  ref:

Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993
  
Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach; Robert M. (Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA)

Note: Randell Mills  is NOT listed as co-inventor. If the patent was actually granted in 1993, it was submitted far earlier. At that time the lag time was about 4 years. So the extent of Mills' creative involvement is not clear. Mills and first research facility were also located in Lancaster (Thermacore Hdqts) in the early 1990s, and he early-on teamed up with Thermacore to develop the "wet" electrolytic cell using potassium catalyst. If Mills were an actual co-inventor, then it was probably a mistake for him not to have his name included on the disclosure as there is absolutely NO requirement that the inventor must have any employment relationship with the patent owner.

Though the original patent is owned by Thermacore, not BLP, it seems that there must have been complicated agreements that neither side liked - and the partnership soon disintegrated. Mills went on to forego the "wet" electrolytic research in favor of first, a gas-phase implementation, but now almost exclusively, plasma phase. 

Consider this quote from Thermacore: "Light water electrolytic experiments at Thermacore show positive results. The most outstanding example is a cell producing 41 watts of heat with only 5 watts of electrical input. The cell has operated continuously for over one year..."  

This does not sound to me like a process that is so corrosive that it cannot be commercialized. The electrolytic battery, for example, using sufuric acid is far more corrosive and, shall we say, there are quite a few of them around, even if they must be replaced every 4-5 years.

Thermacore Electrolytic heater-    Abstract

"A heater which uses the electrolysis of a liquid to produce heat from electricity and transfers the heat from the electrolyte by means of a heat exchanger. One embodiment includes electrodes of nickel and platinum and an electrolyte of potassium carbonate with a heat exchanger immersed in and transferring heat from the electrolyte. "

Thermacore International is now a subsidiary of Modine Manufacturing Company, and a global supplier of thermal engineering products for many industries. With manufacturing locations in Lancaster, Pa in the USA, and overseas in Mexico, the U.K., Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, Thermacore provides B2B manufacturing to other OEMs along with design R&D & manufacturing. It was formerly an independent ultra high-tech outfit, with compounded growth of 40% annually before the manufacturing economy went sour, and more recently it was acquired by Modine.

Nobody really seems to knows what was going on with Thermacore or what their relationship with Mills became after merger with Modine. The only thing that seems clear is that Modine decided not to pursue the technology. However, it could well be that the wet electrolytic hydrino technology, and perhaps some of the original personnel, did not fit well into the Modine corporate culture, and realizing the unfulfilled potential of the wet cell, these R&D folks decided to leave.

Here are some very  interesting pdf files from the Mills' BLP site, relating to Thermacore (if the papers are are still there):
http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Anomalous-Heat-from-Atomic-Hydrogen.pdf http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Final-Report-Nascent-Hydrogen.pdf

For emphasis, let me repeat: THE CELL OPERATED CONTINUOUSLY FOR OVER ONE YEAR. This was prior to the Modine merger. 

Now, remember, this statement is not coming from some fly-by-night self-promoting entrepreneur, nor even some university professor who is ignorant of manufacturing realities and corporate intrigue - but instead it comes from one of the most well-respected of high-tech firms, a manufacturing firm, and the inventors of the heat-pipe and many other wonderful thermal inventions. 

Again, the British anouncement by the Eccles/Watts group was gravely deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and their callous plea for funding is abhorent under circumstances of what must be *intentional non-disclosure*.

This failure to credit others and disclose prior patent status casts serious doubt on both their (the Watt group) integrity and the thoroughness of their research, and may even approach criminal misconduct, since a plea for money comses along with their claim of original invention. A 5-minute Google search would have turned all of this up (as it has been posted to Vortex before).

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 10:21:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA22021;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 10:18:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 10:18:56 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Skaterats defeat Newtons 3rd law. Yo! Duuude!
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:38:27 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEPHDJAA.knagel gis.net>
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
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"CqkI82.0.-N5._7Ho-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50546
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Proffered for your edification and amusement...

I'm guessing some loophole is being exploited,
that the boards ride on a rough surface seems
a likely candidate. But all the same,
the reactionless drive crowd could do worse
than study this.

K.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134757050_skateboard17.html

Perfect wave' of energy can keep skateboarders on a roll — even uphill

By Gina Kim
Seattle Times staff reporter

The price: looking like a freak.

The payoff: skateboarding for miles but
never needing to set a foot on the
pavement.

With arm motions dubbed "choppin'
wood," "swimming" and "climbing," two
Redmond natives have developed
skateboarding techniques that
manipulate hills and distance without
ever needing to push off.

The duo on wheels can often be found
along the Burke-Gilman/Sammamish
River trail on sunny days, headphones
in place and hitting about 18 mph on
flat stretches.

And they ride for miles, keeping their feet on the board the whole way.

"You have to be totally willing to look like a complete idiot," said Derek
Munson, a 33-year-old author of children's books.

Munson bought a 36-inch longboard skateboard on sale about two years
ago. He often ponders abstract ideas such as the intricacies of pi and the
musical concept of the perfect fifth, and while playing on his new board he
was mulling over the idea of opposites. And then the thought came to him.

"I wondered if it'd ever be possible to generate energy rather than lose
energy," he explained. "I bet there was a way that you could generate and
maintain your own speed without ever putting your foot down."

While the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, Munson
found through trial and error that the most efficient route on a longboard
seems to be what he calls an energy-filled wave. Rocking the skateboard
from side to side while keeping a center of balance made it move, he
discovered.

Excited, Munson told his 22-year-old neighbor about the finding.

"I said, 'I've got to see this,' " recalled Ashton Mey, a student at
Bellevue
Community College and an avid longboarder. "Then it all seemed doable in
the search for the perfect wave."

>From a dead stop, Mey and Munson hop on their boards and propel
themselves, flinging their arms in every direction. They gain momentum by
moving their skateboards in figure eights, switching their weight from their
toes to their heels and then back again. And to get up steep hills with
little
momentum, they'll spin their longboards from back to front and front to
back.

"You just end up dancing," Munson said.

The two have spent about four hours a
day during the past two summers
perfecting techniques to conquer hills
and distance. They've made it from
Redmond to Woodinville, stopping only
to fix broken parts or change batteries
in their CD players. Their ultimate goal
is to go 27 miles from Redmond's
Marymoor Park to Seattle's Gas Works
Park, never setting a foot on the paved
path.

"That's fantastic. I've never heard of that
before," said Michael Brooke, publisher
of the Canada-based skateboarding
magazine Concrete Wave. "I've heard of
people pumping ... but that's unusual if they're going for miles and miles."

Special swiveling trucks — similar to car axles — can improve momentum,
said Brooke, but Munson and Mey use regular trucks.

They vary the longboards they ride, sometimes using 54-inch skateboards
that Munson likens to "jumbo jets," versus the 36-inch "F-16s."

Munson took up the Japanese martial art Aikido to help with his center of
balance and flexibility. And Mey does "living-room" yoga to assist with his.

Music is a key element because the beats help them find rhythms for their
dancelike movements; they've experimented with Bach but have settled into
lounge and acid jazz.

"The reality with skateboarding is that there's always going to be people
who
come up with new ideas and concepts," Brooke said. "There's a whole
bunch of other types of skateboarding out there other than kids who just do
rails and stairs."

Munson gave himself a hernia last summer trying to get up a sharp incline.
But he and Mey say the experience is almost spiritual.

"You're in total sync with your surroundings," Mey said.

"It's like conducting all the energy around you, not just the energy within
you," said Munson. "You just hit this place where everything you do is
translated into movement."

And while they continue working on new uphill moves, they have yet to find a
name for what it is they are doing.

"Foolishness," suggested Munson.

"It's just 'groovin,' " Mey said.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 10:40:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA32175;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 10:36:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 10:36:49 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:56:18 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEPHDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <008901c31e21$34620920$0a016ea8 cpq>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"6Fsr-3.0.ds7.kOHo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50547
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jones.

Curious business about the Thermacore patent; I met Robert S. at an
energy conference back when this was all happening
and we discussed the device in a general way.
He was pretty clear that it was Mills who came to them
with the experiment, which they scaled up and tested.
I have no idea what became of the research, as they
are a commercial concern and have no interest in
relating to others their success or failure in the endeavor.

I'm guessing that, being businessmen, they all got
as much as they could from the collaboration, and
then moved on to something else. Considering the politics
surrounding this sort of work, can you blame them?

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9 pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 12:11 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat


As Fred mentioned earlier, the Potassium electrolytic heat cell idea and
patent is not owned nor invented by Mills/ BLP, not do Eccles/ Watts have
even the remotest claim to originality.  The anouncement by the Watts group
was gravely deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and
their callous plea for funding is abhorent and disgusting under
circumstances of what must surely be *intentional non-disclosure* on their
part.  ref:

Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993

Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach; Robert M.
(Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA)

Note: Randell Mills  is NOT listed as co-inventor. If the patent was
actually granted in 1993, it was submitted far earlier. At that time the lag
time was about 4 years. So the extent of Mills' creative involvement is not
clear. Mills and first research facility were also located in Lancaster
(Thermacore Hdqts) in the early 1990s, and he early-on teamed up with
Thermacore to develop the "wet" electrolytic cell using potassium catalyst.
If Mills were an actual co-inventor, then it was probably a mistake for him
not to have his name included on the disclosure as there is absolutely NO
requirement that the inventor must have any employment relationship with the
patent owner.

Though the original patent is owned by Thermacore, not BLP, it seems that
there must have been complicated agreements that neither side liked - and
the partnership soon disintegrated. Mills went on to forego the "wet"
electrolytic research in favor of first, a gas-phase implementation, but now
almost exclusively, plasma phase.

Consider this quote from Thermacore: "Light water electrolytic experiments
at Thermacore show positive results. The most outstanding example is a cell
producing 41 watts of heat with only 5 watts of electrical input. The cell
has operated continuously for over one year..."

This does not sound to me like a process that is so corrosive that it cannot
be commercialized. The electrolytic battery, for example, using sufuric acid
is far more corrosive and, shall we say, there are quite a few of them
around, even if they must be replaced every 4-5 years.

Thermacore Electrolytic heater-    Abstract

"A heater which uses the electrolysis of a liquid to produce heat from
electricity and transfers the heat from the electrolyte by means of a heat
exchanger. One embodiment includes electrodes of nickel and platinum and an
electrolyte of potassium carbonate with a heat exchanger immersed in and
transferring heat from the electrolyte. "

Thermacore International is now a subsidiary of Modine Manufacturing
Company, and a global supplier of thermal engineering products for many
industries. With manufacturing locations in Lancaster, Pa in the USA, and
overseas in Mexico, the U.K., Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, Thermacore provides
B2B manufacturing to other OEMs along with design R&D & manufacturing. It
was formerly an independent ultra high-tech outfit, with compounded growth
of 40% annually before the manufacturing economy went sour, and more
recently it was acquired by Modine.

Nobody really seems to knows what was going on with Thermacore or what their
relationship with Mills became after merger with Modine. The only thing that
seems clear is that Modine decided not to pursue the technology. However, it
could well be that the wet electrolytic hydrino technology, and perhaps some
of the original personnel, did not fit well into the Modine corporate
culture, and realizing the unfulfilled potential of the wet cell, these R&D
folks decided to leave.

Here are some very  interesting pdf files from the Mills' BLP site, relating
to Thermacore (if the papers are are still there):
http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Anomalous-Heat-from-Atomic-Hydrogen.pdf
http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Final-Report-Nascent-Hydrogen.pdf

For emphasis, let me repeat: THE CELL OPERATED CONTINUOUSLY FOR OVER ONE
YEAR. This was prior to the Modine merger.

Now, remember, this statement is not coming from some fly-by-night
self-promoting entrepreneur, nor even some university professor who is
ignorant of manufacturing realities and corporate intrigue - but instead it
comes from one of the most well-respected of high-tech firms, a
manufacturing firm, and the inventors of the heat-pipe and many other
wonderful thermal inventions.

Again, the British anouncement by the Eccles/Watts group was gravely
deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and their
callous plea for funding is abhorent under circumstances of what must be
*intentional non-disclosure*.

This failure to credit others and disclose prior patent status casts serious
doubt on both their (the Watt group) integrity and the thoroughness of their
research, and may even approach criminal misconduct, since a plea for money
comses along with their claim of original invention. A 5-minute Google
search would have turned all of this up (as it has been posted to Vortex
before).

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 12:41:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA09895;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 12:38:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 12:38:13 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519131358.02dd3660 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:35:54 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
In-Reply-To: <008901c31e21$34620920$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"cfkuB1.0.OQ2.aAJo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50548
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993
>
>Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach; Robert M. 
>(Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA)

What is the URL for this document? (I believe there are several patent 
servers, but I have not found one that works well.)


>not clear. Mills and first research facility were also located in 
>Lancaster (Thermacore Hdqts) in the early 1990s . . .

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I do not think it was in the same building. No 
doubt it was in Mill's best interest to be included in the patent. I cannot 
imagine why he wasn't. There must be a story behind the story.


>example is a cell producing 41 watts of heat with only 5 watts of 
>electrical input. The cell has operated continuously for over one year..."
>
>This does not sound to me like a process that is so corrosive that it 
>cannot be commercialized.

Right. I never heard that it self-destructs quickly.


>The only thing that seems clear is that Modine decided not to pursue the
>technology. However, it could well be that the wet electrolytic hydrino 
>technology, and perhaps some of the original personnel, did not fit well 
>into the Modine corporate culture, and realizing the unfulfilled potential 
>of the wet cell, these R&D folks decided to leave.

If true, this is an insane decision. (It may well the true -- people do 
crazy things all the time.) Anyone who believes they original report would 
drop all research and pursuant single-mindedly, since the patent could be 
worth trillions of dollars.


>Now, remember, this statement is not coming from some fly-by-night 
>self-promoting entrepreneur, nor even some university professor who is 
>ignorant of manufacturing realities and corporate intrigue - but instead 
>it comes from one of the most well-respected of high-tech firms, a 
>manufacturing firm, and the inventors of the heat-pipe and many other 
>wonderful thermal inventions.

On the other hand, the claims made in the URL at Mills' site are screwy. 
Thermacore says the effect is not nuclear because they have not detected 
nuclear ash. Okay, did they detect commensurate chemical ash? Not as far as 
I know. Therefore it cannot be chemical, either. Also, it would be 
impossible to detect helium in this experiment, so they really do not know 
whether they have nuclear ash or not. They seem to skirt over this issue. I 
suspect they do not want to associate themselves with cold fusion or any 
form of nuclear energy, perhaps because of public relations.


>Again, the British anouncement by the Eccles/Watts group was gravely 
>deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and their

Yup.


>callous plea for funding is abhorent under circumstances of what must be 
>*intentional non-disclosure*.

Well, I find it silly or incompetent, not exactly abhorrent. Who knows what 
their intentions might have been. It does not make sense to commit an 
underhanded or criminal act when anyone can find out you have cheated by 
using Google for five minutes. It is like trying to shoplift a canoe. 
People are bound to notice you.


>This failure to credit others and disclose prior patent status casts 
>serious doubt on both their (the Watt group) integrity and the 
>thoroughness of their research, and may even approach criminal misconduct, 
>since a plea for money comes along with their claim . . .

I know little about patent laws, but I doubt this would constitute a 
criminal violation on that end. It would simply mean they do not get a 
patent. It might be a criminal violation of laws regarding solicitation of 
investment funds, which is probably what Beene has in mind.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 13:24:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17739;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 13:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519160633.02dd3660 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:18:05 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Wasting time on environmentalist organizations
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZiF0d2.0.5L4.GmJo-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50549
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a futile waste of time, but periodically I feel moved to contact 
some of the leading environmentalist organizations, such as the Union of 
Concerned Scientists (ucs ucsusa.org). I just sent them the attached form 
letter. I am sure there will be no response, but perhaps it is worth doing 
this so that future historians will see how out-to-lunch and useless these 
organizations were. Of course they are not the only ones. The APS and every 
single U.S. industrial corporation are equally guilty of ignoring cold 
fusion. But the environmentalists pride themselves on being 
anti-establishment, fearless and open minded, so in a sense they are even 
more culpable.

The most pathetic group of all are the scientists who form so-called 
"skeptical" societies, trumpeting their independence and originality. They 
are among the most pathetic misguided losers I have come across outside of 
Los Vegas. One of them connected with the "Skeptic" magazine had the gall 
to write to me:

>Dear Mr. Rothwell: Not being a physicist, I have not read the papers that 
>you cite in favor of cold fusion or its criticism in the techncal literature.

My response:

"Naturally. And of course, for that reason, you would never think to attack 
cold fusion, or endorse it. The problem is that the authors who attack cold 
fusion in 'The Skeptical Enquirer' and 'The Skeptic' have also not read the 
technical literature, yet these magazines allow them to publish highly 
emotional and unfounded attacks on it. By your standards and mine this is a 
violation of academic ethics. All we ask for is an opportunity to present 
our case, not an endorsement by you or by the editors. Your readers can 
judge the issues for themselves. They deserve a chance to see both sides . . ."

Of course, he never responded. These people never do.

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Subject: New Scientist magazine features cold fusion at U.S. Navy

Here is something absolutely vital to the environment. See:

http://lenr-canr.org/NewScientist.htm

"We do not know if Cold Fusion will be the answer to future energy needs, 
but we do know the existence of Cold Fusion phenomenon through repeated 
observations by scientists throughout the world. It is time that this 
phenomenon be investigated so that we can reap whatever benefits accrue 
from additional scientific understanding. It is time for government funding 
organizations to invest in this research."

Dr. Frank E. Gordon
Head, Navigation and Applied Sciences Department
Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego


The environmentalist movement has been ignoring this research for years, 
because many environmentalists bought into the myth that the cold fusion 
effect was never replicated. In fact, as the scientific papers in our 
library show, it was replicated at high signal to noise ratios at hundreds 
of prestigious laboratories. I suggest you review some of the papers in our 
Library with an open mind.

- Jed Rothwell
Librarian, http://lenr-canr.org/


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 13:36:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23236;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 13:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530502baeeedfa3205 [12.21.208.202]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 12:37:05 -0800
To: <knagel gis.net>, "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Skaterats defeat Newtons 3rd law. Yo! Duuude!
Resent-Message-ID: <"5drsK1.0.yg5.8_Jo-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50550
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

While this is a very cool idea for a sport, there isn't much here that
indicates violation of Newton's Third.  An ice scater never "puts a foot
down to pavement" so to speak.  The scate has lots of lateral bite but
almost zero forward-reverse traction.  If you imagine the skateboard to be
a single foot of an ice scater, but where the skate is lifted the board
merely turns, cuts, back, and realigns with the skate for its tacking power
stroke, then you can see how leaning and pressing into the board while on
the tacking power stroke adds momentum to the skate boarder and to the
board itself.  In the case of the board, however, power can be gained on
both tacks.

In addition some momentum can be gained from use of air pressure or wind,
or from literally walking the board by alternately lifting alternate sides
while pressing backwards on the grounded side.


At 1:38 PM 5/19/3, Keith Nagel wrote:

>The payoff: skateboarding for miles but
>never needing to set a foot on the
>pavement.


" And to get up steep hills with
>little
>momentum, they'll spin their longboards from back to front and front to
>back.

This maneuver sounds almost like walking.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:13:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA21934;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:11:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:11:41 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519162404.02e4fa00 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:29:12 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Energy cell creates heat
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEPHDJAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <008901c31e21$34620920$0a016ea8 cpq>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"N-_ZZ2.0.RM5.DYKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50551
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>I'm guessing that, being businessmen, they all got as much as they could 
>from the collaboration, and then moved on to something else. Considering 
>the politics surrounding this sort of work, can you blame them?

I can blame them! This is cowardly and foolish behavior. They may well be 
throwing away a fortune. If, in the future, this technology is developed by 
someone else, who becomes ten times richer than Bill Gates, what will these 
people think of themselves? They will go down in history as some of the 
most inept businessmen of all time, along with the San Francisco high 
rollers who thought the Transcontinental Railroad was a bad bet, and 
refused to invest in it.

You might counter that these people are not investing in CF (or whatever 
the Mills effect is) because it would be politically dangerous. Their 
customers may include oil companies for example. I do not buy this. Any 
businessman would know ways to hide his involvement and develop on the q.t.

If they discovered errors in their own work, and they now believe there was 
no excess heat, that would be a valid reason not to invest in the research.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:13:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA22536;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:12:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:12:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519150208.02dd3660 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:02:36 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat COPY 2?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Adn-X.0.tV5.dYKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50552
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This seems to have gotten lost in cyberspace.

Jones Beene wrote:

>Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993
>
>Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach; Robert M. 
>(Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA)

What is the URL for this document? (I believe there are several patent 
servers, but I have not found one that works well.)


>not clear. Mills and first research facility were also located in 
>Lancaster (Thermacore Hdqts) in the early 1990s . . .

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I do not think it was in the same building. No 
doubt it was in Mill's best interest to be included in the patent. I cannot 
imagine why he wasn't. There must be a story behind the story.


>example is a cell producing 41 watts of heat with only 5 watts of 
>electrical input. The cell has operated continuously for over one year..."
>
>This does not sound to me like a process that is so corrosive that it 
>cannot be commercialized.

Right. I never heard that it self-destructs quickly.


>The only thing that seems clear is that Modine decided not to pursue the
>technology. However, it could well be that the wet electrolytic hydrino 
>technology, and perhaps some of the original personnel, did not fit well 
>into the Modine corporate culture, and realizing the unfulfilled potential 
>of the wet cell, these R&D folks decided to leave.

If true, this is an insane decision. (It may well the true -- people do 
crazy things all the time.) Anyone who believes they original report would 
drop all research and pursuant single-mindedly, since the patent could be 
worth trillions of dollars.


>Now, remember, this statement is not coming from some fly-by-night 
>self-promoting entrepreneur, nor even some university professor who is 
>ignorant of manufacturing realities and corporate intrigue - but instead 
>it comes from one of the most well-respected of high-tech firms, a 
>manufacturing firm, and the inventors of the heat-pipe and many other 
>wonderful thermal inventions.

On the other hand, the claims made in the URL at Mills' site are screwy. 
Thermacore says the effect is not nuclear because they have not detected 
nuclear ash. Okay, did they detect commensurate chemical ash? Not as far as 
I know. Therefore it cannot be chemical, either. Also, it would be 
impossible to detect helium in this experiment, so they really do not know 
whether they have nuclear ash or not. They seem to skirt over this issue. I 
suspect they do not want to associate themselves with cold fusion or any 
form of nuclear energy, perhaps because of public relations.


>Again, the British anouncement by the Eccles/Watts group was gravely 
>deficient for not mentioning this most relevant background, and their

Yup.


>callous plea for funding is abhorent under circumstances of what must be 
>*intentional non-disclosure*.

Well, I find it silly or incompetent, not exactly abhorrent. Who knows what 
their intentions might have been. It does not make sense to commit an 
underhanded or criminal act when anyone can find out you have cheated by 
using Google for five minutes. It is like trying to shoplift a canoe. 
People are bound to notice you.


>This failure to credit others and disclose prior patent status casts 
>serious doubt on both their (the Watt group) integrity and the 
>thoroughness of their research, and may even approach criminal misconduct, 
>since a plea for money comes along with their claim . . .

I know little about patent laws, but I doubt this would constitute a 
criminal violation on that end. It would simply mean they do not get a 
patent. It might be a criminal violation of laws regarding solicitation of 
investment funds, which is probably what Beene has in mind.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:22:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA29157;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:19:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:19:47 -0700
Message-ID: <00e001c31e4c$4504dc00$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70@pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030519131358.02dd3660@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:19:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA29122
Resent-Message-ID: <"helEx1.0.V77.pfKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50553
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
 
> >Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993
 
> What is the URL for this document? (I believe there are several patent 
> servers, but I have not found one that works well.)


http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,273,635.WKU.&OS=PN/5,273,635&RS=PN/5,273,635 

or [bookmark] and go to 
http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm

and type in the patent number 

 
> On the other hand, the claims made in the URL at Mills' site are screwy. 
> Thermacore says the effect is not nuclear because they have not detected 
> nuclear ash. Okay, did they detect commensurate chemical ash? 

I suppose if hydrinos were considered to be chemical ash, and why shouldn't they be - then yes, Mills claims to  have actually collected them, and to have sent them to numerous labs for verification...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:23:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA30658;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:21:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:21:37 -0700
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Skaterats defeat Newtons 3rd law. Yo! Duuude!
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: ID = dcf35902a696aec8ab4a512a7c111b8b
Reply-To: michael.foster excite.com
From: "Michael Foster" <michael.foster excite.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: michael.foster excite.com
X-Mailer: PHP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 
Message-Id: <20030519212050.07A123DBA xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 17:20:50 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Message-ID: <"gkfif1.0.iU7.VhKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50554
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Here in Los Angeles, skateboarding center of the universe, this news is so old as to have whiskers on it.

When I first saw some kids skateboarding uphill without touching their feet to the ground, it must have been at least 15 years ago.  They were actually going up a rather steep incline right on Sunset Blvd.  I have to admit I was pretty amazed.  In fact, I was so impressed I stopped my car and talked to one of the kids about what he was doing.  Keep in mind they were doing this on ordinary skate boards and they didn't look in the least clumsy or ridiculous doing it.  Indeed, I'd have to say they looked quite graceful.

What the kid I talked to said, in essence, was, "I dunno, you kind of have to, like, feel it, dude."  He also said it required a lot more effort to do this than just pushing the board along with your feet.

This is hardly a method of defeating Newton's 3rd.  Simple vectoring explains the thing quite handily.  In other words, if they had no traction on the ground, they couldn't do it.  It's really the same thing as a sailboat being able to sail into the wind.

M.

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:36:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA07939;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:34:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:34:50 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519172700.02e51e20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 17:34:30 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat - Oops.
In-Reply-To: <00e001c31e4c$4504dc00$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030519131358.02dd3660 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"UiAZd2.0.ux1.utKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50555
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

> > On the other hand, the claims made in the URL at Mills' site are screwy.
> > Thermacore says the effect is not nuclear because they have not detected
> > nuclear ash. Okay, did they detect commensurate chemical ash?
>
>I suppose if hydrinos were considered to be chemical ash, and why 
>shouldn't they be - then yes, Mills claims to  have actually collected 
>them, and to have sent them to numerous labs for verification...

Ah, yes. The Thermocore document posted here:

http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Anomalous-Heat-from-Atomic-Hydrogen.pdf

. . . does subscribe to the hydrino theory. I misread it. I thought it was 
disavowing that hypothesis as well, leaving no explanation at all.

Still, I think they would have to look for helium before they can 
completely rule out nuclear ash, and helium is difficult to isolate and detect.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:37:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA08684;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:35:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:35:58 -0700
Message-ID: <005a01c31e4e$877a7de0$0300a8c0 ggrf30j>
Reply-To: "Nick Palmer" <nick wynterwood.co.uk>
From: "Nick Palmer" <nick wynterwood.co.uk>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502baeeedfa3205 [12.21.208.202]>
Subject: Re: Skaterats defeat Newtons 3rd law. Yo! Duuude!
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 22:35:02 +0100
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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"no1Nw1.0.F72.zuKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50557
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

If you look at the link to the Seattle newspaper that featured these
"skaterats", you will see a picture of them and a "watcher" - Bill Beatty,
91 - is this our Bill? I never dreamed that he might be this venerable...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134757050_skateboard17.html


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 14:38:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA08641;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 14:35:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:35:56 -0700
Message-ID: <002e01c31e46$9d6c4b90$a141ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030518135142.02734d10 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030519103648.02d90e70@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:38:29 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"pkvdv.0.j62.xuKo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50556
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed wrote:


> Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> >No, it's not quite the same thing. If you read the rest of Mike Butcher's
> >post, he quotes the Watts group as stating that the results flow from a
> >fundamental study of the hydrogen atom, including what they call a
> >metastable state releasing a lot of energy. This points very directly to
the
> >work of Mills because of the presence of potassium, which is a known
> >BlackLight Power catalyst.
>
> Well, assuming it works as advertised, I still think it would be fantastic
> coincidence if this discovery (and Mills') had nothing to do with cold
> fusion. It seems unlikely to me that two similar revolutionary energy
> producing reactions remain undiscovered until circa 1990.

I've been over all of this on the other side of the fence in the HSG
sandpile. Mills' story is that he had an inspiration while studying
electrical engineering at MIT after getting his MD from Harvard. When F&P
made their announcement he decided to try an electrolytic experiment. He was
working with Dr. John Farrell at Franklin & Marshall University at the time
and according to a conversation with John, Mills asked him to look for
candidate catalysts. Potassium and Rubidium were found. A experimental cell
with a KCO3 electrolyte turned on immediately and gave excess heat. As I
recall this claim was met with great skepticism as Mills was using a nickel
cathode and everybody else was using Pd and waiting hours or days for
turn-on.

Mills' Australian patent contains some language which one could consider
an attempt to ride the CF bandwagon. Some think that the shrunken hydrogen
atoms can somehow help overcome the Coulomb barrier and what is really
happening in Mills' cells is LENR.

It happens that Mills' orbitsphere model of the hydrogen atom is taking a
beating currently with the help of Peter Zimmerman (and others), who has
critiqued LENR here in the past. So one might say that LENR and BLP both
currently have difficulty with theory but there is lots of experimental
evidence supporting both. Mills is being published in a few first-rate
journals, including the Journal of Applied Physics.

If one looks at the actual experiments, there is a world of difference
between the two phenomena. At some deep level I think there is a connection,
but that is not a matter of one swallowing the other, any more that two
faces of a coin swallow one another.

In the BLP sandpile, I have been trying to force the theorist critics to
confront experimental evidence. Oddly enough, my example of choice involves
heat release by a BLP cell submerged in a water bath. You can puzzle with
this one: excess heat is released when a mixture of hydrogen and helium flow
through it, but not when krypton and hydrogen are used. It also works when
water vapor flows through the cell, but not krypton. The cell operates well
below atmospheric pressure and is energized by microwaves, creating a plasma
in which the reactions take place. The conditions are clear cut, the excess
heat release macroscopic, errors are insignificant. For theory, you have to
accept Mills.

There is chemical ash, shrunken hydrogen atoms, or hydrinos. Mills claims to
detect these by spectroscopic methods. Recently he condensed the gas output
of the H-He cell in a liquid nitrogen trap. Tests of that gas show very
unusual characteristics, which Mills attributes to a hydrino compound.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 15:25:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA09737;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 15:22:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:22:01 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:41:39 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEPJDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519131358.02dd3660 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gfw7i1.0.UN2.8aLo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50558
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed writes:
>>Thermacore Patent   5,273,635   December 28, 1993
>What is the URL for this document? (I believe there are several patent 
>servers, but I have not found one that works well.)

You can lead a horse to water

http://www.ipdiscover.com/download.htm

but can you make him drink?

USPTO and ESpacenet both hold page images of this patent.

K.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 15:28:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA13549;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 15:27:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:27:08 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: WSCI: anyone going to SSE in Montana?
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305191525380.11143-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"b61Xe2.0.dJ3.xeLo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50559
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


The next SSE conference is in Kalispell Montana (next to Glacier Nat. Pk)

SSE is the scientist group which publishes JSE, the Journal of Scientific
Exploration.  I've been to several of these conferences.  They're fun:
full of actual scientists doing "weird" research such as parapsychology,
UFO analysis, cryptozoo, etc.  I talked to Gene Mallove, P. Graneu, D.
Radin and some of the folks from Vortex-L.  Cost is $125 for the
conference.

The conference is June 11-14 (Wednesday eve. thru Saturday noon)

  22nd Annual SSE Meeting
  http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/22nd.html

  MAP
  http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=20+n+main+st&zip=59901&mag=8


Seattle air fair is currently $210 round trip, so I'm thinking of driving.
The conference hotel is expensive, but there's another nearby for
$60/nite, or a mile walk to a Motel 6 for $30/nite.


Is anyone else going to this?




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 19 15:46:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA24558;
	Mon, 19 May 2003 15:44:22 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:44:22 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Energy cell creates heat
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 19:04:08 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEPLDJAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519162404.02e4fa00 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"bhRB8.0.b_5.6vLo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50560
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed sputters:
>I can blame them! This is cowardly and foolish behavior. They may well be
>throwing away a fortune.

How? They have their IP, read the claims.
If someone else is successful commercializing a device, and
infringe, they'll make some money. Considering the patent
history on this stuff, I suspect they'll be joining
a long queue. Although the USPTO seems reluctant to issue
anything new, browse other countries and you'll see the
words "cold fusion" appearing prominently in the titles.
No pussyfooting around.

The post that started this thread seemed more
to refer to arc type systems than the
electrolytic systems preferred by Mill's and
others at the time of the patent. Smith & Riley mention concerns
about input power measurement, surely a
sign of unstable arcing.

K.






 If, in the future, this technology is developed by
someone else, who becomes ten times richer than Bill Gates, what will these
people think of themselves? They will go down in history as some of the
most inept businessmen of all time, along with the San Francisco high
rollers who thought the Transcontinental Railroad was a bad bet, and
refused to invest in it.

You might counter that these people are not investing in CF (or whatever
the Mills effect is) because it would be politically dangerous. Their
customers may include oil companies for example. I do not buy this. Any
businessman would know ways to hide his involvement and develop on the q.t.

If they discovered errors in their own work, and they now believe there was
no excess heat, that would be a valid reason not to invest in the research.

- Jed



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 08:19:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA23221;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 08:16:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:16:57 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:16:56 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"boqnf2.0.lg5.eRao-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50561
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I reread that Telegraph article carefully. I must say, the author Matthews 
must be incredibly ignorant of middle-school science, and the scientists 
are infuriating. They are giving him a load double-talk and nonsense, and 
he is so dumb he buys it. They are obviously trying to disguise the nature 
of the experiment. For example:


MATTHEWS: They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat of the 
notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two scientists 
claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a 
similar-looking device at room temperature. The findings were widely 
challenged and the scientists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, accused 
of incompetence, fled America to set up labs in France.

These are flat-out lies. The effect was replicated by hundreds of 
researchers. It was never "challenged" by anyone. The only "notorious" 
aspect of it was the behavior of the opposition.


MATTHEWS: "We are absolutely not saying this is cold fusion, or that we 
have found a way round the law of energy conservation," said Christopher 
Davies, the managing director of Gardner Watts. . . .  "What we are saying 
is that the device seems to tap into another, previously unrecognised 
source of energy."

And what, exactly, do they think cold fusion is? It fits their description 
exactly -- an unknown source of energy which produces no significant 
radiation. Have they never heard of Mills or Thermacore? As others have 
pointed out, Google will tell them in a few seconds.


MATTHEWS: According to Mr Davies, the cell is the product of research into 
the fundamental properties of hydrogen, the most common element in the 
universe. He argues that calculations based on quantum theory, the laws of 
the sub-atomic world, suggest that hydrogen can exist in a so-called 
metastable state that harbours a potential source of extra energy.

An absurd hypothesis! I am sure it has occurred to them to let the cell run 
for a week or two, which would prove this is out of the question. Cells of 
this nature have been made before and run for a year or more.


MATTHEWS: Scientists admit to being astonished by the sheer size of the 
energy increase produced by the cell. "I've never seen a claim like this 
before," said Prof Stephen Smith of the physics department at Essex University.

Prof. Smith has never heard of cold fusion? It is possible, I suppose. 
Perhaps he has no Internet connection.


MATTHEWS: "In the case of cold fusion, people talked about getting a 10 per 
cent energy gain or so, which could be explained away quite easily but this 
is much too big for that."

First, this is incorrect. Some cold fusion cells output 300% excess, and 
some have zero input and only output. Second, even if it were true, 10% 
continued long enough will exceed the limits of chemistry.


MATTHEWS:  Prof Smith said: "This needs to be very carefully checked, as 
there could be far more energy going in than the makers think."

That check should have been performed months ago. It would take only a few 
days, not months as Smith claims.


MATTHEWS: According to the Gardner Watts team, it will take about six 
months to carry out tests putting the reality of the effect beyond all 
doubt. The company then plans to develop a prototype capable of turning 
less than one kilowatt of electrical power into 10 kilowatts of heat.

More nonsense. If they can do that, they can easily convert the heat into 
electricity, cut input power to zero, and make the machine self-sustain.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 08:41:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA02620;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 08:38:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:38:30 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520113339.00ab2618 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:38:18 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"P6f181.0.Oe.plao-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50562
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I toned down those comments and zapped them off to the Telegraph editors. 
Not that it will do any good . . .

It is incredible how distorted and amateur the reporting is in many of 
these mainstream, big-name newspapers and magazines. Of course the problem 
is not limited to the UK, or to science reporting. Anyone with books on 
specialized subjects or access to the Internet or books on specialized 
subjects can dig up facts proving that many stories are nonsense. I guess 
the problem is that a reporter must be a generalist -- a jack of all trades 
and master of none. But Matthews is a science writer! You'd think a science 
writer would know enough to avoid making seven elementary blunders in a 
one-page article.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 08:49:54 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA07539;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 08:48:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:48:09 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520084725.032ffce0 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:50:33 -0700
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520113339.00ab2618 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"qLkfN.0.jr1.vuao-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50563
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed:

 >It is incredible how distorted and amateur the reporting is in many of 
these mainstream, big-name newspapers and magazines. Of >course the problem 
is not limited to the UK, or to science reporting. Anyone with books on 
specialized subjects or access to the

Looks to me that Matthews was looking for an easy way to gain favor or look 
"smart"..by "kicking the CF dog" when it was already down (in its public 
perception).





Steve 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 08:59:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA11862;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 08:57:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:57:05 -0700
Message-ID: <002801c31ee7$f00f0260$0329ff3e f7t8y3>
From: "Mike Butcher" <thebends ntlworld.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 16:53:19 +0100
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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"vkicI1.0.8v2.G1bo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50564
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

If anyone wants the link to the article:

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F05%2F18%2Fncell18.xml



Mike Butcher


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 11:27:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA15195;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 11:13:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:13:09 -0700
Message-ID: <00bd01c31efb$427515e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
Subject: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:11:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B8_01C31EC0.956E6520"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZiBDL2.0.Jj3.r0do-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50565
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_00B8_01C31EC0.956E6520
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One further thought on the outlandish prospect that "water-fuel" is a =
indeed real phenomenon which should be investigated by serious =
experimenters.=20

If an automobile engine were somehow to be able to use water as its only =
fuel then obviously the real source of the energy becomes an issue. =
Since mass and energy are interchangeable, of course, it is always easy =
to surmise that some small amount of mass is being converted into =
energy.

Even in combustion, some mass is being converted into energy, although =
the actual energy involved is so small compared to the mass of the =
reactants that it is sometimes difficult to pinpoint which components =
have lost mass.... Makes you appreciate how large "C squared" really =
is...  Consequently, mass/energy conversion does not automatically =
qualify any reaction as being "nuclear" - and the situation becomes even =
more muddled when we begin talking about inner orbitals of atoms as =
opposed to outer orbitals (which is where chemical reactions take =
place).

In a situation where we find x-rays coming from the stress-related =
mechanical failure (and this is a common occurrence in industry) it is =
clear that we are already treading in an area that is not quite chemical =
and not quite nuclear. It is obvious from the spectroscopy used in =
failure analysis that the x-rays are coming from auger cascades and that =
valence electrons are somehow being accelerated into the inner orbitals =
of the structural materials- sometimes grazing the nucleus itself. If =
structural failure can create auger cascades, and quasi-chemical auger =
reaction then create photons which are thousands of times more energetic =
than those that are found in chemical reactions, then one path to "free" =
energy might be glibly stated as: Hey, why not just go out and create a =
recurring series of structural failures - and at the same time recover =
most of the energy that you used to created the failures.

Why not, indeed....

In short, if there is such a thing as water-fuel, it can be probably =
reduced to being related to but different from CANR (chemically assisted =
nuclear reaction) and not having a name yet, so here is one: CAMFR or =
chemically assisted mechanical failure reaction, to be explained below. =
It is a grey area that is so little studied up to now that anyone who =
reads and understands this diatribe can probably be said to be =
on-the-cutting-edge of something....at least until that time comes when =
some big national lab or arrogant PhD comes along and starts taking =
credit for it all.. and probably without attribution (ala Eccles/Watts =
or ORNL sonofusion)...

Since failure analysis is accepted as an absolute fact by all of =
science, why is it so difficult for skeptics to imagine that something =
similar can be occurring in supra-chemical reactions - those that =
involve combustion only as a "trigger" -but where the real source of =
energy is mechanical failure. Sure, combustion itself doesn't normally =
create nuclear reactions nor auger cascades, but it can provide the =
energy necessary for "bootstrapping" i.e. using a small fast explosion =
to trigger a much larger mechanical failure event.=20

This happens all the time in the compressive failure of... ta-da...good =
old water ice...the failure of which is a proven source of x-rays and =
extremely violent explosions that put regular combustion of hydrogen to =
shame.

If you haven't seen it before, please have a look at this graphic =
representation of exploding water - an "Ice Bomb" :
http://genchem.chem.wisc.edu/demonstrations/Gen_Chem_Pages/10liquidsnsoli=
dpage/ice_bomb.htm

The ice bomb explosion shown here is a not particularly violent demo but =
it does manage to fracture an iron sphere - it can be a close metaphor =
for the more numerous mini-ice-bombs that result when water vapor, =
entrained in the air intake of an ICE (internal combustion engine) is =
made to explode by a bootstrapping mechanism using self-generated =
hydrogen from electrolysis.=20

Every mole of water (18 grams) can contain as many as 10^18 of these =
mini-bombs that can be forced by a vacuum into a double phase change - =
going from liquid to solid (ice) and then immediately sublimating into =
gas, expanding to over 1000 times its previous volume at relatively low =
temperature, driving the piston of the ICE, while at the same time, =
seeming to circumvent thermodynamic "laws".
=20
The phase change in ice structure creates an internal beta-aether =
pressure of about 30,000 psi, not coincidentally near the tensile =
failure modulus of cast iron, and although not particularly violent in a =
carefully controlled demo, the explosive potential of any ice-bomb is =
proportional to the net surface area.

In the case of the sphere above, dia of 8 cm you have a surface area of  =
4 pi x r^2=3D ~.02 meter^2.  But the smaller the sphere, the greater the =
ratio of surface area to volume, so that with water mist phase changing =
into ice, one can get a surface area of 1000 sq meters/gram and =
effective explosive force that is about a million times greater than the =
demo. That would be a good day to skip class.

Does this explanation help to convince any skeptic out there that =
water-fuel is a real possibility?

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_00B8_01C31EC0.956E6520
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>One further thought on the outlandish prospect that "water-fuel" is =
a=20
indeed real phenomenon which should be investigated by serious =
experimenters.=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If an automobile engine were somehow to be able to use water as its =
only=20
fuel then obviously the real source of the energy becomes an issue. =
Since mass=20
and energy are interchangeable, of course, it is always easy to surmise =
that=20
some small amount of mass is being converted into energy.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Even in combustion, some mass is being converted into energy, =
although the=20
actual energy involved is so small compared to the mass of the reactants =
that it=20
is sometimes difficult to pinpoint which components have lost mass.... =
Makes you=20
appreciate how large "C squared" really is...&nbsp; Consequently, =
mass/energy=20
conversion&nbsp;does not automatically qualify any reaction as being =
"nuclear" -=20
and the situation becomes even more muddled when we begin talking about =
inner=20
orbitals of atoms as opposed to outer orbitals (which is where chemical=20
reactions take place).</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In a situation where we find x-rays coming from the stress-related=20
mechanical failure (and this is a common occurrence in industry) it is =
clear=20
that we are already treading in an area that is not quite chemical and =
not quite=20
nuclear. It is obvious from the spectroscopy used in failure analysis =
that the=20
x-rays are coming from auger cascades and that valence electrons are =
somehow=20
being accelerated into the inner orbitals of the structural materials- =
sometimes=20
grazing the nucleus itself. If structural failure can create auger =
cascades, and=20
quasi-chemical auger reaction then create photons which are thousands of =
times=20
more energetic than those that are found in chemical reactions, then one =
path to=20
"free" energy might be glibly stated as: Hey, why not just go out and =
create a=20
recurring series of structural failures - and at the same time recover =
most of=20
the energy that you used to created the failures.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Why not, indeed....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In short, if there is such a thing as water-fuel, it&nbsp;can be =
probably=20
reduced to being related&nbsp;to but different from&nbsp;CANR =
(chemically=20
assisted nuclear reaction) and not having a name yet, so here is one: =
CAMFR or=20
chemically assisted mechanical failure reaction, to be explained below. =
It is a=20
grey area that is so little studied up to now that anyone who reads and=20
understands&nbsp;this diatribe can probably be said to be =
on-the-cutting-edge of=20
something....at least until that time comes when some big national lab =
or=20
arrogant PhD comes along and starts taking credit for it all.. =
and&nbsp;probably=20
without attribution (ala Eccles/Watts or ORNL sonofusion)...</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Since failure analysis is accepted as an absolute fact by all of =
science,=20
why is it so difficult for skeptics to imagine that something similar =
can be=20
occurring in supra-chemical reactions - those that involve combustion =
only as a=20
"trigger" -but where the real source of energy is mechanical failure. =
Sure,=20
combustion itself doesn't normally create nuclear reactions nor auger =
cascades,=20
but it can provide the energy necessary for "bootstrapping" i.e. using a =
small=20
fast explosion to trigger a much larger mechanical failure event. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>This happens all the time in the compressive failure of... =
ta-da...good old=20
water ice...the failure of which is a proven source of x-rays and =
extremely=20
violent explosions that put regular combustion of hydrogen to =
shame.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If you haven't seen it before, please have a look at this graphic=20
representation of exploding water - an "Ice Bomb" :<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://genchem.chem.wisc.edu/demonstrations/Gen_Chem_Pages/10liqu=
idsnsolidpage/ice_bomb.htm">http://genchem.chem.wisc.edu/demonstrations/G=
en_Chem_Pages/10liquidsnsolidpage/ice_bomb.htm</A><BR><BR>The=20
ice bomb explosion shown here is a&nbsp;not particularly violent demo =
but it=20
does manage to fracture an iron sphere - it&nbsp;can be&nbsp;a close =
metaphor=20
for the more numerous mini-ice-bombs that result when water vapor, =
entrained in=20
the air intake of an ICE (internal combustion engine) is made to explode =
by a=20
bootstrapping mechanism using self-generated hydrogen from=20
electrolysis.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Every mole of water (18 grams) can contain as many as 10^18 of =
these=20
mini-bombs that can be forced by a vacuum into a double phase change - =
going=20
from liquid to solid (ice) and then immediately sublimating into gas, =
expanding=20
to over 1000 times its previous volume at relatively low temperature, =
driving=20
the piston of the ICE, while at the same time, seeming to circumvent=20
thermodynamic "laws".</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;<BR>The phase change in ice structure creates an internal=20
beta-aether&nbsp;pressure of about 30,000 psi, not coincidentally near =
the=20
tensile failure modulus of cast iron, and although not particularly =
violent in a=20
carefully controlled demo, the explosive potential of any ice-bomb is=20
proportional to the net surface area.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In the case of&nbsp;the sphere above, dia&nbsp;of&nbsp;8 =
cm&nbsp;you have a=20
surface area of  4 pi x r^2=3D ~.02 meter^2.&nbsp; But the smaller the =
sphere, the=20
greater the ratio of surface area to volume, so that with water mist =
phase=20
changing into ice, one can get a surface area of 1000 sq meters/gram and =

effective explosive force that is about a million times greater than the =
demo.=20
That would be a good day to skip class.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Does this explanation help to convince any skeptic out there that=20
water-fuel is a real possibility?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00B8_01C31EC0.956E6520--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 20 11:57:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07586;
	Tue, 20 May 2003 11:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520142945.00ab2618 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 14:32:08 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Energy cell creates heat
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEPLDJAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030519162404.02e4fa00 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"DW3z93.0.Ss1.vJdo-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50566
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>Jed sputters:
> >I can blame them! This is cowardly and foolish behavior. They may well be
> >throwing away a fortune.
>
>How? They have their IP, read the claims.
>If someone else is successful commercializing a device, and
>infringe, they'll make some money.

