From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  1 18:57:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA13592;
	Sat, 1 Nov 2003 18:54:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 18:54:40 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA46589.EA66E2F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:01:50 -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: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031030094926.01c0af08@pop.mindspring.com> <000001c3a025$038ad490$9f56ccd1@asus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"mJQH6.0.BK3.l77f_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52355
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Mike Carrell wrote:

> Jed wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > As for the creativity, joy, passion or raw sanity of people like Papp or
> > Correa, no one needs my help to judge these things.
>
> <snip>
>
> >You can read the debate between
> > Correa and Storms and decide for yourself whether Correa is creative. At
> > least with regard to basic physics, I don't call that "creative" -- I
> think
> > he has a screw loose. He does not sound joyful to me. Passionate, yes.
> > Please read the document and judge for yourself. You might agree with his
> > definition of "work." I would not want anyone to take my word for such
> > things. That makes me look like the accuser, or the source of nasty
> rumors,
> > when all I am doing is reporting what these people say about themselves.
> > Nothing I say about them is one-tenth as awful as what they say about
> > themselves.
>
> "....the eye of the beholder", as the saying goes. I have read a good
> portion of the correspondence between the Correas and Ed Storms, enough to
> see the drift of the conversation. I'm more familiar with the Correa's
> viewpoint than either Ed or Jed. I have had the benefit of hours of personal
> conversation and extended correspondence with all three. I do not expect my
> following comments to 'settle' anything. I will be satisfied with a bit more
> mellow perspective.
>
> First, Paulo Correa respects Ed Storms as a scientist, and has said so to me
> directly.

Perhaps this opinion was expressed some time in the past because I have gotten
the recent impression that this opinion has changed because of my relationship
with Jed through www.LENR-CANR.org.

> The correspondence is very polite. The discussion revolves around
> the Correa's observations of the behavior of an electroscope, a very simple
> device for demonstrating electrostatic charge. It consists of closed
> insulating vessel, usually glass, in which a length of conducting metal foil
> is draped over a horizontal wire, which is bent to allow one end to protrude
> through an insulating stopper. When 'charged', the ends of the foil 'leaves'
> mutually repel until the 'charge' is somehow dissipated.
>
> While 'charged', the foil remains elevated against the pull of gravity. In
> the language of conventional physics, no "work" is being done to maintain
> the foil elevated and 'motionless'. The Correas assert that "work" is being
> done. Thus begins an extended dispute and Jed's fulminating assertion that
> the Correa's don't understand the definitionof "work" and are therefore
> [unprintable]. I can say that they perfectly well understand the
> conventional definition of work, but they are pointing to a more fundamental
> issue having to do with the nature of "energy" [formally defined as the
> 'ability to do work', which is a kind of hand waving, for there exists no
> more fundamental definition, even if everybody uses the term and think they
> know what it means].

My problem, which I tried to express in my discussion with the Correas, is
their using a word (Work), that has a definite definition, to describe a novel
idea.  I would have had no problem, which I expressed to them, if they had
said, "yes we agree with your understanding of conventional work, but we wish
to describe something different.  We will call this new concept "internal work"
or some other word".  Instead, they insisted on using the word "Work" to
describe their concept and got annoyed at my arguments.  It is hard enough to
describe a novel idea without confusing the description by making up
definitions that are unique to the situation.

>
>
> On a microscopic level the foil consists of atoms in motion and motion
> within the atoms, so there is 'activity'. Somehow it is maintained. Standard
> physics in a way glosses over all this. The Correas used a metaphor:
> consider holding a weight stationalry at arm's length against the pull of
> gravity. You would soon sweat with the "work" involved. Now obviously
> producing the necessary tension in your muscles involves a complex
> expenditure of "energy" for which there are conventional ways of translating
> this into internal "work", even though "work" is not being done on the
> weight.

Using this metaphor further confuses the issue because work is not being done
by the arm, but by the chemical reactions occurring in the arm.  If the Correas
wish a better metaphor they might propose a piece of paper being held aloft by
the wind - the wind being the aether or some other imagined but external force
acting on the electroscope leaves.

>
>
> The Correas are not being "conventional". From their early studies of
> Reich's aether and orgone energy to the PAGD cell, to their return to orgone
> accumulators and electroscopes, the Correas have been in pursuit of a
> different and perhaps more fundamental description of physical reality. In
> doing this, they have used language of people such as Reich and Tesla to
> make distinctions which may be important but have been glossed over in
> contemporary physics.  Thus there arises a lot of discussion of terms,
> definitions, and concepts. One could dismiss all this as another instance of
> verbose pseudoscience were it not for the remarkable properties of the PAGD
> cell and other observations. I noted in the correspondence that the Correas
> repeatedly referred to monographs on their website defining various
> concepts. I could not tell from the dialogue, as far as I read, if Ed had
> ever downloaded and attempted to master them. I have not read these, perhaps
> I will at some point.

To some extent, my initial discussion was a test of how effectively I and the
Correas might communicate.  I do not have the patience nor the time to attempt
a difficult conversation that can not end in some understanding.  Once I
discovered such understanding was impossible, I dropped the subject and went
back to something I have some hope of understanding.  I can only wish the
Correas luck in their efforts and in their attempts to explain their ideas to
conventional people.

Mike, I hope these comments make my approach a little clearer.

Ed

>
>
> All of this is very much over Jed's head, which he freely admits, as is the
> work of Mills. I appreciate his candor in this. As said of the little girl
> with the curl, when Jed is good, he is very very good, and when he is off
> target....he is well, off target, pointedly so.
>
> I don't know if this helps anyone here. To go further requires a serious
> attempt to understand the Correa's line of thought. Demonizing people does
> not help.
>
> Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  1 19:35:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA05923;
	Sat, 1 Nov 2003 19:34:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 19:34:38 -0800
Message-ID: <000f01c3a0f2$25933500$3e79ccd1@asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec@snip.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031030094926.01c0af08@pop.mindspring.com> <000001c3a025$038ad490$9f56ccd1@asus> <3FA46589.EA66E2F@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:33:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"LEXr22.0.LS1.Dj7f_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52356
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ed Storms wrote:

<snip>
> >
> > First, Paulo Correa respects Ed Storms as a scientist, and has said so
to me
> > directly.
>
> Perhaps this opinion was expressed some time in the past because I have
gotten
> the recent impression that this opinion has changed because of my
relationship
> with Jed through www.LENR-CANR.org.

I have not been in touch with the Correas directly for some time. Dr.
Askanas, a friend and supporter of the Correas, surfaced on HSG with some
very harsh language after I posted some general comments intended to be
favorable about the Correas.

>
<snip>
>
> My problem, which I tried to express in my discussion with the Correas, is
> their using a word (Work), that has a definite definition, to describe a
novel
> idea.  I would have had no problem, which I expressed to them, if they had
> said, "yes we agree with your understanding of conventional work, but we
wish
> to describe something different.  We will call this new concept "internal
work"
> or some other word".  Instead, they insisted on using the word "Work" to
> describe their concept and got annoyed at my arguments.  It is hard enough
to
> describe a novel idea without confusing the description by making up
> definitions that are unique to the situation.

I know, I understood that clearly in the part of the dialogue I read. >
> >
> > On a microscopic level the foil consists of atoms in motion and motion
> > within the atoms, so there is 'activity'. Somehow it is maintained.
Standard
> > physics in a way glosses over all this. The Correas used a metaphor:
> > consider holding a weight stationary at arm's length against the pull
of
> > gravity. You would soon sweat with the "work" involved. Now obviously
> > producing the necessary tension in your muscles involves a complex
> > expenditure of "energy" for which there are conventional ways of
translating
> > this into internal "work", even though "work" is not being done on the
> > weight.
>
> Using this metaphor further confuses the issue because work is not being
done
> by the arm, but by the chemical reactions occurring in the arm.  If the
Correas
> wish a better metaphor they might propose a piece of paper being held
aloft by
> the wind - the wind being the aether or some other imagined but external
force
> acting on the electroscope leaves.

The metaphor could be better. Paulo's PhD is in the biological sciences, so
he is perfectly aware of your point. He would disagree that aether is an
"imagined" force. To him, it is quite "real", and therein lies the problem.
The term "aether" is completely out of fashion today, although it was used
over a century ago. It is generally considered now that all measurable
phenomena can be understood without recourse to an "aether". Part of the
problem are the definitions of "aether", which can be as varied as those of
God; whatever it takes to make your model work. There is a body of papers in
respected literature modeling fundamental particles as vortex knots in an
aether as a perfect fluid. The math can be horrendous. One can be
philosophically suspicious of the continued proliferation of the particle
zoo; one suspects that all these are variations of something more
fundamental.

The Correas have their own view of all this, as does Harold Aspden. There is
real difficulty in communicating new concepts. >
> >
<snip>
>
> To some extent, my initial discussion was a test of how effectively I and
the
> Correas might communicate.  I do not have the patience nor the time to
attempt
> a difficult conversation that can not end in some understanding.  Once I
> discovered such understanding was impossible, I dropped the subject and
went
> back to something I have some hope of understanding.  I can only wish the
> Correas luck in their efforts and in their attempts to explain their ideas
to
> conventional people.
>
> Mike, I hope these comments make my approach a little clearer.

Ed, your comments are quite consonant with the understanding I had of your
position. I'm quite aware that you have other things in progress and can't
take the time to dig into the massive material. While I have more time than
you do, at the moment I am also attending to other things while wishing the
Correas well in their endeavors.

Regards,
Mike Carrell


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  1 20:43:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA19765;
	Sat, 1 Nov 2003 20:37:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 20:37:16 -0800
From: Yakov <rockcast@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: rockcast@earthlink.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:40:31 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031030094926.01c0af08@pop.mindspring.com> <3FA46589.EA66E2F@ix.netcom.com> <000f01c3a0f2$25933500$3e79ccd1@asus>
In-Reply-To: <000f01c3a0f2$25933500$3e79ccd1@asus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200311012240.32114.rockcast@earthlink.net>
X-ELNK-Originating-IP: 67.233.31.116
Resent-Message-ID: <"j6nD_1.0.fq4.yd8f_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52357
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Saturday 01 November 2003 22:33, Mike Carrell wrote:
> Ed Storms wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > First, Paulo Correa respects Ed Storms as a scientist, and has said so
>
> to me
>
> > > directly.
> >
> > Perhaps this opinion was expressed some time in the past because I have
>
> gotten
>
> > the recent impression that this opinion has changed because of my
>
> relationship
>
> > with Jed through www.LENR-CANR.org.
>
> I have not been in touch with the Correas directly for some time. Dr.
> Askanas, a friend and supporter of the Correas, surfaced on HSG with some
> very harsh language after I posted some general comments intended to be
> favorable about the Correas.
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > My problem, which I tried to express in my discussion with the Correas,
> > is their using a word (Work), that has a definite definition, to describe
> > a
>
> novel
>
> > idea.  I would have had no problem, which I expressed to them, if they
> > had said, "yes we agree with your understanding of conventional work, but
> > we
>
> wish
>
> > to describe something different.  We will call this new concept "internal
>
> work"
>
> > or some other word".  Instead, they insisted on using the word "Work" to
> > describe their concept and got annoyed at my arguments.  It is hard
> > enough
>
> to
>
> > describe a novel idea without confusing the description by making up
> > definitions that are unique to the situation.
>
> I know, I understood that clearly in the part of the dialogue I read. >
>
> > > On a microscopic level the foil consists of atoms in motion and motion
> > > within the atoms, so there is 'activity'. Somehow it is maintained.
>
> Standard
>
> > > physics in a way glosses over all this. The Correas used a metaphor:
> > > consider holding a weight stationary at arm's length against the pull
>
> of
>
> > > gravity. You would soon sweat with the "work" involved. Now obviously
> > > producing the necessary tension in your muscles involves a complex
> > > expenditure of "energy" for which there are conventional ways of
>
> translating
>
> > > this into internal "work", even though "work" is not being done on the
> > > weight.
> >
> > Using this metaphor further confuses the issue because work is not being
>
> done
>
> > by the arm, but by the chemical reactions occurring in the arm.  If the
>
> Correas
>
> > wish a better metaphor they might propose a piece of paper being held
>
> aloft by
>
> > the wind - the wind being the aether or some other imagined but external
>
> force
>
> > acting on the electroscope leaves.
>
> The metaphor could be better. Paulo's PhD is in the biological sciences, so
> he is perfectly aware of your point. He would disagree that aether is an
> "imagined" force. To him, it is quite "real", and therein lies the problem.
> The term "aether" is completely out of fashion today, although it was used
> over a century ago. It is generally considered now that all measurable
> phenomena can be understood without recourse to an "aether". Part of the
> problem are the definitions of "aether", which can be as varied as those of
> God; whatever it takes to make your model work. There is a body of papers
> in respected literature modeling fundamental particles as vortex knots in
> an aether as a perfect fluid. The math can be horrendous. One can be
> philosophically suspicious of the continued proliferation of the particle
> zoo; one suspects that all these are variations of something more
> fundamental.
>
> The Correas have their own view of all this, as does Harold Aspden. There
> is real difficulty in communicating new concepts. >
>
> <snip>
>
> > To some extent, my initial discussion was a test of how effectively I and
>
> the
>
> > Correas might communicate.  I do not have the patience nor the time to
>
> attempt
>
> > a difficult conversation that can not end in some understanding.  Once I
> > discovered such understanding was impossible, I dropped the subject and
>
> went
>
> > back to something I have some hope of understanding.  I can only wish the
> > Correas luck in their efforts and in their attempts to explain their
> > ideas
>
> to
>
> > conventional people.
> >
> > Mike, I hope these comments make my approach a little clearer.
>
> Ed, your comments are quite consonant with the understanding I had of your
> position. I'm quite aware that you have other things in progress and can't
> take the time to dig into the massive material. While I have more time than
> you do, at the moment I am also attending to other things while wishing the
> Correas well in their endeavors.
>
> Regards,
> Mike Carrell


Hate to have to add more uneeded complexity to this, but there is a principle
in engineering called 'virtual work'.  The concept  is of forces that would do
some of this 'virtual work' if not constrained by other forces.  Castigliano's
principle applied to the fourth order differential equation of the elastic 
line when operating on statically indeterminate structures is a case in 
point.   So is slope deflection analyses on indeterminate structures.
Here we run into matrixes of many orders, each member consisting of
complex differentials.  Computers are needed to solve some of them if
a real or rational or combination of the above is even possible.   That is
where finite element analyses is born.  The Correas may know this
all too well, especially when chaos is thrown in.
  
Yakov

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov  2 12:27:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA23184;
	Sun, 2 Nov 2003 12:26:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 12:26:40 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: More Fink PAGD...
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 13:49:27 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEALDOAA.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: <"Lj6sF2.0.2g5._XMf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52358
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi All.

Jeff sent me some schematics, again I took the liberty
of converting the files into one PDF which is available
at this link

http://www.kpnconsulting.com/vortex/schematics.pdf

Compare this to the frontpage illustration of US5449989
to see how this differs from the Correa device.