The problem is that time is running out on the patent, and as far as I 
know, nobody else is trying to commercialize a device. In fact, nobody else 
knows it exists, or will believe it. If the technology is ever to see the 
light of day, the patent holders themselves must develop it some extent, 
and demonstrate it to the public in order to convince people it exists.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 04:05:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id DAA26456;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 03:52:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 03:52:53 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baf10a9e74dc [12.21.211.116]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 02:55:17 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Cc: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
Resent-Message-ID: <"MuxtY3.0.IT6.5gro-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50567
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:11 AM 5/20/3, Jones Beene wrote:

[snip]
>
>... the explosive potential of any ice-bomb is proportional to the net
>surface area.
>
[snip]

Why is this true?


[snip]
>Does this explanation help to convince any skeptic out there that
>water-fuel is a real possibility?
[snip]


Only solid replicated hard data can do that.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 08:16:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA06546;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 08:04:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 08:04:09 -0700
Message-ID: <002d01c31faa$045fe280$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500baf10a9e74dc [12.21.211.116]>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 08:02:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA06045
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q08rf3.0.zb1.fLvo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50568
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>

> >... the explosive potential of any ice-bomb is proportional to the net
> >surface area.

> Why is this true?


This seems to be the case from the limited amount of experimentation that has been done so far. In fact the proportionality may even turn out to be exponential - that is less certain, but the trend towards ever increasing explosiveness with decreasing particle size appears clear. The best real-world analogy would seem to be "surface tension."

As an object's size decreases, so does its volume. Volume is proportional to weight and inertia. So as an object's size decreases, its volume decreases by a power of three - as does inertia. Because surface tension decreases in direct proportion to the object's diameter, any reduction in surface tension is relatively small. So as size goes down, surface tension decreases only by a power of one, while inertia drops by a power of three. 

If you reverse the table and start to replace inertia, in this analogy, with the phase change forces that occur when ice sublimates, and set that dynamic against the compressive force that acts as the "trigger" then it appears that the focus of the compressive stress and triaxial tension is across the surface interface of the sphere... But, tehn again, the force released is greater than just hydrogen bonding and can only be explained by recourse to beta-aether.

The above is just an intitial reply... let me contact Frank Grimer to see if he concurs or has any any additional insight based on clay mechanics....


> Only solid replicated hard data can do that.

Stay tuned....

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 08:40:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA21351;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 08:28:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 08:28:14 -0700
X-Peer-Info: remote-ip 199.125.98.234 local-ip 199.125.85.40
  local-name mercury.mv.net
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 11:31:04 -0700
Subject: New Scientist CF coverage -- facts behind the story
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BAF113AD.8461%editor infinite-energy.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 IAA21047
Resent-Message-ID: <"LZKgL.0.UD5.Eivo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50569
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>From INFINITE ENERGY ‹ Issue #49, May/June 2003
   www.infinite-energy.com

New Scientist Covers
U.S. Navy Cold Fusion Report
  by Dr. Eugene F. Mallove

Faithful readers of Infinite Energy have been aware of a two-volume
technical report on cold fusion, which strongly supports the research, a
document published last year under U.S. Navy auspices. This was Technical
Report 1862, February 2002,² Thermal and Nuclear Aspects of the Pd/D2O
System² (see Infinite Energy, #44.)  Now the U.K. publication New Scientist
has chimed in with an article about this report.

The article in New Scientist¹s March 29, 2003 issue (pp. 36-43), written by
New Hampshire-based journalist Bennett Daviss, pointedly discusses only the
Navy report and no other research conducted by cold fusion scientists that
has been published in other technical journals (or in Infinite Energy) or in
the various Proceedings of the now nine International Cold Fusion
Conferences.  It does, however, mention the website www.lenr-canr.org, which
enables readers to examine other down-loadable technical articles on
low-energy nuclear reactions.

For the much maligned science of cold fusion, any publicity is better than
no publicity‹even if the article in question is poorly done, negative, or
neutral in its stance. This New Scientist piece by Ben Daviss is not
negative and not poorly done per se, but it is most certainly deadly
neutral‹no doubt precisely what the New Scientist editors demanded of the
writer if he were going to attempt a cold fusion piece at all.  How else to
explain the absurd title, ³Reasonable Doubt,² which could cut both ways. The
cover of New Scientist promoted the article thus: ³Cold Fusion: What the US
Navy found after ten years¹ research.²  In the table of contents, the Navy
scientists¹ work is dubbed a ³strange story.² None of the more prominent
cold fusion scientists (apart from Dr. Melvin Miles and Dr. Stan Szpak/Dr.
Pamela Mosier-Boss) had their work reviewed or referenced in this article
‹not even cold fusion pioneer Dr. Martin Fleischmann, though he is a
co-author of the Navy report.  Presumably these scientists, though
indistinguishable in their general outlook about cold fusion, were deemed
less than reliable by New Scientist.  In a book review of science
sociologist Bart Simon¹s Undead Science: Science Studies and the Afterlife
of Cold Fusion (2002) in the issue of New Scientist of the previous week
(March 22), the New Scientist editors selected this slimy out-take line for
prominence‹the reviewer¹s vulgar comparison of cold fusion: ³The result
recalls the late Frank Zappa¹s quip about jazz: it¹s not dead, it just
smells funny.²   With that as background odor, what else might one expect of
the present article by Daviss? Thus, the most objectionable aspect of this
feature by Daviss is that it presents a disconnected and distorted view of
what is really going on in cold fusion.  It conveys the highly erroneous
impression that there is really no other research in the field that comes
close to the high quality of this Navy-sponsored work, and that even this
Navy research can be ²reasonably  doubted.²

After stating up front that the Navy report presents evidence that cold
fusion is real, the article¹s most offensive sentence is delivered, ³If this
claim were being made by almost anyone else, it probably would ‹ and maybe
should ‹ be greeted with embarrassed silence.² What?!  Blanket condemnation
of all other cold fusion publication venues and conference Proceedings?
This pre-supposes a scientific knowledge and sophistication that the editors
of New Scientist most certainly do not possess on the subject of cold
fusion/LENR.  But this obnoxious bit of bigotry is just the fig-leaf cover
for New Scientist¹s abandonment of intelligent coverage of cold fusion for
the past dozen years‹ about what one would expect from its editors past and
present. There has been essentially no coverage of cold fusion during the
past dozen years in New Scientist, mixed in with‹from time to time‹egregious
mis-information about it (see below).  This, from a popularized science
magazine that specializes in splashy cover stories with the trashiest
speculative nonsense about quirky new interpretations of quantum mechanics,
supposed ³dark energy,² multi-universes, and other irrationalities
sanctioned by mainstream physics.  Such hot air is allowed about anything
and everything within physics, but not about replicable table-top
experiments demonstrating low-energy nuclear reactions, which suggest
profound new physics at work‹ way beyond the ken of the NS editors and its
mainstream Fizzix fictionalizers. It will be delicious to  observe how these
editors will dig themselves out of their deep hole some years hence, when,
we trust, they will be forced to do so.

Daviss has authored at least one other article on cold fusion‹a profile of
this editor in TWA¹s in-flight magazine, an article reprinted with his
permission in Infinite Energy (see #17). He has also written other pieces on
alternative energy for Infinite Energy, for which we have been grateful.
Daviss is an honest, open-minded, hard worker and a gentleman. On his own
initiative last year, but with my encouragement and advice, Ben undertook
his difficult process of getting New Scientist to write an update about cold
fusion, and we are glad that he succeeded ‹whatever restrictions were placed
on his coverage, willingly or unwillingly accepted by him.
Though I have not yet seen any earlier draft version of the article, as some
Navy cold fusion scientists have, I do know that the article was originally
much longer (some 8,000 words) ‹perhaps about twice as long as the published
version. No doubt a longer feature would have given more range for positive
discussion.  It should be mentioned that there are some serious omissions
and loose ends in the article as it stands:

€ There is no mention of the critical fact that Dr. Melvin Miles tried‹in
vain‹to persuade the DoE anti-cold fusion panel in 1989 to include his later
positive excess heat results, which were obtained in ample time to be
inserted in the Huizenga panel report. He was rebuffed and only his earlier
negative results were included.
€ In discussing the helium correlation with excess heat obtained by Dr.
Miles, it is not mentioned that these results were  announced as early as
1991, and‹ more important‹ that Miles calculated the probability that his
helium-producing cells could randomly match the excess-heat-producing cells
in the group of cells tested for helium and excess heat. The chance was only
1 out of 16,384, that is, 0.0061%.
€ In discussing Dr. Michael Melich¹s retrospective look at some of the
allegedly negative results for excess heat, Daviss writes: ³MIT officials
told Melich that they had thrown away all the data and notebooks, and had
nothing for him to review.²  This statement by the ³MIT officials² (whenever
it occurred)  may or may not be true, but the editors and author should know
that original data was, in fact, examined extensively by both this author
(Mallove) and another MIT graduate, Dr. Mitchell Swartz, and found to show:
A. Significant evidence for excess heat in the MIT calorimetry experiment
and B. Proof of fraudulent manipulation of the heavy water excess heat
results to suppress the finding of excess heat.  Ben Daviss of course knew
about these facts. They should either have appeared in the article, or the
remark about Melich and the alleged disappearing MIT notebooks should not
have been made.  Let us keep the key facts of science history straight.

In thinking about how New Scientist has treated cold fusion over the past
dozen years, I am reminded of an appalling breach that occurred in its May
1, 1993 issue, which our late editorial colleague Christopher P. Tinsley of
Nottingham, England commented upon in a letter sent to it on May 2, 1993.
This letter was never published by New Scientist, or even acknowledged.  For
the benefit of history, and to further prove what the editors of New
Scientist have really been about on the matter of cold fusion, it is our
pleasure to reprint Tinsley¹s letter. Chris would be pleased to know that it
appeared ³from the grave² (actually, from the dusty urn) years after his
1997 death:

                   
May 2, 1993
Dear Sir,

  You express your concern (Comment, 1 May) that science should be
accurately reported.

  Turning to page 6 of the same issue, I saw with interest your article on
the latest cold fusion paper from Profs. Fleischmann and Pons, which I was
able to compare with the actual paper (Physics Letters A, Vol. 176, 1-12, 3
May 1993). This comparison showed a level of distortion and inaccuracy which
astonished me.

  Your article refers to excess energy of up to 2W/cm3. The paper refers to
excess energy which ³remains relatively constant at about 20 watts/cm3 for
the bulk of the experiment, followed by a rapid rise to about 4kW/cm3 as the
cell boils dry.²  Further, even after the cell has boiled dry, it remains at
a temperature of about 100°C for some hours.

  The article shows a diagram based on a graph from the paper. This shows an
aspect of the calorimetry during the first few hours of the experiment.  The
calorimetry of the boiling phase, which occurs some days later is shown in
the paper in an adjoining graph, which you omit. This graph shows the sudden
increase in excess energy per unit volume which accompanies the start of the
boiling phase. The comments from Dr Williams [Ed. Note: of the U.K. Harwell
laboratory] on Œsmall discrepancies in the measured temperature¹ and, ³It is
very sensitive to experimental error,² seem to me quite ludicrous in this
context.

  Having seen his quoted remarks in the French newspaper L¹Express, I am
driven to doubt whether Professor Vigier would consider your report of his
actions to be fair or in context.  As to the question of whether the excess
energy has a nuclear origin, it should be noted that the paper‹as its title
clearly states‹is concerned solely with the calorimetric aspects of the
work. However, a simple calculation based on the information in the paper
shows that in the boiling phase alone, the excess energy is several hundred
eV/atom of Pd, which is two orders of magnitude greater than any possible
chemical reaction.

  These comments are far from exhaustive. Should you not decide to follow
this remarkable travesty of science reporting with a full and accurate
article on the subject then it will at least be a matter of record that you
are happy to let it stand.

Yours faithfully, 
Christopher P. Tinsley

**

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 10:30:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA17999;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 10:17:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 10:17:28 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030521130804.02db5460 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 13:16:38 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: New Scientist CF coverage -- facts behind the story
In-Reply-To: <BAF113AD.8461%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"mp_jM2.0.TO4.YIxo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50570
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I agree with this editorial. After talking with the author, Bennett Daviss, 
and with Mel Miles, I got the impression that the editors at New Scientist 
changed the tone of the article and cut some of the material Daviss wanted 
to include, which would have made a stronger case.

Anyway, any publicity is good publicity. Actually, at this stage I would 
welcome a froth-at-the-mouth attack in Nature, Sci. Am. or some similar big 
name publication. Even if an attack did not include the addresses 
LENR-CANR.org or www.Infinite-Energy.com (which would surely be the case), 
people would wonder what all the fuss is about. They would find these web 
sites on their own. That is the beauty of the Internet. It reduces the 
power of large, wealthy publishers.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 12:59:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA19009;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 12:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Lifter finally tested in vacuum...
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:04:38 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEACDKAA.knagel gis.net>
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: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"MUv1O2.0.we4._Tzo-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50571
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

The good geeks at BlazeLabs have gotten around
to testing the lifter in a decent vacuum system,
and as you might imagine, the results show pretty
clearly that ion motion is the principal ( and
only ) source of thrust.

http://blazelabs.com/l-vacuum.htm

If you're not familiar with these folks, check
out the rest of the site. Some very good work
to be found here.

K.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 13:08:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA14805;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 12:57:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:57:29 -0700
Message-ID: <007401c31fd3$09bb3490$2c79ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:55:19 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"7bTAJ2.0.8d3.eezo-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50572
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed wrote:


> I reread that Telegraph article carefully. I must say, the author Matthews
> must be incredibly ignorant of middle-school science, and the scientists
> are infuriating. They are giving him a load double-talk and nonsense, and
> he is so dumb he buys it. They are obviously trying to disguise the nature
> of the experiment. For example:
>
>
> MATTHEWS: They insist, however, that their cell is not just a repeat of
the
> notorious "cold fusion" debacle of the late 1980s. Then two scientists
> claimed to have found a way of generating nuclear energy from a
> similar-looking device at room temperature. The findings were widely
> challenged and the scientists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons,
accused
> of incompetence, fled America to set up labs in France.
>
> These are flat-out lies. The effect was replicated by hundreds of
> researchers. It was never "challenged" by anyone. The only "notorious"
> aspect of it was the behavior of the opposition.

Let's parse this more carefully. 1) Unjustly, but it was 'notorious' and a
'debacle'. 2) The devices are vaguely electrolytic, but not similar-looking.
3) the findings were widely challenged in the press and forums; the positive
data was ignored. 4) F&P were accused on incompetence. 5) Pons fled to
France, Fleischmann did not 'flee' England.
>
>
> MATTHEWS: "We are absolutely not saying this is cold fusion, or that we
> have found a way round the law of energy conservation," said Christopher
> Davies, the managing director of Gardner Watts. . . .  "What we are saying
> is that the device seems to tap into another, previously unrecognized
> source of energy."
>
> And what, exactly, do they think cold fusion is? It fits their description
> exactly -- an unknown source of energy which produces no significant
> radiation. Have they never heard of Mills or Thermacore? As others have
> pointed out, Google will tell them in a few seconds.

They, like Mills, want to avoid any association with "cold fusion". There is
a previously unrecognized source of energy, which is the Mills BLP reaction
which could well be the source of energy. The few lines I have found with
the patent application speak of below ground energy states, a catalyst, and
a plasma to "allow atoms to fuse together". Note it does not say nuclei. The
BLP process requires near-contact catalysis, which could be described as
*atoms* fusing together. Cold fusion is a nuclear process.

It happens that the electrolyte is KCO3 in water. K is a BLP catalyst. So is
ionized oxygen. So in this plasma, which can dissociate water into hydrogen
and oxygen, there are hydrogen atoms and two BLP catalysts, O+ and K. Mills
has conducted his experiments in well controlled conditions for research
purposes. A pulsed plasma is very uncontrolled, but the BLP reactions could
well be going on there. I don't think the reactions are temperature
sensitive. It's more a matter of H atoms and the catalyst atoms having close
encounters of the catalytic kind. >
>
> MATTHEWS: According to Mr Davies, the cell is the product of research into
> the fundamental properties of hydrogen, the most common element in the
> universe. He argues that calculations based on quantum theory, the laws of
> the sub-atomic world, suggest that hydrogen can exist in a so-called
> metastable state that harbours a potential source of extra energy.
>
> An absurd hypothesis! I am sure it has occurred to them to let the cell
run
> for a week or two, which would prove this is out of the question. Cells of
> this nature have been made before and run for a year or more.

Jed, no, it is not absurd. It is the basis for Mills' BlackLight Power
technology. There are dozens of papers confirming the existence of these
states. >
>
> MATTHEWS: Scientists admit to being astonished by the sheer size of the
> energy increase produced by the cell. "I've never seen a claim like this
> before," said Prof Stephen Smith of the physics department at Essex
University.
>
> Prof. Smith has never heard of cold fusion? It is possible, I suppose.
> Perhaps he has no Internet connection.

You have to get it put into your face. The F&P claims were for a few watts
or less, as were many of the experiments that effectively got buried. I know
the story as well as you do. The GW cell is macroscopic in its effects as
are some of the recent BLP cells. >
>
> MATTHEWS: "In the case of cold fusion, people talked about getting a 10
per
> cent energy gain or so, which could be explained away quite easily but
this
> is much too big for that."
>
> First, this is incorrect. Some cold fusion cells output 300% excess, and
> some have zero input and only output. Second, even if it were true, 10%
> continued long enough will exceed the limits of chemistry.

This is true, but the absolute energy levels were often not remarkable. All
this falls into he category of the demo that was so ardently wanted in the
early days of CF. >
>
> MATTHEWS:  Prof Smith said: "This needs to be very carefully checked, as
> there could be far more energy going in than the makers think."
>
> That check should have been performed months ago. It would take only a few
> days, not months as Smith claims.

This is old news. My impression us that money is wanted to find out what is
really going on in the cells. unless you have a real understanding of the
process, scaling up is full of surprises and disappointments. This has been
the bane of CF. >
>
> MATTHEWS: According to the Gardner Watts team, it will take about six
> months to carry out tests putting the reality of the effect beyond all
> doubt. The company then plans to develop a prototype capable of turning
> less than one kilowatt of electrical power into 10 kilowatts of heat.
>
> More nonsense. If they can do that, they can easily convert the heat into
> electricity, cut input power to zero, and make the machine self-sustain.

Note "plans to develop". It is very clear from BLP theory that on an
atom-by-atom basis, the reaction yields far more energy from each hydrogen
atom that is needed to get that atom from water by electrolysis and
dissociation. But in a real reactor lots of things can happen to H and
catalyst atoms besides the BLP reaction, which may involve only a fraction
of the produced atoms. Thus the system is energy-inefficient, however
energetic the reaction itself may be. With heat the output, there are losses
in conversion to electricity to electrolyze the water or run the GW device.
Thus the challenge to close the loop and have a self-sustaining energy
source may be long in coming.

There are very serious engineering problems to be solved for both GW and
BLP. There is a lack of appreciation of those problems on the part of many
impatient observers.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 14:28:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA00348;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 14:17:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:17:41 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baf19b477ce4 [12.21.211.144]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 13:20:20 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Resent-Message-ID: <"VkjLD.0.K5.qp-o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50573
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:02 AM 5/21/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>
>
>> >... the explosive potential of any ice-bomb is proportional to the net
>> >surface area.
>
>> Why is this true?
>
>
>This seems to be the case from the limited amount of experimentation that
>has been done so far. In fact the proportionality may even turn out to be
>exponential - that is less certain, but the trend towards ever increasing
>explosiveness with decreasing particle size appears clear. The best
>real-world analogy would seem to be "surface tension."
>
>As an object's size decreases, so does its volume. Volume is proportional
>to weight and inertia. So as an object's size decreases, its volume
>decreases by a power of three - as does inertia. Because surface tension
>decreases in direct proportion to the object's diameter, any reduction in
>surface tension is relatively small. So as size goes down, surface tension
>decreases only by a power of one, while inertia drops by a power of three.
>
>
>If you reverse the table and start to replace inertia, in this analogy,
>with the phase change forces that occur when ice sublimates, and set that
>dynamic against the compressive force that acts as the "trigger" then it
>appears that the focus of the compressive stress and triaxial tension is
>across the surface interface of the sphere... But, tehn again, the force
>released is greater than just hydrogen bonding and can only be explained
>by recourse to beta-aether.



None of the above seems to point to a source of free (explosive) energy.
Even if small ice chunks are somehow bound together more than they should
be, that does not indicate a lack of symmetry in the event scenario.  If
anything it indicates an energy sink, because there is a stronger bonding
than corresponds to the energy that creates the bond, i.e. than is
indicated by the heat of formation.  It is not clear how this makes for a
larger explosion.  Are you saying that ice chunks slamming together from
the force of excess surface tension make for kinetic energy and thus
massive heat energy which is then released in the form of steam?  There has
to then be some asymmetric secenario whereby the escaping water atoms can
break this surface tension without losing kinetic energy.  I don't see
where you have provided a scenario for this.



>
>The above is just an intitial reply... let me contact Frank Grimer to see
>if he concurs or has any any additional insight based on clay
>mechanics....
>
>
>> Only solid replicated hard data can do that.
>
>Stay tuned....
>
>Jones

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 14:29:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA00723;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 14:18:22 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:18:22 -0700
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <165.2028f65b.2bfd46d2 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 17:17:06 EDT
Subject: claim of dark matter confirmation
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10637
Resent-Message-ID: <"6y3GR2.0.4B.Tq-o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50574
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

THE FOLLOWING RELEASE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY 
PRESS OFFICE IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, AND IS FORWARDED FOR YOUR 
INFORMATION.  (FORWARDING DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT BY THE AMERICAN 
ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY.)  Steve Maran, American Astronomical Society

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACTS:
Dr. Francisco Prada, Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias in 
Spain,+34-922425431, fprada ing.iac.es

Dr. Anatoly Klypin, New Mexico State University at Las Cruces, 
(505) 646-1400, aklypin nmsu.edu

Gary S. Ruderman, Public Information Officer, Sloan Digital Sky Survey, 
312-320-4794, sdsspio aol.com


Sloan Digital Sky Survey study confirms dark matter

A new study using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey provides the most direct 
evidence yet that galaxies reside at the center of giant, dark matter 
concentrations that may be 50 times larger than the visible galaxy 
itself.

The study very directly supports the generally accepted astronomical 
theories on dark matter and contradicts an alternative theory of gravity 
known as Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND).

Lead investigator, Francisco Prada, of the Max Planck Institute for 
Astronomy in Germany and the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias in 
Spain, and a team of colleagues from New Mexico State University at Las 
Cruces and at other Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) institutions, will 
present the results of the team's research at a joint conference of the 
Isaac Newton Group of Telescopes and the Instituto de Astrofisica de 
Canarias, May 26-30 in La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain.

Prada and his colleagues studied the motion of about 3,000 satellites 
orbiting isolated bright galaxies and found strong evidence of dark 
matter gravitational effects.

The study "is important because it is a direct measurement of some of 
the properties predicted for dark matter," said Anatoly Klypin of New 
Mexico State University.

Although it cannot be observed directly, dark matter is believed to 
account for about 27 percent of the total mass of the universe, 
compared with only about 3 percent for normal, observable matter. The 
rest, according to standard models of the structure and evolution of 
the universe, consists of dark energy and radiation.

Prada and his colleagues observed 250,000 galaxies from the Sloan 
Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) telescope to find good candidates for a 
study of the gravitational effects of dark matter. From the SDDS data, 
they identified about 3,000 satellites -- generally small galaxies 
orbiting large ones -- for which they could measure velocities.

The velocity of a satellite declines predictably as the satellite moves 
Away from the object it is orbiting, due to the effects of gravity. In 
the case of planets in our solar system, where there is too little dark 
matter to have a gravitational effect, the decline is rapid because 
there is no mass between the planets and the sun, he said. But in the 
outer reaches of galaxies, where dark matter is believed to be 
clustered, the decline in velocity would be much more gradual if 
standard cosmological models are correct.

"Our results imply the presence of dark matter," Prada said. The 
findings provide strong evidence against the MOND alternative theory of 
gravity, he said.  MOND, controversial since it was proposed in 1983, 
eliminates the need for dark matter in explaining the nature of the 
universe, by changing the law of gravity in areas such as the outskirts 
of galaxies.

Researchers said the SDSS study probes dark matter in a way that cannot 
be done by any other current experiment. This type of research could 
not have been done without the unique capabilities of the SDSS.

The researchers determined the velocity of each satellite relative to 
the galaxy it orbits by measuring the redshift in the light spectra from 
the objects.  Redshift, a change in light waves as an object moves away 
from an observer, is a standard means of measuring the speed of a distant 
object.

The next stage of the research will be to extend the sample of galaxies 
and satellites studied to improve the accuracy of the results.

Participating institutions in this discovery are: The Max Planck 
Institute for Astronomy, Germany; Centro Astronomico Hispano-Aleman; New 
Mexico State University; Princeton University Observatory; Apache Point 
Observatory; University of Michigan; Eotvos University, Budapest; and 
Johns Hopkins University.

(A complete list of people contributing to the discovery is posted on 
the NEWS Section of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Web site at www.sdss.org)

ABOUT THE SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY (SDSS)

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (sdss.org) will map in detail one-quarter 
of the entire sky, determining the positions and absolute brightness of 
100 million celestial objects. It will also measure the distances to more 
than a million galaxies and quasars. The Astrophysical Research 
Consortium (ARC) operates Apache Point Observatory, site of the SDSS 
telescopes.

SDSS is a joint project of The University of Chicago, Fermilab, the 
Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, The Johns 
Hopkins University, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-
Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for 
Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, University of 
Pittsburgh, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, 
and the University of Washington.

Funding for the project has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan 
Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. 
Department of Energy, the Japanese Monbukagakusho and the Max Planck 
Society.

Additional information about the conference is at:
http://www.iac.es/proyect/sattail/

ILLUSTRATION   available from Ruderman (above) at SDSS

------------------------------------------------------------------
IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO CONTINUE RECEIVING PRESS RELEASES THAT ARE
FORWARDED TO THE NEWS MEDIA VIA THE AMERICAN ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY,
PLEASE REPLY ACCORDINGLY TO ANY INCOMING PRESS RELEASE, OR WRITE
TO stephen.p.maran nasa.gov.  Requests for referrals to experts
should be sent to the same address.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 15:15:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA26052;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 15:04:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:04:45 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030521175433.02dd1658 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 18:04:15 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Amusing letters from the present and past editors of the
  Scientific American
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"cTETG1.0.-M6.zV_o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50575
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In April, the editor of Sci. Am. responded to a letter from Ed Storms. 
Owing to a mistake I made in configuring my e-mail, I did not receive it 
until today. It is so amusing I have decided to share it with the world. I 
uploaded it along with some other missives from the Sci. Am. into:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/Appeal.htm

By the way, grand total downloads today stand at 110,000. As I said in my 
response to Rennie, "The Internet has given us a voice, despite your ridicule."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 15:29:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA02674;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 15:18:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:18:30 -0700
Message-ID: <013201c31fe6$b11e54c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500baf19b477ce4 [12.21.211.144]>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:16:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA02318
Resent-Message-ID: <"qB-3X1.0.gf.ri_o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50576
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace H. wrote:

> None of the above seems to point to a source of free (explosive) energy.
> Even if small ice chunks are somehow bound together more than they should
> be, that does not indicate a lack of symmetry in the event scenario. 

The lack of symmetry is known as the "The Sixth Power Law". 

At 0 °C, the increase in volume with the phase change conversion from water to ice, or vice-versa, is ~9 percent. This will result in an instantaneous pressure differential of about 25,000 psi over the "trigger" pressure (which is about 4,300 psi.)

I would like to send the relevant graph, but I am struggling with brain-dead MS security issues and can't get it to save in another program - as I recall you don't have html anyway so it wouldn't help much.

PV^6 = k equation of state for water 

PV^6= a constant, where P= p+i where p= external pressure and i=internal pressure

According to Frank's (Frank Grimer) calculations:

PV^6 = k 
taking V across gives       P    = k.V^(-6)

taking logs               log(P) = log(k) -6.log(V)

differentiating            dP/P  =  0    -6.dV/V 

                           dP/P  =  -6.dV/V   

                           dP  =  -6.(dV/V).(P)    

P = 3800 bar and dV/V = roughly 0.09 say,

So                         dP  =   (-6).(0.09).(3800)

                           dP  =   roughly  - 2000 bar

More accurate calculation 
with the log. equation gives dP  = 1535 bar or 22,500 psi

So I see 1500 bar as the increase in Beta-aether pressure as ice 
turns to water. If sublimation implies it is taken right down to it origin then
we have a pressure drop of 3800 - 1500 bar = 2300 bar. 

I will try to get Frank into this discussion, as I suspect you will have a number of follow-on questions that he can best answer.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 15:36:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA07840;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 15:26:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:26:36 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030521180602.02de77d0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 18:25:56 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
In-Reply-To: <007401c31fd3$09bb3490$2c79ccd1 asus>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-klto3.0.Qw1.Rq_o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50577
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have inadvertently caused some confusion here, which I hope did not carry 
over to the letter I sent to the Telegraph. (It was rephrased, so perhaps not.)

Mike Carrell wrote:

> > These are flat-out lies. The effect was replicated by hundreds of
> > researchers. It was never "challenged" by anyone. The only "notorious"
> > aspect of it was the behavior of the opposition.
>
>Let's parse this more carefully. 1) Unjustly, but it was 'notorious' and a
>'debacle'.

The treatment of CF was a debacle. The actual experimental work as carried 
out in hundreds of labs from 1989 to 1991 was a triumph. I assume the 
author of the news article meant that the research itself was a debacle, 
which is a lie.


> > And what, exactly, do they think cold fusion is? It fits their description
> > exactly -- an unknown source of energy which produces no significant
> > radiation. Have they never heard of Mills or Thermacore? As others have
> > pointed out, Google will tell them in a few seconds.
>
>They, like Mills, want to avoid any association with "cold fusion".

Probably!


>a plasma to "allow atoms to fuse together". Note it does not say nuclei. 
>The BLP process requires near-contact catalysis, which could be described 
>as *atoms* fusing together. Cold fusion is a nuclear process.

No one knows whether cold fusion is purely nuclear, and no one can say 
whether the Mills process is the same as cold fusion, or something 
different. (It seems intuitively likely to me that the two are related, but 
who knows?) The Mills' theory may be completely incorrect.


> > MATTHEWS: According to Mr Davies, the cell is the product of research into
> > the fundamental properties of hydrogen, the most common element in the
> > universe. He argues that calculations based on quantum theory, the laws of
> > the sub-atomic world, suggest that hydrogen can exist in a so-called
> > metastable state that harbours a potential source of extra energy.
> >
> > An absurd hypothesis! I am sure it has occurred to them to let the cell
>run
> > for a week or two, which would prove this is out of the question. Cells of
> > this nature have been made before and run for a year or more.
>
>Jed, no, it is not absurd.  It is the basis for Mills' BlackLight Power 
>technology. There are dozens of papers confirming the existence of these 
>states.

Reading this article, I assumed the "metastable" state Davies refers to is 
some sort of chemical configuration, similar to what Robert Forward 
described. I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that Davies and the others in 
the U.K. are either unaware of the Mills theory, or they disavow it. If 
they know about Mills & Thermacore -- his theory and research -- why are 
they trying to get a patent for something Thermacore patented years ago?


> > Prof. Smith has never heard of cold fusion? It is possible, I suppose.
> > Perhaps he has no Internet connection.
>
>You have to get it put into your face. The F&P claims were for a few watts
>or less . . .

I do not see how this could affect the professor's judgement. In any case, 
CF devices are small. The power density of many CF experiments is much 
better than the Mills / Thermacore experiments. (I do not know about more 
recent work.)


> > doubt. The company then plans to develop a prototype capable of turning
> > less than one kilowatt of electrical power into 10 kilowatts of heat.
> >
> > More nonsense. If they can do that, they can easily convert the heat into
> > electricity, cut input power to zero, and make the machine self-sustain.
>
>Note "plans to develop". . . .

. . .  Thus the system is energy-inefficient, however
>energetic the reaction itself may be. With heat the output, there are 
>losses in conversion to electricity to electrolyze the water or run the GW 
>device. Thus the challenge to close the loop and have a self-sustaining 
>energy source may be long in coming.

Unless the gadget is limited to temperatures well below 100 deg C, I do not 
think it would be difficult to close the loop with a 10 to 1 ratio. Even 
thermoelectric chips could do it, and they are the least efficient means, I 
believe.

Many fruitcake inventors insist that their devices only work with an 
external source of input power, even though these devices supposedly 
produce 10 times input, or better, and some supposedly output electricity. 
(Such claims are well known to longtime readers here, so I will not belabor 
the point.) Either these fruitcakes are ignorant or they are trying to 
disguise the nature of their discovery for some strange reason. When the 
people in the U.K. make similar statements, I get suspicious.


>There are very serious engineering problems to be solved for both GW and BLP.

And even worse problems with pubic relations! I fear there is no cure.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 15:48:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA13836;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 15:38:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:38:13 -0700
Message-ID: <002901c31fe9$9a4ec380$cebd4943 metrogr.org>
From: "Jeff & Dorothy Kooistra" <dskjdk myexcel.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <165.2028f65b.2bfd46d2 aol.com>
Subject: Re: claim of dark matter confirmation
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 18:37:44 -0400
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: <"praKc3.0.1O3.K__o-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50578
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This looks to be nothing more than additional observational confirmation
that galaxies don't rotate (and things in orbit around them don't revolve)
the way one would expect if only gravity and observable matter were at work.
It isn't really a confirmation of "dark matter," or, as I prefer, "mystical
matter."

Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: <Erikbaard aol.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: claim of dark matter confirmation


> THE FOLLOWING RELEASE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY
> PRESS OFFICE IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, AND IS FORWARDED FOR YOUR
> INFORMATION.  (FORWARDING DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT BY THE AMERICAN
> ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY.)  Steve Maran, American Astronomical Society
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 16:02:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA21238;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 15:52:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:52:01 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030521184809.02dd1c40 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 18:51:28 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Amusing letters from the present and past editors of the
  Scientific American
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030521175433.02dd1658 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"mjm1F1.0.eB5.HC0p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50579
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Okay, I revised the last paragraph a little, and I hope I added HTML 
statements that cause the latest version to load automatically.

Suggestions & corrections to this and other documents on LENR-CANR are much 
appreciated.

Please note the announcement on the main screen:

http://lenr-canr.org/index.html

QUOTE:

The appeal now includes responses from the present and previous editors of 
the Scientific American, who took issue with our characterizations of their 
views, and declared that any scientific research "not fully understood at 
present" is "pathological."


I hope this is not too political, or confrontational. Opinions, anyone?

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 17:21:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA01123;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 17:10:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 17:10:49 -0700
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <18d.1a6f3ac1.2bfd6f2b aol.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 20:09:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Energy cell creates heat
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 120
Resent-Message-ID: <"frpUP.0.SH.8M1p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50580
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 5/20/03 2:51:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
JedRothwell mindspring.com writes:

<< If the technology is ever to see the 
 light of day, the patent holders themselves must develop it some extent, 
 and demonstrate it to the public in order to convince people it exists.
 
 - Jed >>

I see the cell has a titantum cathode.  Has anyone else tried titantum and
potash?

Frank Z

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 19:17:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA04705;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 19:05:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:05:13 -0700
Message-ID: <00c101c32006$69280970$2c79ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030521180602.02de77d0@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 22:03:56 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"D_vMF1.0.I91.O13p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50581
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed wrote:

<snip>
>

>
> >a plasma to "allow atoms to fuse together". Note it does not say nuclei.
> >The BLP process requires near-contact catalysis, which could be described
> >as *atoms* fusing together. Cold fusion is a nuclear process.
>
> No one knows whether cold fusion is purely nuclear, and no one can say
> whether the Mills process is the same as cold fusion, or something
> different. (It seems intuitively likely to me that the two are related,
but
> who knows?) The Mills' theory may be completely incorrect.

Please. Jed has pointedly not studied Mills' results and clarification is
needed for readers of Vortex.

LENR produces energy of such intensity that from F&P onward only nuclear
processes could produce it. BLP produces energy of lower intensity, but
greater than any conventional chemistry.

LENR produces transmutation of many kinds. BLP produces hydrogen in a lower
energy state, but it is till hydrogen. Deuterium can also enter the BLP
reaction. No transmutation products have been detected.

LENR produces weak X rays but no gamma or neutron radiation. BLP produces
intense radiation in the EUV and visible range. Other spectral evidence is
in the visible range.

Mills "theory" has many aspects, including the orbitsphere model of the
hydrogen atom. The experimental results support many aspects of the theory,
including the existence of lower-energy states of the hydrogen atom.

My intuition is like Jed's, that at some deep level a connection will be
made, but that will be in a new era of physics.
>
<snip>

> >Jed, no, it is not absurd.  It is the basis for Mills' BlackLight Power
> >technology. There are dozens of papers confirming the existence of these
> >states.
>
> Reading this article, I assumed the "metastable" state Davies refers to is
> some sort of chemical configuration, similar to what Robert Forward
> described.

No, it is not. The abstract of the patent application has this statement:
-----------------------
Methods and apparatus are described for releasing energy from hydrogen
and/or deuterium atoms. An electrolyte is provided which has a catalyst
therein suitable for initiating transitions of hydrogen and/or deuterium
atoms in the electrolyte to a subground energy state. A plasma discharge is
generated in the electrolyte to release energy by fusing the atoms together.
------------------------

The word is "atoms", not a 'chemical configuration'. A 'subground energy
state' is cited. The plasma discharge fuses 'atoms' -- not nuclei --
together.

 I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that Davies and the others in
> the U.K. are either unaware of the Mills theory, or they disavow it. If
> they know about Mills & Thermacore -- his theory and research -- why are
> they trying to get a patent for something Thermacore patented years ago?

I don't know their history or what they knew or didn't know. It is also
possible that they were quite aware of Mills' experimental work and just
changed the language to one less radical to avoid offending the academics
and the patent office. Paulo Correa, whose patents are detailed descriptions
of a very unusual phenomenon, included a paragraph to the effect that the
source of energy was not understood, but would conform to physical laws when
those are better understood.
>
<snip>
>
<snip>
> Many fruitcake inventors insist that their devices only work with an
> external source of input power, even though these devices supposedly
> produce 10 times input, or better, and some supposedly output electricity.
> (Such claims are well known to longtime readers here, so I will not
belabor
> the point.) Either these fruitcakes are ignorant or they are trying to
> disguise the nature of their discovery for some strange reason. When the
> people in the U.K. make similar statements, I get suspicious.

Jed, what CF cell has produced power that exceeded all the support
equipment? Even the Case cell has not done that yet. The intensity of the
reaction at active sites is not in doubt. Getting enough stable active sites
is the problem.


Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 21:20:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA13551;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 21:09:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 21:09:07 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0abaf1fcbab623 [64.61.198.252]>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 23:09:52 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: suggestions for a venue
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1162; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"_tTca3.0.WJ3.Yr4p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50582
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I just met this man, Floyd Weidrich, floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com , who 
claims to have several designs of FE machines that he wants to give 
to mankind. He is looking for suitable venues in which to post them 
on the Internet. I have sent him the following people, and I am 
looking for more. Pat Bailey, Wayne Green Eugene Mallove, Tom Valone. 
If any of you people have any more suggestions, let me know.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 21 21:29:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA18119;
	Wed, 21 May 2003 21:17:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 21:17:00 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0cbaf1ffd37072 [64.61.198.252]>
In-Reply-To: <20030522034749.3894.qmail web21005.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030522034749.3894.qmail web21005.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 23:17:53 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of any kind!Today!
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1158545408==_ma============"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1162; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"VnM6U1.0.yQ4.xy4p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50583
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

--============_-1158545408==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

>Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 22:44:54 -0500 To: 
><mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com From: 
>"thomas malloy" < 
><mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com>temalloy@metro.lakes.com >  
>Subject: please respond
>
>Just a test to make sure that your email address is working.
>
>Subject:1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any kind!
>
>If you see inventions that do not purtain to you,
>
>I have over 300 inventions just by me writing
>
>to your groups means that I have
>
>  something that  you would
>
>  like just ask or phone
>
>  me or email:
>
>
>I can elimanate 80% of differant Cancers!Want to know more 
>call!1-760-789-5720    or 
><http://mail.yahoo.com/config/login?/ym/Compose?To=Emailfloyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>Email 
>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com How would you like to travel to the stars 
>Today with Magnetic times Magnetics I can do it!
>
>I can supply 100% of  H 2 or Hydrogen right now today for the whole 
>world!How would you like a 1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of 
>any kind!
>
>I CAN BUILD A UFO THAT CAN TRAVEL FROM ONE GALAXY TO ANOTHER IN LESS 
>THAN ONE HOUR MagneticX Magnetic   AND I CAN BUILD IT TODAY!I can 
>prove it!magnetic device that is one million times more effective 
>than a superconductor!Let me prove to you!SYNTHETIC FUELS
>
>Name: Floyd Wiedrich Sr.
>
>Address: 140N.14th.st.#111
>
>Town/City: Ramona,California.
>
>State: California
>
>Country: United States of America
>
>Zip Code: 92065 
>
>ICQ:#290147564  Class: CEO-Retired
>DOD R&D Grants military Navy aircraft carriers
>
>Phone_Number: 760-789-5720 Corp.SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>
>Email_Address: 
><http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=7fc2e67e0aeacd0c8655647e122c1bd4&lat=1049431895&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fmail%2eyahoo%2ecom%2fconfig%2flogin%3f%2fym%2fCompose%3fTo%3dfloyd_lee%40wiedrich%2dsr%2ecom>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com
>
>
>    I myself have never seen a U.F.O.but do I believe,in the late 
>1950s and early 1960s,at Moffett Field, California there were four 
>flying saucers on our military base each one was of different
>size they were often on the tarmac in front of the blimp hangers. 
>There were over 15 thousand military at the base from the aircraft 
>carriers air wings, that were stationed there that would mean there 
>had to be one heck of a lot of people who seen those flying saucers 
>on the tarmac. Not everybody is blind that could explain a lot of 
>sightings for everybody however I would like to build my own flying 
>saucers with my technology with magnetics systems and antimagnetic 
>systems. I am a disabled veteran and I hardly ever leave my 
>apartment however if somebody was to back me and if I was to get 
>round-the-clock nursing for my mother who has Alzheimer's and 
>incontinence I can build all the systems in less than a couple years 
>however the hydrogen system would be as big as the construction as 
>the Panama Canal was but it would supply 100 percent of the United 
>States energy use including all combustion engines,
><http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=6919290>http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=6919290
>
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff0839c020a2b&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html   
><http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&userid=floydwiedrichsr&password=w5149842&page=index&image=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&db=&n=f>http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&userid=floydwiedrichsr&password=w5149842&page=index&image=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&db=&n=f
>
><http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=5984971>http://bbs.slate.msn.
>com/?id=3936&m=5984971
>
>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef6363d4&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=9e2b8fa3ee839960aabf1b494c0985f0&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d95fbdaa05071fd9701d46f2de82e74d4%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203B.jpeg
>
>   I do not talk about fiction ever,I can take you to anyplace in the 
>universe in a matter of a few hours with magnetic propultion,open my 
>web page!Floyd Lee Wiedrich Sr.
>
> 
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=939d5aef9b0eec6ee3a568b9c971a253&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3df5fcb60633eff4b54c4240658b7424d9%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com 
>
>ph:[ 760-789-5720] 140N.14th.st.#111 [ramona,ca.92065]
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=06965655d2febc93ac5667f732e57066&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d5b491ea141a3b826ec5f5928cf468bf3%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://thumbnails.match.com/thumbnails/42/03/13184203B.jpeg
>
><'"http
>://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef6363d4&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3b>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg
>
>Im the only one on this planet that understands Magnetic power as 
>much as I !1st Picture on left is the most powerful magnetic power 
>in the Universe,it is a double black hole,now this is more power,as 
>Tim would say from tool time,that is why I like the biggest and 
>fastest pc!I think people should see who they are hereing from these 
>are pictures of me!
><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff0839c020a2b&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html
>
>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>
><http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html>http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html

--============_-1158545408==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of
any</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-2"><b>Date:</b> Wed, 21 May
2003 22:44:54 -0500<b> To:</b></font> <a
href="mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com"><font
size="-2">floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com</font></a><font size="-2"><b>
From:</b> &quot;thomas malloy&quot; &lt;</font> <a
href="mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com"><font
size="-2">temalloy metro.lakes.com</font></a><font size="-2">
&gt;&nbsp;</font><font size="-1"><b> Subject:</b> please
respond</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>Just a test to make sure that your
email address is working.</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
size="-2"><b>Subject:</b>1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any
kind!</font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-2"><b>If you
see inventions that do not purtain to you,</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-2"><b>I have
over 300 inventions just by me writing</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-3"><b>to your
groups means that I have</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
size="-2"><b>&nbsp;something that&nbsp; you would</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
size="-2"><b>&nbsp;like just ask or phone</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
size="-2"><b>&nbsp;me or email:</b></font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><br></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><font size="+2">I can elimanate 80%
of differant Cancers!Want to know more
call!1-760-789-5720&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or</font></tt> <a
href=
"http://mail.yahoo.com/config/login?/ym/Compose?To=Emailfloyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com"><tt><span
></span>Email</tt><font face="Verdana" size="-2">
floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com</font></a><tt> How would&nbsp;you like to
travel to the stars Today with Magnetic times Magnetics I can do
it!<br>
</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><font size="+2">I can supply 100% of&nbsp;
H 2 or Hydrogen right now today for the whole world!</font></tt><font
face="Helvetica" size="+2" color="#000033">How would you like a 1000hp
magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any kind!</font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Helvetica" size="+2"
color="#000033">I CAN BUILD A UFO THAT CAN TRAVEL FROM ONE GALAXY TO
ANOTHER IN LESS THAN ONE HOUR
MagneticX&nbsp;Magnetic&nbsp;</font><font face="Arial" size="+2"
color="#000000">&nbsp;</font><font face="Helvetica" size="+2"
color="#000033">&nbsp;AND I CAN BUILD IT TODAY!I can prove it!magnetic
device that is one million times more effective than a
superconductor!Let me prove to you!</font><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Name:</b> Floyd Wiedrich
Sr.</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Address:</b>
140N.14th.st.#111</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Town/City:</b>
Ramona,California.</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>State:</b> California</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Country:</b> United States of
America</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Zip Code:</b> 92065&nbsp;</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>ICQ:#290147564&nbsp;<b> Class:</b>
CEO-Retired<br>
</tt><font face="Verdana" size="-2">DOD R&amp;D Grants military Navy
aircraft carriers</font><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Phone_Number:</b> 760-789-5720
Corp.SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Email_Address:</b></tt> <a
href=
"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=7fc2e67e0aeacd0c8655647e122c1bd4&amp;lat=1049431895&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fmail%2eyahoo%2ecom%2fconfig%2flogin%3f%2fym%2fCompose%3fTo%3dfloyd_lee%40wiedrich%2dsr%2ecom"><tt><span
></span>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com<br>
</tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;&nbsp; I myself have never seen
a U.F.O.but do I believe,in the late 1950s and early 1960s,at Moffett
Field, California there were four flying saucers on our military base
each one was of different<br>
size they were often on the tarmac in front of the blimp hangers.
There were over&nbsp;15 thousand military&nbsp;at the base from the
aircraft carriers air wings, that were stationed there that would mean
there had to be one heck of a lot of people who seen&nbsp;those flying
saucers on the tarmac. Not everybody is blind that could explain a lot
of sightings for everybody however I would like to build my
own&nbsp;flying saucers with my technology with magnetics systems and
antimagnetic systems. I am a disabled veteran and I hardly ever leave
my apartment however if somebody was to back me and if I was to get
round-the-clock nursing for my mother who has Alzheimer's and
incontinence I can build all the systems in less than a couple years
however the hydrogen system would be as big as&nbsp;the construction
as the Panama Canal was but it would supply 100 percent of the United
States energy use including all combustion engines,</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=6919290"><tt><font
color="#0000FF">http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=6919290</font></tt
></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><br></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff0839c020a2b&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html<tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;</tt
> </a><a
href=
"http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&amp;userid=floydwiedrichsr&amp;password=w5149842&amp;page=index&amp;image=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&amp;db=&amp;n=f"><tt><span
></span
>http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&amp;u<span
></span
>serid=floydwiedrichsr&amp;password=w5149842&amp;page=index&amp;image<span
></span>=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&amp;db=&amp;n=f<br>
</tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=5984971"><font
size="-1" color="#0000FF">http://bbs.slate.msn.<br>
com/?id=3936&amp;m=5984971</font></a><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA<br>
</tt><a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef6363d4&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg<tt></tt
></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=9e2b8fa3ee839960aabf1b494c0985f0&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d95fbdaa05071fd9701d46f2de82e74d4%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203B.jpeg<br>
<tt></tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp; I do not talk about fiction
ever,I can take you to anyplace in the universe in a matter of a few
hours with magnetic propultion,open my web page!Floyd Lee Wiedrich
Sr.</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt> <a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=939d5aef9b0eec6ee3a568b9c971a253&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3df5fcb60633eff4b54c4240658b7424d9%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com&nbsp;<br>
<tt></tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>ph:[ 760-789-5720] 140N.14th.st.#111
[ramona,ca.92065]<br>
</tt><a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=06965655d2febc93ac5667f732e57066&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d5b491ea141a3b826ec5f5928cf468bf3%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>http://thumbnails.match.com/thumbnails/42/03/13184203B.jpeg<br
>
<tt></tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href=
"'&quot;http
://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef6363d4&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3b"><span
></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg<br>
<tt></tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>Im the only one on this planet that
understands Magnetic power as much as I !1st Picture on left is the
most powerful magnetic power in the Universe,it is a double black
hole,now this is more power,as Tim would say from tool time,that is
why I like the biggest and fastest pc!I think people should see who
they are hereing from these are pictures of me!<br>
</tt><a
href=
"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff0839c020a2b&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
></span>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html<br>
<tt></tt></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA</tt><br>
<tt></tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html"><font
size="-1"
color="#0000FF">http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html</font
></a></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1158545408==_ma============--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 01:38:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA13498;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 01:27:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 01:27:25 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baf23ace53be [12.21.211.146]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 00:30:07 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: suggestions for a venue
Resent-Message-ID: <"vNTu82.0.lI3.jd8p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50584
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:09 PM 5/21/3, thomas malloy wrote:
>I just met this man, Floyd Weidrich, floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com , who
>claims to have several designs of FE machines that he wants to give
>to mankind. He is looking for suitable venues in which to post them
>on the Internet. I have sent him the following people, and I am
>looking for more. Pat Bailey, Wayne Green Eugene Mallove, Tom Valone.
>If any of you people have any more suggestions, let me know.


How about our very own William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>?  He is well known
to host such things.  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 01:48:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA17413;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 01:38:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 01:38:24 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501baf23cd1ccc2 [12.21.211.204]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 00:40:52 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of any kind!Today!
Resent-Message-ID: <"P9eu03.0.xF4._n8p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50585
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Say... this guy already has a website?  The following looks like spam I
delete all the time.   I wonder what http://64.4.32.251... is?


At 11:17 PM 5/21/3, thomas malloy wrote:
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
>>Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 22:44:54 -0500 To:
>><mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com From:
>>"thomas malloy" <
>><mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com>temalloy@metro.lakes.com >
>>Subject: please respond
>>
>>Just a test to make sure that your email address is working.
>>
>>Subject:1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any kind!
>>
>>If you see inventions that do not purtain to you,
>>
>>I have over 300 inventions just by me writing
>>
>>to your groups means that I have
>>
>>  something that  you would
>>
>>  like just ask or phone
>>
>>  me or email:
>>
>>
>>I can elimanate 80% of differant Cancers!Want to know more
>>call!1-760-789-5720    or
>><http://mail.yahoo.com/config/login?/ym/Compose?To=Emailfloyd_lee wiedrich
>>-sr.com>Email
>>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com How would you like to travel to the stars
>>Today with Magnetic times Magnetics I can do it!
>>
>>I can supply 100% of  H 2 or Hydrogen right now today for the whole
>>world!How would you like a 1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of
>>any kind!
>>
>>I CAN BUILD A UFO THAT CAN TRAVEL FROM ONE GALAXY TO ANOTHER IN LESS
>>THAN ONE HOUR MagneticX Magnetic   AND I CAN BUILD IT TODAY!I can
>>prove it!magnetic device that is one million times more effective
>>than a superconductor!Let me prove to you!SYNTHETIC FUELS
>>
>>Name: Floyd Wiedrich Sr.
>>
>>Address: 140N.14th.st.#111
>>
>>Town/City: Ramona,California.
>>
>>State: California
>>
>>Country: United States of America
>>
>>Zip Code: 92065
>>
>>ICQ:#290147564  Class: CEO-Retired
>>DOD R&D Grants military Navy aircraft carriers
>>
>>Phone_Number: 760-789-5720 Corp.SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>>
>>Email_Address:
>><http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=7fc2e67e0aeacd0c8655647e12
>>2c1bd4&lat=1049431895&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fmail%2eyahoo%2ecom%2fconfig
>>%2flogin%3f%2fym%2fCompose%3fTo%3dfloyd_lee%40wiedrich%2dsr%2ecom>floyd_le
>>e wiedrich-sr.com
>>
>>
>>    I myself have never seen a U.F.O.but do I believe,in the late
>>1950s and early 1960s,at Moffett Field, California there were four
>>flying saucers on our military base each one was of different
>>size they were often on the tarmac in front of the blimp hangers.
>>There were over 15 thousand military at the base from the aircraft
>>carriers air wings, that were stationed there that would mean there
>>had to be one heck of a lot of people who seen those flying saucers
>>on the tarmac. Not everybody is blind that could explain a lot of
>>sightings for everybody however I would like to build my own flying
>>saucers with my technology with magnetics systems and antimagnetic
>>systems. I am a disabled veteran and I hardly ever leave my
>>apartment however if somebody was to back me and if I was to get
>>round-the-clock nursing for my mother who has Alzheimer's and
>>incontinence I can build all the systems in less than a couple years
>>however the hydrogen system would be as big as the construction as
>>the Panama Canal was but it would supply 100 percent of the United
>>States energy use including all combustion engines,
>><http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=6919290>http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=
>>3936&m=6919290
>>
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff083
>>9c020a2b&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inven
>>tions.html
>><http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&userid=flo
>>ydwiedrichsr&password=w5149842&page=index&image=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&db
>>=&n=f>http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&useri
>>d=floydwiedrichsr&password=w5149842&page=index&image=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ej
>>pg&db=&n=f
>>
>><http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=5984971>http://bbs.slate.msn.
>>com/?id=3936&m=5984971
>>
>>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816c
>>ef6363d4&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/0
>>3/13184203E.jpeg
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=9e2b8fa3ee839960aabf1b49
>>4c0985f0&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d95fbdaa05071fd9701d46f2de82e74d4%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/0
>>3/13184203B.jpeg
>>
>>   I do not talk about fiction ever,I can take you to anyplace in the
>>universe in a matter of a few hours with magnetic propultion,open my
>>web page!Floyd Lee Wiedrich Sr.
>>
>>
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=939d5aef9b0eec6ee3a568b9
>>c971a253&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3df5fcb60633eff4b54c4240658b7424d9%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com
>>
>>ph:[ 760-789-5720] 140N.14th.st.#111 [ramona,ca.92065]
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=06965655d2febc93ac5667f7
>>32e57066&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d5b491ea141a3b826ec5f5928cf468bf3%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://thumbnails.match.com/thumbnails/
>>42/03/13184203B.jpeg
>>
>><'"http
>>://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef6363d
>>4&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2f
>>linkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e88%26amp%3
>>blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3b>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg
>>
>>Im the only one on this planet that understands Magnetic power as
>>much as I !1st Picture on left is the most powerful magnetic power
>>in the Universe,it is a double black hole,now this is more power,as
>>Tim would say from tool time,that is why I like the biggest and
>>fastest pc!I think people should see who they are hereing from these
>>are pictures of me!
>><'"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=51039bfd2c6711a36e3ff083
>>9c020a2b&lat=1048987719&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcgi%2
>>dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3ef0d78e229120%
>>26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inven
>>tions.html
>>
>>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>>
>><http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html>http://uk.geocitie
>>s.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html
>
><!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
><html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
>blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
> --></style><title>Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of
>any</title></head><body>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-2"><b>Date:</b> Wed, 21 May
>2003 22:44:54 -0500<b> To:</b></font> <a
>href="mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com"><font
>size="-2">floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com</font></a><font size="-2"><b>
>From:</b> &quot;thomas malloy&quot; &lt;</font> <a
>href="mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com"><font
>size="-2">temalloy metro.lakes.com</font></a><font size="-2">
>&gt;&nbsp;</font><font size="-1"><b> Subject:</b> please
>respond</font></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>Just a test to make sure that your
>email address is working.</tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
>size="-2"><b>Subject:</b>1000hp magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any
>kind!</font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-2"><b>If you
>see inventions that do not purtain to you,</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-2"><b>I have
>over 300 inventions just by me writing</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana" size="-3"><b>to your
>groups means that I have</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
>size="-2"><b>&nbsp;something that&nbsp; you would</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
>size="-2"><b>&nbsp;like just ask or phone</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Verdana"
>size="-2"><b>&nbsp;me or email:</b></font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><br></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><font size="+2">I can elimanate 80%
>of differant Cancers!Want to know more
>call!1-760-789-5720&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or</font></tt> <a
>href=
>"http://mail.yahoo.com/config/login?/ym/Compose?To=Emailfloyd_lee wiedrich-
>sr.com"><tt><span
>></span>Email</tt><font face="Verdana" size="-2">
>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com</font></a><tt> How would&nbsp;you like to
>travel to the stars Today with Magnetic times Magnetics I can do
>it!<br>
></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><font size="+2">I can supply 100% of&nbsp;
>H 2 or Hydrogen right now today for the whole world!</font></tt><font
>face="Helvetica" size="+2" color="#000033">How would you like a 1000hp
>magnetic car!That uses no fuel of any kind!</font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Helvetica" size="+2"
>color="#000033">I CAN BUILD A UFO THAT CAN TRAVEL FROM ONE GALAXY TO
>ANOTHER IN LESS THAN ONE HOUR
>MagneticX&nbsp;Magnetic&nbsp;</font><font face="Arial" size="+2"
>color="#000000">&nbsp;</font><font face="Helvetica" size="+2"
>color="#000033">&nbsp;AND I CAN BUILD IT TODAY!I can prove it!magnetic
>device that is one million times more effective than a
>superconductor!Let me prove to you!</font><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Name:</b> Floyd Wiedrich
>Sr.</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Address:</b>
>140N.14th.st.#111</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Town/City:</b>
>Ramona,California.</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>State:</b> California</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Country:</b> United States of
>America</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Zip Code:</b> 92065&nbsp;</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>ICQ:#290147564&nbsp;<b> Class:</b>
>CEO-Retired<br>
></tt><font face="Verdana" size="-2">DOD R&amp;D Grants military Navy
>aircraft carriers</font><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Phone_Number:</b> 760-789-5720
>Corp.SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><b>Email_Address:</b></tt> <a
>href=
>"http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=7fc2e67e0aeacd0c8655647
>e122c1bd4&amp;lat=1049431895&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fmail%2eyahoo%2eco
>m%2fconfig%2flogin%3f%2fym%2fCompose%3fTo%3dfloyd_lee%40wiedrich%2dsr%2ecom
>"><tt><span
>></span>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com<br>
></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;&nbsp; I myself have never seen
>a U.F.O.but do I believe,in the late 1950s and early 1960s,at Moffett
>Field, California there were four flying saucers on our military base
>each one was of different<br>
>size they were often on the tarmac in front of the blimp hangers.
>There were over&nbsp;15 thousand military&nbsp;at the base from the
>aircraft carriers air wings, that were stationed there that would mean
>there had to be one heck of a lot of people who seen&nbsp;those flying
>saucers on the tarmac. Not everybody is blind that could explain a lot
>of sightings for everybody however I would like to build my
>own&nbsp;flying saucers with my technology with magnetics systems and
>antimagnetic systems. I am a disabled veteran and I hardly ever leave
>my apartment however if somebody was to back me and if I was to get
>round-the-clock nursing for my mother who has Alzheimer's and
>incontinence I can build all the systems in less than a couple years
>however the hydrogen system would be as big as&nbsp;the construction
>as the Panama Canal was but it would supply 100 percent of the United
>States energy use including all combustion engines,</tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href="http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=6919290"><tt><font
>color="#0000FF">http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=6919290</font></tt
>></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt><br></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=51039bfd2c6711a3
>6e3ff0839c020a2b&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3
>ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html<tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;</tt
>> </a><a
>href=
>"http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&amp;userid=
>floydwiedrichsr&amp;password=w5149842&amp;page=index&amp;image=Floyd+Wiedri
>ch+Sr%2Ejpg&amp;db=&amp;n=f"><tt><span
>></span
>>http://build.webspawner.com/scripts/build.pl?process=saveimage&amp;u<span
>></span
>>serid=floydwiedrichsr&amp;password=w5149842&amp;page=index&amp;image<span
>></span>=Floyd+Wiedrich+Sr%2Ejpg&amp;db=&amp;n=f<br>
></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href="http://bbs.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&amp;m=5984971"><font
>size="-1" color="#0000FF">http://bbs.slate.msn.<br>
>com/?id=3936&amp;m=5984971</font></a><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN
>CALIFORNIA<br>
></tt><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=6f15217c4c26aff1
>79a7816cef6363d4&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a67
>1f69a9d242e88%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg<tt></tt
>></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=9e2b8fa3ee839960
>aabf1b494c0985f0&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d95fbdaa05071fd9701d
>46f2de82e74d4%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203B.jpeg<br>
><tt></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp; I do not talk about fiction
>ever,I can take you to anyplace in the universe in a matter of a few
>hours with magnetic propultion,open my web page!Floyd Lee Wiedrich
>Sr.</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;</tt> <a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=939d5aef9b0eec6e
>e3a568b9c971a253&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3df5fcb60633eff4b54c4
>240658b7424d9%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com&nbsp;<br>
><tt></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>ph:[ 760-789-5720] 140N.14th.st.#111
>[ramona,ca.92065]<br>
></tt><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=06965655d2febc93
>ac5667f732e57066&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d5b491ea141a3b826ec5
>f5928cf468bf3%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>http://thumbnails.match.com/thumbnails/42/03/13184203B.jpeg<br
>>
><tt></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http
>://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=6f15217c4c26aff179a7816cef63
>63d4&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e32%2e251%2fcg
>i%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3d7720b20b546ad0f5a671f69a9d242e8
>8%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3b"><span
>></span>http://pictures.match.com/pictures/42/03/13184203E.jpeg<br>
><tt></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>Im the only one on this planet that
>understands Magnetic power as much as I !1st Picture on left is the
>most powerful magnetic power in the Universe,it is a double black
>hole,now this is more power,as Tim would say from tool time,that is
>why I like the biggest and fastest pc!I think people should see who
>they are hereing from these are pictures of me!<br>
></tt><a
>href=
>"'&quot;http://64.4.32.251/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&amp;lah=51039bfd2c6711a3
>6e3ff0839c020a2b&amp;lat=1048987719&amp;hm___action=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e3
>2%2e251%2fcgi%2dbin%2flinkrd%3f_lang%3dEN%26amp%3blah%3dcccffe0ecbbcc0483c3
>ef0d78e229120%26amp%3blat%3d1048045096%26amp%3bh"><span
>></span>http://www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html<br>
><tt></tt></a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>SYNTHETIC FUELS OF SOUTHERN
>CALIFORNIA</tt><br>
><tt></tt></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href="http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html"><font
>size="-1"
>color="#0000FF">http://uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html</font
>></a></blockquote>
><div><br></div>
></body>
></html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 02:23:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA30478;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 02:13:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 02:13:32 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 01:16:09 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id CAA30255
Resent-Message-ID: <"dczpd.0.7S7.yI9p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50586
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:16 PM 5/21/3, Jones Beene wrote:

>The lack of symmetry is known as the "The Sixth Power Law".
>
>At 0 °C, the increase in volume with the phase change conversion from
>water to ice, or vice-versa, is ~9 percent. This will result in an
>instantaneous pressure differential of about 25,000 psi over the "trigger"
>pressure (which is about 4,300 psi.)


There is an increase in volume only as the phase change goes from water to
ice, not vice versa, true?  When ice turns to water it shrinks, true?

The equation relating pressure and volume (I assume for ice), PV^6 = k,
though non-linear, does not indicate any inherent lack of symmetry going in
opposite directions with regard to pressure, and doesn't account for
temperature change.   I assume it is the solid to gas phase change itself,
conversion to the ideal gas law:

   p V = n R T


where p is pressure, V is gas volume, and n is the number of moles of gas,
R is the universal gas constant 8.314 J/mol-K, and T is temperature in K,
that creates the required discontinuity.

How about a nice simple state-by-state description of the proposed cycle?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 07:51:05 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA27276;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 07:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 07:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3ECCE0B2.9060308 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:37:38 -0400
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: suggestions for a venue
References: <a05111b0abaf1fcbab623 [64.61.198.252]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"dMGsy1.0.5g6.q3Ep-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50587
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

thomas malloy wrote:

> I just met this man, Floyd Weidrich, floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com , who 
> claims to have several designs of FE machines that he wants to give to 
> mankind. He is looking for suitable venues in which to post them on 
> the Internet. I have sent him the following people, and I am looking 
> for more. Pat Bailey, Wayne Green Eugene Mallove, Tom Valone. If any 
> of you people have any more suggestions, let me know.
>
>

Stephen Greer?

Hal Puthoff?


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 07:59:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA09539;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 07:49:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 07:49:04 -0700
Message-ID: <3ECCE37D.1040308 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:49:33 -0400
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of any kind!Today!
References: <v01530501baf23cd1ccc2 [12.21.211.204]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"awF2B2.0.kK2.WDEp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50588
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>Say... this guy already has a website?  The following looks like spam I
>delete all the time.   I wonder what http://64.4.32.251... is?
>

That's www.pav0.hotmail.com.

On second thought, this guy seems more like a Stephen Greer type than a 
Hal Puthoff type.  His (Floyd's) web site URLs actually link to his 
email address.  He does have a web page on Geocities; but, it has no 
content.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 09:20:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA29238;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 09:07:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 09:07:32 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030522114715.0279eb20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:06:57 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telegraph article is full of nonsense
In-Reply-To: <00c101c32006$69280970$2c79ccd1 asus>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030521180602.02de77d0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"m3m1v2.0.k87.3NFp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50589
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell wrote:

> > different. (It seems intuitively likely to me that the two are related,
>but
> > who knows?) The Mills' theory may be completely incorrect.
>
>Please. Jed has pointedly not studied Mills' results and clarification is
>needed for readers of Vortex.

I said the theory may be wrong; I was not talking about the results. Some 
expert physicists have looked reasonably carefully at the Mills theory, 
with an open mind, and they say it cannot be true. I do not understand 
enough to take sides, but it is clear to me the theory is still an open 
question. As for the results, they have not yet been independently 
replicated by several researchers (5 or 10 by my somewhat arbitrary 
standard), so they still open to question.


>LENR produces energy of such intensity that from F&P onward only nuclear 
>processes could produce it. BLP produces energy of lower intensity, but 
>greater than any conventional chemistry.

Some BLP cells have run with greater power density, producing more energy, 
than some LENR cells. Based on energy output alone, you cannot conclude 
that the Mills effect is -- or is not -- CF. I am not sure what energy 
"intensity" means. Power? That is irrelevant; the only thing that matters 
is the total energy produced by the cell compared to the mass of reactants. 
As far as I know, no one has run a Mills cell until it is exhausted, so no 
one knows the limits of energy production. If the data is trustworthy, the 
limits are far above chemistry, but you would have to run a cell for years 
to find out whether they reach nuclear levels.


>LENR produces transmutation of many kinds. BLP produces hydrogen in a 
>lower energy state, but it is still hydrogen.

Perhaps it does. For that matter, perhaps CF does too.


>Deuterium can also enter the BLP reaction. No transmutation products have 
>been detected.

Has there been a rigorous search for transmutation products? They are very 
difficult to detect with CF. None of the BLP cells that I am familiar with 
would allow a suitable test.


>LENR produces weak X rays but no gamma or neutron radiation. BLP produces 
>intense radiation in the EUV and visible range.

Gamma radiation from LENR was detected by Iwamura and others. Neutrons are 
produced reproducibly with a mixture of light and heavy water, which may 
have some bearing on the BLP effect. It may be that the BLP effect is a 
rare form of CF that enhances gammas and neutrons above levels seen in most 
other CF experiments.

Of course it may be that the Mills effect and CF are completely different 
and unrelated. But I do not think anyone has proved that yet. Naturally, 
there are differences between the two, but for that matter there are large 
differences between the various forms of CF that have been reported, with 
various different metals, temperatures and so on.


>Jed, what CF cell has produced power that exceeded all the support
>equipment?

Energy from the support equipment cannot enter the cell or be mistaken for 
excess heat. That would violate the second law in all the cells I know of, 
except one that operated in an ice bed. So this is irrelevant.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 13:19:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA02475;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 13:06:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:06:30 -0700
Message-ID: <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:04:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA02261
Resent-Message-ID: <"g6LqO1.0.Yc.6tIp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50590
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Horace Heffner" 

> How about a nice simple state-by-state description of the proposed cycle?

Well, that's a pretty tall order for a work-in-progress, the details of which are far from formalized. There is both a broader theory involved, which frames much of the dynamics of this process in terms of a hidden aether structure, and without that theoretical basis, it would be hard to comprehend the dynamics of the "explosiveness of ice," or the use of water as a fuel. 

However, I will eventually attempt to go through a state-by state description of a real-world implementation - how I see water-fuel being used in the aforementioned Dingle engine conversion. And then try to tie that implementation into the larger theory.

Let me preface by saying that this theory is not to be taken as proof that Dingle's particular design works as claimed, although most who have looked at it, including the engineers from BMW could find no fraud nor any hidden source of power (as with Keely's notorious compressed air network) so for arguments sake, let's say that there is an anomaly over there in the Philippines and this is an attempt to first, understand, and second, to optimize it. If Dingle himself understood it, and if he could get it to work "on demand" then of course, he would be "richer than Gates" and we wouldn't be having this discussion. That he gets it to work occasionally is mind-blowing, and that the occasional success is not reported in our so-called "free-press" is perhaps a future story for some enterprising investigative journalist.

Due to the complicated nature of all of this and my present time constraint, I will include the first of three mini-essays that lay some ground work. This one  could be entitled "The Tensile Strength of Water" Following that, I will post "Shock Waves and Overunity" and "Beta-aether and Supra-Chemical Reactions."  Sorry for the verbosity, but this is not an easy thing to put down in words and  to an extent is "OJT"  for me - "learning as you go" so to speak...

The Tensile Strength of Water

Many commuters start off their day with a "cuppa joe" from 7-11 but few of them have ever pondered which of the two major structures in their tight little addicted grasp has the higher "tensile strength". Fewer yet have come to the conclusion that there are NO TENSILE FORCES at all.

For the time being, let's delay the more provocative latter topic and show how the coffee has greater tensile strength than the Styrofoam container.

An interesting thread on the tensile strength of water can be followed at:
http://yarchive.net/chem/water_strength.html
The following is a paraphrase of info from these messages and our emerging theory of water-fuel and beta-aether.
 
Tall trees get water transported to their leaves, some above 150 feet,  by drawing it up in tension. Some observers like to categorize this as "capillary action" but on closer inspection, it is a "pull" and not a "push" at least as to the proximate cause. When cast in terms of hidden reality and beta aether forces, it may turn out looking more like a push, but not the atmospheric pressure kind of push. And certainly water can be pulled far higher than it could be pushed by atmospheric pressure. Most liquids have plenty of what we like to call "tensile strength" but not much "stiffness," and therein lies some of the semantic confusion. The "transpiration" transport process can be said to rely on the tensile strength of water more than any other factor. How long can a column of pure water support tension higher than  the vapor pressure? Indefinitely. What is the tensile strength in psi?
 
Adhesive forces in water can amount to several thousands of pounds per square inch to several tens of thousands, depending on structure, freedom from "defects" and temperature. Two flat plates pressed together with a film of water in-between would have enormous adhesive strength, far beyond the 14.7 psi of the atmosphere. The tensile strength of water is variously quoted by those who have studied it, but it is no less than 3,000 psi at STP. You can probably measure this value by bringing two pistons against a column of thoroughly degassed water and then measuring the force required to pull them apart. 
 
But the tensile strength under a uniform compressive load, or at extremely small diameters, or in regular ice or clathrates is another interesting issue. The surface tension of water is a two dimensional  reflection of its tensile strength, up to a point, but at really fine subdivision and low temperatures, a paradigm shift may occur. Clathrates are a very interesting subject for water-fuel because they can be as much as 20 time stronger than ice, when logically, they should be MUCH weaker structurally, because...well...they are diluted with a gas...which begs the question, "what is the tensile strength of air?"

If you think about it, water molecules at STP would probably like to whiz around like little independent bullets bouncing off each other at about 1000 mph, were it not for the intermolecular  forces bind these particles into a tightly packed mass.That that they stick together so firmly is another indication of tensile strength and/or of beta-aether pressure. 

A fine exposition of the structure of water can be found at:
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html
Where the most natural structure for water is the 280-Molecule expanded icosahedral water cluster  based on the regular arrangement of 14-molecule units ... This is probably the structure that has the most inherent tensile strength and therefore, *explosiveness*

Would you like to have a go at calculating the tensile strength of this "super-molecule" in a back-door fashion? Try this approach: 

The pressure in this little sphere is given by  P = S*pi*2*R/(pi*R^2) = 2*S/R (circumference*tension/area of equatorial plane) where S is the surface tension in dynes/cm (about 75) and R is the radius in cm. Water molecules are of the order of, say, 10^-8 cm, so let's size our arbitrary bubble at 10^-7 cm, a roughly molecular level sphere. The calculated pressure holding this sphere together is then of the order 2*80/(10^-7) dynes/cm2 = 1.5*10^9 dynes/cm2 which translates into about 2*10^4 psi. At lower temperature, or when compressively stressed, it can be even higher.

We don't really expect great accuracy from such an off-the-wall calculation, but it does give an indication of the order of the tension it would take to allow expansion of the  nanobubbles against an internal pressure - and is thus a rough estimate of  the potential tensile strength of water AND it's explosiveness. BTW the tensile strength of solid polystyrene is about 4500 psi and the tensile yield of that Styrofoam cup is probably on the order of 50 psi - so yeah, to answer our original commuter trivia question, the coffee at 7-11 is pretty damn strong - one heck of a lot stronger (in tension) than their cup!

Where is this all going?

When you put the old coffee pot on the stove, the steam coming out is not very explosive, but if you were to weld over all the openings, eventually you would get a horrendous big explosion and the shock wave that resulted from the tensile failure of the coffee pot would be such that it could propel shards a velocity that could be fatal. So there is a definite relationship between what we call "tensile strength" and explosiveness. This is true even if there is ultimately NO TENSILE FORCE (to be explained latter). And the smaller you can get your "containment structure" the more efficient will be the process...

More later,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 13:25:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA06942;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 13:14:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:14:01 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 16:13:23 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: More from Rennie
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ftse73.0.Gi1.8-Ip-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50591
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Sci. Am. editor Rennie sent me some more e-mail messages. They are 
remarkably candid and revealing. I packaged the entire discussion in a new 
document:

http://lenr-canr.org/AppealandSciAm.pdf


I just sent Rennie that URL, with this message, which is sincere:

". . . As I said, if you like to make changes or add footnotes, please let 
me know. This is not a graduate thesis, after all.

Thank you again for your forthright and candid expression of your views. 
Frankly, I wish you would publish these same views in your magazine, 
expressed the same way. Even the one sided version without a rebuttal would 
help people understand where you are coming from."


- Jed Rothwell


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 15:49:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA20186;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 15:38:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 15:38:19 -0700
Message-ID: <3ECD50FD.1090008 zipworld.com.au>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 08:36:45 +1000
From: Alan Schneider <alansch zipworld.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of any kind!Today!
References: <v01530501baf23cd1ccc2 [12.21.211.204]> <3ECCE37D.1040308@rtpatlanta.com>
In-Reply-To: <3ECCE37D.1040308 rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"M8SNE.0.Cx4.R5Lp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50592
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I dunno what to make of this guy. He seems to have no less than
three free webpages up, at

www.webspawner.com/users/floydwiedrichsr/index.html
uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html
www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html

none of which seem to contain more than rambling, disconnected
prosy.

I remain ever hopeful but this seems to be all fluff and
no substance.

Alan



Terry Blanton wrote:
> Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
>> Say... this guy already has a website?  The following looks like spam I
>> delete all the time.   I wonder what http://64.4.32.251... is?
>>
> 
> That's www.pav0.hotmail.com.
> 
> On second thought, this guy seems more like a Stephen Greer type than a 
> Hal Puthoff type.  His (Floyd's) web site URLs actually link to his 
> email address.  He does have a web page on Geocities; but, it has no 
> content.
> 
> Terry
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 17:08:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA27343;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 16:58:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 16:58:12 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b26baf314137a64 [64.61.197.243]>
In-Reply-To: <3ECD50FD.1090008 zipworld.com.au>
References: <v01530501baf23cd1ccc2 [12.21.211.204]>
 <3ECCE37D.1040308 rtpatlanta.com> <3ECD50FD.1090008@zipworld.com.au>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 18:58:57 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: 1000mhp magnetic airship!That uses no fuel of any kind!Today!
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"E9qFv2.0.4h6.JGMp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50594
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Alan Posted;

>I dunno what to make of this guy. He seems to have no less than
>three free webpages up, at
>
>www.webspawner.com/users/floydwiedrichsr/index.html
>uk.geocities.com/iq200flw/personalpageblue.html
>www.geocities.com/iq200flw/Inventions.html
>
>none of which seem to contain more than rambling, disconnected
>prosy.
>
>I remain ever hopeful but this seems to be all fluff and
>no substance.

I agree. He made me an offer I couldn't refuse. Promote my invention 
and I'll make it worth your while. Having done what he asked, I sent 
him an email asking for a set of plans, so far I haven't received a 
response. I'll keep you posted.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 17:09:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA03949;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 16:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 16:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <a6.37e0915a.2bfebd7c aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 19:55:40 EDT
Subject: I know how it feels Jed
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 120
Resent-Message-ID: <"Yt_gT1.0.dz.aFMp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50593
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 19:39:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA02522;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 19:27:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 19:27:41 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [192.82.7.23]
X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes msn.com]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Water Fuel
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 19:26:27 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <BAY5-F24jkyqU7a0xtA00019d4a hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2003 02:26:28.0367 (UTC) FILETIME=[B71A21F0:01C320D2]
Resent-Message-ID: <"yfYgo1.0.Hd.TSOp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50595
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have not been following this thread, and all of this may have been 
mentioned, but I found the 43,000 Hz comment of interest, due to our 
involvement wirth the late Andrea Puharich and his Patent on water 
dissociation by means of resonance many years back.

I lifted this old post from another group and have shortened it a bit.

Mark Goldes
Magnetic Power Inc.



From: Trevor Sleath [Boeing Engineer]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002
Subject: Re: Hydrogen Home Power Unit

I have come across a number of ways of capturing aetheric energy from the 
molecular processes involving water or its constituents.

The first way is to excite the water molecules at a resonant frequency ( 
around 43,000 Hz).  This will break the molecular bonds for relatively 
little energy expenditure.  You can then recombine the resultant gasses by 
spark ignition for a much larger energy release.  This is how a scheme for 
running a car on water can work.

A second way is to pass molecular hydrogen at low pressure over a heated 
tungsten wire (or through a tungsten electric arc).  The hydrogen 
disassociates into atomic hydrogen and absorbs a lot of energy in the 
process (the temperature drops).  However, the recombination of atomic 
hydrogen (by burning) to molecular hydrogen releases much more energy (the 
temperature rises) than the dissociation.  This is the process used in 
atomic hydrogen welding torches.  The molecular processes are described by 
William Lyne in his book "Occult Ether Physics".


Trevor S.

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 22 20:28:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA23917;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 20:17:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:17:03 -0700
Message-ID: <006601c320d9$a1238ec0$5c79ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030521180602.02de77d0@pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030522114715.0279eb20@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:38:18 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"Z0Dpz.0.br5.kAPp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50596
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I have just finished paging through this patent sent to me by Peter Gluck,
which is the basis for the GW "Edison" cell and related claims. The fallout
from this is going to be very interesting. The article in the Telegraph
misses many crucial points, which are most interesting.

There has been some pushing and shoving between the LENR and BLP camps about
what is 'really' going on. I'm a resident of both, or perhaps a
fence-straddler, with a foot in each. Which is precisely where Eccles sits.
The fact that they have a world patent and are getting favorable press and
attention from British academics says a lot about scientific and public
perception and politics.

Eccles invokes processes which are clearly at the heart of Mills' BLP claims
and technology. He also invokes nuclear fusion with both H and D as inputs.
His approach is empirical, saying here is a cell that produces excess energy
in the form of heat, and here is my idea of what makes it work. The
promoters want a big gob of money to try to figure out what are the real
processes going on. In my opinion, they will need a very big gob indeed and
they may find that scaling it up to commercial scale will be unexpectedly
adventurous.

Eccles very explicitly invokes a sub-ground state of the hydrogen (and
deuterium) atom, induced by atoms of potassium and rubidium by the exchange
of a photon. This is exactly the reaction originally postulated by Mills and
the basis of his early electrolytic cells. All that differs is the exact
mechanism of the energy exchange, where Mills lays a theoretical base
(resonant transfer without photons) and Eccles essentially waves his hands,
invoking photons. Eccles invokes resonant conditions and Fourier constraints
to justify the 1/2, 1/3,... sub ground states, as Mills did first. Eccles
states that the radius of the H or D atoms is reduced, as does Mills, naming
them hydrinos.

In the second step, Eccles postulates that the reduced H and D atoms more
readily fuse by pathways that favor He production and low radiation energies
than the pathway forced in Tokomaks. What radiation there is easily
shielded. Eccles does not discuss how the Coulomb barrier is overcome; he
doesn't even mention it.

Eccles sidesteps CF by defining CF as the injection of D into a Pd cathode
by electrolysis. This obviously ignores the voluminous research documented
by www.lenr-canr.org and elsewhere. In the Eccles model, the fusion occurs
in the plasma at relatively low energies and without magnetic confinement,
although a moderate magnetic field is said to help the process. He pointedly
makes no mention of Mills' prior work.

Eccles carefully states that the process is consistent with SQM, standard
quantum mechanics. Whether an expert in SQM would agree is not the issue, he
bowed to the correct altar instead of erecting another, classical quantum
mechanics (CQM) as Mills did, causing general consternation.

Many tests are necessary to validate the energy claims, as has been
discussed. Among these are wideband power measurements of the pulsed power
input to the plasma cell. At this point, one is reminded of Stanley Meyer,
who was also doing pulsed electrolysis under conditions that could have
included BLP reactions in ionized water vapor as recently described by
Mills. I am also reminded of another inventor, I think Papp, who had an
engine run in part by noble gases. It seemed absurd at the time, but Mills
has described a very potent BLP reaction between H and ionized helium.

The catalytic reaction between H and K+ and H and Rb+ each yield 'excess
heat' as found by Mills years ago. More recently, Mills has disclosed a BLP
reaction between H and O++, which can easily exist in the plasma cell.
Mills' plasma studies of these reactions in many experiments have been well
below atmospheric pressure where the physics is more easily studied. Under
the conditions postulated by Eccles, the local pressure will be above
atmospheric by some measure and the density of the H and K and Rb and O
atoms much higher. It is possible that these, participating in BLP
reactions, are the whole source of the 'excess heat' and that the postulated
fusion reactions do not occur.

Eccles has pointedly not mentioned Mills, whose work is prior. Mills has
drawn a great deal of flack from the academic community in the US because of
his orbitsphere model of the hydrogen atom, his formulation of CQM, and
detailed mathematical calculations relating his model to a host of
phenomena. Eccles mentions a match between predicted emission lines and
observations of galactic cluster emissions. Mills did this earlier.

Mills has support in the XX million range from private investors. His
website is rich in detailed reports and papers by Mills et.al. are beginning
to appear in first-rank journals such as the Journal of Applied Physics. At
some point there will be a clash between the Eccles patent and Mills. Much
is at stake, but the battle lines are not yet drawn.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 01:58:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA31373;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 01:47:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 01:47:39 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b06baf39060b361 [64.61.198.28]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 03:48:10 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: the next step
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1158442795==_ma============"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1162; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"qMaUq1.0.mf7.c0Up-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50597
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

--============_-1158442795==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

Fellow Vortexians;

I received the following email from Floyd Weidrich, and sent this reply.

>Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:14:36 -0500 To: 
><mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com From: 
>"thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com>  Subject: the next step
>Thomas Malloy thank you for trying but I would never give my 
>inventions away to 1 person, when I want to give them to the world 
>with no catches I hope you understand,God 
>Bless!<<mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com>temalloy@metro.lakes.com>, 
><mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com
>thomas malloy 
><<mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com>temalloy@metro.lakes.com>, 
><mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com>floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com
>
>I sent your email out to most everyone I could think of who is
>interested in FE machines. No one is going to take you seriously
>unless someone builds a prototype. Several of the people I sent your
>email to will build a machine if they are provided with a design. Are
>you prepared to take the next step and provide the design?

No one is going to take you seriously unless you have a working 
prototype. There are too many frauds out there who are saying the 
same thing. You have three choices, either you build a prototype, or 
I do, or forget it.
--============_-1158442795==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: the next step</title></head><body>
<div>Fellow Vortexians;</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I received the following email from Floyd Weidrich, and sent this
reply.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-2"><b>Date:</b> Thu, 22 May
2003 13:14:36 -0500<b> To:</b></font> <a
href="mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com"><font
size="-2">floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com</font></a><font size="-2"><b>
From:</b> &quot;thomas malloy&quot;
&lt;temalloy metro.lakes.com&gt;&nbsp;</font><font size="-1"><b>
Subject:</b> the next step</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Thomas Malloy thank you for trying but I
would never give my inventions away to 1 person, when I want to give
them to the world with no catches I hope you understand,God Bless!&lt;<a
href="mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com">temalloy@metro.lakes.com</a
>&gt;, <a
href="mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com">floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com</a
></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>thomas malloy &lt;<a
href="mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com">temalloy@metro.lakes.com</a
>&gt;, <a
href="mailto:floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com">floyd_lee@wiedrich-sr.com</a><br
>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>I sent your email out to most
everyone I could think of who is<br>
interested in FE machines. No one is going to take you seriously<br>
unless someone builds a prototype. Several of the people I sent
your<br>
email to will build a machine if they are provided with a design.
Are<br>
you prepared to take the next step and provide the
design?</tt></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>No one is going to take you seriously unless you have a working
prototype. There are too many frauds out there who are saying the same
thing. You have three choices, either you build a prototype, or I do,
or forget it.</div>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1158442795==_ma============--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 06:23:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA14341;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 06:11:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:11:09 -0700
Message-ID: <001b01c3212c$8beabbc0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <BAY5-F24jkyqU7a0xtA00019d4a hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:09:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id GAA14177
Resent-Message-ID: <"BZsmM.0.wV3.itXp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50598
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Mark,

> due to our 
> involvement wirth the late Andrea Puharich and his Patent on water 
> dissociation by means of resonance many years back.


I was not aware that you were involved with Puharich.

In any of this previous work, were there any signs of OU from water dissociation, even anecdotal, that you can share?

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 07:15:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA24998;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 07:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 07:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030523095508.02ddc9f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:02:07 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")
In-Reply-To: <006601c320d9$a1238ec0$5c79ccd1 asus>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030520105944.02db1648 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030521180602.02de77d0 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030522114715.0279eb20 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"IL0_k3.0.W66.9eYp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50599
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell wrote:

>Eccles very explicitly invokes a sub-ground state of the hydrogen (and 
>deuterium) atom, induced by atoms of potassium and rubidium by the 
>exchange of a photon. This is exactly the reaction originally postulated 
>by Mills and the basis of his early electrolytic cells.

Eccles must be familiar with Mills. It would be a fantastic coincidence if 
he came up with the same theory and the same "hydrino" name.


>He pointedly
>makes no mention of Mills' prior work.

I know little about patent law, but I know that you are supposed to cite 
all of relevant prior patents. I suppose the Thermacore patent would be 
judged relevant. Do you have to include all textbooks, such as Mills'? I 
wouldn't know.

I think the patent may be ruled invalid if you know about prior work and 
you do not list it. So this is a foolish, risky thing to do.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 09:28:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA07100;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 09:17:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:17:46 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [192.82.7.126]
X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes msn.com]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:15:20 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <BAY5-F5O2wXU4RlDUh80001aa03 hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2003 16:15:20.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[81FB4020:01C32146]
Resent-Message-ID: <"_r7V32.0.mk1.fcap-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50600
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jones, all,

His Patent discusses the possibility, but it was never approached in the 
experimental work.

It would have required additional breakthroughs, such as that attempted by 
Joseph Yater, and more recently claimed by Borealis Power, as well as Hi-Z 
in San Diego.

It was marginal OU.  If memory serves the theoretical statement was a 
maximum of 120%.

Mark


>From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
>Subject: Re: Water Fuel
>Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:09:29 -0700
>
>Hi Mark,
>
> > due to our
> > involvement wirth the late Andrea Puharich and his Patent on water
> > dissociation by means of resonance many years back.
>
>
>I was not aware that you were involved with Puharich.
>
>In any of this previous work, were there any signs of OU from water 
>dissociation, even anecdotal, that you can share?
>
>Jones
>

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 09:50:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA17604;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 09:39:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:39:31 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b01baf35fef500b [64.61.197.243]>
In-Reply-To: <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
 <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:40:07 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"xQuL-.0.yI4.3xap-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50601
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene responded'

>From: "Horace Heffner"
>
>  > How about a nice simple state-by-state description of the proposed cycle?


>real-world implementation - how I see water-fuel being used in the 
>aforementioned Dingle engine conversion. And then try to tie that 
>implementation into the larger theory.

Were can I read about the Dingle engine?
>..
>
>The Tensile Strength of Water
>  has greater tensile strength than the Styrofoam container.

That doesn't take much;

>long can a column of pure water support tension higher than  the 
>vapor pressure? Indefinitely. What is the tensile strength in psi?
>
>Adhesive forces in water can amount to several thousands of pounds 
>per square inch to several tens of thousands, depending on 
>structure, freedom from "defects" and temperature. Two flat plates 
>pressed together with a film of water in-between would have enormous 
>adhesive strength, far beyond the 14.7 psi of the atmosphere. The 
>tensile strength of water is variously quoted by those who have 
>studied it, but it is no less than 3,000 psi at STP. You can 
>probably measure this value by bringing two

I realize that there is some adhesive action of water when it is 
inbetween two flat plates, but 3000 PSI! I don't think so.