Firstly, Jeff's cell is a two element cell, triggering
occurs at the breakover point rather than before as
in the Correa cell. Secondly, Jeff is not drawing a
clean vacuum as claimed in US5449989. The techniques
used by the Correas should be familar to those in
the neon sign industry, they use a bombarder to clean
the tube prior to use. Finally, the Correa device
makes full use of the ringdown from caps C3 and C5
when the gap fires, the circuit shown by Fink
only uses the negative portion of the pulse. Fink
also puts his collector circuit outside the current loop
of the discharge, and bundles C3 and C5 into
one cap. Also, C3-C5 are big caps, on order of 20000 
microfarads, Fink's C1 is on order of 1 microfarad.

Altogether a different circuit, I would
conclude. It should be understood by all that this
is not a reproduction of US5449989; let's not battle
over that issue OK???

I've had a chance to reread US5449989, it's been
years since I looked at it. Again I'm struck by
the fact that, when you edit out all the bizarre
personal attacks and diatribes, Paulo comes across
as a serious and intelligent researcher. The
patent is a bit wordy and neglects certain bits
of useful information but by and large he describes
the basic technology in terms accessable to most
technically literate researchers. It saddens me
that he'll not respond to thoughtful review of his
work, but produces volumes of text in response
to both real and perceived personal attacks.
One can speculate on the reasons for this, but
I simply urge Paulo to address the group directly
and ignore what flames may arise from others.
I know he follows the list pretty closely, so
how about it???

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 02:24:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id CAA04378;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 02:23:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 02:23:15 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcbd8adfb80@[12.110.74.28]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 01:23:59 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: EPR and FTL communication (Draft #3)
Resent-Message-ID: <"w1kJY3.0.G41.IoYf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52359
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>From time to time, quantum mechanics paradoxes, faster than light (FTL)
communication, and cryptographic issues have been discussed here on vortex.
These issues all come together in a package when the Einstein Podolsky
Rosen (EPR) paradox is concerned.  The EPR paradox consists of the fact
that photons that are quantum entangled must, upon one of the photon states
being measured,  communicate the measured state to the paired photon
instantaneously, and thus faster than light itself can travel.

The purpose here is to suggest an experiment to determine if the quantum
states of paired photons are truly communicated and maintained on an
instant basis.

A method is suggested here to determine if a hidden orthogonal state of
polarization is maintained at FTL speed between entangled photons.  The
method entails the use the chirality of sugar or other materials with
similar magneto-optical properties to rotate the direction of polarization
of one photon of the entangled pair during a specific time period and then
detect whether or not the paired photon rotates during that time period.
Rotation of polarization is a relative effect.  If the rotation in some
specific period of time can be detected, then it is demonstrated that
quantum state is continually maintained.

The principle problem with this method is that it may not be possible to
rotate the polarization of one photon of an entangled pair without breaking
the entanglement.

The method consists of the following steps:

1. Use of an entangled photon generator which creates two channels of
polarized entangled photons.

2. One channel, called the local channel, consists of a delay loop that
delays  photons in a fiber channel such that a communication signal is
imposed upon them just prior to the time the photons in the communication
channel arrive at their destination.  The local channel is assumed to be
located entirely at the transmitting site.  Alternatively the entangled
stream generator can be located at the half-way point between sender and
receiver, Alice and Bob, and beam one channel to each.

3. Photons in the local channel, after sufficient delay, are routed through
a device (a rotator) that rotates the polarization of the photons in the
local channel.  Such a device can be made from sugar water inside an
electromagnetic solenoid.  Polarization of any light directed through the
main axis of the solenoid will be rotated an amount that depends on the
strength of the magnetic field and the length of the solenoid enclosed
sugar-water path.  For purposes of establishing a high data rate, the
photons can be diverted (fast electromechanical mirror switched) through
one of two paths: (a) a path through a 90 degree rotator or (b) a
straight-through path.

4. A polarizing filter is located in path (a) following the rotator.  This
is oriented so as to pass photons that are properly rotated 90 degrees.  A
detector is then used to detect photons that make it thorough path a.

5. Photons in the communication channel are passed through a final
polarizing filter (the final filter) oriented orthogonal to the channel
beam and to the polarization direction of the photons in the communication
channel as set by the initial polarizing filter but without any rotation
being applied to the local channel beam.  Photons that are paired with
local channel photons that pass through channel a should thus pass through
the final filter also.  Photons that are paired with local channel photons
that pass through channel b should thus be rejected by the final filter.

5. Photons that pass through the final filter are then directed to a
detector that provides the output signal of the communications channel to
Bob.

7. The timing of path change between paths a and b in the local channel is
manipulated by Alice so as to send meaningful messages to Bob.

When a photon pair is entangled, and the photons in the local channel are
diverted down path a, then they should be detected by both Bob and Alice's
detectors.  When a photon pair is entangled, and the photons in the local
channel are diverted down path b, then they should not be detected by
either Bob or Alice's detectors.  This assumes that the direction of
polarization of the photons in the local channel is instantaneously relayed
to the entangled photons in the communication channel.

Note that this method only depends on detection of (relative) rotation at a
specific time interval from photon creation.  This method eliminates the
need for knowing the initial state of the photons involved.  Polarization
filters  in the local channel need not actually be used to effect the
communication.

If the method works as hoped then it is possible to make the message
available for reading during a very select time interval.  This is
accomplished by passing the local channel photons in path a through the
rotator and then, after a brief time interval, passing the same photons
through a rotator that rotates the photons back to their original
orientation.  If the communication is via light beam, then this sets a
limit to how far away the receiver Bob can be.  Further, it requires an
eavesdropper, provided he is closer than the intended receiver, to know
exactly how much delay to add to the received message to obtain a proper
signal.  The sender Alice can protect the actual message by passing the
local beam through additional meaningless random rotations (at other times)
that hide the location (in time) of the real data.  Further, the
eavesdropper can not simply detect the polarization of a photon and then
pass on a photon with the detected angle to hide the eavesdropping.  The
reason for this is that, provided the eavesdropping occurs too early, the
photons are all oriented in the same direction.  The bogus replacement
photons are then all oriented in the same direction and further, since they
are not entangled, are not subject to the (later) communication of the
state of rotation.  The eavesdropper must be physically at Bob's location
to eavesdrop.  If the eavesdropper is located too far away, then the
message is no longer available to him.

Note that the delay for communication is adjusted by making the local
channel delay local photon rotation until just prior to the arrival of the
communication channel photons at their destination.  The delay could be
much less, but then this increases the message transmission delay, i.e. the
message latency time as opposed to the data rate.

An experiment requiring the simplest message would involve sending a single
bit via a one-way FTL communication channel and returning it via a second
one-way (return) FTL communication channel, and repeating this process to
establish an oscillation.  It is then necessary to transmit over a
sufficient distance D that the oscillation frequency f is faster than the
frequency F = c/D that can be achieved by light.  A 10 km communication
link (each way) need only cycle faster than about 15 kHz to break the light
speed barrier.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 06:45:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA23528;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 06:42:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 06:42:13 -0800
Message-ID: <004401c3a217$a4bb6d40$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: HOOH prototypes
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 06:34:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0041_01C3A1D4.964D68A0"
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: <"oFkLf3.0.Wl5.4bcf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52360
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_0041_01C3A1D4.964D68A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In past months, I posted several times to vortex about the intriguing =
prospects of possibly using HOOH as a substitute auto fuel or fuel =
extender, not knowing that some brave soul (aka the "Swiss Rocket Man") =
has already taken the concept to a high degree of experiential =
implementation....