>When you put the old coffee pot on the stove, the steam coming out 
>is not very explosive, but if you were to weld over all the 
>openings, eventually you would get a horrendous big explosion and 
>the shock wave that resulted from the tensile failure .

I fail to see how a steam explosion is germane to this.

AFAIK, the tree's roots pump the water up, Two pistons in a pipe with 
water inbetween would be incredably difficult to separate because of 
air pressure. The water would have to be vaporized.

This whole discussion flies in the face of my observations of water. 
I'd appreciate some URL's to back up your contentions.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 10:04:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA23846;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 09:53:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:53:01 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:12:07 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEANDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F5O2wXU4RlDUh80001aa03 hotmail.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"0hRfK.0.Pq5.i7bp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50602
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi All.

Mark writes:
>It was marginal OU.  If memory serves the theoretical statement was a 
>maximum of 120%.

This is the "normal" OU that you get from the electrolysis
process, that is to say, the efficiency of splitting
water at 1.23 volts.

It's been pointed out that the recombination process is
at best 80% efficient, preventing any fun from being had from
this interesting fact. Yet it still fires the imagination,
even if it is just a heat pump...

For all those playing with A/C and electrolysis, isn't
it remarkable how much capacity you get per sqr cm of
electrode area? My recollection was .1 - 1 microfarads,
or some such massive number. Double layer capacity is
the basis of the supercaps which are now commercially
available. Of course the capacity gets a little leaky
over 1 volt (grin).

K.







>From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
>Subject: Re: Water Fuel
>Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:09:29 -0700
>
>Hi Mark,
>
> > due to our
> > involvement wirth the late Andrea Puharich and his Patent on water
> > dissociation by means of resonance many years back.
>
>
>I was not aware that you were involved with Puharich.
>
>In any of this previous work, were there any signs of OU from water 
>dissociation, even anecdotal, that you can share?
>
>Jones
>

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 11:09:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA23453;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 10:57:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:57:45 -0700
Message-ID: <007a01c32154$8fadb000$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEANDKAA.knagel gis.net>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:55:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA23145
Resent-Message-ID: <"nsWl42.0.Mk5.P4cp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50603
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel writes:


> For all those playing with A/C and electrolysis, isn't
> it remarkable how much capacity you get per sqr cm of
> electrode area? My recollection was .1 - 1 microfarads,
> or some such massive number. Double layer capacity is
> the basis of the supercaps which are now commercially
> available. Of course the capacity gets a little leaky
> over 1 volt (grin).


Forget supercaps if you've got, well.... coulomb envy...

Ever heard of the BatCap? 

Let's you plug those leaks up to quite a few volts, plus....how does 10,000 amps grab you....

Just the thing for those slow days when you want to crank Led Zep up to 175 dB
http://www.batcap.net/8400spec.htm


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 11:29:05 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA00660;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 11:16:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:16:35 -0700
Message-ID: <007e01c32156$4e8eeec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]> <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8@cpq> <a05111b01baf35fef500b@[64.61.197.243]>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:08:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA00342
Resent-Message-ID: <"zJzaB.0.8A.3Mcp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50604
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

From: "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
 
> Were can I read about the Dingle engine?

Wasn't it you that had the AutoBild article translated from German? That was the guy...

> I fail to see how a steam explosion is germane to this.

Do you fail to see how any "explosion" is different vis-a-vis "combustion"?

Even with the same amount of fuel, there is both a quantitative and a qualitative difference....and that difference can be summed up in the word *shockwave*

Hint: remember the thread on velocity, acceleration, jerk and jounce?
 
> AFAIK, the tree's roots pump the water up, 

Preposterous! where on earth did you hear that roots have the ability to pump?

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 12:02:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA19259;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 11:51:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:51:01 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030523144716.02dd5c10 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:50:33 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
In-Reply-To: <007e01c32156$4e8eeec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
 <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <a05111b01baf35fef500b [64.61.197.243]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"051cK1.0.ci4.Iscp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50605
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Preposterous! where on earth did you hear that roots have the ability to pump?

This was discovered in 1718 by S. Hales. The two main mechanisms are 
transpiration and capillary action. See:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/scienceshack/backcat/adamexp/wstreepump.shtml

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 12:28:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA00587;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:17:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:17:18 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 15:36:36 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEAPDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <007a01c32154$8fadb000$0a016ea8 cpq>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"JKBdr3.0.59.zEdp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50606
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hey Jones.

I suspect the end user of this device is
not going to be jamming on Plant and Page...

No useful specs are provided, is current surge
or continuous??? Capacity???

Double layer caps can be series'd to get the
voltage up, at the cost of increased losses.
Back when I was messing with this stuff, I
came up with a "green" battery consisting of
salt water, seaweed, and coconut shells. Not
very good compared to a lead acid cell, but
it had a certain "Gilligans Island" feel
to it that was very satisfying. Same technology.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9 pacbell.net]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 1:56 PM
To: vortex
Subject: Re: Water Fuel


Keith Nagel writes:


> For all those playing with A/C and electrolysis, isn't
> it remarkable how much capacity you get per sqr cm of
> electrode area? My recollection was .1 - 1 microfarads,
> or some such massive number. Double layer capacity is
> the basis of the supercaps which are now commercially
> available. Of course the capacity gets a little leaky
> over 1 volt (grin).


Forget supercaps if you've got, well.... coulomb envy...

Ever heard of the BatCap?

Let's you plug those leaks up to quite a few volts, plus....how does 10,000
amps grab you....

Just the thing for those slow days when you want to crank Led Zep up to 175
dB
http://www.batcap.net/8400spec.htm



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:00:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29056;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530501baf42097761f [12.21.209.177]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:51:11 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: the next step
Resent-Message-ID: <"mHfXG3.0.s57.didp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50607
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 3:48 AM 5/23/3, floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com wrote:

>>Thomas Malloy thank you for trying but I would never give my
>>inventions away to 1 person, when I want to give them to the world
>>with no catches I hope you understand,God
>>Bless!
>No one is going to take you seriously unless you have a working
>prototype. There are too many frauds out there who are saying the
>same thing. You have three choices, either you build a prototype, or
>I do, or forget it.


Giving away inventions is easy.  Simply publish them.  If they are
worthwhile, someone will likely use the ideas or build upon them. I feel
fairly certain Floyd Lee must know this, as most any sane person does.  It
therefore is reasonable to conclude he does NOT want to give his ideas to
the world with no catches.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:01:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29104;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530503baf425398ccb [12.21.209.177]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:51:15 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Resent-Message-ID: <"2c_Zu2.0.d67.lidp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50608
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 1:04 PM 5/22/3, Jones Beene wrote:
>From: "Horace Heffner"
>
>> How about a nice simple state-by-state description of the proposed cycle?
>
>Well, that's a pretty tall order for a work-in-progress, ...
[snip]


No, it should be a starting point ... to establish exactly the step from
which excess energy can evolve, or a step which should be experimentally
examined for being over unity.  You repeatedly post all kinds of stuff
which has absolutely no indication of being or accounting for an overunity
process.  This is why I am attempting to pin down your thought process.  If
you can not do this you have gone nowhere towards a design. True?



>
>Where is this all going?
>
>When you put the old coffee pot on the stove, the steam coming out is not
>very explosive, but if you were to weld over all the openings, eventually
>you would get a horrendous big explosion and the shock wave that resulted
>from the tensile failure of the coffee pot would be such that it could
>propel shards a velocity that could be fatal. So there is a definite
>relationship between what we call "tensile strength" and explosiveness.
>This is true even if there is ultimately NO TENSILE FORCE (to be explained
>latter). And the smaller you can get your "containment structure" the more
>efficient will be the process...
>
>More later,


Again, I say this is not an indication of an overunity process.  In the
above example energy simply accumulates further in the form of higher
pressure and possibly temperature due to the better confinement.  There is
still no indication so far of ANY overunity process.  You seem to be simply
mystified by a cloak of complexity.  I say lift the cloak and spell out
exactly where and how the excess energy is derived.    Thus far you don't
even seem to have the cycles pinned down, the successive steps.  Once you
have that it is then a matter of finding the step or steps during which or
between which the excess energy is derived.

To be a meaningful source of energy a process must be repeatable in a
cycle.  It is well known that non-repeatable events exist which tap zero
point energy (ZPE), energy from the vacuum, for example.  This knowledge is
of no practical use thus far.   The problem in this ZPE example is to find
a cycle of events that is repeatable and which also take energy from the
vacuum.  Such a cycle then has the real possiblilty of being implemented in
a stand alone free energy device.

The states of water are a complex set of data points.  The problem is to
show a closed path through those points that generates a net energy
increase.  This might then be the starting point for creation of a theory
for the source of the energy.

On the other hand, if you already have a theory or even an experiment that
suggests a source of free enrgy, then it is just a matter of determining
the cycle you will use to repeatedly or continually perform the free energy
creating step in a closed system.

Thus far, there is no indication of free energy.  Is this correct?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:05:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA16647;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:54:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:54:44 -0700
Message-ID: <00ed01c32164$f333a480$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]> <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8@cpq> <a05111b01baf35fef500b@[64.61.197.243]> <5.2.0.9.2.20030523144716.02dd5c10@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:53:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA16375
Resent-Message-ID: <"KiwMg1.0.w34.3odp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50609
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>

> >Preposterous! where on earth did you hear that roots have the ability to pump?
> 
> This was discovered in 1718 by S. Hales. The two main mechanisms are 
> transpiration and capillary action. See:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/scienceshack/backcat/adamexp/wstreepump.shtml



Sorry Jed,

Transpiration and capillary action, as I mentioned in the previous posts, are tensile mechanisms, not compressive, in other words, a partial vacuum is created at the leaf (transpiration) rather pumping at the roots (compressive), as the operative mechanism...

Casual observers may use the word "pumping" loosely but roots do NOT pump, i.e. they are incapable of mechanical action and furthermore, transpiration is not dependent on atmospheric pressure, except in the negative sense of "lack thereof"... in other words these mechanisms do not depend on any form of *real* pumping action, just "suction" due to evaporation in the leaves following solar irradiation, with the walls of the "capillaries" and their small diameter substituting for lack of lateral stiffness in water...

It is a tensile mechanism....plain and simple....were it dependent on barometric pressure, then no tree could grow over approximately 400 inches, which is the 1 atm equivalent (or 101 kPa or ~30 in of mercury.)...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:08:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA17228;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:55:52 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:55:52 -0700
Message-ID: <00ee01c32165$1e396fc0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <BAY5-F5O2wXU4RlDUh80001aa03 hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:54:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA17009
Resent-Message-ID: <"khjYI2.0.6D4.7pdp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50611
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

From: "Mark Goldes"

> It would have required additional breakthroughs, such as that attempted by 
> Joseph Yater, 

Was this was the guy from MIT who tried to get direct thermal-to-electric energy conversion out of regular diodes?

Last year it seems, Kucherov at Eneco developed a dedicated thermal diode that he claimed to be about 18 percent efficient when the heat source is near 300 degrees C and that is quite an extraordinary claim! He was from MIT also so maybe the two shared ideas early on...

Had this Eneco claim been true and the diode easy to manufacture, then of course, Detroit would be real interested as few autos get 18 percent on average, from much higher temps...

I would be the last person to "dis" Eneco, in fact I wish I had a position over there, but they have had about as many duds, disappointments and unfulfilled claims, following glowing announcements, as Bearden and Newman put together... but coming from guys with PhDs...maybe they should try some inventors who aren't so heavily burdened by higher-educational disability! 

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:08:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01010;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 12:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530504baf42d3a6e29 [12.21.209.177]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:57:42 -0800
To: <knagel gis.net>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Water Fuel
Resent-Message-ID: <"w3YPp1.0.gF.Todp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50610
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 3:36 PM 5/23/3, Keith Nagel wrote:

>Back when I was messing with this stuff, I
>came up with a "green" battery consisting of
>salt water, seaweed, and coconut shells. Not
>very good compared to a lead acid cell, but
>it had a certain "Gilligans Island" feel
>to it that was very satisfying. Same technology.


A battery that runs on seawater and also does not use up its electrodes to
produce energy would seem to be quite an asset.  Did you have such a
device?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:29:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA27994;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 13:18:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:18:46 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030523160936.02dbab38 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 16:18:21 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
In-Reply-To: <00ed01c32164$f333a480$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
 <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <a05111b01baf35fef500b [64.61.197.243]>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030523144716.02dd5c10 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"P98MX.0.Er6.b8ep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50612
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Transpiration and capillary action, as I mentioned in the previous posts, 
>are tensile mechanisms, not compressive, in other words, a partial vacuum 
>is created at the leaf (transpiration) rather pumping at the roots 
>(compressive), as the operative mechanism...
>
>Casual observers may use the word "pumping" loosely but roots do NOT pump, 
>i.e. they are incapable of mechanical action . . .

Well, okay, but I wouldn't call that a "loose" definition, exactly. The 
first steam driven vacuum pumps for mines were made by Savory, in 1698. No 
moving parts! What else would you call them but "pumps"?


>It is a tensile mechanism....plain and simple....were it dependent on 
>barometric pressure, then no tree could grow over approximately 400 
>inches, which is the 1 atm equivalent (or 101 kPa or ~30 in of mercury.)...

The same as Savery's pumps. The limits to tree height is about 400 feet, 
instead. That's as high as California redwoods grow, and apparently that is 
the physical limit.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:36:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA31708;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 13:25:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:25:18 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: the next step
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 16:44:27 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIEBBDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <v01530501baf42097761f [12.21.209.177]>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"lDPEM1.0.Ml7.jEep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50613
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace writes:
>It therefore is reasonable to conclude he does NOT want to give his ideas
to
>the world with no catches.

Indeed. Floyd Lee has already roped in one salesman, on the
strength of vapours alone...

I enjoyed reading the links, especially the bits at the
end where he makes marriage proposals to you the
reader and talks about bumping into god for 17 seconds
who turns out to be, in fact, a black woman. Cleopatra Jones???

Pretty good Thomas. It's ALMOST Francis E. Dec, but
not quite. He's not sincere enough. Try again.

K.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 13:37:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA32029;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 13:25:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:25:50 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>, "Horace Heffner" <hheffner@mtaonline.net>
Subject: RE: Water Fuel/double layer capacity
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 16:27:13 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIEBADKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <v01530504baf42d3a6e29 [12.21.209.177]>
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"7VLnD.0.Gq7.DFep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50614
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Horace:

I compared it to a lead acid battery for a good reason,
both are rechargeable. It's not a primary battery,
and neither is the batcap. The seawater is just
an electrolyte.

One of the problems with double layer capacitors
as batteries is the voltage decays exponentially,
( 'cause it's a capacitor of course ) so I found
some kind of controller was needed to make 
a drop in replacement for a standard cell.
I used a cheap Maxim chip, very efficient.

K.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 3:58 PM
To: knagel gis.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Water Fuel


At 3:36 PM 5/23/3, Keith Nagel wrote:

>Back when I was messing with this stuff, I
>came up with a "green" battery consisting of
>salt water, seaweed, and coconut shells. Not
>very good compared to a lead acid cell, but
>it had a certain "Gilligans Island" feel
>to it that was very satisfying. Same technology.


A battery that runs on seawater and also does not use up its electrodes to
produce energy would seem to be quite an asset.  Did you have such a
device?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 14:00:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA11408;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 13:48:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:48:50 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 17:08:05 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEBCDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030523095508.02ddc9f0 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"pj6PU.0.9o2.naep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50615
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi.

Looking at WO0025320A1's international search report now...

Although Mills is not mentioned, what do you
think of the material that was referenced?

EP0392325 Electrochemical nuclear fusion method
WO9014669 Production of fusion energy

Forgetting theory, they both seem kind of
relevant huh? Spark in water make big Heat!

K.



-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:JedRothwell mindspring.com]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 10:02 AM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")


Mike Carrell wrote:

>Eccles very explicitly invokes a sub-ground state of the hydrogen (and 
>deuterium) atom, induced by atoms of potassium and rubidium by the 
>exchange of a photon. This is exactly the reaction originally postulated 
>by Mills and the basis of his early electrolytic cells.

Eccles must be familiar with Mills. It would be a fantastic coincidence if 
he came up with the same theory and the same "hydrino" name.


>He pointedly
>makes no mention of Mills' prior work.

I know little about patent law, but I know that you are supposed to cite 
all of relevant prior patents. I suppose the Thermacore patent would be 
judged relevant. Do you have to include all textbooks, such as Mills'? I 
wouldn't know.

I think the patent may be ruled invalid if you know about prior work and 
you do not list it. So this is a foolish, risky thing to do.

- Jed



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 14:20:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA21058;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 14:10:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:10:01 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [192.82.7.126]
X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes msn.com]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Water Fuel
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:08:29 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <BAY5-F7N6gFEoODXZSp0000bcfe hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2003 21:08:29.0988 (UTC) FILETIME=[75EA4640:01C3216F]
Resent-Message-ID: <"cHaN13.0.r85.duep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50617
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones,

Joe Yater lived in the shadow of, but was not connected with, MIT.  The 
diodes were only "regular" in theory.  Several patents exist.  Making his 
device was extremely difficult from a practical standpoint.

Borealis Power claims much better efficiency than ENECO.  Hi-Z does as well. 
  The former is thermionic while the latter is thermoelectric.  The Hi-Z 
work, coincidently, grew out of work at MIT's Lincoln Laboratory.  Hi-Z is a 
hands-on operation that has been making practical the highly academic MIT 
work.

There are also quantum dots as well as other recent claims of high 
efficiency, solid-state, heat-to-electric conversion.

Mark



>From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
>Subject: Re: Water Fuel
>Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:54:27 -0700
>
>From: "Mark Goldes"
>
> > It would have required additional breakthroughs, such as that attempted 
>by
> > Joseph Yater,
>
>Was this was the guy from MIT who tried to get direct thermal-to-electric 
>energy conversion out of regular diodes?
>
>Last year it seems, Kucherov at Eneco developed a dedicated thermal diode 
>that he claimed to be about 18 percent efficient when the heat source is 
>near 300 degrees C and that is quite an extraordinary claim! He was from 
>MIT also so maybe the two shared ideas early on...
>
>Had this Eneco claim been true and the diode easy to manufacture, then of 
>course, Detroit would be real interested as few autos get 18 percent on 
>average, from much higher temps...
>
>I would be the last person to "dis" Eneco, in fact I wish I had a position 
>over there, but they have had about as many duds, disappointments and 
>unfulfilled claims, following glowing announcements, as Bearden and Newman 
>put together... but coming from guys with PhDs...maybe they should try some 
>inventors who aren't so heavily burdened by higher-educational disability!
>
>Jones
>

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 14:22:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA19107;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 14:05:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:05:36 -0700
Message-ID: <012501c3216e$d47d3380$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530503baf425398ccb [12.21.209.177]>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:03:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA18775
Resent-Message-ID: <"ICynZ2.0.Ng4.Uqep-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50616
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Horace,

> No, it should be a starting point ... to establish exactly the step from
> which excess energy can evolve, or a step which should be experimentally
> examined for being over unity.  You repeatedly post all kinds of stuff
> which has absolutely no indication of being or accounting for an overunity
> process.  This is why I am attempting to pin down your thought process.  If
> you can not do this you have gone nowhere towards a design. True?

Not exactly, ...

Do you (or anyone) know exactly where the OU in CF is coming from, really?

The recent Vortex exchange about the possibility that some of it, or even all of the OU is related somehow to the Mills hydrino (deuterino), and the fact that excess heat has been found in a few experiments with no nuclear ash is indicative of the fact that after 14 years of effort involving thousands of scientists, no one can really state where all the excess is coming from with any degree of confidence...and when you think about it, water-fuel has a fair amount in common with CF techniques...(except for the palladium)

...and yet you want to pin me down on something that I have been experimenting with for only a comparatively short while... that hardly seems fair (but I do appreciate the challenge of trying to meet your present and future objections) ...even so:

I have listed these possibilities in past postings -
.... aqueous electrons from the air or water
.... the hydrino
.... a type of cold fusion
.... loss of mass in water, due to previously unrecognized component (x) which is recharged from solar, neutrino, or deep-earth exposure,
.... a new type of thermodynamic paradigm involving atomic hydrogen (or the hydroxyl ion) held as a temporary clathrate in ice

....or my current favorite, which I am preparing another long rambling post on, so you can have plenty of bull's-eye area to aim at in the next round of target practice, which is the "supra-chemical" reaction, i.e. a series of reactions that involve valence electrons which are accelerated by Van der Waals-type forces (beta-aether) into inner orbitals, such as occurs in structural failure - thus the name CAMFR or chemically-assisted-mechanical-failure-reaction. 

A CAMFR, or supra-chemical (ballotechnic) reaction must always be "triggered" but significant energy input, but can provide 10-30 times more energy than a chemical reaction. There is even a computer code out there for modeling ballotechnics.... but if you were to actually admit to having it...who knows if the MIB might not show up at you door  ;-)

Thanks for thinking about it... it is an extremely important issue IMHO (water-fuel) even if Dingle's claims prove to be bogus, and I don't believe that they will... and in fact, I will bet that Naudin has an engine running on water-fuel before the end of July, if he doesn't knock off for Bastille day, even though it will be using the Mizuno-type cell rather than the modified ultrasonic electrolyzer that I am trying to get to work in a partial vacuum situation....

More later,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 16:25:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA03287;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 15:50:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 15:50:50 -0700
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <1e0.98b52e4.2bffff71 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 18:49:21 EDT
Subject: Re: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: tom rhfweb.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e0.98b52e4.2bffff71_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"qNcWX1.0.0p.9Ngp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50618
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_1e0.98b52e4.2bffff71_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<A HREF=3D"http://www.befreetech.com/top_ten_inventions.htm">http://www.befr=
eetech.com/top_ten_inventions.htm</A>

"TOP 10 IMPOSSIBLE INVENTIONS THAT WORK
by Jeane Manning
   =20
3. SYSTEM TO SPLIT WATER FOR FUEL BY USING RESONANCE=20

Another variation on the water-fuel theme relies more on vibrations than on=20
chemistry. At more than 100 per cent efficiency, such a system produces=20
hydrogen gas and oxygen from ordinary water at normal temperatures and press=
ure. One=20
example is U.S. Patent 4,394,230, Method and Apparatus for Splitting Water=20
Molecules, issued to Dr. Andrija Puharich in 1983. His method made complex=20
electrical wave forms resonate water molecules and shatter them, which freed=
=20
hydrogen and oxygen. By using Tesla's understanding of electrical resonance,=
 Puharich=20
was able to split the water molecule much more efficiently than the=20
brute-force electrolysis that every physics student knows. (Resonance is wha=
t shatters=20
a crystal goblet when an opera singer hits the exact note which vibrates wit=
h=20
the crystal's molecular structure.) Puharich reportedly drove his mobile hom=
e=20
using only water as fuel for several hundred thousand kilometers in trips=20
across North America. In a high Mexican mountain pass he had to make do with=
 snow=20
for fuel. Splitting water molecules as needed in a vehicle is more=20
revolutionary than the hydrogen-powered systems with which every large auto=20=
manufacturer=20
has dallied. With the on-demand system, you don't need to carry a tank full=20=
of=20
hydrogen fuel which could be a potential bomb. Another inventor who=20
successfully made fuel out of water on the spot was the late Francisco Pache=
co of New=20
Jersey. The Pacheco Bi-Polar Autoelectric Hydrogen Generator (U.S. Patent No=
.=20
5,089,107) separated hydrogen from seawater as needed. A pioneer in breaking=
=20
down water into hydrogen and oxygen without heat or ordinary electricity, Jo=
hn=20
Worrell Keely reportedly performed feats which 20th-century science is unabl=
e=20
to duplicate. He worked with sound and other vibrations to set machines into=
=20
motion. To liberate energy in molecules of water, Keely poured a quart of wa=
ter=20
into a cylinder where tuning forks vibrated at the exact frequency to libera=
te=20
the energy. Does this mean he broke apart the water molecules and liberated=20
hydrogen, or did he free a more primal form of energy? The records which cou=
ld=20
answer such questions are lost. However, a century later, Keely is being=20
vindicated. One scientist recently discovered that Keely was correct in pred=
icting=20
the exact frequency which would burst apart a water molecule. Keely understo=
od=20
atoms to be intricate vibratory phenomena."
=A0  =20
"6. A METHOD FOR TRANSMUTATION OF ELEMENTS=20

Changing atomic elements or making elements appear mysteriously? It sounds=20
like impossible alchemy, but experimenters recently did this, without Big=20
Science particle accelerators. These scientists learned from a metaphysician=
, Walter=20
Russell (1871-1963). During vivid spiritual experiences, Russell had seen=20
everything in the universe, from the atom to outer space, being formed by an=
=20
invisible background geometry. Russell not only portrayed his visions in pai=
ntings,
 he also learned science. He was so far ahead that in 1926 he predicted=20
tritium, deuterium, neptunium, plutonium and other elements. Recently, profe=
ssional=20
engineers Ron Kovac and Toby Grotz of Colorado, with help from Dr. Tim=20
Binder, repeated Russell's 1927 work, which was verified at the time by West=
inghouse=20
Laboratories. Russell found a novel way to change the ratio of hydrogen to=20
oxygen in water vapor inside a sealed quartz tube, or to change the vapor to=
=20
completely different elements. Their conclusion agrees with Russell: the geo=
metry=20
of motion in space is important in atomic transmutation. Kovac shorthands=20
that idea to geometry of space-bending. These modern shape-shifters speak of=
=20
Russell's feats such as prolate or oblate the oxygen nucleus into nitrogen o=
r=20
hydrogen or vice versa. To change nuclei, they change the shape of a magneti=
c=20
field. Although they used expensive analyzing equipment, it is basically tab=
letop=20
science. No atom-smashing cyclotron needed; just a gentle nudge using the=20
right frequencies. Focus and un-focus light-motion, create a vortex and cont=
rol=20
it. Cold fusion researchers are also running across strange elements popping=
 up=20
in their own electrified brews. No one is proposing to make gold and upset=20
world currencies, but some experimenters aim to clean up radioactive waste b=
y=20
their novel processes."
   =20





Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A>




















--part1_1e0.98b52e4.2bffff71_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><A HREF=3D"http://www.befreetech.com/top_ten_invention=
s.htm">http://www.befreetech.com/top_ten_inventions.htm</A><BR>
<BR>
"</FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000066" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=
=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><B>TOP 10 IMPOSSIBLE INV=
ENTIONS THAT WORK</FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR:=20=
#ffffff" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></B><BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000066" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3=
 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">by Jeane Manning</FONT><FONT=
  COLOR=3D"#000066" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D4 FAMILY=3D"S=
ANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3=
 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">    </FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#=
000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FA=
CE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
3. SYSTEM TO SPLIT WATER FOR FUEL BY USING RESONANCE <BR>
<BR>
Another variation on the water-fuel theme relies more on vibrations than on=20=
chemistry. At more than 100 per cent efficiency, such a system produces hydr=
ogen gas and oxygen from ordinary water at normal temperatures and pressure.=
 One example is U.S. Patent 4,394,230, Method and Apparatus for Splitting Wa=
ter Molecules, issued to Dr. Andrija Puharich in 1983. His method made compl=
ex electrical wave forms resonate water molecules and shatter them, which fr=
eed hydrogen and oxygen. By using Tesla's understanding of electrical resona=
nce, Puharich was able to split the water molecule much more efficiently tha=
n the brute-force electrolysis that every physics student knows. (Resonance=20=
is what shatters a crystal goblet when an opera singer hits the exact note w=
hich vibrates with the crystal's molecular structure.) Puharich reportedly d=
rove his mobile home using only water as fuel for several hundred thousand k=
ilometers in trips across North America. In a high Mexican mountain pass he=20=
had to make do with snow for fuel. Splitting water molecules as needed in a=20=
vehicle is more revolutionary than the hydrogen-powered systems with which e=
very large auto manufacturer has dallied. With the on-demand system, you don=
't need to carry a tank full of hydrogen fuel which could be a potential bom=
b. Another inventor who successfully made fuel out of water on the spot was=20=
the late Francisco Pacheco of New Jersey. The Pacheco Bi-Polar Autoelectric=20=
Hydrogen Generator (U.S. Patent No. 5,089,107) separated hydrogen from seawa=
ter as needed. A pioneer in breaking down water into hydrogen and oxygen wit=
hout heat or ordinary electricity, John Worrell Keely reportedly performed f=
eats which 20th-century science is unable to duplicate. He worked with sound=
 and other vibrations to set machines into motion. To liberate energy in mol=
ecules of water, Keely poured a quart of water into a cylinder where tuning=20=
forks vibrated at the exact frequency to liberate the energy. Does this mean=
 he broke apart the water molecules and liberated hydrogen, or did he free a=
 more primal form of energy? The records which could answer such questions a=
re lost. However, a century later, Keely is being vindicated. One scientist=20=
recently discovered that Keely was correct in predicting the exact frequency=
 which would burst apart a water molecule. Keely understood atoms to be intr=
icate vibratory phenomena."<BR>
=A0   <BR>
"6. A METHOD FOR TRANSMUTATION OF ELEMENTS <BR>
<BR>
Changing atomic elements or making elements appear mysteriously? It sounds l=
ike impossible alchemy, but experimenters recently did this, without Big Sci=
ence particle accelerators. These scientists learned from a metaphysician, W=
alter Russell (1871-1963). During vivid spiritual experiences, Russell had s=
een everything in the universe, from the atom to outer space, being formed b=
y an invisible background geometry. Russell not only portrayed his visions i=
n paintings, he also learned science. He was so far ahead that in 1926 he pr=
edicted tritium, deuterium, neptunium, plutonium and other elements. Recentl=
y, professional engineers Ron Kovac and Toby Grotz of Colorado, with help fr=
om Dr. Tim Binder, repeated Russell's 1927 work, which was verified at the t=
ime by Westinghouse Laboratories. Russell found a novel way to change the ra=
tio of hydrogen to oxygen in water vapor inside a sealed quartz tube, or to=20=
change the vapor to completely different elements. Their conclusion agrees w=
ith Russell: the geometry of motion in space is important in atomic transmut=
ation. Kovac shorthands that idea to geometry of space-bending. These modern=
 shape-shifters speak of Russell's feats such as prolate or oblate the oxyge=
n nucleus into nitrogen or hydrogen or vice versa. To change nuclei, they ch=
ange the shape of a magnetic field. Although they used expensive analyzing e=
quipment, it is basically tabletop science. No atom-smashing cyclotron neede=
d; just a gentle nudge using the right frequencies. Focus and un-focus light=
-motion, create a vortex and control it. Cold fusion researchers are also ru=
nning across strange elements popping up in their own electrified brews. No=20=
one is proposing to make gold and upset world currencies, but some experimen=
ters aim to clean up radioactive waste by their novel processes."<BR>
    <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_1e0.98b52e4.2bffff71_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 16:37:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24103;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 16:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 16:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: ConexTom aol.com
Message-ID: <134.201aeba3.2c000156 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 18:57:26 EDT
Subject: Re: The Eccles Patent ("Telegraph Article")
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_134.201aeba3.2c000156_boundary"
X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6011
Resent-Message-ID: <"aTNUb.0.Iu5.Wvgp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50619
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_134.201aeba3.2c000156_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/22/2003 11:28:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
mikec snip.net writes:

> I have just finished paging through this patent sent to me by Peter Gluck,
> which is the basis for the GW "Edison" cell and related claims.

Could you give me or post the patent number for the above GW Edison device, 
Thank you.

Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: tom rhfweb.com
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\personal">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\newage</A>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF="www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.com</A>


--part1_134.201aeba3.2c000156_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 5/22/2003 11:28:34 PM Eastern Dayli=
ght Time, mikec snip.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I have just finished paging thr=
ough this patent sent to me by Peter Gluck,<BR>
which is the basis for the GW "Edison" cell and related claims.</BLOCKQUOTE>=
<BR>
<BR>
Could you give me or post the patent number for the above GW Edison device,=20=
Thank you.<BR>
<BR>
Baron Von Volsung, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>=
, Email: tom rhfweb.com<BR>
President Thomas D. Clark, tom rhfweb.com, <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\persona=
l">www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>
New Age Production's Inc., <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\newage">www.rhfweb.com\=
newage</A><BR>
Star Haven Community Services, at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com\sh">www.rhfweb.c=
om\sh</A><BR>
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at <A HREF=3D"www.rhfweb.com">www.rhfweb.c=
om</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_134.201aeba3.2c000156_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 23 23:36:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA05807;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 23:34:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 23:34:48 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b19baf477a712d3 [64.61.198.28]>
In-Reply-To: <007e01c32156$4e8eeec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <v01530502baf23ebc4008 [12.21.211.204]>
 <003d01c3209d$6b7219e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <a05111b01baf35fef500b [64.61.197.243]>
 <007e01c32156$4e8eeec0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 01:35:42 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1162; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"g0iq02.0.ZQ1.7Anp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50620
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jones Breene responded;

>From: "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
>
>>  Were can I read about the Dingle engine?
>
>Wasn't it you that had the AutoBild article translated from German? 
>That was the guy...

Sorry, I didn't recognize the name. At least he has a working 
prototype, even if he is being difficult.

>
>>  I fail to see how a steam explosion is germane to this.
>
>Do you fail to see how any "explosion" is different vis-a-vis "combustion"?

I realize that an chemical explosion is combustion done quickly. My 
point was that a sealed vessel on a fire exploding from steam 
pressure, is not analogous to flashing water into vapor and expecting 
to somehow extract usable energy from it. If I understand the 
proposed mechanism, water is dispersed into small droplets, and then 
frozen, then it sublimates. I've seen a similar process here in the 
frozen north when you hang wet clothes on a line, eventually they 
become dry. I just fail to see how you expect to get energy out of it.

>
>Even with the same amount of fuel, there is both a quantitative and 
>a qualitative difference....and that difference can be summed up in 
>the word *shockwave*

I realize that there is a difference between an explosion and a 
detonation, but I think that the energy release is the same, the 
energy is just more concentrated.

>
>Hint: remember the thread on velocity, acceleration, jerk and jounce?
>
>>  AFAIK, the tree's roots pump the water up,
>
>Preposterous! where on earth did you hear that roots have the ability to pump?

I read the BBC article. I knew I remembered hearing my high school 
science teacher saying that this was sometimes the case. Apparently a 
tree uses a combination of capillary action and vacuum to pull sap up 
from the roots.

later



....or my current favorite, which I am preparing another long 
rambling post on, so you can have plenty of bull's-eye area to aim at 
in the next round of target practice, which is the "supra-chemical" 
reaction, i.e. a series of reactions that involve valence electrons 
which are accelerated by Van der Waals-type forces (beta-aether) into 
inner orbitals, such as occurs in structural failure - thus the name 
CAMFR or chemically-assisted-mechanical-failure-reaction.

You're saying that when a piece of metal fails from fatigue that the 
electrons are forced into lower orbitals? Wow, how do you measure 
that?

A CAMFR, or supra-chemical (ballotechnic) reaction must always be 
"triggered" but significant energy input, but can provide 10-30 times 
more energy than a chemical reaction. There is even a computer code 
out there for modeling ballotechnics.... but if you were to actually 
admit to having it...who knows if the MIB might not show up at you 
door  ;-)

As I told James McCanney, http://www.jmccanneyscience.com , if the 
Invisible Government IG is willing to kill scientists in order to 
stop scientific progress, we might as well bend over and kiss our 
butts goodbye.

Does someone have an URL's relating to ballotechnics?

Thanks for thinking about it... it is an extremely important issue 
IMHO (water-fuel) even if Dingle's claims prove to be bogus, and I 
don't believe that they will... and in fact, I will bet that Naudin 
has an engine running on water-fuel before the end of July, if he 
doesn't knock off for Bastille day, even though it will be using the 
Mizuno-type cell rather than the modified ultrasonic electrolyzer 
that I am trying to get to work in a partial vacuum situation....

Wow! This is starting to make sense. You're saying that fine ice 
crystals sublimed in a partial vacuum and subjected to the proper 
resonant frequency might just fly apart?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 03:51:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id DAA09338;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 03:50:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 03:50:48 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baf4ff9ddc5c [12.21.209.177]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 02:54:10 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water fuel and CANR
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vfn5c1.0.pH2.8wqp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50621
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 1:35 AM 5/24/3, thomas malloy wrote:
>Jones Breene responded;
>
>>From: "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
>>
>>>  Were can I read about the Dingle engine?
>>
>>Wasn't it you that had the AutoBild article translated from German?
>>That was the guy...
>
>Sorry, I didn't recognize the name. At least he has a working
>prototype, even if he is being difficult.



So what exactly IS the reference on Dingle?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 05:11:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA22119;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 05:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 05:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <v01530500baf50cdff9cb [12.110.74.28]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 04:12:21 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Duty to disclose information material to patentability
Resent-Message-ID: <"en1zH.0.UP5.X3sp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50622
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

There have at times been discussions here on vortex regarding the "duty to
disclose" in a patent application information material to patentability.
Researching background information can be left to the examiner, but
anything he does not pick up that is known by the applicant to be material
to patentability must be disclosed.  This is covered in the USPTO rules,
see rule "# 1.56 Duty to disclose information material to patentability"
in:

<http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_rules.pdf>

There are also laws relating to this duty.  See:

<http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf>


Following is a summary of the status of the above information circa 1996,
when there was much debate about the Correa Patents.  Not much has changed
in the interim.  Note that under 35 U.S.C. 301 that ANY PERSON AT ANY TIME
may cite to the Office in writing prior art consisting  of patents or
printed publications which that person believes to have a bearing on the
patentability of any claim of a particular patent.  If you are concerned
about the validity of any patent, you can get involved and write to the
PTO, even with your identity protected.

>From the rules:

# 1.56  Duty to disclose information material to patentability.


        (a)     A patent by its very nature is affected with a public
interest.  The public interest is best served, and the most effective
patent examination  occurs when, at the time an application is being
examined, the Office is aware  of and evaluates the teachings of all
information material to patentability.  Each individual associated with
the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a duty of candor
and good faith in dealing with the Office, which includes a duty to
disclose  to the Office all information known to that individual to be
material to patentability  as defined in this section. The duty to
disclose information exists with respect  to each pending claim until the
claim is cancelled or withdrawn from consideration,  or the application
becomes abandoned. Information material to the patentability  of a claim
that is cancelled or withdrawn from consideration need not be submitted
if the information is not material to the patentability of any claim
remaining  under consideration in the application. There is no duty to
submit information  which is not material to the patentability of any
existing claim. The duty  to disclose all information known to be material
to patentability is deemed  to be satisfied if all information known to be
material to patentability of  any claim issued in a patent was cited by
the Office or submitted to the Office  in the manner prescribed by ww
1.97(b)-(d) and 1.98. However, no patent will  be granted on an
application in connection with which fraud on the Office was  practiced or
attempted or the duty of disclosure was violated through bad faith  or
intentional misconduct. The Office encourages applicants to carefully
examine:
        (1)     prior art cited in search reports of a foreign patent
office in  a counterpart application, and

        (2)     the closest information over which individuals associated
with  the filing or prosecution of a patent application believe any
pending claim  patentably defines, to make sure that any material
information contained therein  is disclosed to the Office.

        (b)     Under this section, information is material to
patentability when  it is not cumulative to information already of record
or being made of record  in the application, and

        (1) It establishes, by itself or in combination with other
information,  a prima facie case of unpatentability of a claim; or

        (2)     It refutes, or is inconsistent with, a position the
applicant  takes in:

        (i)     Opposing an argument of unpatentability relied on by the
Office,  or

        (ii)    Asserting an argument of patentability.

        A prima facie case of unpatentability is established when the
information  compels a conclusion that a claim is unpatentable under the
preponderance of  evidence, burden-of-proof standard, giving each term in
the claim its broadest  reasonable construction consistent with the
specification, and before any consideration  is given to evidence which
may be submitted in an attempt to establish a contrary  conclusion of
patentability.

        (c)     Individuals associated with the filing or prosecution of a
patent  application within the meaning of this section are:

        (1)     Each inventor named in the application;

        (2)     Each attorney or agent who prepares or prosecutes the
application;  and

        (3)     Every other person who is substantively involved in the
preparation  or prosecution of the application and who is associated with
the inventor,  with the assignee or with anyone to whom there is an
obligation to assign the  application.

        (d)     Individuals other than the attorney, agent or  inventor
may comply  with this section by disclosing information to the attorney,
agent, or inventor.
        [42 FR 5593, Jan. 28, 1977; paras. (d) & (e) - (i), 47 FR 21751,
May 19,  1982, effective July 1, 1982; para.  (c), 48 FR 2710, Jan. 20,
1983, effective  Feb. 27, 1983; paras. (b) and  (j), 49 FR 554, Jan. 4,
1984, effective Apr.  1, 1984; paras. (d) and  (h), 50 FR 5171, Feb. 6,
1985, effective Mar. 8, 1985;  para. (e), 53 FR 47808, Nov. 28, 1988,
effective Jan. 1, 1989; 57 FR 2021,  Jan. 17, 1992, effective Mar. 16, 1992]




LAWS NOT IN TITLE 35, UNITED STATES CODE

18 U.S.C. 1001  Statements or entries generally.

        Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department

or agency  of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies,

conceals, or covers  up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact,

or makes any false, fictitious  or fraudulent statements or

representations, or makes or uses


any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false,

fictitious  or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than

$10,000 or imprisoned  not more than five years, or both.




35 U.S.C. 301   Citation of prior art.



        Any person at any time may cite to the Office in writing prior art

consisting  of patents or printed publications which

that person believes to have a bearing on the patentability of any claim

of  a particular patent.  If the person explains in writing the pertinency

and  manner of applying such prior art to at least one claim of the

patent, the  citation of such prior art and the explanation thereof will

become a part of  the official file of the patent.  At the written request

of the person citing  the prior art, his or her identity will be excluded

from the patent file and  kept confidential.



        (Added Dec. 12, 1980, Public Law 96-517, sec. 1, 94 Stat. 3015.)



35 U.S.C. 302   Request for reexamination.





        Any person at any time may file a request for reexamination by the

Office  of any claim of a patent on the basis of any prior art cited under

the provisions  of section 301 of this title. The request must be in

writing and must be accompanied  by payment of a reexamination fee

established by the Commissioner of Patents  pursuant to the provisions of

section 41 of this title. The request must set  forth the pertinency and

manner of applying cited prior art to every claim  for which reexamination

is requested.  Unless the requesting person is the  owner of the patent,

the Commissioner promptly will send a copy of the request  to the owner of

record of the patent.



        (Added Dec. 12, 1980, Public Law 96-517, sec. 1, 94 Stat. 3015.)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 09:32:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07728;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 09:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 09:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 09:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qrrlh2.0.fu1.epvp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50623
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Sci. Am. editor Rennie sent me some more e-mail messages. They are
> remarkably candid and revealing. I packaged the entire discussion in a new
> document:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/AppealandSciAm.pdf


They're VERY interesting.

He seems to base his opinion of LENR only upon what others think; others
who very probably have never read the papers.  He should be basing his
opinion on his own examination of *both* sides of the controversy... and
yet he won't go and read the papers himself?  Bizarre.  Perhaps this a
case of "my mind is made up, so don't bother me with evidence found
later!"  Or perhaps he's waiting for OTHER magazine editors to publish
articles about the positive evidence before even questioning his own
position.  Bizarre for a journalist to have such an attitude, and triply
bizarre for anyone associated with science.

Well, New Scientist had their short article out in March.  Heh.  Perhaps
this just proves that New Scientist staff is incompetent?  If so, then
that's a classic example of the "experimenter's regress"  problem.

If we become certain that LENR doesn't exist, then when Schwinger and
Storms and SRI later present positive evidence for it, this is not
evidence, instead it is "evidence."  In other words, it just proves their
own incompetence.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, all the papers
supporting the phenomenon are seen as simple evidence of experimenter
incompetence.  In that case the reliability of the labs reporting a
replication mean nothing.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, then positive
replications are evidence of incompetence.  In that case no amount of
positive evidence can *ever* be convincing.  A pre-existing conviction
that LENR is bogus acts as a mental filter.  All positive evidence is seen
as corrupt, and then is rejected unread.  In that case the negative
evidence builds up, but the positive evidence does not.

But where did such a pre-existing conviction come from?  In science it's
wrong to first adopt a viewpoint and then to use the selection of evidence
in order to support that viewpoint.  Politicians do it.  The legal system
is based on it.  Science is totally different: a bend-over-backwards
search for the truth rather than a defense of a an existing position
during a debate.  If one claims to be scientific, yet also adopts a
position not based on evidence, then that is pseudoscience.  It is a
particular form of pseudoscience known widely as "Cargo Cult Science."
One essential element is missing: the no-holds-barred search for truth.

This illustrates that it's enormously important for science workers to
remain tenative and unprejudiced.  If they fail to do this, then they'll
start using self-persuasion tactics such as reading only the material
which supports their position, while at the same time refusing to read
material written by opponents.  Mr. Rennie has apparently fallen into this
trap.  I could be mistaken though.  Has he read the several books which
support LENR?  Or does he exclusively read material which supports the
anti-LENR position?  If the latter, then he's involved with Cargo Cult
Science.

Why would anyone ever adopt a firm position and start selecting evidence?
One reason is ridicule.  It's a known phenomenon in sociology.

Once a person has ridiculed a particular concept, that person is trapped.
They've surrendered their objectivity and their self-image is on the line.
A huge conflict of interest exists because, if their ridicule was wrong,
it's an embarrassing error of major proportion, and they've opened
*themselves* up as a target for ridicule.  Once such a conflict of
interest exists, only an overwhelming amount of contrary evidence can ever
sway them into reexamining their position.  The practice of ridicule very
often leads to a firmly closed mind, so scientists should avoid such
behavior at all costs.


One major mistake he made:  saying that he needs no justification for his
position.  Totally wrong.  His position is not proper science;  he's not
reviewing both sides of the evidence while calmly revising his opinion
when new evidence comes in.  Instead he takes a stance of *active
disbelief*, even hostility, then refuses to examine evidence which might
damage this position.  Strong levels of belief and disbelief BOTH require
detailed justification.  The only position which doesn't require
justification is the scientific one: refusing to make judgements when
evidence is lacking.  He certainly hasn't refused to make judgements.
Yes, it is up to the LENR researchers to present evidence, it is not up to
the scientific community to disprove unsupported claims.  But his position
is nothing like that of a scientist. Instead he mysteriously "knows" that
LENR is bogus, and when LENR researchers present evidence, he bad-mouths
it and refuses to inspect it.