Here is his add-on accessory for the bicycle... This could really speed =
up your commute!

http://www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete09.html


And check out a go-cart that goes 0-170 in 2.6 seconds:

http://www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete08.html

Problem is, he can't yet make peroxide "one the fly," using a portions =
of the engines' electrical output (BION it may be possible!)... but all =
one can say about this guys' collection of rolling-stock, not to mention =
'cahones' is Wow!

Jones

if you are not "Madeline Albright aware" (she supposedly told Castro he =
was 'deficient'), and/or don't know what 'cahones' are. check out:
http://www.sickone.com/cahones.html
------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C3A1D4.964D68A0
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>In past months, I posted several times to vortex about the =
intriguing=20
prospects of possibly using HOOH as a substitute auto fuel or fuel =
extender, not=20
knowing that some brave soul (aka the&nbsp;"Swiss Rocket Man")&nbsp;has =
already=20
taken the concept to a high degree of experiential =
implementation....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Here is his add-on accessory for the bicycle... This could really =
speed up=20
your commute!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete09.html">http:/=
/www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete09.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>And check out a go-cart that goes 0-170 in 2.6 seconds:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete08.html">http:/=
/www.meditech.ch/exoticthermoengineering/ete08.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Problem is, he can't yet make&nbsp;peroxide "one the fly," using a =
portions=20
of the engines' electrical&nbsp;output (BION it may be possible!)... but =
all one=20
can say about this guys' collection of rolling-stock, not to mention =
'cahones'=20
is Wow!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>if you are not "Madeline Albright aware" (she supposedly told =
Castro he was=20
'deficient'), and/or don't know what 'cahones' are. check out:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.sickone.com/cahones.html">http://www.sickone.com/cahon=
es.html</A></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C3A1D4.964D68A0--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 07:12:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA06937;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 07:08:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 07:08:58 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031103095129.01c0b648@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:08:52 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"s6Zuw2.0.Fi1.9-cf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52361
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell writes:

 > I have read a good
 > portion of the correspondence between the Correas and Ed Storms, enough to
 > see the drift of the conversation. . . .

 > First, Paulo Correa respects Ed Storms as a scientist, and has said so to me
 > directly. The correspondence is very polite.

Perhaps you should read to the end. If this is polite I would hate to see 
Correa in a bad mood.


 > While 'charged', the foil remains elevated against the pull of gravity. In
 > the language of conventional physics, no "work" is being done to maintain
 > the foil elevated and 'motionless'. The Correas assert that "work" is being
 > done. Thus begins an extended dispute and Jed's fulminating assertion that
 > the Correa's don't understand the definitionof "work"

Of course it begins and ends. There is no motion and no heat. Therefore 
there is no work. That is the definition of work.


 > I can say that they perfectly well understand the
 > conventional definition of work, but they are pointing to a more fundamental
 > issue having to do with the nature of "energy" [formally defined as the
 > 'ability to do work',

That is not work. It is potential energy.


 > On a microscopic level the foil consists of atoms in motion and motion
 > within the atoms, so there is 'activity'. Somehow it is maintained.

If you are going to define it that way, you might as well say the atoms at 
the bottom of a boulder "work" to keep the boulder from undergoing 
gravitational collapse. Maybe they do, but it is not "work" in the normal 
sense, because they do not move or generate heat.


 >  Standard physics in a way glosses over all this.

I do not know enough about subatomic physics to say how this is treated, 
but I am sure the textbooks to not "gloss over" this. The need to explain 
it would occur to anyone. Perhaps the textbooks explain it incorrectly, or 
Correa has a better explanation, but he will not persuade anyone by 
arbitrarily redefining basic physics terms, trashing the first law of 
thermodynamics, or by comparing electroscopes with arms.


 > The Correas used a metaphor:
 > consider holding a weight stationalry at arm's length against the pull of
 > gravity. You would soon sweat with the "work" involved.

That is not a metaphor; it is a fact. Your arm produces heat when it does 
that. The electroscope produces no heat. An arm holding up a weight it 
nothing like an electroscope.


 > All of this is very much over Jed's head, which he freely admits . . .

I do not! I understand this perfectly well. I understand it better than 
Correa does.


 > . . . as is the work of Mills. . . .

Some aspects of the work of Mills are over my head.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 08:33:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA32407;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:32:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:32:09 -0800
Message-ID: <002901c3a21f$76279fa0$d209bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Hydrocarbon Surplus in the Universe
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:30:26 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e2e83aa69c741a990e0e3e0ffb2aa0ed350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"FZ6an3.0.7w7.8Cef_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52362
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Based on the atom abundance's in the universe there should be lots of  hydrocarbon
(CxHy) molecules around after the oxygen tied up by the metals as oxides (MxOy) is
accounted for.

http://www.webelements.com/

Hydrogen:

Abundance ppb by weight                              ppb by atoms
 Universe 750000000                                    930,000,000     H2  gas
 Sun 750000000                                           930,000,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 24000000           170000000
 Crustal rocks 1500000                                31,000,000
 Sea water 107800000                                 662000000
 Stream 115000000                                     110000000
 Human 100000000                                     620000000

Carbon:
Abundance ppb by weight                         ppb by atoms
 Universe 5000000                                     500,000       CO2  gas
 Sun 3000000                                            300,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 15000000         18000000
 Crustal rocks 1800000                             3,100,000
 Sea water 28000                                      14,400
 Stream 1200                                              100
 Human 230000000                                 120000000

Nitrogen:
Abundance ppb by weight                      ppb by atoms
 Universe 1000000                                  90,000               NH3 gas     N2
gas
 Sun 1000000                                         90,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 1400000       1400000
 Crustal rocks 20000                              29,000
 Sea water 500                                       220
 Stream 240                                            17
 Human 26000000                                12000000


Oxygen:
Abundance ppb by weight                      ppb by atoms
 Universe 10000000                                  800,000          O2 gas
 Sun 9000000                                           700,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 410000000     480000000
 Crustal rocks 460000000                        600,000,000
 Sea water 857000000                            331000000
 Stream 880000000                                 55000000
 Human 610000000                                 240000000

Magnesium:
Abundance ppb by weight                       ppb by atoms
 Universe 600000                                     30,000        MgO  MgCO3
 Sun 700000                                            30,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 120000000    100000000
 Crustal rocks 29000000                         25,000,000
 Sea water 1326000                               337000
 Stream 4100                                          170
 Human 270000                                     70000

Aluminum:
Abundance ppb by weight                 ppb by atoms
 Universe 50000                                    2,000                        Al2O3
 Sun 60000                                            3,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 9300000    6700000
 Crustal rocks 82000000                    63,000,000
 Sea water 5                                             1.1
 Stream 400                                             15
 Human 900                                             210

Silicon:
Abundance ppb by weight                      ppb by atoms
 Universe 700000                                   30,000                    SiO2
 Sun 900000                                           40,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 140000000   100000000
 Crustal rocks 270000000                      200,000,000
 Sea water 1000                                       220
 Stream 5000                                            180
 Human 260000                                     58000

Calcium:

 Abundance ppb by weight                   ppb by atoms
 Universe 70000                                       2,000            CaO    CaCO3
 Sun 70000                                              2,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 11000000      5200000
 Crustal rocks 50000000                         26,000,000
 Sea water 4220                                      650
 Stream 1500                                          38
 Human 14000000                                 2200000


Iron:
Abundance ppb by weight                          ppb by atoms
 Universe 1100000                                      20,000          FeO    Fe2O3
Fe3O4
 Sun 1000000                                             30,000
 Meteorite (carbonaceous) 220000000        77000000
 Crustal rocks 63000000                             23,000,000
 Sea water 3                                                   0.33
 Stream 670                                                    12
 Human 60000                                                6700