I wish he had simply cleared up the mystery in his letters to Jed.  On
what is his judgement of LENR based?  Perhaps he wants to hide his
reasoning because it will fall apart in the light of day.  Perhaps it's
from the following.

If we're to actively disbelieve the LENR papers, on what should we base
our disbelief?

  1. We all know that only Pons and Fleichman presented positive results,
     and none of the attempted replications produced any similar effects.
     (Wrong, as shown by the briefest inspection of the long list of
     research papers.)

  2. The rest of the scientific community knows that LENR doesn't exist.
     That many smart people can't possibly be wrong.  (Bad move.  This is
     like reviewing a book by talking to lots of other people who never
     read it either.  Where is the large group of experts who have
     actually read any of the positive results?  Do they even know that
     the papers exist?  R. Feynman had harsh words to say about this sort
     of pseudoscience, re. the parable of the Emperor's Nose.)

  3. Nobody offered a mechanism whereby fusion can occur at such low
     energy.   (Bad reasoning.   Galileo's whispered response shows the
     great flaw in the above thinking: "and yet it moves."  Galileo
     didn't propose a mechanism.  Science doesn't insist on knowing
     mechanisms before accepting evidence!  What if this wasn't the case?
     This would mean that the scientific community of the time should
     rightly have turned their back on Galileo, only to embrace the modern
     heliocentric viewpoint after Newton proposed a mechanism fifty years
     later.  No!  Observations don't magically become real only after a
     theory is developed to explain them.)

  4. Pons and Fleichman spent all that money, yet where's the fusion-
     powered home furnace?   (Bad reasoning.  Here's an analogy to
     illustrate.  What if the scientific community had ridicule
     Becquerel's crazy claim that mysterious rays were emitted by a
     common mineral called pitchblende?  Ridicule was a danger, since he's
     proposing an instance of a perpetual motion machine.   Fortunately
     his claim was trivial to reproduce.  But imagine what might have
     happened if it wasn't.  In that case, should his colleagues reject
     evidence on the grounds that he is unable to build a uranium-powered
     furnace?  Obviously not.  We shouldn't reject LENR claims while
     while requiring that all new phenomena be easy to harness and
     engineer.  And also note that Bequerel committed a high crime: he
     proposed no airtight theory nor identified a sensible mechanism when
     reporting his evidence!  His evidence triggered a decades-long
     search for a mechanism.  The LENR papers did not.  Ask yourself
     why, then go out and find a solid answer.)

  6. Only crackpots come out in support of LENR.  (Wrong.  Before his
     death, Julian Schwinger was a supporter on the theory side.  SRI
     and NRL reproduced the phenomenon and recommended that studies
     continue.  So did one of the country's top electrochemists J. O.
     Bockris.  And on the public information side, Sir Arthur C. Clarke
     has come out as a major supporter.  Ah.  But because of "experimenter
     regress", if we decide that LENR is bogus, this just means that these
     people are all fools.  #6 above is circular reasoning: only crackpots
     support LENR because anyone who supports LENR is defined as being a
     crackpot.)

  7. If LENR is real, then Alchemy really exists!  We'd have to rewrite
     everything we know about chemistry in the everyday world!
     (Alchemy is blasphemy, and LENR supporters are heretics?  In science,
     ever it was thus: most revolutionary discoveries were blasphemy.
     Continental drift is the poster child for this. The above isn't an
     argument against LENR, instead it's an argument that LENR, if real,
     will trigger the next scientific revolution.  Yes, we all knew this.)

  8. Pons and Fleichman saw neutrons.  Then they didn't.  And the neutron
     output was vastly too low to explain the excess heat as having
     nuclear origin.  Then they saw gammas at one energy.  When someone
     showed that the energy was wrong for that sort of reaction, their
     next paper showed the curves moved to the right place.  Doesn't this
     prove their incompetence?  (Maybe, but maybe also it demonstrates the
     pressures and rushed publication of the times, and demonstrates a
     trial and error process of discovery which always exists but is
     usually hidden behind a polished research paper.  Only their initial
     results, the thermal results, stood the test of time, and it was only
     later that other 'nuclear ash' such as He4 and Tritium were measured
     and found.)

 9.  Major labs showed that LENR doesn't exist.  That's what led to the
     ERAB report which condemned the whole affair.   (Yes, but this falls
     into the "experimenter's regress" problem:  if we know that LENR is
     real, then when major labs cannot replicate yet a few individuals
     succeed, then perhaps it means that the major labs didn't call up
     Pons/Fleichman and ask about the various techniques needed for
     success.  Yet if LENR *is( bogus, then it means that the major labs
     did perform the experiment correctly, and anyone announcing a
     successful replication has made a major error.   Which position is
     right?  We cannot know, since we would first have to know in advance
     if LENR is real!  In other words, in order to properly judge
     evidence, in order to know if LENR is real, we have to first know
     whether LENR is real.  That's the experimenters' regress.)

 10. The Japanese poured huge amounts of money into LENR research.  Then
     they gave up.  If LENR is so real, why didn't a well-funded program
     demonstrate this?   (Good question.  It had better not be rhetorical.
     Why did the Japanese effort fail?  I'm not familiar with the issue
     myself.  There could be many answers, so we'd better investigate and
     not simply take it as proof that LENR is bogus.   Perhaps the
     project was bogged down by politics?  Strapped with the sort of
     active hostile disbelief so prevalent in the USA?  Bad luck in using
     palladium from sources later proved to contain unknown contaminants?
     Refusal to contact Pons/Fleichman or other successful experimenters
     to find out the needed techniques?  Or perhaps it was a competent
     demonstration that LENR doesn't exist.  Further info is needed. )

 11. If LENR is real, where is all the evidence in support of this
     position?  ( It's at http://lenr-canr.org   Ah, but anyone who finds
     positive evicence for LENR has simply revealed themselves to be a
     crackpot?  By definition, that website contains papers written by
     crackpots with scientific credentials?  So it would seem, but only if
     we take an initial position that LENR is bogus. )

OK, so far I see no reason for adopting a stance of active and hostile
disbelief.  Perhaps Mr. Rennie will wish to submit some info which will
cause me to take his position.  Jed's article is now in a public place.
In my opinion it looks pretty bad that Mr. Rennie can't instantly give
clear and convincing reasons why he has made such a firm judgement that
LENR is nothing but a mistake.  If he reads this, perhaps he can replace
my above list with something sound.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
billb eskimo.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 09:56:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16962;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 09:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 09:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 09:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240948021.21817-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"QrdqG1.0.k84.IFwp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50624
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Sat, 24 May 2003, William Beaty wrote:

> If we're to actively disbelieve the LENR papers, on what should we base
> our disbelief?
>
>   1. We all know that only Pons and Fleichman presented positive results,

Are there any online articles which list the most common reasons given for
adopting a position of LENR-disbelief?  (I don't mean the most solid
reasons.  I mean the most common reasons, such as "nobody replicated the
P&F experiment.")


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
billb eskimo.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 10:09:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA21411;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0fbaf46616f1ea [64.61.198.28]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530501baf42097761f [12.21.209.177]>
References: <v01530501baf42097761f [12.21.209.177]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 19:08:02 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: the next step
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"DolMo1.0.SE5.xRwp-" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50625
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner replied to my previous post;

>At 3:48 AM 5/23/3, floyd_lee wiedrich-sr.com wrote:
>
>>>Thomas Malloy thank you for trying but I would never give my
>>>inventions away to 1 person, when I want to give them to the world
>>>with no catches I hope you understand,God
>>>Bless!
>>No one is going to take you seriously unless you have a working
>>prototype. There are too many frauds out there who are saying the
>>same thing. You have three choices, either you build a prototype, or
>>I do, or forget it.
>
>
>Giving away inventions is easy.  Simply publish them.  If they are
>worthwhile, someone will likely use the ideas or build upon them. I feel
>fairly certain Floyd Lee must know this, as most any sane person does.  It
>therefore is reasonable to conclude he does NOT want to give his ideas to
>the world with no catches.

This is a man who says that he is terminal, is convinced that the CIA 
will kill anyone who builds a FE machine, and considers himself 
computer savy. His "pages" on the Internet give lie to that. OTOH, 
there is a second option, Floyd is not sane.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 10:23:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA05724;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 10:22:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 10:22:30 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 13:42:09 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEBFDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"k8ZD1.0.HP1.Jfwp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50626
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

Having read the material Jed has posted, I'm underwhelmed.

Rennie is pretty clear from the start about his position,
which I will summarize as follows.

1) I (Rennie) am a journalist
2) I'm NOT a scientist
	so it follows that
3) I CAN'T judge the papers by their scientific merit.
4) As a journalist, I must rely on authoritative sources.
5) Those sources tell me LENR-CANR is bad science.
6) So I report this.

These positions shouldn't be so alien to Jed, he uses
them himself on occasion but substitutes authorities more to
his liking in step 5.

Let me tell you, as one who is
indirectly familiar with SciAm's staff ( secretaries
tongues will wag, and remember I'm right here in
town with them ), they're struggling to gain readership.
The glory days of SciAm are long gone, leaving
sometime during the 80's with C.L. Strong. The journal
is filled with ads now, and rather than position themselves
as a text for serious scientists, they pursue the
"Discover" and "Popular Science" markets.

There is common interest here, Jed. Controversy sells
magazines, and creates web traffic. That you couldn't
come to a better outcome surprises me.

I'm curious why Ed's suggestion was rejected. Can we see
that response from Rennie? THAT'S the one Rennie should be
taken to task on, as it's a reasonable request and
one which would benefit SciAm as much as LENR-CANR.org.
Why was this rejected???

K.



-----Original Message-----
From: William Beaty [mailto:billb eskimo.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 12:25 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)


On Thu, 22 May 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Sci. Am. editor Rennie sent me some more e-mail messages. They are
> remarkably candid and revealing. I packaged the entire discussion in a new
> document:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/AppealandSciAm.pdf


They're VERY interesting.

He seems to base his opinion of LENR only upon what others think; others
who very probably have never read the papers.  He should be basing his
opinion on his own examination of *both* sides of the controversy... and
yet he won't go and read the papers himself?  Bizarre.  Perhaps this a
case of "my mind is made up, so don't bother me with evidence found
later!"  Or perhaps he's waiting for OTHER magazine editors to publish
articles about the positive evidence before even questioning his own
position.  Bizarre for a journalist to have such an attitude, and triply
bizarre for anyone associated with science.

Well, New Scientist had their short article out in March.  Heh.  Perhaps
this just proves that New Scientist staff is incompetent?  If so, then
that's a classic example of the "experimenter's regress"  problem.

If we become certain that LENR doesn't exist, then when Schwinger and
Storms and SRI later present positive evidence for it, this is not
evidence, instead it is "evidence."  In other words, it just proves their
own incompetence.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, all the papers
supporting the phenomenon are seen as simple evidence of experimenter
incompetence.  In that case the reliability of the labs reporting a
replication mean nothing.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, then positive
replications are evidence of incompetence.  In that case no amount of
positive evidence can *ever* be convincing.  A pre-existing conviction
that LENR is bogus acts as a mental filter.  All positive evidence is seen
as corrupt, and then is rejected unread.  In that case the negative
evidence builds up, but the positive evidence does not.

But where did such a pre-existing conviction come from?  In science it's
wrong to first adopt a viewpoint and then to use the selection of evidence
in order to support that viewpoint.  Politicians do it.  The legal system
is based on it.  Science is totally different: a bend-over-backwards
search for the truth rather than a defense of a an existing position
during a debate.  If one claims to be scientific, yet also adopts a
position not based on evidence, then that is pseudoscience.  It is a
particular form of pseudoscience known widely as "Cargo Cult Science."
One essential element is missing: the no-holds-barred search for truth.

This illustrates that it's enormously important for science workers to
remain tenative and unprejudiced.  If they fail to do this, then they'll
start using self-persuasion tactics such as reading only the material
which supports their position, while at the same time refusing to read
material written by opponents.  Mr. Rennie has apparently fallen into this
trap.  I could be mistaken though.  Has he read the several books which
support LENR?  Or does he exclusively read material which supports the
anti-LENR position?  If the latter, then he's involved with Cargo Cult
Science.

Why would anyone ever adopt a firm position and start selecting evidence?
One reason is ridicule.  It's a known phenomenon in sociology.

Once a person has ridiculed a particular concept, that person is trapped.
They've surrendered their objectivity and their self-image is on the line.
A huge conflict of interest exists because, if their ridicule was wrong,
it's an embarrassing error of major proportion, and they've opened
*themselves* up as a target for ridicule.  Once such a conflict of
interest exists, only an overwhelming amount of contrary evidence can ever
sway them into reexamining their position.  The practice of ridicule very
often leads to a firmly closed mind, so scientists should avoid such
behavior at all costs.


One major mistake he made:  saying that he needs no justification for his
position.  Totally wrong.  His position is not proper science;  he's not
reviewing both sides of the evidence while calmly revising his opinion
when new evidence comes in.  Instead he takes a stance of *active
disbelief*, even hostility, then refuses to examine evidence which might
damage this position.  Strong levels of belief and disbelief BOTH require
detailed justification.  The only position which doesn't require
justification is the scientific one: refusing to make judgements when
evidence is lacking.  He certainly hasn't refused to make judgements.
Yes, it is up to the LENR researchers to present evidence, it is not up to
the scientific community to disprove unsupported claims.  But his position
is nothing like that of a scientist. Instead he mysteriously "knows" that
LENR is bogus, and when LENR researchers present evidence, he bad-mouths
it and refuses to inspect it.

I wish he had simply cleared up the mystery in his letters to Jed.  On
what is his judgement of LENR based?  Perhaps he wants to hide his
reasoning because it will fall apart in the light of day.  Perhaps it's
from the following.

If we're to actively disbelieve the LENR papers, on what should we base
our disbelief?

  1. We all know that only Pons and Fleichman presented positive results,
     and none of the attempted replications produced any similar effects.
     (Wrong, as shown by the briefest inspection of the long list of
     research papers.)

  2. The rest of the scientific community knows that LENR doesn't exist.
     That many smart people can't possibly be wrong.  (Bad move.  This is
     like reviewing a book by talking to lots of other people who never
     read it either.  Where is the large group of experts who have
     actually read any of the positive results?  Do they even know that
     the papers exist?  R. Feynman had harsh words to say about this sort
     of pseudoscience, re. the parable of the Emperor's Nose.)

  3. Nobody offered a mechanism whereby fusion can occur at such low
     energy.   (Bad reasoning.   Galileo's whispered response shows the
     great flaw in the above thinking: "and yet it moves."  Galileo
     didn't propose a mechanism.  Science doesn't insist on knowing
     mechanisms before accepting evidence!  What if this wasn't the case?
     This would mean that the scientific community of the time should
     rightly have turned their back on Galileo, only to embrace the modern
     heliocentric viewpoint after Newton proposed a mechanism fifty years
     later.  No!  Observations don't magically become real only after a
     theory is developed to explain them.)

  4. Pons and Fleichman spent all that money, yet where's the fusion-
     powered home furnace?   (Bad reasoning.  Here's an analogy to
     illustrate.  What if the scientific community had ridicule
     Becquerel's crazy claim that mysterious rays were emitted by a
     common mineral called pitchblende?  Ridicule was a danger, since he's
     proposing an instance of a perpetual motion machine.   Fortunately
     his claim was trivial to reproduce.  But imagine what might have
     happened if it wasn't.  In that case, should his colleagues reject
     evidence on the grounds that he is unable to build a uranium-powered
     furnace?  Obviously not.  We shouldn't reject LENR claims while
     while requiring that all new phenomena be easy to harness and
     engineer.  And also note that Bequerel committed a high crime: he
     proposed no airtight theory nor identified a sensible mechanism when
     reporting his evidence!  His evidence triggered a decades-long
     search for a mechanism.  The LENR papers did not.  Ask yourself
     why, then go out and find a solid answer.)

  6. Only crackpots come out in support of LENR.  (Wrong.  Before his
     death, Julian Schwinger was a supporter on the theory side.  SRI
     and NRL reproduced the phenomenon and recommended that studies
     continue.  So did one of the country's top electrochemists J. O.
     Bockris.  And on the public information side, Sir Arthur C. Clarke
     has come out as a major supporter.  Ah.  But because of "experimenter
     regress", if we decide that LENR is bogus, this just means that these
     people are all fools.  #6 above is circular reasoning: only crackpots
     support LENR because anyone who supports LENR is defined as being a
     crackpot.)

  7. If LENR is real, then Alchemy really exists!  We'd have to rewrite
     everything we know about chemistry in the everyday world!
     (Alchemy is blasphemy, and LENR supporters are heretics?  In science,
     ever it was thus: most revolutionary discoveries were blasphemy.
     Continental drift is the poster child for this. The above isn't an
     argument against LENR, instead it's an argument that LENR, if real,
     will trigger the next scientific revolution.  Yes, we all knew this.)

  8. Pons and Fleichman saw neutrons.  Then they didn't.  And the neutron
     output was vastly too low to explain the excess heat as having
     nuclear origin.  Then they saw gammas at one energy.  When someone
     showed that the energy was wrong for that sort of reaction, their
     next paper showed the curves moved to the right place.  Doesn't this
     prove their incompetence?  (Maybe, but maybe also it demonstrates the
     pressures and rushed publication of the times, and demonstrates a
     trial and error process of discovery which always exists but is
     usually hidden behind a polished research paper.  Only their initial
     results, the thermal results, stood the test of time, and it was only
     later that other 'nuclear ash' such as He4 and Tritium were measured
     and found.)

 9.  Major labs showed that LENR doesn't exist.  That's what led to the
     ERAB report which condemned the whole affair.   (Yes, but this falls
     into the "experimenter's regress" problem:  if we know that LENR is
     real, then when major labs cannot replicate yet a few individuals
     succeed, then perhaps it means that the major labs didn't call up
     Pons/Fleichman and ask about the various techniques needed for
     success.  Yet if LENR *is( bogus, then it means that the major labs
     did perform the experiment correctly, and anyone announcing a
     successful replication has made a major error.   Which position is
     right?  We cannot know, since we would first have to know in advance
     if LENR is real!  In other words, in order to properly judge
     evidence, in order to know if LENR is real, we have to first know
     whether LENR is real.  That's the experimenters' regress.)

 10. The Japanese poured huge amounts of money into LENR research.  Then
     they gave up.  If LENR is so real, why didn't a well-funded program
     demonstrate this?   (Good question.  It had better not be rhetorical.
     Why did the Japanese effort fail?  I'm not familiar with the issue
     myself.  There could be many answers, so we'd better investigate and
     not simply take it as proof that LENR is bogus.   Perhaps the
     project was bogged down by politics?  Strapped with the sort of
     active hostile disbelief so prevalent in the USA?  Bad luck in using
     palladium from sources later proved to contain unknown contaminants?
     Refusal to contact Pons/Fleichman or other successful experimenters
     to find out the needed techniques?  Or perhaps it was a competent
     demonstration that LENR doesn't exist.  Further info is needed. )

 11. If LENR is real, where is all the evidence in support of this
     position?  ( It's at http://lenr-canr.org   Ah, but anyone who finds
     positive evicence for LENR has simply revealed themselves to be a
     crackpot?  By definition, that website contains papers written by
     crackpots with scientific credentials?  So it would seem, but only if
     we take an initial position that LENR is bogus. )

OK, so far I see no reason for adopting a stance of active and hostile
disbelief.  Perhaps Mr. Rennie will wish to submit some info which will
cause me to take his position.  Jed's article is now in a public place.
In my opinion it looks pretty bad that Mr. Rennie can't instantly give
clear and convincing reasons why he has made such a firm judgement that
LENR is nothing but a mistake.  If he reads this, perhaps he can replace
my above list with something sound.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
billb eskimo.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 11:33:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA06232;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 11:32:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 11:32:31 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524140949.02d75430 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 14:32:11 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEBFDKAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"I9fyz.0.IX1._gxp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50627
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

Rennie is pretty clear from the start about his position,
>which I will summarize as follows.
>
>1) I (Rennie) am a journalist
>2) I'm NOT a scientist
>         so it follows that
>3) I CAN'T judge the papers by their scientific merit.
>4) As a journalist, I must rely on authoritative sources.
>5) Those sources tell me LENR-CANR is bad science.
>6) So I report this.
>
>These positions shouldn't be so alien to Jed, he uses
>them himself on occasion but substitutes authorities more to
>his liking in step 5.

That's not fair. I only take that position when I am not, in fact, 
competent to judge the issues. If I feel capable of taking one side or 
another, I state that clearly. Perhaps I am often guilty of thinking I know 
more than I do, and taking sides when I should not, but it is not fair to 
suggest I hide behind expert opinions.

In my opinion, Rennie is not following good journalist ethics either. 
Nagel's list is right on the mark -- that is what Rennie says -- but he 
shouldn't. In my "Titanic" paper I describe how I think a journalist should 
handle this situation:


"First, use your best judgment; go with what sounds reasonable. The problem 
is that truth sometimes sounds unreasonable . . . This advice is unfair to 
Goldberg, because he probably does not have much judgment when it comes to 
marine technology in 1912. Like a reporter, he must act as a generalist . . .

. . . If you cannot tell a reciprocating engine from a turbine, perhaps you 
should refrain from writing about the Titanic. Reporters, historians, and 
scientists who know nothing about electrochemistry and calorimetry should 
refrain from writing about cold fusion. If a reporter must write about cold 
fusion, he should search the Internet for articles about it. We are pleased 
to note that many search tools bring up [www.infinite-energy.com]. A 
reporter starting there need not trust our judgment. We include a list of 
original sources: peer-reviewed scientific papers . . .  A reporter who 
does not understand these papers must do his best with summaries written 
for the layman, and admit to his readers that he does not fully grasp the 
technical issues.

When a scientist writes about cold fusion, he should be held to more 
exacting standards . . ."


>There is common interest here, Jed. Controversy sells magazines, and 
>creates web traffic. That you couldn't come to a better outcome surprises me.

I thought this was the best outcome I could hope for. In two days, readers 
have downloaded 1,049 copies of the Rennie letters, which is good for us.

I understand that Rennie is a businessman, and he cannot endanger his 
magazine by publishing a positive article about CF. He could not publish 
even one sentence without bringing down the wrath of the APS and many major 
advertisers. He recently attacked Star Wars, but as Ed Storms pointed out 
to me, the Star Wars project has powerful enemies as well as friends.


>I'm curious why Ed's suggestion was rejected. Can we see that response 
>from Rennie?

I do not have it. Ed told me Rennie rejected the plan.

What do you think, Ed: Do you feel comfortable posting the response here? I 
did not hesitate to upload Rennie's messages, because they were addressed 
to "Editors lenr-canr.org," after all.


>  THAT'S the one Rennie should be taken to task on, as it's a reasonable 
> request and one which would benefit SciAm as much as LENR-CANR.org.

I do not think it would benefit SciAm! It would be a disaster for them. I 
suppose that is the real reason he would never do it. If I stood to lose my 
job and see my reputation destroyed, I might not be so bold either.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 12:13:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA04404;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 12:12:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 12:12:35 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524143349.02d778e8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 15:12:36 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"2n_721.0.e41.ZGyp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50628
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:

>[Rennie] should be basing his opinion on his own examination of *both* 
>sides of the controversy... and yet he won't go and read the papers 
>himself?  Bizarre.

Actually, he said in his first letter that he did "look over a number of 
the offerings" at LENR-CANR.org, but he found them unconvincing. He has not 
told anyone which papers he read, and he has not revealed any technical 
reasons for his doubts. Actually, as I said in my rebuttal, it is even 
worse: he has not made any falsifiable statements. It is literally 
impossible to urge with him. (I assume this is deliberate, and he is 
evading the issue. Either that, or he does not understand the concept of a 
"falsifiable argument.")

Mike Staker congratulated Rennie for his ability to absorb scientific 
literature 1000 times faster than Staker can. If Rennie were capable of 
writing a coherent, falsifiable, genuine technical critique after "looking 
over" papers for one or two days, it would be world record. He would be a 
polymath.


>I wish he had simply cleared up the mystery in his letters to Jed.  On
>what is his judgement of LENR based?

I think his position is pretty clear. He is going with the majority 
opinion. He does not hide that fact. Actually, it is a reasonable argument, 
but he should admit it is very weak. I often go along with the majority 
opinion because I know nothing about the subject, but I always admit that 
is a weak argument. For example, I doubt the Mills theory is right because 
many experts tell me he can't be. That is reasonable but so weak it is only 
little better than a guess, or flipping a coin. The problem is that 
information is cheap and accessible, that the world overwhelms any reader 
with millions of "facts." We cannot begin to verify each fact or each 
textbook law. We cannot work through the logic behind every theory, or 
study every experiment. As T. Kuhn pointed, there is always contrary 
evidence, and always inexplicable gaps in a theory. We must take for 
granted 99.99% of what we read.

Most of the time it makes little difference whether we are right or wrong. 
Even when a whacky notion plays a vital role in your job, things often work 
out okay anyway. Your misguided answer may be close enough to give a 
workable answer and keep you out of trouble. It is rare that a person is 
catastrophically wrong and it has some major impact on society. When 
someone at the CIA concludes that Iraq has tons of WMD, and it turns out 
Iraq has nothing, it has a huge impact. When a CIA analyst is equally wrong 
about the next election in Japan, or the grape harvest in Peru, it makes no 
difference. It just happens that when the editor of SciAm is wrong about 
CF, *that* makes a difference.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 12:31:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA15284;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 12:30:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 12:30:26 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524151631.02d55a88 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 15:21:18 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Correction
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524143349.02d778e8 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"JxhE-3.0.kk3.HXyp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50629
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>Actually, as I said in my rebuttal, it is even worse: he has not made any 
>falsifiable statements. It is literally impossible to urge with him.

Meant ARGUE with him. Sorry about that.

Argue in the philosophic sense: "give evidence of; put forth reasons for or 
against; debate." Not argue as in yelling and carrying on like a four year 
old. I don't do that more than once or twice a year.

Note that Rennie's statements such as "cold fusion is like creationism" are 
not falsifiable because they are too vague. The meaning cannot be pinned 
down, unless he elaborates and cites specific instances. Anything resembles 
anything else: a fish *is* like a bicycle in some ways. To make this into a 
genuine argument, Rennie must specify why, when, where and how he thinks CF 
resembles creationism, and he has to present examples from the literature 
on CF and creationism.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 12:35:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA17346;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 12:34:02 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 12:34:02 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 15:53:49 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEBGDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524140949.02d75430 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"heMIh2.0.yE4.gayp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50630
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed writes:
>That's not fair. I only take that position when I am not, in fact,
>competent to judge the issues. If I feel capable of taking one side or
>another, I state that clearly. Perhaps I am often guilty of thinking I know
>more than I do, and taking sides when I should not, but it is not fair to
>suggest I hide behind expert opinions.

I'm not judging you, or Rennie for that matter. I certainly
don't expect either of you, as journalists, to have an
extensive grasp of the issues. Actually, you're an Advocate,
rather than a Journalist, so I EXPECT partisan rhetoric from you.
Nothing wrong there.

Your comments on Mill's theories come to mind, often you state
that you cannot judge them and so rely on others
opinions. I don't have any problem with that. But you can't
really take Rennie to task for this either.

>I thought this was the best outcome I could hope for. In two days, readers
>have downloaded 1,049 copies of the Rennie letters, which is good for us.

So Rennie was right then in his assumption that the goal
was to ridicule them to promote LENR-CANR???? It's a
safe strategy, as it's easy to goad the centrists into
rejecting you, but that's not very fair either (grin).

OK, this is sounding too much like a personal attack,
which it certainly isn't, so lest I dig my own hole too
deep I'll go back to the important issue.

>I understand that Rennie is a businessman, and he cannot endanger his
>magazine by publishing a positive article about CF. He could not publish
>even one sentence without bringing down the wrath of the APS and many major
>advertisers.

On the contrary. If an article was written as Ed Storms describes,
the result would be great controversy and increased readership
of both SciAm and LENR-CANR. Look, a publishing company pays Rennies
salary, not the APS or Bob Parks. And besides, he'd be getting
their (APS) opinions too, so no one could claim SciAm was advocating.
Trust me on this one Jed, they're hurting for eyeballs over
there. I'm pretty shocked you couldn't spin some kind of
story from them out of the work you've done for LEN-CANR.
Clearly SOMETHING is happening, even to a non-scientist
such as Rennie.

That said, I'd expect the article to be slanted towards the
CF rejecting scientists, as the majority of scientists feel
this way and such would have to be reflected in the article.
That's a shame, but it's the price you'll be paying to
get more of your CF papers into peoples hands. You ever
heard the definition of a pioneer? He's the guy with
all the arrows sticking out of his ass. You get used
to it after a while...

K.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 13:26:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA15209;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 13:25:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 13:25:35 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524154523.02d82a98 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 16:25:40 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEBGDKAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524140949.02d75430 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"0qvga3.0.Zj3._Kzp-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50631
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>Your comments on Mill's theories come to mind, often you state that you 
>cannot judge them and so rely on others opinions. I don't have any problem 
>with that. But you can't really take Rennie to task for this either.

I take Rennie to task for this. When I comment on Mills, I always bend over 
backwards to make it clear this is mere opinion, without credible, 
technical justification. If he said that about CF, he would be far more 
fair and evenhanded than he is.

Also, I have zero emotional investment in my opinions about the Mills 
theory, as I have often made clear. I could not care less whether it is 
correct or not. Whereas it seems clear from Rennie's tone that he *does* 
have an emotional investment in his views of CF.

Note that I do admit to an emotional investment in CF experiments. 
Experiments matter to me, because they may affect society and the ecology.

I am not a member of the congregation at the Church of Physics Theory. The 
squabbles & passions that ignite between members is no concern of mine. Any 
textbook theory that works pretty well most of the time is fine with me. As 
I said last year, Guy Murchie pointed out that navigators still use the 
Ptolemaic system. They treat the world as if it were flat, and the sun and 
stars revolve around it. That's not "wrong" or crazy. They are not members 
of the Flat Earth Society. It is convenient for them, and right enough for 
their purposes. Whether it is actually right in some sense  is an obscure 
philosophic issue. Navigators don't care, and neither do I.


> >I thought this was the best outcome I could hope for. In two days, readers
> >have downloaded 1,049 copies of the Rennie letters, which is good for us.
>
>So Rennie was right then in his assumption that the goal
>was to ridicule them to promote LENR-CANR????

I told him the goal. I made it clear that I was pleased to "elicit 
responses" from him, that I planned to publish his comments, and that some 
readers would agree with him, some would find him ridiculous, and some 
infuriating. The goal was to reveal his attitude and his ideas to the 
world, and to compare and contrast them to my own. The second goal, 
obviously, was to drum up more interest in the web site.


>On the contrary. If an article was written as Ed Storms describes, the 
>result would be great controversy and increased readership of both SciAm 
>and LENR-CANR. Look, a publishing company pays Rennies salary, not the APS 
>or Bob Parks.

Bob *Park*, not Parks. The publishing company would get into very hot water 
if it allowed a semi-positive article about CF. The APS and many major 
advertisers would lambast it. Thousands of subscribers would angrily cancel 
their subscriptions. Competing magazines and journals would play up the 
story gleefully, and try to grab as much market share as they could. Ed 
Storms and I have spoken with various journalists and science writers who 
published meek, middle of the road articles. They got in serious trouble. 
Very Important People came down hard on them with unveiled threats.

What would you expect? This is real life. Hundreds of millions of dollars 
in research funding would be jeopardized at the DoE and elsewhere. People's 
careers and reputations would be threatened. Rennie himself would come off 
looking like an idiot for his previous published attacks. There is not a 
chance in the world he would allow anything like Ed's proposed article.

Beyond the DoE, we face the wrath of the oil, coal and nuclear industry. 
These are the most violent, destructive, powerful and ruthless people on 
earth. They run the administration. They think nothing of instigating a $70 
billion war for business purposes. They would not hesitate to crush the 
SciAm if it crossed them. CF can never begin to overcome these barriers 
except by first appealing to the general public -- voters and consumers. 
They are the only group more powerful than the DoE, Exxon, the Vice 
President and OPEC.


>And besides, he'd be getting their (APS) opinions too, so no one could 
>claim SciAm was advocating.

EVERYONE would say they have lost their minds. The APS would never deign to 
enter into a discussion in the first place. It is beneath their dignity to 
acknowledge that the CF debate exists.


>Trust me on this one Jed, they're hurting for eyeballs over there.

They would be destroyed if they ran the article Ed suggests. They know that 
as well as I do. In a sense I sympathize with Rennie, but on the other 
hand, he helped bring about this mess, and he has benefited from the 
anti-CF hysteria.


>Clearly SOMETHING is happening, even to a non-scientist such as Rennie.

He does not think so! I am sure he is being honest when he says it is all 
nonsense, no better than creationism. People like him have no inkling they 
may be wrong about CF. It has never crossed their minds. They have often 
told me so, and it pretty clear from their actions. As Hitler boasted of 
himself, they move with the sublime assurance of a sleepwalker.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 16:21:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA07397;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 16:19:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 16:19:44 -0700
Message-ID: <3ECFF0D8.CC30DC80 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 16:23:46 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: knagel gis.net
CC: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEBFDKAA.knagel gis.net>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------35A46EC053BF10B6F791E814"
Resent-Message-ID: <"q_SBk2.0.Np1.Fu_p-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50632
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.
--------------35A46EC053BF10B6F791E814
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Keith,
In your e-mail you asked to see my letter to Mr. Rennie in which I suggested
that Scientific American publish an article about cold  fusion co-authored by a
skeptic and a believer.  This is attached below.  Mr. Rennie rejected the idea
for the reasons he made clear in his exchange with Jed.

I have much sympathy for Mr. Rennie, indeed for any writer who attempts to
present cold fusion accurately.  The skeptics have done a good job of creating
a myth that is now believed by the general population as well as by the
ordinary scientist.  Because it is a myth, it has no relationship to the ideals
that science uses to judge reality.  This is why agreements based on these
ideals will have no effect.  Once a myth is believed, the subject falls outside
of any rational discussion.  The issue becomes a matter of faith, much like
beliefs held by religious fanatics.  While this form of insanity is
inconvenient to people who want cold fusion to be accepted, it raises several
interesting questions.  How did the skeptics go about creating the myth and why
were they so successful?  How does a person go about destroying a myth?
Perhaps if we could answer these questions, we might be more successful in
getting cold fusion accepted.

Regards,
Ed


4/25/03
> >> Dear Mr. Rennie,
> >
> >Thank you for your reply to my Letter to the Editor .  If I understand your
> >approach to LENR debate correctly, you do not personally see any
evidence
> >in the hundreds of papers that support the effect and the absence of
> >general acceptance of the field makes you reluctant to address this issue
> >in Scientific American.   Essentially, you are saying that Scientific
> >American is a follower, not a leader in presenting new ideas in science.
> >After all, if the leaders in science can not accepted an idea, how can an
> >editorial staff be expected to come to a more accurate conclusion? While
I
> >think this is a reasonable approach for such a magazine to take, it does
> >not fully answer the issue I raised in my letter.
> >
> >Respected scientists have on many occasions been completely wrong
about the
> >reality of "novel" ideas and, because of their great influence, have made
> >science look silly to later generations.  This is a fact that my letter
> >addressed.  The question is, how should new ideas be handled by science
so
> >that trust and respect can be maintained? How much debate should be
allowed
> >about controversial subjects in conventional scientific literature?  At
the
> >present time, the amount of allowed debate seems to me to be very
small for
> >most subjects that fall outside of accepted ideas.  When such debate
does
> >occur, it can only be found in unconventional publications read by only a
> >few people.  I ask you, is this a healthy condition for science?  Would not
> >science be better served if controversial issues could be occasionally
> >discussed in an even handed way in such publications as Scientific
> >American.  By even handed, I mean the rejecting view point would be
> >acceptable to skeptics while the side supporting the idea would be
> >acceptable to the "believers".  This is in contrast to what is usually
> >done, if it is done at all, where a skeptic presents both sides of the
> >argument.
> >
> >I would like to suggest the following.  The process called LENR has now
> >acquired a level of understanding that warrants its serious
reexamination.
> >In addition, the clean energy this process promises is essential in light
> >of the present situation with respect to our increasingly limited oil
> >supply and its location.  Most scientists who might support the reality of
> >the LENR process have very little knowledge about what is known, in
spite
> >of over 77,000 papers that have now been down loaded from the website.
If
> >you agree that these conclusions are even partially true, I suggest
> >Scientific American publish an article about the subject coauthored by a
> >skeptic and a believer, wherein the reality of the phenomenon would be
> >debated.  The magazine would not have to come out on either side of the
> >issue, but be an honest broker of information about an increasingly
> >important subject.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Edmund Storms

Keith Nagel wrote:

> Hi All.
>
> Having read the material Jed has posted, I'm underwhelmed.
>
> Rennie is pretty clear from the start about his position,
> which I will summarize as follows.
>
> 1) I (Rennie) am a journalist
> 2) I'm NOT a scientist
>         so it follows that
> 3) I CAN'T judge the papers by their scientific merit.
> 4) As a journalist, I must rely on authoritative sources.
> 5) Those sources tell me LENR-CANR is bad science.
> 6) So I report this.
>
> These positions shouldn't be so alien to Jed, he uses
> them himself on occasion but substitutes authorities more to
> his liking in step 5.
>
> Let me tell you, as one who is
> indirectly familiar with SciAm's staff ( secretaries
> tongues will wag, and remember I'm right here in
> town with them ), they're struggling to gain readership.
> The glory days of SciAm are long gone, leaving
> sometime during the 80's with C.L. Strong. The journal
> is filled with ads now, and rather than position themselves
> as a text for serious scientists, they pursue the
> "Discover" and "Popular Science" markets.
>
> There is common interest here, Jed. Controversy sells
> magazines, and creates web traffic. That you couldn't
> come to a better outcome surprises me.
>
> I'm curious why Ed's suggestion was rejected. Can we see
> that response from Rennie? THAT'S the one Rennie should be
> taken to task on, as it's a reasonable request and
> one which would benefit SciAm as much as LENR-CANR.org.
> Why was this rejected???
>
> K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Beaty [mailto:billb eskimo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 12:25 PM
> To: vortex-l eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: More from Rennie (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> > Sci. Am. editor Rennie sent me some more e-mail messages. They are
> > remarkably candid and revealing. I packaged the entire discussion in a new
> > document:
> >
> > http://lenr-canr.org/AppealandSciAm.pdf
>
> They're VERY interesting.
>
> He seems to base his opinion of LENR only upon what others think; others
> who very probably have never read the papers.  He should be basing his
> opinion on his own examination of *both* sides of the controversy... and
> yet he won't go and read the papers himself?  Bizarre.  Perhaps this a
> case of "my mind is made up, so don't bother me with evidence found
> later!"  Or perhaps he's waiting for OTHER magazine editors to publish
> articles about the positive evidence before even questioning his own
> position.  Bizarre for a journalist to have such an attitude, and triply
> bizarre for anyone associated with science.
>
> Well, New Scientist had their short article out in March.  Heh.  Perhaps
> this just proves that New Scientist staff is incompetent?  If so, then
> that's a classic example of the "experimenter's regress"  problem.
>
> If we become certain that LENR doesn't exist, then when Schwinger and
> Storms and SRI later present positive evidence for it, this is not
> evidence, instead it is "evidence."  In other words, it just proves their
> own incompetence.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, all the papers
> supporting the phenomenon are seen as simple evidence of experimenter
> incompetence.  In that case the reliability of the labs reporting a
> replication mean nothing.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, then positive
> replications are evidence of incompetence.  In that case no amount of
> positive evidence can *ever* be convincing.  A pre-existing conviction
> that LENR is bogus acts as a mental filter.  All positive evidence is seen
> as corrupt, and then is rejected unread.  In that case the negative
> evidence builds up, but the positive evidence does not.
>
> But where did such a pre-existing conviction come from?  In science it's
> wrong to first adopt a viewpoint and then to use the selection of evidence
> in order to support that viewpoint.  Politicians do it.  The legal system
> is based on it.  Science is totally different: a bend-over-backwards
> search for the truth rather than a defense of a an existing position
> during a debate.  If one claims to be scientific, yet also adopts a
> position not based on evidence, then that is pseudoscience.  It is a
> particular form of pseudoscience known widely as "Cargo Cult Science."
> One essential element is missing: the no-holds-barred search for truth.
>
> This illustrates that it's enormously important for science workers to
> remain tenative and unprejudiced.  If they fail to do this, then they'll
> start using self-persuasion tactics such as reading only the material
> which supports their position, while at the same time refusing to read
> material written by opponents.  Mr. Rennie has apparently fallen into this
> trap.  I could be mistaken though.  Has he read the several books which
> support LENR?  Or does he exclusively read material which supports the
> anti-LENR position?  If the latter, then he's involved with Cargo Cult
> Science.
>
> Why would anyone ever adopt a firm position and start selecting evidence?
> One reason is ridicule.  It's a known phenomenon in sociology.
>
> Once a person has ridiculed a particular concept, that person is trapped.
> They've surrendered their objectivity and their self-image is on the line.
> A huge conflict of interest exists because, if their ridicule was wrong,
> it's an embarrassing error of major proportion, and they've opened
> *themselves* up as a target for ridicule.  Once such a conflict of
> interest exists, only an overwhelming amount of contrary evidence can ever
> sway them into reexamining their position.  The practice of ridicule very
> often leads to a firmly closed mind, so scientists should avoid such
> behavior at all costs.
>
> One major mistake he made:  saying that he needs no justification for his
> position.  Totally wrong.  His position is not proper science;  he's not
> reviewing both sides of the evidence while calmly revising his opinion
> when new evidence comes in.  Instead he takes a stance of *active
> disbelief*, even hostility, then refuses to examine evidence which might
> damage this position.  Strong levels of belief and disbelief BOTH require
> detailed justification.  The only position which doesn't require
> justification is the scientific one: refusing to make judgements when
> evidence is lacking.  He certainly hasn't refused to make judgements.
> Yes, it is up to the LENR researchers to present evidence, it is not up to
> the scientific community to disprove unsupported claims.  But his position
> is nothing like that of a scientist. Instead he mysteriously "knows" that
> LENR is bogus, and when LENR researchers present evidence, he bad-mouths
> it and refuses to inspect it.
>
> I wish he had simply cleared up the mystery in his letters to Jed.  On
> what is his judgement of LENR based?  Perhaps he wants to hide his
> reasoning because it will fall apart in the light of day.  Perhaps it's
> from the following.
>
> If we're to actively disbelieve the LENR papers, on what should we base
> our disbelief?
>
>   1. We all know that only Pons and Fleichman presented positive results,
>      and none of the attempted replications produced any similar effects.
>      (Wrong, as shown by the briefest inspection of the long list of
>      research papers.)
>
>   2. The rest of the scientific community knows that LENR doesn't exist.
>      That many smart people can't possibly be wrong.  (Bad move.  This is
>      like reviewing a book by talking to lots of other people who never
>      read it either.  Where is the large group of experts who have
>      actually read any of the positive results?  Do they even know that
>      the papers exist?  R. Feynman had harsh words to say about this sort
>      of pseudoscience, re. the parable of the Emperor's Nose.)
>
>   3. Nobody offered a mechanism whereby fusion can occur at such low
>      energy.   (Bad reasoning.   Galileo's whispered response shows the
>      great flaw in the above thinking: "and yet it moves."  Galileo
>      didn't propose a mechanism.  Science doesn't insist on knowing
>      mechanisms before accepting evidence!  What if this wasn't the case?
>      This would mean that the scientific community of the time should
>      rightly have turned their back on Galileo, only to embrace the modern
>      heliocentric viewpoint after Newton proposed a mechanism fifty years
>      later.  No!  Observations don't magically become real only after a
>      theory is developed to explain them.)
>
>   4. Pons and Fleichman spent all that money, yet where's the fusion-
>      powered home furnace?   (Bad reasoning.  Here's an analogy to
>      illustrate.  What if the scientific community had ridicule
>      Becquerel's crazy claim that mysterious rays were emitted by a
>      common mineral called pitchblende?  Ridicule was a danger, since he's
>      proposing an instance of a perpetual motion machine.   Fortunately
>      his claim was trivial to reproduce.  But imagine what might have
>      happened if it wasn't.  In that case, should his colleagues reject
>      evidence on the grounds that he is unable to build a uranium-powered
>      furnace?  Obviously not.  We shouldn't reject LENR claims while
>      while requiring that all new phenomena be easy to harness and
>      engineer.  And also note that Bequerel committed a high crime: he
>      proposed no airtight theory nor identified a sensible mechanism when
>      reporting his evidence!  His evidence triggered a decades-long
>      search for a mechanism.  The LENR papers did not.  Ask yourself
>      why, then go out and find a solid answer.)
>
>   6. Only crackpots come out in support of LENR.  (Wrong.  Before his
>      death, Julian Schwinger was a supporter on the theory side.  SRI
>      and NRL reproduced the phenomenon and recommended that studies
>      continue.  So did one of the country's top electrochemists J. O.
>      Bockris.  And on the public information side, Sir Arthur C. Clarke
>      has come out as a major supporter.  Ah.  But because of "experimenter
>      regress", if we decide that LENR is bogus, this just means that these
>      people are all fools.  #6 above is circular reasoning: only crackpots
>      support LENR because anyone who supports LENR is defined as being a
>      crackpot.)
>
>   7. If LENR is real, then Alchemy really exists!  We'd have to rewrite
>      everything we know about chemistry in the everyday world!
>      (Alchemy is blasphemy, and LENR supporters are heretics?  In science,
>      ever it was thus: most revolutionary discoveries were blasphemy.
>      Continental drift is the poster child for this. The above isn't an
>      argument against LENR, instead it's an argument that LENR, if real,
>      will trigger the next scientific revolution.  Yes, we all knew this.)
>
>   8. Pons and Fleichman saw neutrons.  Then they didn't.  And the neutron
>      output was vastly too low to explain the excess heat as having
>      nuclear origin.  Then they saw gammas at one energy.  When someone
>      showed that the energy was wrong for that sort of reaction, their
>      next paper showed the curves moved to the right place.  Doesn't this
>      prove their incompetence?  (Maybe, but maybe also it demonstrates the
>      pressures and rushed publication of the times, and demonstrates a
>      trial and error process of discovery which always exists but is
>      usually hidden behind a polished research paper.  Only their initial
>      results, the thermal results, stood the test of time, and it was only
>      later that other 'nuclear ash' such as He4 and Tritium were measured
>      and found.)
>
>  9.  Major labs showed that LENR doesn't exist.  That's what led to the
>      ERAB report which condemned the whole affair.   (Yes, but this falls
>      into the "experimenter's regress" problem:  if we know that LENR is
>      real, then when major labs cannot replicate yet a few individuals
>      succeed, then perhaps it means that the major labs didn't call up
>      Pons/Fleichman and ask about the various techniques needed for
>      success.  Yet if LENR *is( bogus, then it means that the major labs
>      did perform the experiment correctly, and anyone announcing a
>      successful replication has made a major error.   Which position is
>      right?  We cannot know, since we would first have to know in advance
>      if LENR is real!  In other words, in order to properly judge
>      evidence, in order to know if LENR is real, we have to first know
>      whether LENR is real.  That's the experimenters' regress.)
>
>  10. The Japanese poured huge amounts of money into LENR research.  Then
>      they gave up.  If LENR is so real, why didn't a well-funded program
>      demonstrate this?   (Good question.  It had better not be rhetorical.
>      Why did the Japanese effort fail?  I'm not familiar with the issue
>      myself.  There could be many answers, so we'd better investigate and
>      not simply take it as proof that LENR is bogus.   Perhaps the
>      project was bogged down by politics?  Strapped with the sort of
>      active hostile disbelief so prevalent in the USA?  Bad luck in using
>      palladium from sources later proved to contain unknown contaminants?
>      Refusal to contact Pons/Fleichman or other successful experimenters
>      to find out the needed techniques?  Or perhaps it was a competent
>      demonstration that LENR doesn't exist.  Further info is needed. )
>
>  11. If LENR is real, where is all the evidence in support of this
>      position?  ( It's at http://lenr-canr.org   Ah, but anyone who finds
>      positive evicence for LENR has simply revealed themselves to be a
>      crackpot?  By definition, that website contains papers written by
>      crackpots with scientific credentials?  So it would seem, but only if
>      we take an initial position that LENR is bogus. )
>
> OK, so far I see no reason for adopting a stance of active and hostile
> disbelief.  Perhaps Mr. Rennie will wish to submit some info which will
> cause me to take his position.  Jed's article is now in a public place.
> In my opinion it looks pretty bad that Mr. Rennie can't instantly give
> clear and convincing reasons why he has made such a firm judgement that
> LENR is nothing but a mistake.  If he reads this, perhaps he can replace
> my above list with something sound.
>
> (((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
> William J. Beaty               http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
> beaty chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
> billb eskimo.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
> 206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

--------------35A46EC053BF10B6F791E814
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

--------------35A46EC053BF10B6F791E814--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 24 22:31:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA07941;
	Sat, 24 May 2003 22:29:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 22:29:31 -0700
Message-ID: <000201c3227e$cb400520$aeceadcb office>
Reply-To: "Robert Beasley" <robert natvita.co.nz>
From: "Robert Beasley" <robert natvita.co.nz>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770@pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030524151631.02d55a88@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Correction
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 11:36:46 +1200
Organization: natvita
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: <"TsrNF2.0._x1.wI5q-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50633
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mail was checked for viral content =nil

Thank you. That
 clarifies that?
Please give a similiar determination (explanation) of cold fusion so that
others can progress in understanding this emerging EM science. Vortex-l
jumps sciences and EM science like "creationism" jumps the lot so please
inherit us all in your reply.
Thank you again.