Regards,

Frederick






From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 09:29:26 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA08201;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:27:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:27:40 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0bbbcc31feecdb@[64.61.217.239]>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:28:15 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"YArZT1.0.102.C0ff_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Unidentified subject!
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52363
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A


1. New Faster Computers from Israel?
From: Voice of Judea <listmaster@voiceofjudea.net>
Subject: Israel Headlines
   Israeli firm has fast processor

An Israeli start-up company has developed a super-fast processor. The 
Enlight processor produced by Lenslet uses optics instead of silicon 
and can compute at the speed of light. The processor may be used in 
computers, telephones and satellite dishes, among other applications. 
The company says it has contracts with Israels Defense Ministry and 
is negotiating with entities in Europe, Japan and the United States.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 09:49:04 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA22806;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:46:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:46:54 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031103124319.01c0b560@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 12:46:48 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: OFF TOPIC Open source voting machines
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"lvUXk1.0.Aa5.EIff_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52364
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,61045,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

This topic came up here after the Florida election fiasco. Voting machines 
in Australia use open source code. This is how it should be done. One of 
the prime tenets of modern cryptography is that the method of encryption 
(the algorithm) must be made public, so that experts everywhere can check 
it for weaknesses.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov  3 12:26:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA05070;
	Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:24:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:24:03 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:24:00 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: "Carbon onions"
In-Reply-To: <a05111b0bbbcc31feecdb@[64.61.217.239]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311031222470.943-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"8egbz.0.3F1.Zbhf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52365
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Here's an interesting bit:

   Concentric buckyballs squeeze out diamond
   http://www.uni-ulm.de/elektronenmikroskopie/Mat-Forsch-MPI-Onions.html




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Tue Nov  4 09:04:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA03555;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 08:59:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 08:59:09 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104114331.01c0b680@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 11:58:55 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"CCMff1.0.Lt.Thzf_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52366
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty writes:

 > Here's an interesting bit:
 >
 >    Concentric buckyballs squeeze out diamond

This may be the first example of atomic-scale manufacturing performed with 
atomic scale tools. As far as I know, the first direct manipulation of 
atoms was performed by IBM, using scanning tunnelling microscopy to 
re-arrange xenon atoms to spell out "IBM" on a surface. See:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/section2_84_14.html

Quote: "This experiment was done with a desktop instrument no bigger or 
more complicated than a compact disc player."

Another quote: "Recently, IBM San Jose used a scanning tunneling microscope 
to, in Feynman's words, put the atom right where the chemist says."

Arthur Clarke may have came up with this idea before Feynman. In "Profiles 
of the Future" (1963) Clarke predicted that eventually all manufacturing 
would be done on the atomic scale, with machines capable of producing any 
object, starting from supplies of elements broken into atoms (plasma, I 
suppose). He added that industrial scale transmutation might make it 
possible to manufacture any object starting with only one element. 
Presumably that would be whatever element is non-toxic and convenient to 
store. Gold or iron might be a good choice.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 10:24:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA23836;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:20:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:20:55 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 09:21:42 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: EPR and FTL communication
Resent-Message-ID: <"SLpL-2.0.Aq5.6u-f_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52368
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Quantum mechanics paradoxes, faster than light (FTL) communication, and
cryptographic issues come together in a package where the Einstein Podolsky
Rosen (EPR) paradox is concerned.  The EPR paradox consists of the fact
that photons that are quantum entangled must, upon one of the photon states
being measured,  communicate the measured state to the paired photon
instantaneously, and thus faster than light itself can travel.

One purpose here is to suggest an experiment to determine if the quantum
states of paired photons are truly communicated and maintained on an
instant basis.

A method is suggested here to determine if a hidden orthogonal state of
polarization is maintained at FTL speed between entangled photons.  The
method entails the use the chirality of sugar or other materials with
similar magneto-optical properties to rotate the direction of polarization
of one photon of an entangled pair during a specific time period and then
detect whether or not the paired conjugate photon rotates during that same
time period.  Rotation of polarization is a relative effect.  If conjugate
rotation in some specific period of time can be detected then it is
demonstrated that the conjugate quantum state is continually maintained.

A method is provided to use this principle, if it is found to be correct,
for useful communication.  The principle problem with this method is that
it may not be possible to rotate the polarization of one photon of an
entangled pair without breaking the entanglement.

The method consists of the following steps:

1. Use of an entangled photon generator which creates two channels of
entangled photons: the local channel and the communication channel. The
photons in the communication channel are conjugates of their entangled
counterparts in the local channel.   The polarization direction of
conjugate pairs is orthogonal.

2. A delay is provided in the local channel that delays photons in a fiber
channel such that a communication signal is only imposed upon the photons
at about the time of receipt at the destination.  The local channel is
assumed to be located entirely at the transmitting site.  Alternatively the
entangled photon generator can be located at the half-way point between
sender and receiver, Alice and Bob, and beam one channel to each.

3. Photons in the local channel, after sufficient delay, are routed through
a device (a rotator) that rotates the polarization of the photons in the
local channel.  Such a device can be made from sugar water inside an
electromagnetic solenoid.  Polarization of any light directed through the
main axis of the solenoid will be rotated an amount that depends on the
strength of the magnetic field and the length of the solenoid enclosed
sugar-water path.  For purposes of establishing a high data rate, the
photons can be diverted (fast electromechanical mirror switched) through
one of two paths: (a) a path through a 90 degree rotator or (b) a
straight-through path.

4. Photons in the communication channel are passed through a polarized
filter (the initial filter) at Bob's location.

5. Photons in the communication channel are then passed through a final
polarizing filter (the final filter) at Bob's location.  The final filter
is oriented orthogonal to the initial filter.  The delay in the local
channel is such that the photons in the local channel that are diverted
through path (a) pass through the rotator after the time their conjugate
photons pass through the initial filter at Bob's location, but before the
conjugates hit the final filter at Bob's location.

6. Photons that pass through the final filter are then directed to a
detector that provides the output signal of the communications channel to
Bob.

7. The timing of switching between paths (a) and (b) in the local channel
is manipulated by Alice so as to (hopefully) send meaningful messages to
Bob.

When a photon pair is entangled, and the photons in the local channel are
diverted down path (a), then the conjugates should pass through both of
Bob's filters.  This assumes that the direction of polarization of
individual photons in the local channel is instantaneously relayed to the
entangled photons in the communication channel, and that the entanglement
is not disrupted by the rotation.  When the photons in the local channel
are diverted down path (b), then their conjugates should not rotate and
thus should fail to pass through Bob's filter pair, because his filters are
orthogonal to each other and the beam.

Note that this communication method only depends on detection of (relative)
rotation at a specific time interval from photon creation.  The method
eliminates the need for knowing the initial state of the photons involved.
No polarization filters are used in the local channel to effect the
communication.

If the method works as suggested then it is possible to make the message
available for reading only during a very select time interval.  This is
accomplished by passing the local channel photons in path (a) through the
rotator and then, after a brief time interval, passing those same photons
through a second rotator that rotates the local photons back to their
original orientation.  This limits how far away the receiver Bob can be.
Further, it requires an eavesdropper, provided he is closer to Alice than
Bob, to know exactly how much delay to add to the received message to
obtain a proper signal.  Alice can protect the actual message by passing
the local beam through additional meaningless random rotations (at other
times) that hide the location (in time) of the real data.  Alice and Bob
can further hide the location in time of the message by adding a delay loop
at Bob's location.