Telephone 649-4442944
Fax  649-4441121

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 7:21 AM
Subject: Correction


> I wrote:
>
> >Actually, as I said in my rebuttal, it is even worse: he has not made any
> >falsifiable statements. It is literally impossible to urge with him.
>
> Meant ARGUE with him. Sorry about that.
>
> Argue in the philosophic sense: "give evidence of; put forth reasons for
or
> against; debate." Not argue as in yelling and carrying on like a four year
> old. I don't do that more than once or twice a year.
>
> Note that Rennie's statements such as "cold fusion is like creationism"
are
> not falsifiable because they are too vague. The meaning cannot be pinned
> down, unless he elaborates and cites specific instances. Anything
resembles
> anything else: a fish *is* like a bicycle in some ways. To make this into
a
> genuine argument, Rennie must specify why, when, where and how he thinks
CF
> resembles creationism, and he has to present examples from the literature
> on CF and creationism.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 07:24:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA06557;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 07:22:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 07:22:44 -0700
Message-ID: <3ED0D1CA.2020600 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 10:23:06 -0400
From: Terry Blanton <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524140949.02d75430 pop.mindspring.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030524154523.02d82a98@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"QLZTA1.0.9c1.p6Dq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50634
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> They would be destroyed if they ran the article Ed suggests. They know 
> that as well as I do. In a sense I sympathize with Rennie, but on the 
> other hand, he helped bring about this mess, and he has benefited from 
> the anti-CF hysteria. 


How about a compromise?  You pick out the three strongest articles which 
support LENR-CANR.  They should be authored by scientists whose 
reputation is well known.  Then ask Rennie to publish, in SciAm letters 
to the editor section, your letter with the URLs which asks readers to 
explain why the results of the experiments are wrong.

Rennie is off the hook; but, he hedges his reputation when the world 
finds out the effect is real.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 09:02:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA17769;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 09:01:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 09:01:30 -0700
Message-ID: <3ED0DBA5.63A76DA2 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 09:07:07 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Off topic
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------836578827FD4BEA46E14A640"
Resent-Message-ID: <"HAOFY2.0.XL4.PZEq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50635
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.
--------------836578827FD4BEA46E14A640
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Here is a statement by Senator Byrd that is off topic but
well worth reading.  Structural changes are being made in
our society and in our government by ignorant men who are
driven by self interest and ideology of the worst kind.
These changes are going to have  profound and devastating
effects on us all.   Senator Byrd, who before the war saw
the folly of the war plans,  once again gives warning.

Once again we see myths being created by the government for
the purpose of self interest.  This process is now occurring
at many levels, not just with respect to cold fusion, and is
effective because the average American is so uneducated
about politics, world history, and science.  Myths can only
be created where ignorance rules and fear is present.
Rulers have always known this fact and have exploited it to
their advantage.  Now it is our turn to be manipulated on a
grand scale, in this case by the oil interests with the help
of the various religions.  Unfortunately, a person who is
susceptible to believing a myth is unaware of this
limitation, much like a person who has received a suggestion
while under hypnosis.  That is why logical argument has no
effect once the damage has been done.  The myth is destroyed
only after reality has revealed just how false the myth
really is, usually after great damage has been done in the
process.  In the case of cold fusion, I believe the myth
will be destroyed only after a working device can be made
that is obvious to the average moron.  Meanwhile the known
facts will be acquired by the younger generation and the few
people in science who are not susceptible to myths, some of
whom will create the working device.

Ed


Published on Wednesday, May 21, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
The Truth Will Emerge
by US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Remarks - May 21, 2003

"Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again, - -
The eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among his worshippers."

Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to
obscure it.
Distortion only serves to derail it for a time.  No matter
to what lengths
we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows,
truth has a way
of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.

But the danger is that at some point it may no longer
matter.  The danger is
that damage is done before the truth is widely realized.
The reality is
that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts
and go along
with whatever distortion is currently in vogue.  We see a
lot of this today
in politics.  I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever
have believed --
right on this Senate Floor.

Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator
that the
American people may have been lured into accepting the
unprovoked invasion
of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing
International law,
under false premises.  There is ample evidence that the
horrific events of
September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch
public focus from
Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September
11th attacks, to
Saddam Hussein who did not.  The run up to our invasion of
Iraq featured the
President and members of his cabinet invoking every
frightening image they
could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of
germ warfare, to
drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major
cities.  We were
treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam
Hussein's direct
threat to our freedoms.  The tactic was guaranteed to
provoke a sure
reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of
post traumatic
stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911.  It
was the
exploitation of fear.  It was a placebo for the anger.

Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has
seemed to refute
the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has been
brushed aside.
Instead of addressing the contradictory evidence, the White
House deftly
changes the subject.  No weapons of mass destruction have
yet turned up, but
we are told that they will in time.  Perhaps they yet will.
But, our costly
and destructive bunker busting attack on Iraq seems to have
proven, in the
main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the
urgent reason to
go in.  It seems also to have, for the present, verified the
assertions of
Hans Blix and the inspection team he led, which President
Bush and company
so derided.  As Blix always said, a lot of time will be
needed to find such
weapons, if they do, indeed, exist.  Meanwhile Bin Laden is
still on the
loose and Saddam Hussein has come up missing.

The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world,
over and over
again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people
and the world from
terrorism.  It assiduously worked to alarm the public and
blur the faces of
Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually
became one.

What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is
that Iraq was no
immediate threat to the U.S.  Ravaged by years of sanctions,
Iraq did not
even lift an airplane against us.  Iraq's threatening
death-dealing fleet of
unmanned drones about which we heard so much morphed into
one prototype made
of plywood and string.  Their missiles proved to be outdated
and of limited
range.  Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology
and our well
trained troops.

Presently our loyal military personnel continue their
mission of diligently
searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only
fertilizer, vacuum
cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried
swimming pool.
They are misused on such a mission and they continue to be
at grave risk.
But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as
justification for a
preemptive invasion  has become more than embarrassing.  It
has raised
serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use
of power.  Were
our troops needlessly put at risk?  Were countless Iraqi
civilians killed
and maimed when war was not really necessary?  Was the
American public
deliberately misled?  Was the world?

What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that
we are
"liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we
have so
euphemistically attached to ourselves.  True, we have
unseated a brutal,
despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow up of
freedom,
self-determination and a better life for the common people.
In fact, if the
situation in Iraq is the result of "liberation," we may have
set the cause
of freedom back 200 years.

Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi
people, water
is scarce, and often foul, electricity is a sometime thing,
food is in short
supply, hospitals are stacked with the wounded and maimed,
historic
treasures of the region and of the Iraqi people have been
looted, and
nuclear material may have been disseminated to heaven knows
where, while
U.S. troops, on orders, looked on and guarded the oil
supply.

Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's
infrastructure and
refurbish its oil industry are awarded to Administration
cronies, without
benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S. steadfastly
resists offers of
U.N. assistance to participate.  Is there any wonder that
the real motives
of the U.S. government are the subject of worldwide
speculation and
mistrust?

And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S.
appears to be
pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government.  Jay Garner
has been
summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too clear that
the smiling face
of the U.S. as liberator is quickly assuming the scowl of an
occupier.  The
image of the boot on the throat has replaced the beckoning
hand of freedom.
Chaos and rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S.
soldiers try to
sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease.
"Regime change" in
Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an occupying
military force
and a U.S. administrative presence that is evasive about if
and when it
intends to depart.

Democracy and Freedom cannot be force fed at the point of an
occupier's gun.
To think otherwise is folly.  One has to stop and ponder.
How could we have
been so impossibly naive?  How could we expect to easily
plant a clone of
U.S. culture, values, and government in a country so riven
with religious,
territorial, and tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S.
motives, and so at
odds with the galloping materialism which drives the
western-style
economies?

As so many warned this Administration before it launched its
misguided war
on Iraq, there is evidence that our crack down in Iraq is
likely to convince
1,000 new Bin Ladens to plan other horrors of the type we
have seen in the
past several days.  Instead of damaging the terrorists, we
have given them
new fuel for their fury.  We did not complete our mission in
Afghanistan
because we were so eager to attack Iraq.  Now it appears
that Al Queda is
back with a vengeance. We have returned to orange alert in
the U.S., and we
may well have destabilized the Mideast region, a region we
have never fully
understood.  We have alienated friends around the globe with
our dissembling
and our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who
may not see
things quite our way.

The path of diplomacy and reason have gone out the window to
be replaced by
force, unilateralism, and punishment for transgressions.  I
read most
recently with amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our
longtime friend
and strategic ally.  It is astonishing that our government
is berating the
new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in
accordance with its own
Constitution and its democratic institutions.

Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as
countries move
ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to ward off a
possible
preemptive strike from a newly belligerent U.S. which claims
the right to
hit where it wants.  In fact, there is little to constrain
this President.
Congress, in what will go down in history as its most
unfortunate act,
handed away its power to declare war for the foreseeable
future and
empowered this President to wage war at will.

As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are
reluctant to ask
questions which are begging to be asked.  How long will we
occupy Iraq?  We
have already heard disputes on the numbers of troops which
will be needed to
retain order.  What is the truth?  How costly will the
occupation and
rebuilding be?  No one has given a straight answer.  How
will we afford this
long-term massive commitment, fight terrorism at home,
address a serious
crisis in domestic healthcare, afford behemoth military
spending and give
away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has climbed
to over $340
billion for this year alone?  If the President's tax cut
passes it will be
$400 billion.  We cower in the shadows while false
statements proliferate.
We accept soft answers and shaky explanations because to
demand the truth is
hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.

But, I contend that, through it all, the people know.  The
American people
unfortunately are used to political shading, spin, and the
usual chicanery
they hear from public officials.  They patiently tolerate it
up to a point.
But there is a line.  It may seem to be drawn in invisible
ink for a time,
but eventually it will appear in dark colors, tinged with
anger.  When it
comes to shedding American blood - - when it comes to
wreaking havoc on
civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous
dissembling is not
acceptable.  Nothing is worth that kind of lie - - not oil,
not revenge, not
reelection, not somebody's grand pipedream of a democratic
domino theory.

And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see
so often of late
by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition
quiet for just
so long.  Because eventually, like it always does, the truth
will emerge.
And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will
fall.



--------------836578827FD4BEA46E14A640
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

--------------836578827FD4BEA46E14A640--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 11:50:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA20230;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 11:49:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 11:49:18 -0700
Message-ID: <000701c322ee$32de5be0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: "vortex-L" <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Subject: how to dissolve americium
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 14:48:13 -0400
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: <"VEq2F3.0._x4.j0Hq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50636
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear chaps,

I am trying to get some americium from smoke detector elements into
solution.  I have tried nitric, HCl, sulfuric, acetic, aqua regia, and none
seem to be working.  Any good chemist out there know what a preferred method
or medium would be?

Best,

NR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 13:06:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA20185;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 13:04:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 13:04:35 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030525153846.00ab5d28 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 16:04:42 -0400
To: "Robert Beasley" <robert natvita.co.nz>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Correction
In-Reply-To: <000201c3227e$cb400520$aeceadcb office>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0305240015290.11016-100000 eskimo.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030522161111.0287d770 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030524151631.02d55a88 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"K6rFR.0.Jx4.I7Iq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50637
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robert Beasley wrote:

>Please give a similiar determination (explanation) of cold fusion so that
>others can progress in understanding this emerging EM science.

By "explanation" I presume you mean a theory or mechanism that explains how 
cold fusion works. There is no such thing as far as I know. Some 
theoreticians have proposed models, but I do not think there is any 
agreement on which, if any, is correct.

As I said in my responses to Rennie, cold fusion is an experimental 
finding, not a theory. Creationism and Darwinian evolution are both 
theories -- attempts to explain data. Cold fusion *is* data. The only way 
to prove that CF does not exist is to demonstrate specific errors in the 
experiments. That's why I was bugging Rennie to tell me what he thinks is 
wrong with Iwamura's work. As far as I know, the only scientist who ever 
published a paper claiming he found errors in experiments was the late D. 
Morrison, in the paper I referenced in the message to Rennie.

This distinction between theory and experiment is somewhat artificial. It 
is somewhat arbitrary. All instruments have a "theory of operation" which 
really is a theory, except that no one questions it. For example, as I 
pointed out to Rennie, the calorimeters used in many cold fusion 
experiments are based on the laws of thermodynamics. If the second law is 
discovered to be inoperative, most calorimeter results would be meaningless.

This reminds me of an old joke. People of my mother's generation had a more 
relaxed sense of hygiene than squeamish modern folks. She thought nothing 
of using a common dipper and a bucket of water, or washing a cutting knife 
in the stream while slicing watermelon. She would say, "I don't belive in 
the germ theory." In 1925, the germ theory still was a theory in some ways. 
The Koch Postulates are somewhat theoretical. They do not call for 
completely observed chain of causality. Koch did not demand direct 
microscopic observations of an infection in progress, or knowledge of the 
specific processes that a bacterium uses to destroy a healthy organism. 
Nowadays, I suppose we probably have direct observation of bacteria causing 
infections and illness, so it is not "the germ theory" anymore, but rather 
the observation that germs cause illness.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 14:55:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA02448;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 14:55:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 14:55:19 -0700
Message-ID: <3ED13BC8.196456F8 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 14:55:20 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Off Topic by Edmund Storms
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"4hoOE3.0._b.6lJq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50638
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

May 25, 2003

Vortex,

Thanks to Storms for his comments and posting of Senator Byrd's remarks.

I find both to be highly relevant to the cold fusion/LENR/CANR and the
American scenes. It has resonance with my feelings and beliefs of late
and since 1989.
Thanks.

-ak-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun May 25 19:55:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA15430;
	Sun, 25 May 2003 19:53:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 19:53:18 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: how to dissolve americium
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:13:12 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEBJDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-reply-To: <000701c322ee$32de5be0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"vPqLc1.0.0n3.T6Oq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50639
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hey Nic.

Sounds like you tried the lot. Is the material
encased in a ceramic or plastic carrier?
Maybe that's the problem. I think the smoke
detector manufactures go to great lengths
to prevent you from doing what you are doing (grin).
And dare I ask, what is that you are doing???

Strangely enough, my Merc index doesn't list
solvents as such, but it does describe a variety of
solvated forms...you could oxidize the material
by heating, which would help get it into solution,
just bear in mind how dangerous this is.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Reiter [mailto:nreiter woh.rr.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 2:48 PM
To: vortex-L
Subject: how to dissolve americium


Dear chaps,

I am trying to get some americium from smoke detector elements into
solution.  I have tried nitric, HCl, sulfuric, acetic, aqua regia, and none
seem to be working.  Any good chemist out there know what a preferred method
or medium would be?

Best,

NR


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 26 07:39:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA10344;
	Mon, 26 May 2003 07:36:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 07:36:26 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030526102058.02d87ae0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 10:36:27 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <3ED0D1CA.2020600 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030524140949.02d75430 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030524154523.02d82a98 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"uFpC02.0.XX2.gPYq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50640
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>How about a compromise?  You pick out the three strongest articles which 
>support LENR-CANR.  They should be authored by scientists whose reputation 
>is well known.  Then ask Rennie to publish, in SciAm letters to the editor 
>section . . .

You could suggest this to Rennie I guess. My impression is that he is 
absolutely convinced CF is bunk, and he will not publish a word about 
it.  His mind is made up. There is nothing Storms or I can say -- or 
anything we can quote from Schwinger -- that will sway his opinion one 
iota. My messages had no impact on him. Take the dispute about the Wright 
brothers. I told him that the Sci. Am. could have gotten the facts any time 
during or after the summer of 1904, so the 1906 article was absurd. The 
Wrights were completely open. They gave comprehensive information and 
demonstrations to many people. I pointed to books and statements from the 
leading experts, including Orville Wright himself. As you saw, Rennie did 
not believe a word of this. He is convinced that his predecessor was right. 
He will never look up what Wright or Tom Crouch said, even though I handed 
him the references and page numbers in my paper. If we cannot get him to 
look up a simple matter of fact -- an uncontroversial fact that anyone 
familiar with the history of early aviation can confirm -- what chance is 
there he will examine cold fusion data? As Schiller said, "Against 
stupidity the gods themselves fight in vain."

Frankly I was surprised Rennie took the time to write to me, and to Storms 
and Staker. (And perhaps to others I have not heard from).

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 26 10:35:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA07120;
	Mon, 26 May 2003 10:33:52 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 10:33:52 -0700
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <122.22bae10a.2c03a9d3 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 13:33:07 EDT
Subject: I know how Jed feels
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_122.22bae10a.2c03a9d3_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10638
Resent-Message-ID: <"Dg_3e1.0.mk1.__aq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50641
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_122.22bae10a.2c03a9d3_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Dr. Znidarsic,

We are sorry to inform you that your manuscript is not
considered suitable for publication in Physical Review A.  A
strict criterion for acceptance in this journal is that
manuscripts must convey new physics.  To demonstrate this fact,
existing work on the subject must be briefly reviewed and the
author(s) must indicate in what way existing theory is
insufficient to solve certain specific problems, then it must be
shown how the proposed new theory resolves the difficulty.  Your
paper does not satisfy these requirements, hence we regret that
we cannot accept it for publication.

Yours sincerely,

Bernd Crasemann
Editor
Physical Review A


--part1_122.22bae10a.2c03a9d3_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Dear Dr. Znidarsic,<BR>
<BR>
We are sorry to inform you that your manuscript is not<BR>
considered suitable for publication in Physical Review A.&nbsp; A<BR>
strict criterion for acceptance in this journal is that<BR>
manuscripts must convey new physics.&nbsp; To demonstrate this fact,<BR>
existing work on the subject must be briefly reviewed and the<BR>
author(s) must indicate in what way existing theory is<BR>
insufficient to solve certain specific problems, then it must be<BR>
shown how the proposed new theory resolves the difficulty.&nbsp; Your<BR>
paper does not satisfy these requirements, hence we regret that<BR>
we cannot accept it for publication.<BR>
<BR>
Yours sincerely,<BR>
<BR>
Bernd Crasemann<BR>
Editor<BR>
Physical Review A<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_122.22bae10a.2c03a9d3_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 26 11:54:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA13135;
	Mon, 26 May 2003 11:52:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:52:09 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.1.20030526204626.00a75230 pop.onlinehome.de>
X-Sender: cc8592609-688 pop.onlinehome.de
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 20:55:22 +0200
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Michael Huffman <knuke sumosound.de>
Subject: Re: how to dissolve americium
In-Reply-To: <000701c322ee$32de5be0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"0cNg7.0.5D3.P9cq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50642
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 14:48 25.05.2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Dear chaps,
>
>I am trying to get some americium from smoke detector elements into
>solution.  I have tried nitric, HCl, sulfuric, acetic, aqua regia, and none
>seem to be working.  Any good chemist out there know what a preferred method
>or medium would be?
>
>Best,
>
>NR

Ahoy Nick,

   If you are attempting what I think you are, then I would advise simply 
grinding the americium/carrier elements into a fine powder, and letting it 
soak in distilled water overnight.  I don't have any reference material at 
hand, but if any of the daughter products of the americium include radium 
or radon gas then will you have more than enough stuff in the water to 
demonstrate the principle.  I would also advise just using the water 
(remove the powder), and shielding everything (except for the counter 
probes, of course).  I did a similar experiment in 96 or 97 using 
yellowcake, and it nearly killed me.

It works.  Good luck,

Knuke
   

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon May 26 12:21:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA26560;
	Mon, 26 May 2003 12:19:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 12:19:43 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500baf818869a9d [12.110.74.47]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:23:02 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: I know how Jed feels
Resent-Message-ID: <"XrTOR.0.wU6.EZcq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50643
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 1:33 PM 5/26/3, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
>Dear Dr. Znidarsic,
>
>We are sorry to inform you that your manuscript is not
>considered suitable for publication in Physical Review A.  A
>strict criterion for acceptance in this journal is that
>manuscripts must convey new physics.  To demonstrate this fact,
>existing work on the subject must be briefly reviewed and the
>author(s) must indicate in what way existing theory is
>insufficient to solve certain specific problems, then it must be
>shown how the proposed new theory resolves the difficulty.  Your
>paper does not satisfy these requirements, hence we regret that
>we cannot accept it for publication.


This is useful and constructive criticism.  Simply pick a constant that
your theory predicts to a much higher precision than given in the
literature and also then research prior work done on that constant.  You
can then fulfill the above criteria by referencing the work found and by
predicting the new value to a high degree of accuracy.  This then provides
fodder for physical research to veryfy or discredit the theory.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 08:49:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA28613;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 08:46:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 08:46:50 -0700
Message-ID: <3ED38783.C18FFD53 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 08:42:59 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW     Friday, 23 May 03]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"-fH_E3.0.v-6.gXuq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50644
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, 23 May 03
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 08:41:51 -0400
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 23 May 03   Washington, DC
          
1. NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS: NO NUCLEAR TESTS UNLESS CONGRESS SAYS SO.
The once-secret Nuclear Posture Review called for development of
a new class of small nukes for bunker-busting (WN 15 Mar 02), but
newer studies indicate that high-yield earth-penetrating weapons
might be needed.  No problem, the administration said, we'll just
develop those too.  The first step was to lift the 1993 ban on
low-yield weapons.  Of course, new weapons must still be tested. 
Efforts by the Democrats to retain the ban failed, but they did
succeed in passing an amendment that would require Congressional
approval before testing.  The same requirement applies to the
high-yield bunker busters.  That would seem to give Congress the
power to block new weapons, but observers note that since 9/11
it's probably much easier to rally public support for testing.

2. PUBLIC SUPPORT: THE MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY COLORING BOOK.   
This year's celebration of Public Service Recognition Week, we
confess, slipped by without our notice.  It is celebrated each
year during the first week of May to honor government employees.
We were reminded of our negligence this week when we received a
copy of the Missile Defense Agency Coloring Book, prepared just
for the occasion.  The first page is President Ronald Reagan; it
continues with an Aegis missile being launched from a ship, and
an airborne laser zapping an enemy missile just after launch. You
can't recruit your supporters too young.  The coloring book came
complete with crayons, which were identified as "made in China."
                               
3. PRIVACY: PENTAGON RENAMES ITS INVASIVE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM.
By any other name, this program still smells.  Back in January,
the Senate banned deployment of the Total Information Awareness
Program, headed by the infamous John Poindexter of Iran Contra
fame, until the Pentagon provides an analysis of its impact on
civil liberties (WN 24 Jan 03).  The Bush administration tried
again as part of an intelligence authorization bill with an even
more invasive version(WN 2 May 03).  Same result.  Now it's back
with a report and a new name: "Terrorist Information Awareness
Program."  "The previous program," a spokesman said, "created the
impression that TIA was to be used for developing dossiers on
U.S. citizens."  Where could people have gotten such an idea?

4. LIE DETECTORS: "I CAN'T HELP IT IF MY PREFRONTAL CORTEX LIED."
The only thing worse than a lie detector that doesn't work would
be one that does.  The last bit of your privacy would be taken.
Relax, we're not there yet.  Now that the National Academy of
Sciences has effectively trashed the polygraph (WN 18 Apr 03),
alternative lie detectors are cropping up.  One, described in
Technology Review for June, senses blood volume and level of
oxygenation in the prefrontal cortex.  The claim is that you have
to think harder to lie, but we all know people for whom it seems
effortless.  WN offers a one-year free subscription to the first
person who demonstrates he or she can beat it. 

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: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 10:06:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA12121;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 10:04:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 10:04:08 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 13:23:43 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEBNDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <3ECFF0D8.CC30DC80 ix.netcom.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Lwt-Q2.0.Jz2.8gvq-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50645
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Ed.

Ed writes:
>How does a person go about destroying a myth?

A few weeks ago, my lover and I took the trek out to
the interim MOMA in Queens, for the Picasso/Matisse show.
As you might imagine, such a show brings out crowds
of people, a much broader cross section of people than
would be drawn by Balthus, say. And the reaction of
the crowd was most illustrative of the problem we are
dealing with.

Some people were wearing these strange headphone like
objects, which provided you with a running monologue
concerning the piece you would be viewing. Wearers tended
to clot about certain paintings, and could present a
formidable barrier to inspection. Until my lover
discovers, that she could walk right in front
of them without noticeable reaction. What could be
so engrossing about the headphone object? Some
careful questioning produces a litany of complaints
about the artists sexual jousting. So here is one
way of substituting myth for primary experience.

Others are staring at the wall, which is a good start,
but it's not the paintings... It's the text next to
them, put there by the Museum staff for your edification
and amusement. And it makes you want to just, for
a brief moment, reach out and "twist" the heads ever
so slightly, a few degrees, so they're facing the
masters work eye to pigment. But that's not
going to happen.

Finally there are those who look at the paintings.
A mixed bag, some too young to know better,
others too old to waste time on the frailties of the
museum staff and critics. All share a common thread,
the desire for an unmediated experience.
In this way is great Art and Science similar;
seeking unvarnished truth from direct experience.

Is the artist a fraud? A great master? The earpiece
tells you one thing. The text, another. Bullshit,
I assert. Your eye is the only judge.

There will never be many lovers of fine art, or
experimental science for that matter. The reason
for this is simple. So few are willing to look.
There is no need for a great conspiracy, this
is something we do to ourselves.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:storms2 ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 6:24 PM
To: knagel gis.net
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More from Rennie (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)


Dear Keith,
In your e-mail you asked to see my letter to Mr. Rennie in which I suggested
that Scientific American publish an article about cold  fusion co-authored
by a
skeptic and a believer.  This is attached below.  Mr. Rennie rejected the
idea
for the reasons he made clear in his exchange with Jed.

I have much sympathy for Mr. Rennie, indeed for any writer who attempts to
present cold fusion accurately.  The skeptics have done a good job of
creating
a myth that is now believed by the general population as well as by the
ordinary scientist.  Because it is a myth, it has no relationship to the
ideals
that science uses to judge reality.  This is why agreements based on these
ideals will have no effect.  Once a myth is believed, the subject falls
outside
of any rational discussion.  The issue becomes a matter of faith, much like
beliefs held by religious fanatics.  While this form of insanity is
inconvenient to people who want cold fusion to be accepted, it raises
several
interesting questions.  How did the skeptics go about creating the myth and
why
were they so successful?  How does a person go about destroying a myth?
Perhaps if we could answer these questions, we might be more successful in
getting cold fusion accepted.

Regards,
Ed


4/25/03
> >> Dear Mr. Rennie,
> >
> >Thank you for your reply to my Letter to the Editor .  If I understand
your
> >approach to LENR debate correctly, you do not personally see any
evidence
> >in the hundreds of papers that support the effect and the absence of
> >general acceptance of the field makes you reluctant to address this issue
> >in Scientific American.   Essentially, you are saying that Scientific
> >American is a follower, not a leader in presenting new ideas in science.
> >After all, if the leaders in science can not accepted an idea, how can an
> >editorial staff be expected to come to a more accurate conclusion? While
I
> >think this is a reasonable approach for such a magazine to take, it does
> >not fully answer the issue I raised in my letter.
> >
> >Respected scientists have on many occasions been completely wrong
about the
> >reality of "novel" ideas and, because of their great influence, have made
> >science look silly to later generations.  This is a fact that my letter
> >addressed.  The question is, how should new ideas be handled by science
so
> >that trust and respect can be maintained? How much debate should be
allowed
> >about controversial subjects in conventional scientific literature?  At
the
> >present time, the amount of allowed debate seems to me to be very
small for
> >most subjects that fall outside of accepted ideas.  When such debate
does
> >occur, it can only be found in unconventional publications read by only a
> >few people.  I ask you, is this a healthy condition for science?  Would
not
> >science be better served if controversial issues could be occasionally
> >discussed in an even handed way in such publications as Scientific
> >American.  By even handed, I mean the rejecting view point would be
> >acceptable to skeptics while the side supporting the idea would be
> >acceptable to the "believers".  This is in contrast to what is usually
> >done, if it is done at all, where a skeptic presents both sides of the
> >argument.
> >
> >I would like to suggest the following.  The process called LENR has now
> >acquired a level of understanding that warrants its serious
reexamination.
> >In addition, the clean energy this process promises is essential in light
> >of the present situation with respect to our increasingly limited oil
> >supply and its location.  Most scientists who might support the reality
of
> >the LENR process have very little knowledge about what is known, in
spite
> >of over 77,000 papers that have now been down loaded from the website.
If
> >you agree that these conclusions are even partially true, I suggest
> >Scientific American publish an article about the subject coauthored by a
> >skeptic and a believer, wherein the reality of the phenomenon would be
> >debated.  The magazine would not have to come out on either side of the
> >issue, but be an honest broker of information about an increasingly
> >important subject.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Edmund Storms

Keith Nagel wrote:

> Hi All.
>
> Having read the material Jed has posted, I'm underwhelmed.
>
> Rennie is pretty clear from the start about his position,
> which I will summarize as follows.
>
> 1) I (Rennie) am a journalist
> 2) I'm NOT a scientist
>         so it follows that
> 3) I CAN'T judge the papers by their scientific merit.
> 4) As a journalist, I must rely on authoritative sources.
> 5) Those sources tell me LENR-CANR is bad science.
> 6) So I report this.
>
> These positions shouldn't be so alien to Jed, he uses
> them himself on occasion but substitutes authorities more to
> his liking in step 5.
>
> Let me tell you, as one who is
> indirectly familiar with SciAm's staff ( secretaries
> tongues will wag, and remember I'm right here in
> town with them ), they're struggling to gain readership.
> The glory days of SciAm are long gone, leaving
> sometime during the 80's with C.L. Strong. The journal
> is filled with ads now, and rather than position themselves
> as a text for serious scientists, they pursue the
> "Discover" and "Popular Science" markets.
>
> There is common interest here, Jed. Controversy sells
> magazines, and creates web traffic. That you couldn't
> come to a better outcome surprises me.
>
> I'm curious why Ed's suggestion was rejected. Can we see
> that response from Rennie? THAT'S the one Rennie should be
> taken to task on, as it's a reasonable request and
> one which would benefit SciAm as much as LENR-CANR.org.
> Why was this rejected???
>
> K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Beaty [mailto:billb eskimo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 12:25 PM
> To: vortex-l eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: More from Rennie (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> > Sci. Am. editor Rennie sent me some more e-mail messages. They are
> > remarkably candid and revealing. I packaged the entire discussion in a
new
> > document:
> >
> > http://lenr-canr.org/AppealandSciAm.pdf
>
> They're VERY interesting.
>
> He seems to base his opinion of LENR only upon what others think; others
> who very probably have never read the papers.  He should be basing his
> opinion on his own examination of *both* sides of the controversy... and
> yet he won't go and read the papers himself?  Bizarre.  Perhaps this a
> case of "my mind is made up, so don't bother me with evidence found
> later!"  Or perhaps he's waiting for OTHER magazine editors to publish
> articles about the positive evidence before even questioning his own
> position.  Bizarre for a journalist to have such an attitude, and triply
> bizarre for anyone associated with science.
>
> Well, New Scientist had their short article out in March.  Heh.  Perhaps
> this just proves that New Scientist staff is incompetent?  If so, then
> that's a classic example of the "experimenter's regress"  problem.
>
> If we become certain that LENR doesn't exist, then when Schwinger and
> Storms and SRI later present positive evidence for it, this is not
> evidence, instead it is "evidence."  In other words, it just proves their
> own incompetence.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, all the papers
> supporting the phenomenon are seen as simple evidence of experimenter
> incompetence.  In that case the reliability of the labs reporting a
> replication mean nothing.  Since we know that LENR is bogus, then positive
> replications are evidence of incompetence.  In that case no amount of
> positive evidence can *ever* be convincing.  A pre-existing conviction
> that LENR is bogus acts as a mental filter.  All positive evidence is seen
> as corrupt, and then is rejected unread.  In that case the negative
> evidence builds up, but the positive evidence does not.
>
> But where did such a pre-existing conviction come from?  In science it's
> wrong to first adopt a viewpoint and then to use the selection of evidence
> in order to support that viewpoint.  Politicians do it.  The legal system
> is based on it.  Science is totally different: a bend-over-backwards
> search for the truth rather than a defense of a an existing position
> during a debate.  If one claims to be scientific, yet also adopts a
> position not based on evidence, then that is pseudoscience.  It is a
> particular form of pseudoscience known widely as "Cargo Cult Science."
> One essential element is missing: the no-holds-barred search for truth.
>
> This illustrates that it's enormously important for science workers to
> remain tenative and unprejudiced.  If they fail to do this, then they'll
> start using self-persuasion tactics such as reading only the material
> which supports their position, while at the same time refusing to read
> material written by opponents.  Mr. Rennie has apparently fallen into this
> trap.  I could be mistaken though.  Has he read the several books which
> support LENR?  Or does he exclusively read material which supports the
> anti-LENR position?  If the latter, then he's involved with Cargo Cult
> Science.
>
> Why would anyone ever adopt a firm position and start selecting evidence?
> One reason is ridicule.  It's a known phenomenon in sociology.
>
> Once a person has ridiculed a particular concept, that person is trapped.
> They've surrendered their objectivity and their self-image is on the line.
> A huge conflict of interest exists because, if their ridicule was wrong,
> it's an embarrassing error of major proportion, and they've opened
> *themselves* up as a target for ridicule.  Once such a conflict of
> interest exists, only an overwhelming amount of contrary evidence can ever
> sway them into reexamining their position.  The practice of ridicule very
> often leads to a firmly closed mind, so scientists should avoid such
> behavior at all costs.
>
> One major mistake he made:  saying that he needs no justification for his
> position.  Totally wrong.  His position is not proper science;  he's not
> reviewing both sides of the evidence while calmly revising his opinion
> when new evidence comes in.  Instead he takes a stance of *active
> disbelief*, even hostility, then refuses to examine evidence which might
> damage this position.  Strong levels of belief and disbelief BOTH require
> detailed justification.  The only position which doesn't require
> justification is the scientific one: refusing to make judgements when
> evidence is lacking.  He certainly hasn't refused to make judgements.
> Yes, it is up to the LENR researchers to present evidence, it is not up to
> the scientific community to disprove unsupported claims.  But his position
> is nothing like that of a scientist. Instead he mysteriously "knows" that
> LENR is bogus, and when LENR researchers present evidence, he bad-mouths
> it and refuses to inspect it.
>
> I wish he had simply cleared up the mystery in his letters to Jed.  On
> what is his judgement of LENR based?  Perhaps he wants to hide his
> reasoning because it will fall apart in the light of day.  Perhaps it's
> from the following.
>
> If we're to actively disbelieve the LENR papers, on what should we base
> our disbelief?
>
>   1. We all know that only Pons and Fleichman presented positive results,
>      and none of the attempted replications produced any similar effects.
>      (Wrong, as shown by the briefest inspection of the long list of
>      research papers.)
>
>   2. The rest of the scientific community knows that LENR doesn't exist.
>      That many smart people can't possibly be wrong.  (Bad move.  This is
>      like reviewing a book by talking to lots of other people who never
>      read it either.  Where is the large group of experts who have
>      actually read any of the positive results?  Do they even know that
>      the papers exist?  R. Feynman had harsh words to say about this sort
>      of pseudoscience, re. the parable of the Emperor's Nose.)
>
>   3. Nobody offered a mechanism whereby fusion can occur at such low
>      energy.   (Bad reasoning.   Galileo's whispered response shows the
>      great flaw in the above thinking: "and yet it moves."  Galileo
>      didn't propose a mechanism.  Science doesn't insist on knowing
>      mechanisms before accepting evidence!  What if this wasn't the case?
>      This would mean that the scientific community of the time should
>      rightly have turned their back on Galileo, only to embrace the modern
>      heliocentric viewpoint after Newton proposed a mechanism fifty years
>      later.  No!  Observations don't magically become real only after a
>      theory is developed to explain them.)
>
>   4. Pons and Fleichman spent all that money, yet where's the fusion-
>      powered home furnace?   (Bad reasoning.  Here's an analogy to
>      illustrate.  What if the scientific community had ridicule
>      Becquerel's crazy claim that mysterious rays were emitted by a
>      common mineral called pitchblende?  Ridicule was a danger, since he's
>      proposing an instance of a perpetual motion machine.   Fortunately
>      his claim was trivial to reproduce.  But imagine what might have
>      happened if it wasn't.  In that case, should his colleagues reject
>      evidence on the grounds that he is unable to build a uranium-powered
>      furnace?  Obviously not.  We shouldn't reject LENR claims while
>      while requiring that all new phenomena be easy to harness and
>      engineer.  And also note that Bequerel committed a high crime: he
>      proposed no airtight theory nor identified a sensible mechanism when
>      reporting his evidence!  His evidence triggered a decades-long
>      search for a mechanism.  The LENR papers did not.  Ask yourself
>      why, then go out and find a solid answer.)
>
>   6. Only crackpots come out in support of LENR.  (Wrong.  Before his
>      death, Julian Schwinger was a supporter on the theory side.  SRI
>      and NRL reproduced the phenomenon and recommended that studies
>      continue.  So did one of the country's top electrochemists J. O.
>      Bockris.  And on the public information side, Sir Arthur C. Clarke
>      has come out as a major supporter.  Ah.  But because of "experimenter
>      regress", if we decide that LENR is bogus, this just means that these
>      people are all fools.  #6 above is circular reasoning: only crackpots
>      support LENR because anyone who supports LENR is defined as being a
>      crackpot.)
>
>   7. If LENR is real, then Alchemy really exists!  We'd have to rewrite
>      everything we know about chemistry in the everyday world!
>      (Alchemy is blasphemy, and LENR supporters are heretics?  In science,
>      ever it was thus: most revolutionary discoveries were blasphemy.
>      Continental drift is the poster child for this. The above isn't an
>      argument against LENR, instead it's an argument that LENR, if real,
>      will trigger the next scientific revolution.  Yes, we all knew this.)
>
>   8. Pons and Fleichman saw neutrons.  Then they didn't.  And the neutron
>      output was vastly too low to explain the excess heat as having
>      nuclear origin.  Then they saw gammas at one energy.  When someone
>      showed that the energy was wrong for that sort of reaction, their
>      next paper showed the curves moved to the right place.  Doesn't this
>      prove their incompetence?  (Maybe, but maybe also it demonstrates the
>      pressures and rushed publication of the times, and demonstrates a
>      trial and error process of discovery which always exists but is
>      usually hidden behind a polished research paper.  Only their initial
>      results, the thermal results, stood the test of time, and it was only
>      later that other 'nuclear ash' such as He4 and Tritium were measured
>      and found.)
>
>  9.  Major labs showed that LENR doesn't exist.  That's what led to the
>      ERAB report which condemned the whole affair.   (Yes, but this falls
>      into the "experimenter's regress" problem:  if we know that LENR is
>      real, then when major labs cannot replicate yet a few individuals
>      succeed, then perhaps it means that the major labs didn't call up
>      Pons/Fleichman and ask about the various techniques needed for
>      success.  Yet if LENR *is( bogus, then it means that the major labs
>      did perform the experiment correctly, and anyone announcing a
>      successful replication has made a major error.   Which position is
>      right?  We cannot know, since we would first have to know in advance
>      if LENR is real!  In other words, in order to properly judge
>      evidence, in order to know if LENR is real, we have to first know
>      whether LENR is real.  That's the experimenters' regress.)
>
>  10. The Japanese poured huge amounts of money into LENR research.  Then
>      they gave up.  If LENR is so real, why didn't a well-funded program
>      demonstrate this?   (Good question.  It had better not be rhetorical.
>      Why did the Japanese effort fail?  I'm not familiar with the issue
>      myself.  There could be many answers, so we'd better investigate and
>      not simply take it as proof that LENR is bogus.   Perhaps the
>      project was bogged down by politics?  Strapped with the sort of
>      active hostile disbelief so prevalent in the USA?  Bad luck in using
>      palladium from sources later proved to contain unknown contaminants?
>      Refusal to contact Pons/Fleichman or other successful experimenters
>      to find out the needed techniques?  Or perhaps it was a competent
>      demonstration that LENR doesn't exist.  Further info is needed. )
>
>  11. If LENR is real, where is all the evidence in support of this
>      position?  ( It's at http://lenr-canr.org   Ah, but anyone who finds
>      positive evicence for LENR has simply revealed themselves to be a
>      crackpot?  By definition, that website contains papers written by
>      crackpots with scientific credentials?  So it would seem, but only if
>      we take an initial position that LENR is bogus. )
>
> OK, so far I see no reason for adopting a stance of active and hostile
> disbelief.  Perhaps Mr. Rennie will wish to submit some info which will
> cause me to take his position.  Jed's article is now in a public place.
> In my opinion it looks pretty bad that Mr. Rennie can't instantly give
> clear and convincing reasons why he has made such a firm judgement that
> LENR is nothing but a mistake.  If he reads this, perhaps he can replace
> my above list with something sound.
>
> (((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
> William J. Beaty               http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
> beaty chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
> billb eskimo.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
> 206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 16:03:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA22449;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 16:01:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 16:01:28 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030527174958.02f120b8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 19:01:07 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEBNDKAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <3ECFF0D8.CC30DC80 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"4nkqu3.0.UU5.6v-q-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50646
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote a charming description of a visit to an art museum:

>Until my lover discovers, that she could walk right in front of them 
>without noticeable reaction.

I noticed this years ago, but my wife tells me the people are merely being 
polite and they're actually annoyed, so I don't do it anymore. My mother 
once attended the gala opening of an exhibition and got a fine view of the 
paintings, almost like a private showing, even though hundreds of people 
attended. The crowd gathered in the middle of the rooms gossiping and 
carrying on. She worked her way around the edges. Apparently she was the 
only person who wanted to see the pictures.


>What could be so engrossing about the headphone object? Some careful 
>questioning produces a litany of complaints about the artists sexual jousting.

I have always wondered what those gadgets are broadcasting! Are you saying 
you carefully questioned the listeners? Did they let you listen in? does 
the broadcast really describe the artists sex lives? In my experience, 
artists have dull sex lives.


>So here is one way of substituting myth for primary experience.

Indeed. Any description of an artist's sex life is probably a myth.


>Is the artist a fraud? A great master?

Or both.


>There will never be many lovers of fine art, or experimental science for 
>that matter. The reason for this is simple. So few are willing to look.

I think that is because looking at paintings, and painting them, is 
difficult. It reminds me of a Zen Buddhist I once spoke with. I asked him 
what his training was really like. He said people go in expecting to 
commune with nature, as you would while having a quiet picnic in the woods. 
They find themselves instead stranded in a horrific storm, wandering 
hopelessly lost in the wilderness, fighting for their lives instead. It is 
a vivid experience, but not what you bargained for. You go to a museum 
expecting to be amused by Fragonard or Bonnard, but you may find yourself 
looking, staring, *seeing* as if for the first time you saw anything, at 
some unspeakable nightmare by Goya instead.

At best, even without Goya, the experience will be similar to experimental 
science, or writing a book: difficult, time-consuming, frightening and even 
unnatural in a sense. It is rather like climbing mountains; your instinct 
tells you to turn away. The Japanese say don't go poking into the tall 
grass looking for snakes. What do you want with a snake, anyway?

This part is not the problem. Society does not need large numbers of people 
doing unrewarding, unnatural, frightening and frustrating jobs. What we 
need is a small cadre of dedicated, mildly eccentric people painting 
pictures, doing research and climbing mountains. We need to leave them 
alone, give them funding, and let them get on with their work in peace. The 
problem with cold fusion is that we have interfered with them. We do not 
want others to poke in the tall grass either, yet someone must do it.

The proof that science is unpopular and unnatural is clear: It was not 
invented until 400 years ago. For hundreds of thousands of years mankind 
could have invented the scientific method, and he often came close to 
inventing it, yet he shied away, again and again. Civilizations perfected 
countless other institutions, such as poetry, painting, literature, law, 
war, education, architecture, medicine, metallurgy, and countless other 
trades and techniques . . . Yet they always fell short of inventing the 
experimental scientific method. This, despite the fact that science is the 
most useful, powerful and valuable institution of all, and the fact that it 
has helped advance all these other institutions immeasurably.

There is some instinct that makes most men shy away from it. I think the 
essence of our phobia is that science demands that you accept nature as 
your final authority, as your master. Not yourself, or your teacher, or 
anyone else. This was expounded by the first and greatest philosopher of 
science, Francis Bacon:

"MAN, as the minister and interpreter of nature, does and understands as 
much as his observations on the order of nature, either with regard to 
things or the mind, permit him, and neither knows nor is capable of more.

. . . Knowledge and human power are synonymous, since the ignorance of the 
cause frustrates the effect. For nature is only subdued by submission, and 
that which in contemplative philosophy corresponds with the cause, in 
practical science becomes the *rule*."

There are among most radical, revolutionary statements ever uttered. They 
are profoundly disturbing to most people. If the average person today 
understood what Bacon meant, he would angrily reject these ideas.

We hate to surrender authority. We hate to think that our religion, our 
books, laws, observations and any other knowledge may be overthrown by an 
inanimate object -- an experimental device. We hate to think of ourselves 
as subservient to nature. We don't mind being subservient to a conscious 
God who has a purpose and sense of justice, but to be ruled or overruled by 
blind, purposeless, essentially meaningless physical laws upsets most 
people. Every ancient text from every civilization I know describes man as 
the master of the world -- the final authority. To be a scientist, you must 
be willing to let a thermometer overrule your entire life's work. No wonder 
the hot fusion scientists cannot do this! Who could? We are asking too much 
of them. No amount of training could bring them to do this to themselves. 
The first scientist, in that sense, was Kepler, who turned his back on 
years of painstaking labor when he saw that Tycho's observations did not 
fit his model.


>There is no need for a great conspiracy . . .

No, it is just human nature. It held us back for millennia. If we are not 
careful, it will drag us down into the dark ages again. People are capable 
of destroying anything, no matter how beneficial, as Bacon observed. On the 
other hand, this same nature is the only thing that allowed us to escape, 
and make progress in the first place. In any case, there is no better class 
of primates waiting in the wings, so let us hope we can find a way to 
finesse our worst instincts, and extend progress for another generation, 
until we die, and the matter is out of our hands.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 16:18:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA32207;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 16:17:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 16:17:14 -0700
Message-ID: <000801c324a5$f4bdf780$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.1.20030526204626.00a75230 pop.onlinehome.de>
Subject: Re: how to dissolve americium
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 19:16:08 -0400
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: <"80Oaj2.0.8t7.v7_q-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50647
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Thanks Michael,

Actually, I wasn't planning to cavitate... but OOOHH that sounds fun!

I had replied to Keith off-list on this, but I was simply trying to come up
with another radioactive "tracer" or dopant / additive for radiaoctive fungi
experiments...the Sam Faile project.  I think I have pretty well given up on
it - will likely stick with my uranyl acetate and thorium nitrate for now.

On the topic of Dr. Faile though...

The other day, I had been talking with Sam and we got onto the topic of
zeolites and cyclosilicates having nano sized channels for vacuum
experiments or solid state sonoluminescence.  Sam related that years ago, he
had been looking at hydrogen implantation in beryl.  He had taken beryl
crystals, and had baked them at 950C to remove all water from the
cyclosilicate channels.  Thus treated, the crystals become milky white.  He
then found that upon exposing the crystals to hard X ray and gamma
radiation, they temporarily turned a red color, which faded back to white
within hours.  However... during this time, the crystals became
phosphorescent in the blue and near UV.  The effect was dramatic in the
dark - they glowed!  No preferable explanation was ever afforded... another
one of those anomalies that come along in the lab and make you go "hmmm"

strange fun in a strange world

NR

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Huffman" <knuke sumosound.de>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: how to dissolve americium


> At 14:48 25.05.2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >Dear chaps,
> >
> >I am trying to get some americium from smoke detector elements into
> >solution.  I have tried nitric, HCl, sulfuric, acetic, aqua regia, and
none
> >seem to be working.  Any good chemist out there know what a preferred
method
> >or medium would be?
> >
> >Best,
> >
> >NR
>
> Ahoy Nick,
>
>    If you are attempting what I think you are, then I would advise simply
> grinding the americium/carrier elements into a fine powder, and letting it
> soak in distilled water overnight.  I don't have any reference material at
> hand, but if any of the daughter products of the americium include radium
> or radon gas then will you have more than enough stuff in the water to
> demonstrate the principle.  I would also advise just using the water
> (remove the powder), and shielding everything (except for the counter
> probes, of course).  I did a similar experiment in 96 or 97 using
> yellowcake, and it nearly killed me.
>
> It works.  Good luck,
>
> Knuke
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 16:19:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA00973;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 16:19:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 16:19:01 -0700
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: RE: More from Rennie  (hostile disbelief = pseudoscience)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: ID = 909b8a8ff0cae19159d456a4b333f05c
Reply-To: michael.foster excite.com
From: "Michael Foster" <michael.foster excite.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: michael.foster excite.com
X-Mailer: PHP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 
Message-Id: <20030527231825.641123DFB xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 19:18:25 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Message-ID: <"QByII1.0.qE.a9_q-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50648
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Keith Nagel wrote:

> There will never be many lovers of fine art, or
> experimental science for that matter. The reason
> for this is simple. So few are willing to look.
> There is no need for a great conspiracy, this
> is something we do to ourselves.

I couldn't possibly agree with this more, and I know I couldn't possibly have put it as well.

M.





_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue May 27 23:57:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA15841;
	Tue, 27 May 2003 23:56:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 23:56:31 -0700
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Water and High Purity O2
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 16:55:56 +1000
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <q1n8dv8pd9uhovpg7kjkdeomufdti6oi7j 4ax.com>
References: <v01530501bae2792032a0 [12.110.74.105]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530501bae2792032a0 [12.110.74.105]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
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 XAA15779
Resent-Message-ID: <"Xw9q3.0.Rt3.Vs5r-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50649
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 Sat, 10 May 2003 01:43:34 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>> http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf
>
>
>I just happened to find this post buried in spam in my infile.  (Messy! 8^)
>
>This is quite amazing - oxygen coming from BOTH cathode and anode.  The
>obvious question then is: where does the hydrogen go?  SOMETHING has to be
>getting hydrogenated, and that something can thus be used as fuel.

I think they actually recombine the hydrogen in the cell, with oxygen from the air. This produces current which assists in the electrolysis. The net result is that pure oxygen extracted from water is replaced by, otherwise hard to purify, oxygen from the air. It is a means of acquiring very pure oxygen, with relatively less energy input than would normally be required for electrolysis.
[snip]

Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

When you are counting the dead, remember who voted
for the man that made it all possible.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 28 09:33:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA30189;
	Wed, 28 May 2003 09:29:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 09:29:59 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bafa8ce7b588 [12.21.208.55]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 08:33:23 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water and High Purity O2
Resent-Message-ID: <"J42_f1.0.cN7.6GEr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50651
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 4:55 PM 5/28/3, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>>This is quite amazing - oxygen coming from BOTH cathode and anode.  The
>>obvious question then is: where does the hydrogen go?  SOMETHING has to be
>>getting hydrogenated, and that something can thus be used as fuel.
>
>I think they actually recombine the hydrogen in the cell, with oxygen from
>the air. This produces current which assists in the electrolysis. The net
>result is that pure oxygen extracted from water is replaced by, otherwise
>hard to purify, oxygen from the air. It is a means of acquiring very pure
>oxygen, with relatively less energy input than would normally be required
>for electrolysis.


If this is the case, that thay pump air through the anode, or otherwise
into the electrolyte, then why does the article say that oxygen xomes from
the anode?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 28 09:34:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA30176;
	Wed, 28 May 2003 09:29:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 09:29:58 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530501bafa92fb22f7 [12.21.208.55]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 08:33:26 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Water and High Purity O2
Resent-Message-ID: <"z0Z9O.0.QN7.6GEr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50650
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 4:55 PM 5/28/3, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 10 May 2003 01:43:34 -0800:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>> http://www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/factsheets/mulvihill.pdf
>>
>>
>>I just happened to find this post buried in spam in my infile.  (Messy! 8^)
>>
>>This is quite amazing - oxygen coming from BOTH cathode and anode.  The
>>obvious question then is: where does the hydrogen go?  SOMETHING has to be
>>getting hydrogenated, and that something can thus be used as fuel.
>
>I think they actually recombine the hydrogen in the cell, with oxygen from
>the air. This produces current which assists in the electrolysis. The net
>result is that pure oxygen extracted from water is replaced by, otherwise
>hard to purify, oxygen from the air. It is a means of acquiring very pure
>oxygen, with relatively less energy input than would normally be required
>for electrolysis.
>[snip]

Oh, yes, OK, after reading the article again carefully I see that you must
be correct. So, it appears that air then must be provided under pressure to
the cathode so that the oxygen in it can be reduced there.  The cathode
does not produce oxygen.  It appears that the two electrodes must remain
separated by a membrane as with ordinary electrolysis.

Interesting that no nasty nitrogen compounds are created at the cathode.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 28 13:35:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA01189;
	Wed, 28 May 2003 13:32:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 13:32:38 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b1dbafacdac1811 [64.61.197.153]>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 15:34:16 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Where things stand
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3
Resent-Message-ID: <"6SI272.0.RI.bpHr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50653
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I'd like to introduce myself. I'm Thomas Malloy. I'm a natural 
philosopher with an interest in physics. I'm deslexic, and lack the 
ability to reason mathematically. I visualize the mechanisms. When I 
need to I can do simple calculations to see if a proposed mechanism 
has any chance of working.

My Real Estate Broker, Leon and I like to discuss physics. Leon read 
Patterns in the Void, and Entanglement. He finished the mathematics 
core of an electrical engineering. He liked the first 100 pages of 
Randall's book so much that he purchased a bound copy. Leon thinks 
that Randall's work is great. We have been trying to get some 
questions answered.

First of all, I'm surprised that you people are still debating 
whether of not Randall's claims are valid. The BLP website talks 
about independent replication.

Randall says that he is looking for someone to put together a team to 
build a plasmomagnetodynamic electrical generator. We think that this 
is an excellent idea. However when I communicated this idea to 
Randall he ignored me.

I also find Randall's claim of a super hard steel to be fascinating. 
I can think of an application for it. The organization that has a 
need for this material has a relationship with the military, so there 
is lots of money available.

Then there is the NASA funded project to develop a BLP rocket, I have 
a link, but I haven't taken time to check it out.

As I understand it, BLP was successful in getting the patent that 
they applied for. This in spite of the best efforts of Robert Parks 
of the APS to stop it.

While I would love to replicate Randall's technology, it is the 
property of BLP, and if I were to do that, they would be well within 
their rights to order me to cease and desist. On the other hand, 
OTOH, I know what things cost, and BLP has spent a lot on money. I 
would think that the investors would be leaning on Randall to start 
generating a cash flow.

Since I know that you monitor this list Randall, I decided to join up 
and post this and see what response I get.

Thomas Malloy

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed May 28 13:36:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA31658;
	Wed, 28 May 2003 13:29:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 13:29:36 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b1cbafacc71ce0f [64.61.197.153]>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 15:31:08 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: HSG: Re: Onslaught on Dr. Mills
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"Cym-31.0.Uk7.lmHr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50652
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vortexians;

I just posted this, and the following post on the hydrino discussion group.

I assume that it was Peter Zimmerman who posted this.


Now it's perfectly fair to argue that Mills has played around in the
lab, made inspired guesses, and gotten some very interesting chemical
reactions.

Look, Randell  either has produced the novel materials that he says 
he has, or else he is one of the greatest BS artists of all time.

I might argue -- do argue, let's be
honest -- that a man who was so sloppy in the solution of his own
equations might equally well be sloppy in his lab work particularly
since he knew what he wanted the experiments to show.

The forgoing reads like slander to me, sir. Were I in Randell's 
place, you would get a letter from my attorney.

  Experimenter
error and the ability to fool oneself are well known and must be guarded
against.

It isn't himself that he has fooled, it's the investors.

I would like to call your attention my my two previous posts, which 
for some strange reason, never showed up in my in box, and which 
didn't show in the archives either.
but which can be seen at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hydrino/message/6173
in which I raise some questions which I have been attempting to get 
Randell to answer. Since he ignored my previous letters, I've decided 
to go on this forum and see if I can get some straight answers.

The techniques required to protect the results of, for
example, a clinical trial of a new drug are quite complex.  And the
protocol must be adhered to quite carefully for the trials to have validity.

Look, the BLP website claims that they have a reactor which produces 
40 W per CC. Now that is the sort of energy out put that doesn't 
require a bomb calorimeter to determine the energy  out put. Either 
Randell has that, or he doesn't.

I've checked out one FE machine story after anther for the past 
twenty five years. Most of the people making these claims have 
written books, which we term vaporware, in which they spell out their 
theories. However with the exception of the late Paul Brown, of 
Nuclear Solutions, http://www.nucsol.com , I am not aware of any of 
them that have been independently replicated.

I was just on a website, 
http://yowusa.com/Archive/May2003/OverunityKit1/overunitykit1.htm 
were a researcher is claiming to be selling a kit which will produce 
a working version of Tom Bearden's MEG. I've spent hours reading 
Tom's pontifications, and until I see a working version of any of the 
marvelous machines that he describes, in my humble opinion, IMHO, he 
has earned the title of King of the Vaporware Merchants. I sent an 
email to the researcher, Larry Park, and we shall see.

Back to Randell Mills and BLP. Leon, who is teaching me to sell 
houses, and completed the mathematics core of an electrical 
engineering degree, before switching to business management, has been 
reading his book and is very impressed with it. Just as I am with his 
energy out put claims, and his novel materials. This is either real, 
or Randell is going to dethrone Tom.

Peter, you seem like an educated man, what are your credentials?






From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 09:19:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA20388;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 09:16:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 09:16:09 -0700
Message-ID: <000f01c325fd$718067a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: unGLUEable Cracks in the 2nd law?
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 09:14:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C325C2.C21EFE00"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"fmWKw.0.P-4.89Zr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50654
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_000A_01C325C2.C21EFE00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, The Law, is concerned with the flow of =
energy (mass-energy) over time but is usually phrased in the negative - =
i.e. as entropy, which is a measure of disorder, and is said to always =
increase. The Law can also be said to be the "arrow of time." It is so =
carefully worded (or interpreted) that it can never be disproven on any =
local scale, such as here on Earth. In other words, like any religion, =
it is true only because it is not falsifiable. Period.=20

The Law is also a good predictor of the way things have operated in the =
past - thus its popularity amongst the science-elite, but that doesn't =
necessarily mean very much, given that the way we have operated in the =
past has been largely predicated on The Law  to begin with. Will The Law =
predict the way things will operate after a certain amount of =
intelligence has been imbued, such as in the idealization that is known =
as "Maxwell's Demon," that is the real question. In other words, aren't =
we are free to ask if is it a real law or maybe just a generalization =
that has worked so well in the past that we chose to call it a law?

The Second Law says that the entropy of the universe increases over =
time, a progression from a more ordered state to a less ordered state, =
but the first philosophical doubt about that, the first chink,  was the =
discovery of the black hole, which can be said to approach an ultimate =
state of physical order. Not only that, the advent of intelligent life =
has also been decidedly anti-entropic, at  least for the last few =
thousand years on Earth. But in our solar system we can say that things =
are still progressing from a state of order to disorder ...but *on that =
particular scale* alone. Our galaxy, on the other hand, has a proven =
black hole in its center, and EVERY star in it is gravitational bind =
will migrate to that black hole, and if nothing else happened, even =
after every star went dead first,  we could eventually progress to a =
state of near-perfect order in the galaxy.=20

"No problemo" quips the apologist, we will simply redefine the black =
hole to be the ultimate state of DIS-order... but then, we counter, what =
about the fact that even locally, the presence of information can alter =
the progression of entropy decidedly. And space travel allows us to =
escape gravity. The possibility that we might be able in a few hundred =
years to "Terraform" another planet is a first step in decreasing =
entropy...and then we must learn to survive without an active star =
(unless we can capture one). At a smaller level, the cells in one's body =
exist in great order; appearing negentropic, but the legions of =
apologists for The Law (i.e. almost all physicists) will counter that  =
this only happens because the entropy of the rest of the universe is =
increased to a greater amount than the entropy of the biological life is =
decreased.=20

That rationalization is not true IMHO and the one overriding factor that =
works against entropy, that being *information* is always available to =
us to counter entropy, it's just that we presently have too little of =
it. In the case of most living things, most of that  information is =
still carried in genes. But humans have developed methods to transport =
added information in many other forms, including even....photons. The =
problem for us egoists, even aeons into the future (although we will =
always desire to think otherwise) is that the intelligence we have =
already accumulated is so very tiny compared to the intelligence that is =
out there...abroad, as it were, that we will never be able to really =
accept our own relative ignorance.

Amusingly, the science-elite will even venture, from time to time, that =
physics is all-but-dead (meaning completely understood). The cynic =
should counter that the science-elite was saying the same thing a =
hundred years ago, and fifty years ago, etc. and look how far we have =
come since then. The rate of increase in intelligence is exponential =
over time, once it has reached critical mass, and we probably understand =
far less than one percent of all of anything - even physics, so there is =
plenty of "wiggle room" to justify almost any expected outcome which can =
be influenced by the application of intelligence, even the demise of The =
Law.

Furthermore, The Law doesn't say that a new kind of chemical reaction =
can't be overunity in any local environment, so long as all mass, seen =
and unseen decreases.  The implication of this being that if one can =
discover or identify (or even hypothesize ?) a source of unseen mass =
that can be manipulated intelligently, then it might be possible, even =
in chemical reactions, to perform free-energy "magic" ....that which we =
call OU... that which appears to be in violation of The Law.=20

Now if one wants to rationalize using water as a fuel, for instance, =
that is- to apparently decrease the entropy of the most important =
molecule for living beings, then the first thing locally to do is to =
identify a source of mass/energy that can be removed without a great =
deal of obvious disruption (and hopefully even be replaced by exposure =
to the larger environment).  We know the mass of hydrogen and oxygen to =
a fair precision, but we also know that this is an average, and that =
there is an "uncertainty principle" that operates in the measurement of =
this mass/energy, so the most relevant question is this , is the =
"uncertainty" in mass measurement higher than that tiny amount of mass =
lost in accepted chemical reactions? What about molecular uncertainty =
and is there a "hidden" particle that gives to water its unusual =
large-scale stability and cohesive strength? The answer, surprisingly, =
is that in both situations there is plenty of wiggle room.

A *boson* is more than an abstraction, it is an integer-spin particle =
which mediates forces between fermions. Odd spin bosons mediate =
repulsive forces; even spin bosons mediate attractive forces. Bosons =
have symmetric wavefunctions and obey Bose-Einstein statistics. One =
wonders, in the case of R. Mills and his hydrino, why he went to such =
lengths in his OS (orbitsphere model) to suggest that a photon was being =
captured to operate "like a gluon" instead of just inventing a boson =
that has the required mass energy (multiples of 13.6 eV).=20

A "glueball" is a theoretical particle made up entirely of bosons =
(gluons). Lattice quantum chromodynamics calculations of glueball mass, =
lifetime, and decay properties appear to conform to a particle with a =
mass energy of 1710 MeV (another resonance is at 1430 MeV).  Glueballs =
are color singlets and therefore CAN EXIST AS FREE PARTICLES. However, =
their experimental detection following annihilation events is difficult =
since the glueballs mix with quark-antiquark states (like ordinary =
flavor-neutral mesons). The difficulty is therefore determining which =
observed mesons are glueballs and which are the usual quark-antiquark =
state. They are assumed to have a short lifetime, but that has =
apparently not been conclusively demonstrated, and even if true, like =
other short-lived particles, the lifetime may vary considerably in a =
"bound" state.

What are the implications of a minimally bound glueball, captured from =
the free particle state and perhaps bound to large aggregates of common =
molecules, such as water? Glueballs could certainly be created in cosmic =
ray events and captured in the ocean. Are glueballs in any way =
responsible for the unusual stability and large scale structure of =
water, the  network of icosahedral water clusters that Prof. Chaplin has =
identified?
http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html

Or, if not the glueball, does this particle serve as a metaphor for =
another non-boson particle which serves the same purpose (structure of =
water)?

Since the loss of a single glueball is equivalent in mass/energy to =
about a billion combustion reactions, we have a candidate particle for =
the appearance of free-energy in water fuel and now a name to apply (at =
least temporarily) to that particle. Not surprisingly, the glueball may =
also be a particle which can be "naturally" replenished over time by =
exposure to the environment (cosmic and/or solar energy) and then later =
converted into "excess" energy in a supra-chemical reaction.=20

I just wish it had a little sexier name than "glueball"....

Jones


Try to accept that intelligence is abroad...=20
...here, truth is too easy to disprove - its defenses are usually down.=20

with apologies to Steve Aylett




------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C325C2.C21EFE00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>The Second Law of Thermodynamics, <EM>The Law</EM>,&nbsp;is =
concerned with=20
the flow of energy (mass-energy) over time but is usually phrased in the =

negative - i.e. as entropy, which is a measure of disorder, and is said =
to=20
always increase.&nbsp;<EM>The Law </EM>can also be said to be =
the&nbsp;"arrow of=20
time." It is so carefully worded (or interpreted) that it can never be =
disproven=20
on any local scale, such as here on Earth. In other words, like any=20
religion,&nbsp;it is true only because it is not falsifiable. Period. =
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><EM>The Law </EM>is also a good predictor of the way things have =
operated=20
in the past&nbsp;-&nbsp;thus its popularity amongst the science-elite, =
but that=20
doesn't necessarily mean very much,&nbsp;given that the way we have =
operated in=20
the past has been largely predicated on <EM>The Law </EM>&nbsp;to begin =
with.=20
Will <EM>The Law </EM>predict the way things will operate after a =
certain amount=20
of intelligence has been imbued, such as in the idealization that is =
known as=20
"Maxwell's Demon," that is the real question. In other words, aren't we =
are free=20
to ask if&nbsp;is it a real law or maybe just a generalization that has =
worked=20
so well in the past that we chose to call it a law?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The Second Law says that the entropy of the universe increases over =
time, a=20
progression&nbsp;from a more ordered state to a less ordered state, but =
the=20
first philosophical doubt about that, the first chink, &nbsp;was the =
discovery=20
of the black hole, which can be said to approach an ultimate state of =
physical=20
order. Not only that, the advent of intelligent life has also been =
decidedly=20
anti-entropic, at&nbsp; least for the last few thousand years on Earth. =
But=20
in&nbsp;our solar system&nbsp;we can say that things are still=20
progressing&nbsp;from a state of order to disorder ...but *on that =
particular=20
scale* alone. Our galaxy, on the other hand,&nbsp;has a proven black =
hole in its=20
center, and EVERY star in it is gravitational bind will migrate&nbsp;to =
that=20
black hole, and if nothing else happened, even&nbsp;after every star =
went dead=20
first, &nbsp;we could eventually progress to a state of near-perfect =
order in=20
the galaxy. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"No problemo" quips the apologist, we will simply redefine the =
black hole=20
to be the ultimate state of DIS-order... but then, we counter,&nbsp;what =
about=20
the fact that even locally, the presence of information can alter the=20
progression of entropy decidedly. And space travel allows us to escape =
gravity.=20
The possibility that we might be able in a few hundred years to =
"Terraform"=20
another planet is a first step in decreasing entropy...and then we must =
learn to=20
survive without an active star (unless we can capture one). At a smaller =

level,&nbsp;the cells in one's body exist in great order; appearing =
negentropic,=20
but the legions of apologists for <EM>The Law </EM>(i.e. almost all =
physicists)=20
will counter that &nbsp;this only happens because the entropy of the =
rest of the=20
universe is increased to a greater amount than the entropy of the =
biological=20
life is decreased. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>That rationalization is not true IMHO and&nbsp;the one overriding =
factor=20
that works against entropy, that being *information* is always available =
to us=20
to counter entropy, it's just that we presently have too little of it. =
In the=20
case of most living things,&nbsp;most of that &nbsp;<EM>information</EM> =
is=20
still carried in genes.&nbsp;But humans have developed methods to =
transport=20
added information in many other forms, including even....photons. The =
problem=20
for us egoists, even aeons into the future (although we=20
will&nbsp;always&nbsp;desire to&nbsp;think otherwise) is that the =
intelligence=20
we have already accumulated&nbsp;is so very tiny compared to the =
intelligence=20
that is out there...<EM>abroad</EM>, as it were, that we will never be =
able to=20
really accept our own relative ignorance.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Amusingly, the science-elite will even venture, from time to=20
time,&nbsp;that physics is all-but-dead (meaning completely understood). =
The=20
cynic should counter that the science-elite was saying the same thing a =
hundred=20
years ago, and fifty years ago, etc. and look how far we have come since =
then.=20
The rate of increase in intelligence is exponential over time, once it =
has=20
reached critical mass, and we probably understand far less than one =
percent of=20
all of anything - even physics, so there is plenty of "wiggle room" to =
justify=20
almost any expected outcome which can be influenced by the application =
of=20
intelligence, even the demise of <EM>The Law.</EM></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Furthermore, <EM>The Law</EM>&nbsp;doesn't say that a new kind=20
of&nbsp;chemical reaction can't be overunity in any local environment, =
so long=20
as all mass, seen and unseen decreases.&nbsp; The implication of this =
being that=20
if one can discover or identify (or even hypothesize ?) a source of =
unseen mass=20
that can be manipulated intelligently, then it might be possible, even =
in=20
chemical reactions,&nbsp;to perform free-energy "magic" ....that which =
we call=20
OU... that which appears to be in violation of <EM>The Law</EM>. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Now if&nbsp;one wants to rationalize using water as a fuel, for =
instance,=20
that is- to apparently decrease the entropy of the most important=20
molecule&nbsp;for living beings, then the first thing locally to do is =
to=20
identify a source of mass/energy that can be removed without a great =
deal of=20
obvious disruption (and hopefully even be replaced by exposure to the =
larger=20
environment).&nbsp; We know the mass of hydrogen and oxygen to a fair =
precision,=20
but we also know that this is an average, and that there is an =
"uncertainty=20
principle" that operates in the measurement of this mass/energy, so the =
most=20
relevant question is this , is the "uncertainty" in mass measurement =
higher than=20
that tiny amount of mass lost in accepted chemical reactions? What about =

molecular uncertainty and is there a "hidden" particle that gives to =
water its=20
unusual large-scale stability and cohesive strength?&nbsp;The answer,=20
surprisingly, is that in&nbsp;both situations there is plenty of wiggle=20
room.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A *boson* is more than an abstraction, it is an integer-spin =
particle which=20
mediates forces between fermions. Odd spin bosons mediate repulsive =
forces; even=20
spin bosons mediate attractive forces. Bosons have symmetric =
wavefunctions and=20
obey Bose-Einstein statistics. One wonders, in the case of R. Mills and =
his=20
hydrino, why he went to such lengths in his OS (orbitsphere model) to =
suggest=20
that a photon was being captured to operate "like a gluon" instead of =
just=20
inventing a boson that has the required mass energy (multiples of 13.6 =
eV).=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A "glueball" is a theoretical particle made up entirely of bosons =
(gluons).=20
Lattice quantum chromodynamics calculations of glueball mass, lifetime, =
and=20
decay properties appear to conform to a particle&nbsp;with a mass energy =
of 1710=20
MeV (another resonance is at 1430 MeV).&nbsp; Glueballs are color =
singlets and=20
therefore CAN EXIST AS FREE PARTICLES. However, their experimental =
detection=20
following annihilation events is difficult since the glueballs mix with=20
quark-antiquark states (like ordinary flavor-neutral mesons). The =
difficulty is=20
therefore determining which observed mesons are glueballs and which are =
the=20
usual quark-antiquark state. They are assumed to have a short lifetime, =
but that=20
has apparently not been conclusively demonstrated, and even if true, =
like other=20
short-lived particles, the lifetime may vary considerably in a "bound"=20
state.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What are the implications of a minimally bound glueball, captured =
from the=20
free particle state and perhaps bound to large aggregates of common =
molecules,=20
such as water? Glueballs could certainly be created in cosmic ray events =
and=20
captured in the ocean. Are glueballs in any way responsible for the =
unusual=20
stability and large scale structure of water,&nbsp;the &nbsp;network of=20
icosahedral water clusters that Prof. Chaplin has identified?</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/clusters.html">http://www.sbu.ac.uk/wa=
ter/clusters.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Or, if not the glueball, does&nbsp;this particle&nbsp;serve as a =
metaphor=20
for another non-boson particle which serves the same purpose (structure =
of=20
water)?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Since the loss of a single glueball is equivalent in mass/energy to =
about a=20
billion combustion reactions, we have a candidate particle for the =
appearance of=20
free-energy in water fuel&nbsp;and now a name to apply (at least =
temporarily)=20
to&nbsp;that particle.&nbsp;Not surprisingly, the glueball may&nbsp;also =
be a=20
particle&nbsp;which can be "naturally" replenished over time by exposure =
to the=20
environment (cosmic and/or solar energy) and then later&nbsp;converted =
into=20
"excess" energy in a supra-chemical reaction. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I just wish it had a little sexier name than "glueball"....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><EM>Try to accept that intelligence is =
abroad...</EM><EM>&nbsp;</EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM>...here, truth is too easy to disprove - its defenses are =
usually=20
down</EM>. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>with apologies to Steve Aylett</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C325C2.C21EFE00--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 11:39:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA14198;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 11:37:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 11:37:24 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529143551.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:37:09 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Be careful with the Ohmori - Mizuno experiment
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ODfQZ2.0.CT3.WDbr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50655
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Here is a message I sent to JNaudin509 aol.com, regarding this replication:

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfr30.htm


As you know, the glow discharge reaction is quite violent, and the light is 
intense. The discharge may produce strong UV light, even when it does not 
appear generate excess heat. Mizuno suggests wearing UV-blocking 
sunglasses, or placing a screen in front of the cell.

Also, as I am sure you realize, you should stay back from the cell while it 
is running, because the intense heat might fracture the container and spew 
boiling, toxic electrolyte. As a safety precaution, Mizuno runs his cells 
inside a constant-air-temperature test chamber, the size of a small 
refrigerator, with a glass window.

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 13:06:36 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA11993;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 13:05:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 13:05:00 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529155755.02dc9d20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:58:12 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Have you done a blank run?
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 NAA11919
Resent-Message-ID: <"w9CBo1.0.Jx2.iVcr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50656
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear Jean-Louis,

Have you done a blank run with the glow discharge experiment? In other 
words, have you done a run that produced no excess heat? I think it is 
important to post data from a blank run, to demonstrate that your 
calorimetry works correctly. Most of Mizuno's runs do not produce excess 
heat, or they produce intermittent excess heat. He can ensure the run will 
be blank by keeping the temperature below 80° C and the voltage below the 
critical onset level.

Mizuno's cathodes only produce heat when the cathode is enveloped with a 
peculiar, high-temperature, sparkling glow discharge, shown in the 
photographs here:

http://lenr-canr.org/Experiments.htm

See the bottom of this page. Note that most of this run produced no excess 
heat. Your cell may also be producing intermittent excess heat, but you 
only measure enthalpy once, at the end of the experiment, so you could not 
tell. In most tests, I believe Mizuno measured enthalpy from the 
temperature rise during the experiment and added in enthalpy lost to vapor 
afterwards.

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 13:35:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA28440;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 13:31:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 13:31:31 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529162812.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 16:31:26 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Have you done a blank run?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"OtTD61.0.Iy6.Zucr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50657
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Naudin pointed out to me that he has done a calibration:

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/calib.htm

I somehow overlooked this page.

If I understand correctly, this shows a calibration done with an electric 
heater only, not glow discharge electrolysis. There seems to be a light in 
the cell. Perhaps the heater incandesced?

A joule heater calibration is important, but I think it is essential to do 
another calibration with glow discharge electrolysis. Input power during 
glow discharge fluctuates violently, and this may affect the accuracy of 
the power meter.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 13:46:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA03610;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 13:44:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 13:44:30 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529164053.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 16:44:23 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Have you done a blank run?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"8wXZ-2.0.Cu.j4dr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50658
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote:

"If I understand correctly, this shows a calibration done with an electric 
heater only, not glow discharge electrolysis. There seems to be a light in 
the cell. Perhaps the heater incandesced?"

Naudin told me that glow is just spotlight reflections from the wall of the 
lab. Ha! I am so used to seeing glow discharge photos I assumed it was 
coming from inside.

Anyway, I think a calibration with glow discharge electrolysis is called for.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 14:12:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA21459;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 14:09:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:09:42 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Have you done a blank run?
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:29:39 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIECEDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529162812.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"a8rSW.0.AF5.MSdr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50659
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Having achieved overunity, JLN must now
stretch to reach the next summit, unity.

The joule heater is a good start. If I remember
from the website, his current measuring instrument
was derated above ~ 20Khz. And the driver is
a transformer secondary with a diode bridge?
Methinks spark type circuits such as this
are going to require higher frequency measurement
technique.

The Mizuno glow discharge picture Jed linked to
was interesting. What sort of power supply/drive
circuit does he use?

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:JedRothwell mindspring.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 4:31 PM
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Have you done a blank run?


Naudin pointed out to me that he has done a calibration:

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/calib.htm

I somehow overlooked this page.

If I understand correctly, this shows a calibration done with an electric 
heater only, not glow discharge electrolysis. There seems to be a light in 
the cell. Perhaps the heater incandesced?

A joule heater calibration is important, but I think it is essential to do 
another calibration with glow discharge electrolysis. Input power during 
glow discharge fluctuates violently, and this may affect the accuracy of 
the power meter.

- Jed



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 14:26:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA00613;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 14:25:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:25:19 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529171729.02ecd838 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:25:12 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Yet another clarification from Naudin
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"2j6To1.0.T9.-gdr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50660
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jean-Louis Naudin, growing justifiably impatient with me, points out that 
he DID do a low power glow discharge calibration, right here:


http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfrtpwr.htm

TEST RESULT AT LOW POWER


All I can say in my defense -- meekly -- is that these pages keep throwing 
me for a loop. I keep going in circles and finding myself back to the same 
place. I click on something that says:

"(click here to see all the details about this Tiny-Cold Fusion Reactor )."

. . . and somehow I lose track and fail to return, like Hansel and Gretel 
wandering through cyberspace. I will have to make sure I have scrolled up 
and down completely, and covered all links on all pages. Maybe I should 
just print everything.

Anyway, I am glad to see he is replicating Ohmori and Mizuno. I look 
forward to hearing their comments.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 14:37:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA07360;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 14:36:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:36:06 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529172635.02ebc880 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:35:53 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Have you done a blank run?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529155755.02dc9d20 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"DM8tt.0.wo1.5rdr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50661
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>In most tests, I believe Mizuno measured enthalpy from the temperature 
>rise during the experiment and added in enthalpy lost to vapor afterwards.

Whereas Ohmori measures vapor loss continuously, by putting the cell on a 
milligram weight scale, and writing down the temperature every minute. He 
begins when the cell has already reached boiling, and he computes other 
heat losses from the cell after the experiment, based on the cooling curve. 
You might say his approach is the opposite to Mizuno's.


Regarding weight scales, this is getting off topic, but the N. Y. Times 
reports researchers are trying to define an standard for mass:

"Scientists Struggling to Make the Kilogram Right Again"

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/27/science/27KILO.html

The article concludes with a funny comment:


For now, Dr. Davis is willing to set his sights lower in the error-prone 
world of superprecision measurements. "It would be nice," he said, "just to 
have two experiments in the world that agreed with each other."


I do not understand why they are using such large masses of material. I 
would go for milligram samples, instead of a kilogram sphere.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 15:20:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA01217;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 15:18:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:18:44 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529175630.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:18:33 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Have you done a blank run?
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIECEDKAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529162812.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"iwwel2.0.oI.3Ter-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50662
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>The Mizuno glow discharge picture Jed linked to was interesting. What sort 
>of power supply/drive circuit does he use?

The power supply? I never thought about that. Mainly he & I have been 
worried about the various redundant power monitors and meters. We fear the 
meter will underestimate the power. For this experiment . . . I think the 
power supply was, "a Takasago EX-1500H direct current power supply was 
used, with 0.01% load regulation." See:

Mizuno, T., et al., Production of Heat During Plasma Electrolysis. Jpn. J. 
Appl. Phys. A, 2000. 39: p. 6055.

http://jjap.ipap.jp/journal/pdf/JJAP-39-10R/6055.pdf

That's the same power supply I photographed in 1999. (July 12, 1999, 
Image22.jpg) He has installed new meters and data loggers, but I believe 
the power supply is the same.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 16:26:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA05012;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 16:24:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 16:24:42 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Have you done a blank run?
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 19:44:40 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKECGDKAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030529175630.00ab71f8 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"zlyhi.0.7E1.wQfr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50663
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Here's the specs on that power supply.

http://www.takasago-ss.co.jp/eng/dc/ex2.htm

The current shunt listed in the paper, 9081, is
sold as an optional add-on to their pencil hitester.
The hitester is rated for AC 500Hz. The shunt
may be better, but I could find no additional
specs for it.

Getting good HF response from shunts below about
1/10th of an ohm is challenging, 1/100 ohm is about
the limit that I'm comfortable with.

What gear did he switch to?

K.



-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:JedRothwell mindspring.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 6:19 PM
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Have you done a blank run?


Keith Nagel wrote:

>The Mizuno glow discharge picture Jed linked to was interesting. What sort
>of power supply/drive circuit does he use?

The power supply? I never thought about that. Mainly he & I have been
worried about the various redundant power monitors and meters. We fear the
meter will underestimate the power. For this experiment . . . I think the
power supply was, "a Takasago EX-1500H direct current power supply was
used, with 0.01% load regulation." See:

Mizuno, T., et al., Production of Heat During Plasma Electrolysis. Jpn. J.
Appl. Phys. A, 2000. 39: p. 6055.

http://jjap.ipap.jp/journal/pdf/JJAP-39-10R/6055.pdf

That's the same power supply I photographed in 1999. (July 12, 1999,
Image22.jpg) He has installed new meters and data loggers, but I believe
the power supply is the same.

- Jed



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 17:16:28 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA32489;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 17:14:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:14:42 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210100bafc514224fb [192.168.123.4]>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKECGDKAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKECGDKAA.knagel gis.net>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:14:21 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick highsurf.com>
Subject: RE: Have you done a blank run?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA32440
Resent-Message-ID: <"SX9oH1.0.Nx7.n9gr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50664
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I've been busted by that same situation that got Jed - what is it with crackpot physics and web site design? Got flamed for posting that someone didn't include certain details on something when in fact, had I had scrolled WAY down below everything, I would have found that little yellow button camouflaged against the bright plaid page background. Mea culpa or theirs-a culpa?

- RM

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu May 29 19:47:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA19793;
	Thu, 29 May 2003 19:46:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 19:46:07 -0700
Message-ID: <20030530024605.47283.qmail web20809.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 03:46:05 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?millennium?= <unamity yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: want to learn about proton/hydrogen structure?  truth?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Cc: future_energy yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"TSsN-2.0.Ar4.lNir-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50665
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

 
 

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.html

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 10:41:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA08857;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 10:38:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 10:38:57 -0700
Message-ID: <02f101c326d2$154077c0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
From: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: <JNaudin509 aol.com>
Subject: A suggestion
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:37:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.101.98.221] using ID <crquin rogers.com> at Fri, 30 May 2003 13:38:21 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <"WNEdI2.0.GA2.mSvr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50666
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vorts:

I had a thought that I *had* to submit  :-)

A "suggestion" to join JLNaudin's group. Last I checked they had I believe
around 2000 members.

Interesting electrolysis overunity experiments at JLNLabs these days. I
watched as J.L.Naudin took Web Site publishing of his single "lifter"
experiment to well over 100 separate successful replications. Many
individual suggestions and experimental variations led to improvements, and
eventually to interest from the media. I suspect JLN's method of publishing
his own "and others submissions" will inspire similar results over the next
year or so with the "cold fusion" electrolysis experiments. I see
replications and some good ideas for improvements already starting on his
list, and hopefully soon they will come pouring in. Also "hopefully", this
may eventually result in a "ground up" movement for cold fusion after
hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of young people and even children
construct CF cells themselves.  I suggest that all CF interested parties who
wish to add their expertise and/or to help this "ground up" movement to join
the JLN list at YahooGroups.

Perhaps JLN may even start a separate CF List-  as he did for the "Lifters".

Best Regards,
Colin







---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/30/2003

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 11:02:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA24415;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 11:01:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 11:01:12 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530134621.02d85978 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:54:00 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home
Cc: <JNaudin509 aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <02f101c326d2$154077c0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"RXeBM1.0.8z5.bnvr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50667
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Colin Quinney wrote:

>I suspect JLN's method of publishing his own "and others submissions" will 
>inspire similar results over the next year or so with the  "cold fusion" 
>electrolysis experiments.

This would be a welcome development.


>I see replications and some good ideas for improvements already starting 
>on his list, and hopefully soon they will come pouring in. Also 
>"hopefully", this may eventually result in a "ground up" movement for cold 
>fusion after hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of young people and even 
>children construct CF cells themselves.

I hope not! That's a terrible idea. This can be a very dangerous experiment 
in the wrong hands. In the versions I have seen, the electrolyte is boiling 
hot toxic liquid which tends to spray around; the cell vibrates and 
sometimes threatens to topple over; the electric power is high enough to 
severely electrocute someone; and direct viewing of the UV light from the 
glow discharge may permanently damage the eyes.

I think Naudin should put a warning message on his site advising young 
people and children NOT to try this without adult supervision in a properly 
ventilated laboratory, equipped with emergency showers and so on. It would 
be tragic if someone were to be hurt doing this, and it would make the 
reputation of CF even worse than it already is.

Most CF experiments I have seen are dangerous. They call for lithium in 
amounts large enough to kill someone, hydrochloric acid, high voltage power 
supplies usually with exposed wires, and so on. Mizuno respects Ohmori's 
work of course, but he is so wary of Ohmori's casual safety standards, he 
refused to go into the room when one of Ohmori's runs was in progress.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 11:16:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA02966;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 11:15:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 11:15:04 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530140812.00ab94f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:14:57 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Splashing electrolyte
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530134621.02d85978 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <02f101c326d2$154077c0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"weSqN.0.Bk.d-vr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50668
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>I hope not! That's a terrible idea. This can be a very dangerous 
>experiment in the wrong hands. In the versions I have seen, the 
>electrolyte is boiling hot toxic liquid which tends to spray around; the 
>cell vibrates and sometimes threatens to topple over . . .

Obviously, if the electrolyte roils and sprays so much it escapes from the 
test tube, this makes the measurement of enthalpy invalid. You should check 
for droplets of electrolyte fallen around the cell after the run.

The cell Naudin uses looks like it should be okay, although the waterline 
is closer to the top than I would prefer.


Another danger is that the hot cathode will vibrate and allow the plasma or 
hot metal to come in contact with the side of the cell. This would probably 
shatter something like Pyrex, splashing the boiling electrolyte around. 
Naudin's cell looks wide enough to avoid this problem.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 12:18:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA13163;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 12:15:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 12:15:28 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Some comforting words from our good friends at Exxon-Mobil
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 15:35:04 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEECLDKAA.knagel gis.net>
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: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"w6Epe.0.bD3.Gtwr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50669
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Exxon shareholders nix green proposals
Thursday, May 29, 2003 Posted: 1339 GMT ( 9:39 PM HKT)

DALLAS, Texas (Reuters) -- Exxon Mobil Corp. shareholders this week
voted down proposals concerning global warming and renewable
energy, as the head of the global energy giant said profits take
precedence over social causes.

"We won't jump on the bandwagon just because others may have a different
view,"
Chief Executive and Chairman Lee Raymond said. "We don't invest to make
social
statements at the expense of shareholder return."

The proposals failed to sway many shareholders, who rejected the renewable
energy measure with 79 percent opposed, compared with 80 percent opposed a
year ago. A new proposal calling for a report on climate change was voted
down with
78 percent opposed.

Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. and other groups that advise mutual
fund and
pension managers, recommended investors support these proposals.

Advocates say these issues have become so controversial they threaten Exxon
Mobil's bottom line. One group, Campaign ExxonMobil, claimed a "strong
showing"
in the face of marketing efforts by the company to play down the issue.

Another measure calling on the oil giant to state it was against
discrimination based
on sexual orientation, was voted down with 73 percent opposed, down from 76
percent a year ago.

The company has stated it has a policy that prohibits any form of
discrimination or
harassment at any of its work places around the world.

Environmental groups have accused Exxon of blocking policies and programs
that
would curb global warming.

Raymond said the company was committed to developing technologies that
address the long-term risks of climate change while Exxon Mobil was working
to
reduce harmful emissions.

Raymond told the meeting that he expects natural gas to increase its share
of the
global energy market over the next several years. Much of the company's
natural gas
growth opportunities come from its projects in Qatar, he said.

"We are somewhere in the process of becoming a significant natural gas
importer in
this country," Raymond said, adding there would have to be major
improvements
made in the liquid natural gas import capabilities of the United States.

He also said the company will be paying closer attention to Iraq as it
starts
significant exports of crude oil to world markets.

Raymond played down the role of solar and wind power as a source in the
global
energy market, saying that the two sources will not likely exceed a 1
percent share of
the world's energy needs by 2020.

"We believe oil and gas, which represents about 60 percent of energy
supplies
today, will remain the dominant energy source," Raymond said.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 12:35:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA26822;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 12:31:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 12:31:59 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530152931.02dc6248 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 15:31:50 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Splashing electrolyte
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530140812.00ab94f0 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530134621.02d85978 pop.mindspring.com>
 <02f101c326d2$154077c0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"upnR71.0._Y6.l6xr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50670
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>The cell Naudin uses looks like it should be okay, although the waterline 
>is closer to the top than I would prefer.