The eavesdropper can not simply detect the polarization of a photon and
then pass on a photon with the detected angle to hide the eavesdropping.
The reason for this is that, when the eavesdropping occurs too early, the
photons are all oriented in the same direction.  The bogus replacement
photons are then all oriented in the same direction and further, since they
are not entangled to the original local channel photons, are not subject to
the (later) communication via rotation.  If Bob does not use a delay loop
then the eavesdropper must be physically at Bob's location to eavesdrop.
If the eavesdropper is located too far away from Alice, then the message is
not available to him.

An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending
a bit (actually only a change of channel state) via a one-way FTL
communication channel and returning it via a second one-way return FTL
communication channel, and repeating this process to establish an
oscillation.  To demonstrate FTL communication it is then necessary to
transmit over a sufficient distance D that the oscillation frequency, f, is
faster than the oscillation frequency F = c/D that can be achieved by
light.  A 10 km communication link (each way) need only cycle faster than
about 15 kHz to break the light speed barrier.

It may be of interest to look for photon sources in the universe that
produce a signal after their photons travel through mutually orthogonal
polarizing filters.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 11:41:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA20336;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:37:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:37:33 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 14:30:01 -0500
Subject: New from Akronos Publishing
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor@infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BBCD6869.996C%editor@infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"2Wa7j3.0.Sz4.y__f_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52369
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear All,


(See Akronos posting below -- after this personal note of mine.)

In the Correa Quicktime video clip that Akronos has announced you will learn
about a modified PAGD running not only a flywheel motor to over 17,000 rpm
(it speeds up to this angular velocity within 15-20 seconds, the basis for
easy calculation of over-unity values in the range 5/1 to 10/1, since the
PAGD is fed by DC current), but also capture of the auxiliary heat from the
PAGD accomplished in parallel by an MM6 Stirling engine, which continued to
run on the residual heat long after PAGD shut off.

The new Stirling Hyborac monograph, is also a profound illustration of the
presence of available aether energy -- which Oracs evidently capture from
*latent heat* produced by solar-sourced ambipolar radiation (this latent
heat is intimately related to the "latent heat" spoken of in conventional
steam/water physics, but which is poorly understood --actually not
understood at all-- there is extensive discussion of this in the Correa
monographs).  This is, in part, what Graneau et al have been seeing in their
arc discharge experiments in air and in water. The Stirling has been
calibrated by the Correas with resistance heaters (one can read about this
in the monograph), which proves that the *average for 48 hours*
round-the-clock *sensible heat* (at the Stirling hot plate, sitting on top
of the Faraday cage) developed within the Faraday cage is about 2 watts!
This is a huge continuous power source from what is clearly unexpected
environmental energy -- unless someone can find a flaw in the published
measurements, and the other fundamental thermal/electric/gravitational
studies that they have published.

The energy source is : 1. NOT LENR or cold fusion reactions; 2. NOT capture
of *sensible heat* from the environment; 3. NOT Puthoff et al's "ZPE"; 3.
NOT Mills' hydrinos; 4. NOT from "dark energy" or "dark matter".  It is
ultimately from *massfree* aether (the non-inertial "substance" from which
all inertial matter -- and all electric "charge" -- ultimately derives and
is composed).  In order to study this energy source, once must carefully
resolve the very real anomalies that have been described by the Correas
(building on the work of Wilhelm Reich), both thermal and
electroscope-related -- both in Oracs as well as concerns naked
electroscopes.  Just as in the case of LENR or cold fusion, to understand
its experimental reality, one must carefully study the anomalies therein
i.e. READ about and STUDY them.

The bottom line in all of this work is the following: there is NO SUCH THING
as "empty space."  You may evacuate all molecular and atomic species to your
heart's content and you will still have a perpetual source of energy in that
mass-evacuated space -- most elegantly seen in the Correa DVD (available at
www.aethera.org) where additional evacuated glass tubes added to the aether
motor circuit make the motor run faster and faster.  This aether is massfree
and it does NOT carry electromagnetic waves. The Michelson/Morley experiment
stands. Light is NOT what has been thought and modeled. Photons are local
productions only. Obviously EM mathematical models work and are fine for
most conventional engineering systems, but they most certainly do not work
for a comprehensive description of nature. Energy can be developed for real,
technical machines that does NOT come from E=mc^2 mass conversion.  There is
much more to nature than conventionally understood mass and conventionally
understood charge and conventionally understood EM theory.  Once again, as
in the failure of the mathematized fictions known as Special and General
Relativity, one sees that an incomplete view of nature is presented by a
restricted view of *experimental measurements* -- i.e. picking and choosing
what experiments one wishes to consider.  This goes equally for conventional
bigoted "thinkers" such as Park and Zimmerman, for advanced theorists and
pioneering experimenters such as Randell Mills and their followers (e.g. Tom
Stolper), and for pioneering theorists and experimenters in the CF/LENR
field.

In Infinite Energy #53, which will be out in January (#52 will appear in
late November), a joint paper by the Correas and me will have further
discussion of the calibration of these Stirling/Hyboracs - some of this
first-principles mechanical calibration was done in New Hampshire by me, and
confirmed by other mechanical methods in Canada, but the present
downloadable monograph is exclusively the work of the Correas.

Those who continue not to read and study and not to perform these
experiments, and who  come up with all manner of ridiculous and bigoted
excuses for not doing so will get what they deserve -- more wandering around
in a swamp of perpetual confusion.  Good luck in yours studies...

Finally, to answer why, in general, the Correas --and I too -- do not
attempt to carry on lengthy technical discussions on this Vortex-l forum,
Paulo Correa provides a comprehensive answer.  I happen to agree with most
all of its generalities and particulars, but it is HIS message to Vortex.  I
am sure that other attacked individuals and companies may feel the same way,
differing perhaps only in the matter of degree.  Fortunately, there are now
other venues in which accuracy and open-mindedness are valued

Eugene Mallove, Sc.D.
New Energy Foundation, Inc.  www.infinite-energy.com
***********************************************************


Dear Friends and Colleagues,

AKRONOS Publishing is pleased to announce the following new additions to
its website:

-  ABRI Monograph AS2-32:
   Correa, P & Correa, A (2003)
   "Around-the-clock free power from improved HYBORACs
   driving low delta-T gamma Stirling engines (Part IV)"
   
   http://www.aetherometry.com/abs-AS2v4.html#abstractAS2-32

   The monograph reports on the Correas' experiments with an improved
   HYBORAC design which permitted uninterrupted operation of the Stirling
   motor for over 48 hours.  It also contains input and output power
   calculations, and a comparison of the improved HYBORAC/Stirling
   technology with existing solar technologies.

   This is the fourth of a series of ABRI monographs dealing with the
   Correas' work on different HYBORAC/Stirling assemblies.  The first two
   reports in this series were released by Akronos as ABRI Monographs
   AS2-25 and AS2-26, and the third (which is not a prerequisite for the
   fourth) is scheduled for publication in the Infinite Energy journal.
   
   
-  A Quicktime video clip of a PAGD reactor driving an inverter flywheel
   and a low delta-T Stirling engine.
   
   http://www.aetherometry.com/cat-abrimedia.html
    
   A research note pertaining to this work is in preparation, and will be
   available in the near future to members of the International Society
   of Friends of Aetherometry (ISFA).
   

-  THE SERPENT'S TOOTH AND ITS EGG
   (or: How the Stupid Are so Often Malicious)
   
   http://www.aetherometry.com/serpent_index.html

   This article is a long-overdue anatomy of the base, scurrilous,
   unprovoked smear campaign that Jed Rothwell and others have been
   conducting for several years on the Vortex-l list.
   