As I continue to stumble around the website, I find that he addressed this 
issue more carefully with his Version #3 cell. See the first pictures here:

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfr30.htm

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 15:10:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA13224;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 15:09:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 15:09:01 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530172846.00ab94f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 17:59:08 -0400
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Exxon-Mobil and ancient Romans
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"0l1qw1.0.YE3.yPzr-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50671
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Thank you Keith, for posting the "comforting words" from Exxon-Mobil.

To me, what is most frightening about such people is their utter failure of 
imagination. It seems almost inhuman, as if their souls have withered away.

Putting aside spiritual considerations, and looking at it purely from a 
business point of view, these people are committing corporate suicide. They 
are turning away from their only hope of survival, and from reality itself. 
I think Hubbert and Deffeyes must be right: oil production is peaking now, 
and will inevitably decline. It is as if IBM in 1960 were to decide the 
computer market is too risky, and they will go back to punch card readers.

In this forum we sometimes talk in hysterical tones about what Schwinger 
called "the death of science." I think such talk is exaggerated, but if 
anything like this does come about, I think history shows it will be a 
gradual extinction, a slowing down, rather than a catastrophic halt. 
Science was once born, and it continued with great promise, only to whither 
and nearly vanish for centuries. If only it had kept going, as Clarke says, 
"by now we would have reached the nearest stars."

The rise and fall of science in the ancient world was described in a book: 
Giorgio de Santillana, "The Origins of Scientific Thought," by  (U. 
Chicago, Mentor; 1961). Let me quote from chapter 19, "The Decline and 
Fall," extensively. (See attached.) I think it describes ominous parallels 
to the present day, such as overly abstract science that concentrates on 
"multi-world theories" instead of practical, here-and-now concerns. 
Aristotle's "great mental block" demonstrates that imagination must precede 
progress. First, we must imagine that things can be different -- they can 
be better, or worse. Only then can we begin to progress. As John F. Kennedy 
put it: "The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or 
cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who 
can dream of things that never were."

Of course every era has had its share of people like the ones at 
Exxon-Mobil and ancient Rome. We should not exaggerate our problems. But 
reading this history gives one a sense of what it life is like when things 
actually do go to hell in a handbasket.

This touches on what I discussed the other day: people's instinctive enmity 
toward science itself. As Martin Fleischmann says, "they don't like it, 
they don't want it," and sooner or later "they will put a stop to it." 
Perhaps it will be much later, millions of years from now. No one can say.

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

It is a common experience of our time that enough change takes place in one 
generation to more than fill a century for our grandfathers. Things seem to 
go the other way in antiquity after about 200 b.c.-- a divide which is 
marked not only by the death of Archimedes but by the consolidation of 
Roman dominion over the Hellenistic empires. Intellectually, what had been 
decades become centuries. . . .

The reasons for this change of pace may concern us, too. We can discern 
several:

. . .  B. Economic decline has set in. There seems to be a failure of 
imagination at the root of it all. A great and stable and ever more 
complicated administration needs economic growth to keep pace with it, and 
the Roman Empire seems to have been strangely incapable of economic and 
political growth; even more so than the Chinese. Urban luxury, 
bread-and-games, world-wide services, the unending attrition of border 
wars, the subsidizing of intractable tribes, are forms of conspicuous waste 
which cannot rest on merely agrarian economies and growing masses of 
plantation slave labor. . . . The burden of taxes became so crushing that 
farmers fled from their land, had to be brought back in chains as "tied to 
the sod." Growing regulations meant increasing avoidance, growing 
expenditure, harsher enforcement, in a never-ending circle. Workers trying 
to flee over the border were sentenced to death by fire. Dullness, 
conformity, and gloom spread like a pall of smog over the last centuries. 
Science became manuals and encyclopedias, literature became stale rhetoric 
on "classic" models, or tales of the wondrous.

  C. The failure of imagination explains, among other things, why men 
became so reactionary-minded, even when they thought they were entertaining 
the most lofty and liberal ideals. Something like that was to occur again 
in the American South. When Aristotle, the great master of ethics, said 
that slavery is a fact of nature, and that we shall need slaves so long as 
the shuttle will not run in the loom by itself, he had registered one of 
those great mental blocks which foretell the end of a cycle. And this leads 
us to what is obviously crucial, the lack of an applied science.

Pure science is always a hazardous and unfinished affair, stretching out 
its structures in perilous balance over the unknown. It does not suit men's 
whims or comfort their fears. In order to be accepted by a tough-minded 
society, it must produce unquestionable and stunning results, as happened 
with Newton's laws. Otherwise, it will be told to lay off and not disturb 
people's minds unnecessarily. Men like Galileo, when they dare to speak 
openly, will be reproved. It happened at the freest moment of Greek thought 
with Anaxagoras; it happened again in a different context with Aristarchus 
and his Copernican suggestion. Much has been said of a "loss of nerve" in 
Greek speculation after 300 B.C. The expression may not be accurate, but it 
circumscribes something that certainly took place: an inflection away from 
certain lines of research, a lack of aggressiveness, a kind of settling down.

The decisive point lies in the use of mathematics. After the early efforts 
of the Pythagoreans to set up a mathematical physics, it is as if the 
enterprise were abandoned as unfruitful. The turning point lies within the 
career of Eudoxus, who was Archytas's pupil. It is, as we said earlier, as 
if the lifting power of pure number had been finally released to rise into 
the realm of abstraction, providing henceforth nothing but transposed 
mathematical models for reality. It "saved" the phenomena instead of 
explaining them. The spheres of Eudoxus, Plato's *Timaeus* as a whole, are 
such models. The relation of number to reality has been transformed 
irretrievably, for even Archimedes is unable to reverse the trend. The 
higher qualitative virtues of number, so to speak, have been saved at the 
expense of actual application. . . .


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 17:23:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA10946;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 17:22:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 17:22:37 -0700
Message-ID: <030301c3270a$7a3d9bc0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
From: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030530134621.02d85978 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 20:20:44 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.101.98.221] using ID <crquin rogers.com> at Fri, 30 May 2003 20:21:40 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <"4O6uk.0.tg2.DN_r-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50672
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dangerous experiments as they stand now I agree Jed. Join *his* list and
warn them. Please.

I will go out on a limb however and  "predict" that with improvements,
within two school years, IF more people like yourself help by contributing,
that they will probably evolve safe enough for Science Fairs. This
presupposes discovering catalysts, weaker electrolytes, different types of
electrodes, lower voltages, advances in pulse forming, etc. The thing is-
I've seen that JL Naudin's *format* of publishing and his encouragement and
recognition to those who submit videos or pictures plus improvements in
experimental results has already proven that his method will work, and if
this CF topic encourages a hundred experimenters with *many* of them adding
something new in efficiency, then although it's not a sure bet, I believe
that the limb that I'm out on isn't really that thin after all.

Colin



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Cc: <JNaudin509 aol.com>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


> Colin Quinney wrote:
>
> >I suspect JLN's method of publishing his own "and others submissions"
will
> >inspire similar results over the next year or so with the  "cold fusion"
> >electrolysis experiments.
>
> This would be a welcome development.
>
>
> >I see replications and some good ideas for improvements already starting
> >on his list, and hopefully soon they will come pouring in. Also
> >"hopefully", this may eventually result in a "ground up" movement for
cold
> >fusion after hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of young people and even
> >children construct CF cells themselves.
>
> I hope not! That's a terrible idea. This can be a very dangerous
experiment
> in the wrong hands. In the versions I have seen, the electrolyte is
boiling
> hot toxic liquid which tends to spray around; the cell vibrates and
> sometimes threatens to topple over; the electric power is high enough to
> severely electrocute someone; and direct viewing of the UV light from the
> glow discharge may permanently damage the eyes.
>
> I think Naudin should put a warning message on his site advising young
> people and children NOT to try this without adult supervision in a
properly
> ventilated laboratory, equipped with emergency showers and so on. It would
> be tragic if someone were to be hurt doing this, and it would make the
> reputation of CF even worse than it already is.
>
> Most CF experiments I have seen are dangerous. They call for lithium in
> amounts large enough to kill someone, hydrochloric acid, high voltage
power
> supplies usually with exposed wires, and so on. Mizuno respects Ohmori's
> work of course, but he is so wary of Ohmori's casual safety standards, he
> refused to go into the room when one of Ohmori's runs was in progress.
>
> - Jed
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/30/2003

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 18:04:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA29418;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 18:03:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:03:03 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>, "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
Subject: RE: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:22:59 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEECNDKAA.knagel gis.net>
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: <030301c3270a$7a3d9bc0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Resent-Message-ID: <"QJOJx.0.aB7.6z_r-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50673
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here's a particularly hazardous example
from an unnamed researcher... He's
doing the underwater arc experiment
in a plastic bottle.

//////
"I also again tried the effect of vaccuum and
pressure upon the  closed plastic bottle, by
blowing or sucking at the end of the hose
with my mouth ! the effect of vacuum and pressure
of the boiling steam generation was interesting to see !
When I sucked air from the bottle via the hose and
produced vacuum inside the bottle, the boiling was
much stronger and more bubbles came out !
When I blew into the hose and increased the
preesure, the boiling came almost to a stop !"
//////

The hose he's talking about goes to the active cell.
Yum, tasty boiling potassium carbonate solution goodness.

K.


-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Quinney [mailto:crquin rogers.com]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 8:21 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


Dangerous experiments as they stand now I agree Jed. Join *his* list and
warn them. Please.

I will go out on a limb however and  "predict" that with improvements,
within two school years, IF more people like yourself help by contributing,
that they will probably evolve safe enough for Science Fairs. This
presupposes discovering catalysts, weaker electrolytes, different types of
electrodes, lower voltages, advances in pulse forming, etc. The thing is-
I've seen that JL Naudin's *format* of publishing and his encouragement and
recognition to those who submit videos or pictures plus improvements in
experimental results has already proven that his method will work, and if
this CF topic encourages a hundred experimenters with *many* of them adding
something new in efficiency, then although it's not a sure bet, I believe
that the limb that I'm out on isn't really that thin after all.

Colin



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Cc: <JNaudin509 aol.com>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


> Colin Quinney wrote:
>
> >I suspect JLN's method of publishing his own "and others submissions"
will
> >inspire similar results over the next year or so with the  "cold fusion"
> >electrolysis experiments.
>
> This would be a welcome development.
>
>
> >I see replications and some good ideas for improvements already starting
> >on his list, and hopefully soon they will come pouring in. Also
> >"hopefully", this may eventually result in a "ground up" movement for
cold
> >fusion after hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of young people and even
> >children construct CF cells themselves.
>
> I hope not! That's a terrible idea. This can be a very dangerous
experiment
> in the wrong hands. In the versions I have seen, the electrolyte is
boiling
> hot toxic liquid which tends to spray around; the cell vibrates and
> sometimes threatens to topple over; the electric power is high enough to
> severely electrocute someone; and direct viewing of the UV light from the
> glow discharge may permanently damage the eyes.
>
> I think Naudin should put a warning message on his site advising young
> people and children NOT to try this without adult supervision in a
properly
> ventilated laboratory, equipped with emergency showers and so on. It would
> be tragic if someone were to be hurt doing this, and it would make the
> reputation of CF even worse than it already is.
>
> Most CF experiments I have seen are dangerous. They call for lithium in
> amounts large enough to kill someone, hydrochloric acid, high voltage
power
> supplies usually with exposed wires, and so on. Mizuno respects Ohmori's
> work of course, but he is so wary of Ohmori's casual safety standards, he
> refused to go into the room when one of Ohmori's runs was in progress.
>
> - Jed
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/30/2003

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 18:06:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA30000;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 18:04:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:04:24 -0700
Message-ID: <032501c32710$519cdae0$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
From: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: <JNaudin509 aol.com>
Subject: Fw: [jlnlabs] [Update] The Cold Fusion Reactor Project group is now opened.
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:02:33 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.101.98.221] using ID <crquin rogers.com> at Fri, 30 May 2003 21:03:47 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <"u0hW83.0.cK7.O-_r-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50674
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vorts:

Please see forwarded message below!

I suggested that JL Naudin will *probably* start separate CF List just mere
hours ago, and he almost immediately made it happen. (see below) You see? He
does want this to work, and I'll bet it will progress even better than what
he's previously laid out with the electro- lifters, because now it's a List
devoted *exclusively* to something potentially a lot more useful-
*replicable* cold fusion.

I'm sure that most of us have many reasons to join. I've noted that besides
JLN himself, many of Naudin's core members are very innovative and
proficient in a multitude of various and pertinent engineering skills.

This promises to be a very *interesting* ride.

Colin

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jnaudin509 aol.com>
To: <jlnlabs yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 5:19 PM
Subject: [jlnlabs] [Update] The Cold Fusion Reactor Project group is now
opened.


> Dear All,
>
> The Cold Fusion Reactor Project group is now created :
>
> This group is dedicated to the experiments about the Cold Fusion Reactor
> Project. The purpose of this group is to share the experimental datas
results
> based on the Cold Fusion Reactor ( CFR ) for building a powerfull and
efficient
> reactor.
>
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cfr_project/
>
> Best Regards
> Jean-Louis Naudin
> Email: <A HREF="mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A>
> Main Web site : <A
HREF="http://www.jlnlabs.org">http://www.jlnlabs.org</A>



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/30/2003

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri May 30 21:14:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA10922;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 21:13:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:13:47 -0700
Message-ID: <036301c3272a$c3a0f080$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
From: "Colin Quinney" <crquin rogers.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 00:11:51 -0400
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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.101.98.221] using ID <crquin rogers.com> at Sat, 31 May 2003 00:12:46 -0400
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZgKvf3.0.ag2.xl2s-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50675
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Keith,

Excellent! Warn them. This is an example of the kind of expertise they need
and require.

Colin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>; "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


> Here's a particularly hazardous example
> from an unnamed researcher... He's
> doing the underwater arc experiment
> in a plastic bottle.
>
> //////
> "I also again tried the effect of vaccuum and
> pressure upon the  closed plastic bottle, by
> blowing or sucking at the end of the hose
> with my mouth ! the effect of vacuum and pressure
> of the boiling steam generation was interesting to see !
> When I sucked air from the bottle via the hose and
> produced vacuum inside the bottle, the boiling was
> much stronger and more bubbles came out !
> When I blew into the hose and increased the
> preesure, the boiling came almost to a stop !"
> //////
>
> The hose he's talking about goes to the active cell.
> Yum, tasty boiling potassium carbonate solution goodness.
>
> K.



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/31/2003

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 31 11:43:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA06242;
	Sat, 31 May 2003 11:42:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 11:42:45 -0700
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>, "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
Subject: RE: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 15:02:45 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIECPDKAA.knagel gis.net>
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: <036301c3272a$c3a0f080$6401a8c0 cs910664a>
Resent-Message-ID: <"5PIbL.0.SX1.aUFs-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50676
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Colin.

I don't think people can be warned off things like this.

I remember the first time I did an underwater arc experiment,
I was about 12-14 at the time, in the basement of my parents
house. The circuit was simplicity itself, a pair of
carbon rods scrounged from drycells and an extension cord.
The "book" ( some crude experimenters handbook ) described
this thing as a reostat, but I was to discover otherwise.

At first I tried my electric train transformer, but
not much happened. So I went to the wall outlet, plugged
in, and moved the electrodes ( by hand! ) towards each
other. A great flash resulted, as I struck an arc and
held it for a moment underwater. Then a sharp snap as
the breaker blew, and the basement was plunged into darkness.
The afterimage of the glass and electrodes danced on my retinas
for a few moments. From the lighted doorsill at the top of
the stairs I could see the silhouette of my fathers head,
angrily jutting into view.

"Keith, what the HELL are you doing down there?"

"Nothing, Dad."

"You've blown a fuse, Boy. Stop fooling with the electricity"

...and had I taken his advice, I'd not be the man I am today.

The last time I did any serious work with this stuff
was around '92, and I found that tungsten didn't hold
up very well over 1000 amps. It just melts like a plastic
religious icon on the dashboard of a Mustang in August.

I'll keep an eye peeled on your new list, but of course
nothing prevents people from coming here instead.

For starters, you might try discussing this old members
attempts to replicate Mizuno.

http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/index.html 

K.



-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Quinney [mailto:crquin rogers.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 12:12 AM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


Hi Keith,

Excellent! Warn them. This is an example of the kind of expertise they need
and require.

Colin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>; "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: A suggestion - Do NOT try this at home


> Here's a particularly hazardous example
> from an unnamed researcher... He's
> doing the underwater arc experiment
> in a plastic bottle.
>
> //////
> "I also again tried the effect of vaccuum and
> pressure upon the  closed plastic bottle, by
> blowing or sucking at the end of the hose
> with my mouth ! the effect of vacuum and pressure
> of the boiling steam generation was interesting to see !
> When I sucked air from the bottle via the hose and
> produced vacuum inside the bottle, the boiling was
> much stronger and more bubbles came out !
> When I blew into the hose and increased the
> preesure, the boiling came almost to a stop !"
> //////
>
> The hose he's talking about goes to the active cell.
> Yum, tasty boiling potassium carbonate solution goodness.
>
> K.



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/31/2003


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 31 14:59:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA22203;
	Sat, 31 May 2003 14:57:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 14:57:53 -0700
Message-ID: <009e01c327bf$80136f60$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: What is water, really?
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 14:56:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_009B_01C32784.D30CBEA0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"ShfeP3.0.rQ5.WLIs-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50677
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_009B_01C32784.D30CBEA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

" Water is H2O, hydrogen two parts, oxygen one, but there is also a =
third thing, that makes it water and nobody knows what it is."    - D. =
H. Lawrence=20

(Not quite as well-known for his physics as E.O. - but D.H. did manage =
to get a few folks real "steamed up" over the years, so maybe he did =
know a thing or two about the subject )=20

You can never understand water until you realize that it isn't even a =
very good liquid. You may never understand "liquidity" at the visceral =
level unless you have worked around molten metal, especially as in =
die-casting. Zinc-aluminum alloys are strong enough to be used in =
automotive engines at a few hundred degrees, but above 800 degrees F =
they are *real* liquids. The way molten metal moves and flows is so =
visually surprising that it cannot be described very well in words. =
Water is just a pretender. By comparison it flows like sludge. Its hard =
to explain this if you haven't "been there, done that."

Is this low fluidity, the comparative non-liquidity of H2O, explainable =
because water is far more complicated than it seems at first? - perhaps =
always having a "solid" phase disguised within its liquid phase? In an =
alternative terminology, the solid phase can be described as having =
hidden "structure" and its slightly altered geometry allows it to be =
under greater Beta-aether pressure than is the fluid phase. It is in =
compression, not in tension and is discontinuous, forming =
macro-molecular spheres of rather surprising strength - as strong in =
tension at the sub-nanoscale level as many metals, for instance. This is =
one of the things that makes Beta-aether so difficult to explain - it =
acts as a pressure at that geometric scale, but the media on which it =
acts will then display effects that we call "tensile strength" or =
"explosiveness."=20

During World War II, the military made extensive use of water injection =
in high performance piston aircraft engines. Later, water injection was =
used by both civilian and military jet aircraft to provide extra thrust, =
principally on takeoff. Even today, water injection systems are =
available that can be installed in automobiles, but this doesn't work =
quite as well as injecting nitrous oxide, which is more "fuel-like" than =
even many hydrocarbons, such as ethanol.=20

Also during WWII in the cold winters it was found that if some ethanol =
was added to the water it would keep it from freezing, but the addition =
of ethanol did NOT improve the performance of water injection, it just =
keeps the fuel line from clogging. The latent heat of vaporization for =
gasoline is about 140 Btu/lb and for ethanol about 361 Btu/lb. Water has =
a latent heat of about 700 Btu/lb! Therefore, when water is injected =
into the engine in the form of a mist, the latent heat of the water will =
cool the charge and increase volumetric efficiency. That is the =
"official" rationale for the phenomenon, but there is much more to it =
than volumetric efficiency.

When the a gasoline+water mist charge is fired in a cylinder, the water =
will turn to high-pressure steam and provide additional power due to the =
pressure exerted by the steam. Steam has three and a half times higher =
critical pressure than does carbon dioxide and because the critical =
pressure of CO2 is so low (1000 psi) it cannot deliver its energy to its =
surroundings nearly as well as steam. This is a main reason that that =
gasoline engines don't get much above 25 % efficiency.=20

Unfortunately there are limits to the amount of water that can be =
injected with gasoline. Too much H2O will cause excessive cooling and =
misfiring because hydrocarbons have a relatively high minimum =
requirement for the amount of fuel dilution that they can tolerate. When =
hydrogen is substituted for gasoline, however, about ten times less =
hydrogen by weight can be used and still provide ignition. What these =
facts imply is obvious - one needs to electrolyze only a small percent =
of fuel that would normally be required in the situation where hydrogen =
is to be combined with water injection, so little in fact that self-made =
hydrogen might suffice.

But there is more. One of the prime ingredients in air/water =
electrochemistry is the hydroxyl radical, OH. Simple in structure, it is =
one of the most reactive natural ions in the atmosphere. A close =
chemical relative is the hydroperoxyl radical, HO2, which is also =
extremely reactive and can be formed easily from only water and air =
under pressure - that is, molecules of water will super-oxidize with =
air+aqueous electrons under pressure to form hydroperoxyl ions - which =
have a short lifetime of tens of milliseconds but can further react with =
the nitrogen or the NO radical to form NO2, which is also very =
"fuel-like". In other words, when you correctly mix air and water under =
alternating vacuum and pressure conditions in an electric field, you can =
manufacture, in situ a lot of fuel-like chemicals, with no hydrocarbons =
whatever.

Even if gasoline were free, what would you rather have, ecologically, to =
power your auto engine- 1000 cm^3/sec of steam at 5000 psi and 500 =
degrees F or 200 cm^3/sec of CO2 at 5000 psi and 2500 degrees F?  This =
first result seems to be only available in narrow circumstances when air =
is entrained with water near its freezing point, electrolyzed and =
injected into a partial vacuum, then immediately compressed. The strange =
chemistry that follows must be immediately utilized in a properly =
designed ICE - with the result being that water, in effect, becomes a =
fuel that can yield many times more explosive energy, in terms of cubic =
feet of gas at a given pressure, than gasoline burned in air....Sure the =
gasoline will give you lots of heat (mostly wasted ) but heat does not =
drive pistons. Gas pressure drives pistons.=20

But make no mistake - water-fuel cannot be explained as some arcane =
variation of standard thermodynamics: there must be "excess energy" but =
to answer Horace's next question about where the excess is really coming =
from?... the only answer I can suggest right now <grin> is D.H. =
Lawrence's " third thing," that which "makes it water and nobody knows =
what it is."

...or it least, this is the working premise behind the water-engine in =
its most current rationalization...for the benefit of those cranky =
under-educated inventors or contrarians who are open to the possibility =
of this kind of "moonshine"...and don't really care what the =
science-elite has pre-ordained....aka.... just your average vort.

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_009B_01C32784.D30CBEA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>" Water is H2O, hydrogen two parts, oxygen one, but there is also a =
third=20
thing, that makes it water and nobody knows what it =
is."&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - D.=20
H. Lawrence </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>(Not quite as well-known for his physics as E.O. - but&nbsp;D.H. =
did manage=20
to get a&nbsp;few folks real "steamed up" over the years, so&nbsp;maybe=20
he&nbsp;did know a thing or two about&nbsp;the subject&nbsp;) </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>You can never understand water until you realize that it isn't even =
a very=20
good liquid. You may never understand "liquidity" at the visceral level =
unless=20
you have worked around molten metal, especially as in die-casting. =
Zinc-aluminum=20
alloys are strong enough to be used in automotive engines at a few =
hundred=20
degrees, but above 800 degrees F they are *real* liquids. The way molten =
metal=20
moves and flows is so visually surprising that it cannot be described =
very well=20
in words. Water is just a pretender. By comparison it flows like sludge. =
Its=20
hard to explain&nbsp;this if you haven't "been there, done that."</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Is this low fluidity, the comparative non-liquidity of H2O, =
explainable=20
because water is far more complicated than it seems at first? - perhaps =
always=20
having a "solid" phase disguised within its liquid phase? In&nbsp;an=20
alternative&nbsp;terminology, the solid phase&nbsp;can be described=20
as&nbsp;having hidden "structure" and&nbsp;its slightly altered geometry =
allows=20
it to be under greater Beta-aether pressure than is the fluid phase. It =
is in=20
compression, not in tension and&nbsp;is discontinuous, forming =
macro-molecular=20
spheres of rather surprising strength - as strong in tension at the=20
sub-nanoscale level as&nbsp;many metals, for instance. This is one of =
the things=20
that makes Beta-aether so difficult to explain - it acts as a pressure =
at that=20
geometric scale, but the media on which it acts will then display =
effects that=20
we call "tensile strength" or "explosiveness." </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>During World War II, the military made extensive use of water =
injection in=20
high performance piston aircraft engines. Later, water injection was =
used by=20
both civilian and military jet aircraft to provide extra thrust, =
principally on=20
takeoff. Even today, water injection systems are available that can be =
installed=20
in automobiles, but this doesn't work quite as well as injecting nitrous =
oxide,=20
which is more "fuel-like" than even&nbsp;many hydrocarbons, such as=20
ethanol.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Also during WWII in the cold winters it was found that if some =
ethanol was=20
added to the water it would keep it from freezing, but the addition of =
ethanol=20
did NOT improve the performance of water injection, it just =
keeps&nbsp;the fuel=20
line&nbsp;from clogging. The latent heat of vaporization for gasoline is =
about=20
140 Btu/lb and for ethanol about 361 Btu/lb. Water has a latent heat of =
about=20
700 Btu/lb! Therefore, when water is injected into the engine in the =
form of a=20
mist, the latent heat of the water will cool the charge and increase =
volumetric=20
efficiency. That is the "official" rationale for the phenomenon, but =
there is=20
much more to it than volumetric efficiency.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>When the a gasoline+water mist charge is fired in a cylinder, the =
water=20
will turn to high-pressure steam and provide additional power due to the =

pressure exerted by the steam. Steam has three and a half times higher =
critical=20
pressure than does carbon dioxide and because the critical pressure of =
CO2 is so=20
low (1000 psi) it cannot deliver its energy to its surroundings nearly =
as well=20
as steam. This is a main reason that that gasoline engines don't get =
much above=20
25 % efficiency. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Unfortunately there are limits to the amount of water that can be =
injected=20
with gasoline. Too much H2O will cause excessive cooling and misfiring =
because=20
hydrocarbons have a relatively high minimum requirement for the amount =
of fuel=20
dilution that they can tolerate. When hydrogen is substituted for =
gasoline,=20
however, about ten times less hydrogen by weight can be used and still =
provide=20
ignition. What these facts imply is obvious -&nbsp;one needs to =
electrolyze only=20
a small percent of&nbsp;fuel that would normally be required&nbsp;in the =

situation where hydrogen is to be combined with&nbsp;water =
injection,&nbsp;so=20
little in fact that&nbsp;self-made hydrogen might suffice.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But there is more. One of the prime ingredients in air/water=20
electrochemistry is the hydroxyl radical, OH. Simple in structure, it is =
one of=20
the most reactive natural ions in the atmosphere.&nbsp;A close chemical =
relative=20
is&nbsp;the hydroperoxyl radical, HO2, which is also extremely reactive =
and can=20
be formed easily from only water and air under pressure -&nbsp;that=20
is,&nbsp;molecules of water&nbsp;will super-oxidize with air+aqueous =
electrons=20
under pressure to form&nbsp;hydroperoxyl ions - which have a short =
lifetime of=20
tens of milliseconds but can further react with the nitrogen or the NO =
radical=20
to form NO2, which is also very "fuel-like". In other words, when you =
correctly=20
mix air and water under alternating vacuum and pressure conditions in an =

electric field, you can manufacture, in situ a lot of fuel-like =
chemicals, with=20
no hydrocarbons whatever.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Even if gasoline were free,&nbsp;what would you rather have,=20
ecologically,&nbsp;to power your auto engine- 1000 cm^3/sec of steam at =
5000 psi=20
and&nbsp;500 degrees F or 200 cm^3/sec of CO2 at 5000 psi and 2500 =
degrees=20
F?&nbsp; This first result&nbsp;seems to be&nbsp;only available in =
narrow=20
circumstances when air is entrained with water near its freezing point,=20
electrolyzed&nbsp;and injected into a partial vacuum, then immediately=20
compressed. The strange chemistry that follows must be immediately =
utilized in a=20
properly designed ICE - with the result being that water, in effect, =
becomes a=20
fuel that can yield&nbsp;many times more explosive energy, in terms of =
cubic=20
feet of gas at a given pressure, than gasoline burned in air....Sure the =

gasoline will give you lots of heat (mostly wasted ) but heat does not =
drive=20
pistons. Gas pressure drives pistons. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But make no mistake - water-fuel cannot be explained as&nbsp;some =
arcane=20
variation of standard thermodynamics: there&nbsp;must be&nbsp;"excess =
energy"=20
but to answer Horace's next question about where the excess is really =
coming=20
from?... the only answer I can suggest right now &lt;grin&gt; =
is&nbsp;D.H.=20
Lawrence's "&nbsp;third thing," that which "makes it water and nobody =
knows what=20
it is."</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>...or it least, this is the working premise behind the water-engine =
in its=20
most current rationalization...for the benefit of those cranky =
under-educated=20
inventors or contrarians who&nbsp;are open to the possibility of this =
kind of=20
"moonshine"...and don't really care what the science-elite has=20
pre-ordained....aka.... just&nbsp;your average vort.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_009B_01C32784.D30CBEA0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 31 18:13:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA11865;
	Sat, 31 May 2003 18:12:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:12:04 -0700
Message-Id: <v01530500bafefc01d938 [12.21.209.211]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 17:15:41 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: What is water, really?
Resent-Message-ID: <"uirwe3.0.Ev2.aBLs-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50678
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 2:56 PM 5/31/3, Jones Beene wrote:
 pistons. Gas pressure drives pistons.
>
>But make no mistake - water-fuel cannot be explained as some arcane
>variation of standard thermodynamics: there must be "excess energy" but to
>answer Horace's next question about where the excess is really coming
>from?... the only answer I can suggest right now <grin> is D.H. Lawrence's
>" third thing," that which "makes it water and nobody knows what it is."
>
>...or it least, this is the working premise behind the water-engine in its
>most current rationalization...for the benefit of those cranky
>under-educated inventors or contrarians who are open to the possibility of
>this kind of "moonshine"...and don't really care what the science-elite
>has pre-ordained....aka.... just your average vort.


Once again, Jones, you wax eloquent and put forth a lot of stimulating
thoughts, but, as you admit above, there is still missing any theory by
which to engineer the device, the source of excess energy.  More
importantly though, assuming the evidence for free energy in water engines
is imperical, there is a lack of reliable data or reproducible experiment
that can be used to home in on an unexplained energy source, or even to
prove that such exists.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 31 19:03:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA03184;
	Sat, 31 May 2003 19:02:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 19:02:44 -0700
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 14:03:08 +1200
From: RBR <RBR clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: What is water, really?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <002401c327e2$10768200$4190a7cb 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_0021_01C32846.881364E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <009e01c327bf$80136f60$0a016ea8 cpq>
Resent-Message-ID: <"J05L81.0.fn.4xLs-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50679
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_0021_01C32846.881364E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Interesting post.....
                        Question ...if you had a cylinder with a steam =
atmosphere ,created a vacuum then as the steam condenses  , would the =
vacuum increase ? .
  Regards RBR



  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Jones Beene=20
  To: vortex=20
  Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 9:56 AM
  Subject: What is water, really?


  " Water is H2O, hydrogen two parts, oxygen one, but there is also a =
third thing, that makes it water and nobody knows what it is."    - D. =
H. Lawrence=20

  (Not quite as well-known for his physics as E.O. - but D.H. did manage =
to get a few folks real "steamed up" over the years, so maybe he did =
know a thing or two about the subject )=20

  You can never understand water until you realize that it isn't even a =
very good liquid. You may never understand "liquidity" at the visceral =
level unless you have worked around molten metal, especially as in =
die-casting. Zinc-aluminum alloys are strong enough to be used in =
automotive engines at a few hundred degrees, but above 800 degrees F =
they are *real* liquids. The way molten metal moves and flows is so =
visually surprising that it cannot be described very well in words. =
Water is just a pretender. By comparison it flows like sludge. Its hard =
to explain this if you haven't "been there, done that."

  Is this low fluidity, the comparative non-liquidity of H2O, =
explainable because water is far more complicated than it seems at =
first? - perhaps always having a "solid" phase disguised within its =
liquid phase? In an alternative terminology, the solid phase can be =
described as having hidden "structure" and its slightly altered geometry =
allows it to be under greater Beta-aether pressure than is the fluid =
phase. It is in compression, not in tension and is discontinuous, =
forming macro-molecular spheres of rather surprising strength - as =
strong in tension at the sub-nanoscale level as many metals, for =
instance. This is one of the things that makes Beta-aether so difficult =
to explain - it acts as a pressure at that geometric scale, but the =
media on which it acts will then display effects that we call "tensile =
strength" or "explosiveness."=20

  During World War II, the military made extensive use of water =
injection in high performance piston aircraft engines. Later, water =
injection was used by both civilian and military jet aircraft to provide =
extra thrust, principally on takeoff. Even today, water injection =
systems are available that can be installed in automobiles, but this =
doesn't work quite as well as injecting nitrous oxide, which is more =
"fuel-like" than even many hydrocarbons, such as ethanol.=20

  Also during WWII in the cold winters it was found that if some ethanol =
was added to the water it would keep it from freezing, but the addition =
of ethanol did NOT improve the performance of water injection, it just =
keeps the fuel line from clogging. The latent heat of vaporization for =
gasoline is about 140 Btu/lb and for ethanol about 361 Btu/lb. Water has =
a latent heat of about 700 Btu/lb! Therefore, when water is injected =
into the engine in the form of a mist, the latent heat of the water will =
cool the charge and increase volumetric efficiency. That is the =
"official" rationale for the phenomenon, but there is much more to it =
than volumetric efficiency.

  When the a gasoline+water mist charge is fired in a cylinder, the =
water will turn to high-pressure steam and provide additional power due =
to the pressure exerted by the steam. Steam has three and a half times =
higher critical pressure than does carbon dioxide and because the =
critical pressure of CO2 is so low (1000 psi) it cannot deliver its =
energy to its surroundings nearly as well as steam. This is a main =
reason that that gasoline engines don't get much above 25 % efficiency.=20

  Unfortunately there are limits to the amount of water that can be =
injected with gasoline. Too much H2O will cause excessive cooling and =
misfiring because hydrocarbons have a relatively high minimum =
requirement for the amount of fuel dilution that they can tolerate. When =
hydrogen is substituted for gasoline, however, about ten times less =
hydrogen by weight can be used and still provide ignition. What these =
facts imply is obvious - one needs to electrolyze only a small percent =
of fuel that would normally be required in the situation where hydrogen =
is to be combined with water injection, so little in fact that self-made =
hydrogen might suffice.

  But there is more. One of the prime ingredients in air/water =
electrochemistry is the hydroxyl radical, OH. Simple in structure, it is =
one of the most reactive natural ions in the atmosphere. A close =
chemical relative is the hydroperoxyl radical, HO2, which is also =
extremely reactive and can be formed easily from only water and air =
under pressure - that is, molecules of water will super-oxidize with =
air+aqueous electrons under pressure to form hydroperoxyl ions - which =
have a short lifetime of tens of milliseconds but can further react with =
the nitrogen or the NO radical to form NO2, which is also very =
"fuel-like". In other words, when you correctly mix air and water under =
alternating vacuum and pressure conditions in an electric field, you can =
manufacture, in situ a lot of fuel-like chemicals, with no hydrocarbons =
whatever.

  Even if gasoline were free, what would you rather have, ecologically, =
to power your auto engine- 1000 cm^3/sec of steam at 5000 psi and 500 =
degrees F or 200 cm^3/sec of CO2 at 5000 psi and 2500 degrees F?  This =
first result seems to be only available in narrow circumstances when air =
is entrained with water near its freezing point, electrolyzed and =
injected into a partial vacuum, then immediately compressed. The strange =
chemistry that follows must be immediately utilized in a properly =
designed ICE - with the result being that water, in effect, becomes a =
fuel that can yield many times more explosive energy, in terms of cubic =
feet of gas at a given pressure, than gasoline burned in air....Sure the =
gasoline will give you lots of heat (mostly wasted ) but heat does not =
drive pistons. Gas pressure drives pistons.=20

  But make no mistake - water-fuel cannot be explained as some arcane =
variation of standard thermodynamics: there must be "excess energy" but =
to answer Horace's next question about where the excess is really coming =
from?... the only answer I can suggest right now <grin> is D.H. =
Lawrence's " third thing," that which "makes it water and nobody knows =
what it is."

  ...or it least, this is the working premise behind the water-engine in =
its most current rationalization...for the benefit of those cranky =
under-educated inventors or contrarians who are open to the possibility =
of this kind of "moonshine"...and don't really care what the =
science-elite has pre-ordained....aka.... just your average vort.

  Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C32846.881364E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4923.2500" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Interesting post.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT=20
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;=20
Question ...if you had a cylinder with a steam atmosphere ,created a=20
vacuum&nbsp;then as the steam condenses&nbsp; , would the vacuum =
increase ?=20
.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp; Regards RBR</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Djonesb9 pacbell.net =
href=3D"mailto:jonesb9 pacbell.net">Jones Beene</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dvortex-l eskimo.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:vortex-l eskimo.com">vortex</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, June 01, 2003 =
9:56 AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> What is water, =
really?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>
  <DIV>" Water is H2O, hydrogen two parts, oxygen one, but there is also =
a third=20
  thing, that makes it water and nobody knows what it =
is."&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -=20
  D. H. Lawrence </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>(Not quite as well-known for his physics as E.O. - but&nbsp;D.H. =
did=20
  manage to get a&nbsp;few folks real "steamed up" over the years, =
so&nbsp;maybe=20
  he&nbsp;did know a thing or two about&nbsp;the subject&nbsp;) </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>You can never understand water until you realize that it isn't =
even a=20
  very good liquid. You may never understand "liquidity" at the visceral =
level=20
  unless you have worked around molten metal, especially as in =
die-casting.=20
  Zinc-aluminum alloys are strong enough to be used in automotive =
engines at a=20
  few hundred degrees, but above 800 degrees F they are *real* liquids. =
The way=20
  molten metal moves and flows is so visually surprising that it cannot =
be=20
  described very well in words. Water is just a pretender. By comparison =
it=20
  flows like sludge. Its hard to explain&nbsp;this if you haven't "been =
there,=20
  done that."</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Is this low fluidity, the comparative non-liquidity of H2O, =
explainable=20
  because water is far more complicated than it seems at first? - =
perhaps always=20
  having a "solid" phase disguised within its liquid phase? In&nbsp;an=20
  alternative&nbsp;terminology, the solid phase&nbsp;can be described=20
  as&nbsp;having hidden "structure" and&nbsp;its slightly altered =
geometry=20
  allows it to be under greater Beta-aether pressure than is the fluid =
phase. It=20
  is in compression, not in tension and&nbsp;is discontinuous, forming=20
  macro-molecular spheres of rather surprising strength - as strong in =
tension=20
  at the sub-nanoscale level as&nbsp;many metals, for instance. This is =
one of=20
  the things that makes Beta-aether so difficult to explain - it acts as =
a=20
  pressure at that geometric scale, but the media on which it acts will =
then=20
  display effects that we call "tensile strength" or "explosiveness." =
</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV>
  <DIV>During World War II, the military made extensive use of water =
injection=20
  in high performance piston aircraft engines. Later, water injection =
was used=20
  by both civilian and military jet aircraft to provide extra thrust,=20
  principally on takeoff. Even today, water injection systems are =
available that=20
  can be installed in automobiles, but this doesn't work quite as well =
as=20
  injecting nitrous oxide, which is more "fuel-like" than even&nbsp;many =

  hydrocarbons, such as ethanol.&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Also during WWII in the cold winters it was found that if some =
ethanol=20
  was added to the water it would keep it from freezing, but the =
addition of=20
  ethanol did NOT improve the performance of water injection, it just=20
  keeps&nbsp;the fuel line&nbsp;from clogging. The latent heat of =
vaporization=20
  for gasoline is about 140 Btu/lb and for ethanol about 361 Btu/lb. =
Water has a=20
  latent heat of about 700 Btu/lb! Therefore, when water is injected =
into the=20
  engine in the form of a mist, the latent heat of the water will cool =
the=20
  charge and increase volumetric efficiency. That is the "official" =
rationale=20
  for the phenomenon, but there is much more to it than volumetric=20
  efficiency.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>When the a gasoline+water mist charge is fired in a cylinder, the =
water=20
  will turn to high-pressure steam and provide additional power due to =
the=20
  pressure exerted by the steam. Steam has three and a half times higher =

  critical pressure than does carbon dioxide and because the critical =
pressure=20
  of CO2 is so low (1000 psi) it cannot deliver its energy to its =
surroundings=20
  nearly as well as steam. This is a main reason that that gasoline =
engines=20
  don't get much above 25 % efficiency. </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Unfortunately there are limits to the amount of water that can be =

  injected with gasoline. Too much H2O will cause excessive cooling and=20
  misfiring because hydrocarbons have a relatively high minimum =
requirement for=20
  the amount of fuel dilution that they can tolerate. When hydrogen is=20
  substituted for gasoline, however, about ten times less hydrogen by =
weight can=20
  be used and still provide ignition. What these facts imply is obvious=20
  -&nbsp;one needs to electrolyze only a small percent of&nbsp;fuel that =
would=20
  normally be required&nbsp;in the situation where hydrogen is to be =
combined=20
  with&nbsp;water injection,&nbsp;so little in fact that&nbsp;self-made =
hydrogen=20
  might suffice.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>But there is more. One of the prime ingredients in air/water=20
  electrochemistry is the hydroxyl radical, OH. Simple in structure, it =
is one=20
  of the most reactive natural ions in the atmosphere.&nbsp;A close =
chemical=20
  relative is&nbsp;the hydroperoxyl radical, HO2, which is also =
extremely=20
  reactive and can be formed easily from only water and air under =
pressure=20
  -&nbsp;that is,&nbsp;molecules of water&nbsp;will super-oxidize with=20
  air+aqueous electrons under pressure to form&nbsp;hydroperoxyl ions - =
which=20
  have a short lifetime of tens of milliseconds but can further react =
with the=20
  nitrogen or the NO radical to form NO2, which is also very =
"fuel-like". In=20
  other words, when you correctly mix air and water under alternating =
vacuum and=20
  pressure conditions in an electric field, you can manufacture, in situ =
a lot=20
  of fuel-like chemicals, with no hydrocarbons whatever.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Even if gasoline were free,&nbsp;what would you rather have,=20
  ecologically,&nbsp;to power your auto engine- 1000 cm^3/sec of steam =
at 5000=20
  psi and&nbsp;500 degrees F or 200 cm^3/sec of CO2 at 5000 psi and 2500 =
degrees=20
  F?&nbsp; This first result&nbsp;seems to be&nbsp;only available in =
narrow=20
  circumstances when air is entrained with water near its freezing =
point,=20
  electrolyzed&nbsp;and injected into a partial vacuum, then immediately =

  compressed. The strange chemistry that follows must be immediately =
utilized in=20
  a properly designed ICE - with the result being that water, in effect, =
becomes=20
  a fuel that can yield&nbsp;many times more explosive energy, in terms =
of cubic=20
  feet of gas at a given pressure, than gasoline burned in air....Sure =
the=20
  gasoline will give you lots of heat (mostly wasted ) but heat does not =
drive=20
  pistons. Gas pressure drives pistons. </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>But make no mistake - water-fuel cannot be explained as&nbsp;some =
arcane=20
  variation of standard thermodynamics: there&nbsp;must be&nbsp;"excess =
energy"=20
  but to answer Horace's next question about where the excess is really =
coming=20
  from?... the only answer I can suggest right now &lt;grin&gt; =
is&nbsp;D.H.=20
  Lawrence's "&nbsp;third thing," that which "makes it water and nobody =
knows=20
  what it is."</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>...or it least, this is the working premise behind the =
water-engine in=20
  its most current rationalization...for the benefit of those cranky=20
  under-educated inventors or contrarians who&nbsp;are open to the =
possibility=20
  of this kind of "moonshine"...and don't really care what the =
science-elite has=20
  pre-ordained....aka.... just&nbsp;your average vort.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Jones</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C32846.881364E0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat May 31 20:12:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA32405;
	Sat, 31 May 2003 20:11:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:11:31 -0700
Message-ID: <002001c327eb$5441c4a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <009e01c327bf$80136f60$0a016ea8 cpq> <002401c327e2$10768200$4190a7cb@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: What is water, really?
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:10:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA32374
Resent-Message-ID: <"fhQ482.0.Fw7.ZxMs-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/50680
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


RBR: Interesting post.....
                        Question ...if you had a cylinder with a steam atmosphere ,created a vacuum then as the steam condenses  , would the vacuum increase ? .


I can't think of any reason that vacuum would not increase (and be a problem) in a long-stoke low temperature engine, if it were not *specifically* designed "out." In fact, that sequence is the way that many of the old large steam engines (railroad type) operated: i.e. getting torque on both the expansion and exhaust (condensation) strokes. But those were very large bore, extremely high torque engines -probably having less power in terms of BHP than your average Corolla....That is different from the relevant mechanics here. (And also indicative of the fact that BHP is almost meaningless wrt true engine performance in heavy vehicles)

Even in faster revolution (>1000 RPM) steam engines, that kind of double action is not possible because of heat transfer rates, so that when using "water-fuel," the important thing would seem to be, not in optimizing heat-to torque conversion output, but in simply triggering the secondary reaction (H2O/ice sublimation explosion) - and this seems to require rather faster RPM, because you need adiabatic pressure increase (rapidity) immediately ahead of the explosion and with minimum time interval. 

Once the secondary reaction has been triggered, then the "excess" energy will materialize and the resultant gas pressure should be so large, in comparison to normal steam engine thermodynamics, that the typical conversion problems will minimize, and in fact the new problem will focus on keeping the power stoke short enough so that the temperature drop of expansion does not interfere with lowering the exhaust pressure below atmospheric. You definitely do not want < 1 atm at the bottom of the power stoke in this design. Something around a "square" bore/stoke ratio should suffice, along with a min. >10:1 (or much larger) compression ratio.

JB