Yours,

Laura McFinlay
Akronos Publishing
   


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 13:43:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20066;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 13:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 13:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104152951.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 15:58:28 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hPbKx1.0.Qv4.Eo1g_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52370
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

 > > producing the necessary tension in your muscles involves a complex
 > > expenditure of "energy" for which there are conventional ways of 
translating
 > > this into internal "work", even though "work" is not being done on the
 > > weight.
 >
 > Using this metaphor further confuses the issue because work is not being 
done
 > by the arm, but by the chemical reactions occurring in the arm.  If the 
Correas
 > wish a better metaphor they might propose a piece of paper being held 
aloft by
 > the wind - the wind being the aether or some other imagined but external 
force
 > acting on the electroscope leaves.

When paper is held aloft by wind (such as kite or a glider), it heats up. 
It heats up exactly as much as it would if dropped through still air. Of 
course this is much too small to measure by ordinary means. If the 
electroscope leaves were being held up by some dynamic force, they would 
heat up as well. Even if the force is not wind, it would have to counteract 
gravity and do work, and work always converts to heat. It does not matter 
how exotic the source may be; even "mass-free energy" -- if it exists -- 
must, in the end, convert to heat. If the force holding up iron leaves 
(similar to the gold electroscope leaves) comes from an electromagnet, for 
example, the electromagnet does internal work and gets warm. A permanent 
magnet does no work and does not get warm.

Of course the heat expended holding up electroscope leaves dynamically 
would be far too small to be measured by ordinary instruments, but I expect 
some microcalorimeters could detect it. They are used to measure the heat 
of impact of a single charged particle from space. Calorimetry, as 
Fleischmann points out, is still one of the most sensitive means of 
measuring energy. Correa's internal work hypothesis might be confirmed by 
doing microcalorimetry. It cannot be confirmed only by observing the 
macroscopic behavior of the leaves, or by theorizing about them. As far as 
I know, according to conventional physics, the forces that hold up 
electroscope leaves are static, like permanent magnetism, not dynamic.

The fact that the leaves gradually relax does not mean the forces are 
actually dynamic. Similar relaxation occurs when an object is held up by 
permanent magnets, which gradually fail (becoming aligned in all 
directions), or when an object is held by a rubber band that gradually 
stretches. Of course that change is dynamic, and work is gradually done, 
and the magnet or rubber band gets very slightly warm.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 14:15:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA00566;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20031104220559.37749.qmail@web11706.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:05:59 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: star mass
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"evN9j.0.g8.eH2g_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52371
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

anyone have any good links on estimating the amount of
mass lost to flares and cme's, and at what masses
stars do different things, change temp, ect?

been trying to do research to placate a friend, but
couldnt find any good links.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 14:22:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA16742;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:19:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:19:35 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA8260D.50101@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:19:57 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
References: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]> <3FA82547.6030506@pobox.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FA82547.6030506@pobox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"vxPIu.0.I54.sN2g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52372
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> (Nothing new here; 

I meant, there's nothing new in _MY_ note -- not that Horace was saying 
nothing new!

I didn't realize how ambiguous that sounded until I read the "return copy".

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 14:30:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA23654;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:26:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:26:21 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA8275E.1010405@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:25:34 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: New from Akronos Publishing
References: <BBCD6869.996C%editor@infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <BBCD6869.996C%editor@infinite-energy.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"sS0wN1.0.Qn5.DU2g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52373
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>-  THE SERPENT'S TOOTH AND ITS EGG
>   (or: How the Stupid Are so Often Malicious)
>


Whew!  Wordcount = 53,726

Seems like a terrible waste of time.  I really don't understand it's 
purpose.  And going off on Keith Nagel like that is quite unfair.

Although, I did enjoy the graphics, especially the butchering of Tesla!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 14:34:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06028;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:31:20 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:31:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcd5d47a813@[12.21.208.197]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 05:14:00 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: EPR and FTL communication
Resent-Message-ID: <"PQH7v2.0.5U1.sY2g_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52374
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Quantum mechanics paradoxes, faster than light (FTL) communication, and
cryptographic issues come together in a package where the Einstein Podolsky
Rosen (EPR) paradox is concerned.  The EPR paradox consists of the fact
that photons that are quantum entangled must, upon one of the photon states
being measured,  communicate the measured state to the paired photon
instantaneously, and thus faster than light itself can travel.

One purpose here is to suggest an experiment to determine if the quantum
states of paired photons are truly communicated and maintained on an
instant basis.

A method is suggested here to determine if a hidden orthogonal state of
polarization is maintained at FTL speed between entangled photons.  The
method entails the use the chirality of sugar or other materials with
similar magneto-optical properties to rotate the direction of polarization
of one photon of an entangled pair during a specific time period and then
detect whether or not the paired conjugate photon rotates during that same
time period.  Rotation of polarization is a relative effect.  If conjugate
rotation in some specific period of time can be detected then it is
demonstrated that the conjugate quantum state is continually maintained.

A method is provided to use this principle, if it is found to be correct,
for useful communication.  The principle problem with this method is that
it may not be possible to rotate the polarization of one photon of an
entangled pair without breaking the entanglement.

The method consists of the following steps:

1. Use of an entangled photon generator which creates two channels of
entangled photons: the local channel and the communication channel. The
photons in the communication channel are conjugates of their entangled
counterparts in the local channel.   The polarization direction of
conjugate pairs is orthogonal.

2. A delay is provided in the local channel that delays photons in a fiber
channel such that a communication signal is only imposed upon the photons
at about the time of receipt at the destination.  The local channel is
assumed to be located entirely at the transmitting site.  Alternatively the
entangled photon generator can be located at the half-way point between
sender and receiver, Alice and Bob, and beam one channel to each.

3. Photons in the local channel, after sufficient delay, are routed through
a device (a rotator) that rotates the polarization of the photons in the
local channel.  Such a device can be made from sugar water inside an
electromagnetic solenoid.  Polarization of any light directed through the
main axis of the solenoid will be rotated an amount that depends on the
strength of the magnetic field and the length of the solenoid enclosed
sugar-water path.  For purposes of establishing a high data rate, the
photons can be diverted (fast electromechanical mirror switched) through
one of two paths: (a) a path through a 90 degree rotator or (b) a
straight-through path.

4. Photons in the communication channel are passed through a polarized
filter (the initial filter) at Bob's location.

5. Photons in the communication channel are then passed through a final
polarizing filter (the final filter) at Bob's location.  The final filter
is oriented orthogonal to the initial filter.  The delay in the local
channel is such that the photons in the local channel that are diverted
through path (a) pass through the rotator after the time their conjugate
photons pass through the initial filter at Bob's location, but before the
conjugates hit the final filter at Bob's location.

6. Photons that pass through the final filter are then directed to a
detector that provides the output signal of the communications channel to
Bob.

7. The timing of switching between paths (a) and (b) in the local channel
is manipulated by Alice so as to (hopefully) send meaningful messages to
Bob.

When a photon pair is entangled, and the photons in the local channel are
diverted down path (a), then the conjugates should pass through both of
Bob's filters.  This assumes that the direction of polarization of
individual photons in the local channel is instantaneously relayed to the
entangled photons in the communication channel, and that the entanglement
is not disrupted by the rotation.  When the photons in the local channel
are diverted down path (b), then their conjugates should not rotate and
thus should fail to pass through Bob's filter pair, because his filters are
orthogonal to each other and the beam.

Note that this communication method only depends on detection of (relative)
rotation at a specific time interval from photon creation.  The method
eliminates the need for knowing the initial state of the photons involved.
No polarization filters are used in the local channel to effect the
communication.

If the method works as suggested then it is possible to make the message
available for reading only during a very select time interval.  This is
accomplished by passing the local channel photons in path (a) through the
rotator and then, after a brief time interval, passing those same photons
through a second rotator that rotates the local photons back to their
original orientation.  This limits how far away the receiver Bob can be.
Further, it requires an eavesdropper, provided he is closer to Alice than
Bob, to know exactly how much delay to add to the received message to
obtain a proper signal.  Alice can protect the actual message by passing
the local beam through additional meaningless random rotations (at other
times) that hide the location (in time) of the real data.  Alice and Bob
can further hide the location in time of the message by adding a delay loop
at Bob's location.

The eavesdropper can not simply detect the polarization of a photon and
then pass on a photon with the detected angle to hide the eavesdropping.
The reason for this is that, when the eavesdropping occurs too early, the
photons are all oriented in the same direction.  The bogus replacement
photons are then all oriented in the same direction and further, since they
are not entangled to the original local channel photons, are not subject to
the (later) communication via rotation.  If Bob does not use a delay loop
then the eavesdropper must be physically at Bob's location to eavesdrop.
If the eavesdropper is located too far away from Alice, then the message is
not available to him.

An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending
a bit (actually only a change of channel state) via a one-way FTL
communication channel and returning it via a second one-way return FTL
communication channel, and repeating this process to establish an
oscillation.  To demonstrate FTL communication it is then necessary to
transmit over a sufficient distance D that the oscillation frequency, f, is
faster than the oscillation frequency F = c/D that can be achieved by
light.  A 10 km communication link (each way) need only cycle faster than
about 15 kHz to break the light speed barrier.

It may be of interest to look for photon sources in the universe that
produce a signal after their photons travel through mutually orthogonal
polarizing filters.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 14:34:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06153;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:31:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:31:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3FA82547.6030506@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:16:39 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
References: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"8JinU3.0.3W1.PZ2g_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52375
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

(Nothing new here; it's just a dramatization of stuff Horace has
  already said.  I was off thinking about this rather silly relativity
  problem when I realized how relevant it was, and I couldn't resist
  posting it here.  Sincere apologies if it "bugs" anyone.)


The Relativistic Centipede -- aka the CCentipede
--- ------------ ---------    --- --- ----------

The CCentipede, which lives in the jungles of Far Pastafooslio, is
quite large, with many body segments, and pair of legs on every
segment.  It walks (er, runs) at a constant speed of 0.867c.

An entomologist -- call her 'E' -- is trying to catch the CCentipede.
While standing still in the jungle, 'E' has measured the CCentipede
carefully, using advanced instruments such as strings, clocks,
measuring sticks, and grad students, and has determined that the beast
appears to be exactly 50 feet long.  'E' has constructed a CCentipede
trap, consisting of a tunnel which is 50 feet long, with doors at each
end.  The trap has an additional very special gadget: A Super-C
Whizzbang Instantly Entangled Communicator which allows information to
be transferred instantly along the length of the tunnel, in the
tunnel's own rest frame.

Eventually, the CCentipede walks (er, runs) into the tunnel.  A sensor
senses the very moment that the REAR END of the CCentipede enters the
trap, and triggers the Super-C Communicator, which sends a pulse down
the length of the tunnel, causing both doors to slam shut _instantly_
and simultaneously (in the tunnel's own rest frame).  If all goes
well, the CCentipede will be trapped in very, very tight quarters.

Note, particularly, that the back (exit) door slams shut at the moment
when the CCentipede's nose is about to exit the trap, and note
carefully that this event is experienced by the CCentipede as well as
the trap.

BUT ... The CCentipede is a clever creature, and it, too, has a
Super-C Whizzbang Instantly Entangled Communicator, which allows it to
respond _instantly_ to any stimulus, along the entire length of its
body (that is, instantly and simultaneously in _its_ own rest frame).

In its rest frame, the CCentipede is 100 feet long, and the tunnel is
only 25 feet long, due to good ol' Relativity.  It sees the tunnel,
and dashes into it.  But at the moment when its nose is about to leave
the trap, as we know, the back (exit) door slams shut.  At that
instant, the CCentipede's Super-C Communicator springs into action
notifying all the CCentipede's legs of the closed door, and it stops
instantly, skidding only enough to allow it to shrink gracefully down
to its "stationary" length of 100 feet in the tunnel's rest frame.

BUT ... something is wrong ...

... the back end of the CCentipede has not entered the trap when it
stops!

SO, the trap hasn't been sprung yet.

SO, the doors never closed.

SO, the CCentipede didn't stop after all, and just ran right through
the open tunnel.

BUT ... something is wrong ...

The back end of the CCentipede must enter the trap as it runs through,
and that triggers the trap, and the doors slam shut.

SO, the CCentipede does see the doors close, and since the event of
the back (exit) door closing is in _both_ frames of reference, it
really does see the door close before its head leaves the trap, after
all.

SO, the CCentipede does stop, after all ...

SO, ...  >>>SPZZAPP<<<

At this moment, the sun and clouds disappear, and the sky turns a
solid, even, deep blue.  Enormous white letters appear, spelling
out...

   "MEMORY ACCESS VIOLATION BY SYSTEM PROCESS 'GOD'
    IF PROBLEM PERSISTS CONTACT YOUR SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR"

followed by many cryptic hexadecimal runes...

================================================================

Reconciling special relativity with FTL communication may present
challenges.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 15:02:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA21004;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:00:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:00:31 -0800
Message-ID: <00ca01c3a327$561dc730$c828010a@arghou.argcorp.argworldwide.com>
From: "GDC" <SnowDog@GoldDirectory.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]> <3FA82547.6030506@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:59:37 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Nov 2003 22:59:45.0110 (UTC) FILETIME=[56C1CF60:01C3A327]
Resent-Message-ID: <"oef7s1.0.y75.D-2g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52376
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I like the CCentipede paradox. Thank you very much for posting it. However,
you don't need a FTL communication device to use it. Imagine that the
entomologist, aware of the approaching CCentipede, simply sends a radio
command to the front door to close at the same time that the CCentipede
passes the back door. She can time this command so that the front door
closes at the exact same moment in her frame of reference, as the back door.
The CCentipide has a known speed, and the point at which it's rear-end
crosses the back door can be calculated. Isn't it the same problem? You
don't need an FTL radio to envision this paradox.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 15:20:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA03828;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:18:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:18:39 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick@highsurf.com@mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210100bbcde3e831ab@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104114331.01c0b680@pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104114331.01c0b680@pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 13:19:16 -1000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick@highsurf.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA03715
Resent-Message-ID: <"-AvmX3.0.kx.DF3g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52377
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A voice operated version would be nice.

"Tea, Earl Grey."

- RM
Honolulu, HI

>This may be the first example of atomic-scale manufacturing performed with atomic scale tools. As far as I know, the first direct manipulation of atoms was performed by IBM, using scanning tunnelling microscopy to re-arrange xenon atoms to spell out "IBM" on a surface. See:
>
>http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/section2_84_14.html
>
>Quote: "This experiment was done with a desktop instrument no bigger or more complicated than a compact disc player."
>
>Another quote: "Recently, IBM San Jose used a scanning tunneling microscope to, in Feynman's words, put the atom right where the chemist says."
>
>Arthur Clarke may have came up with this idea before Feynman. In "Profiles of the Future" (1963) Clarke predicted that eventually all manufacturing would be done on the atomic scale, with machines capable of producing any object, starting from supplies of elements broken into atoms (plasma, I suppose). He added that industrial scale transmutation might make it possible to manufacture any object starting with only one element. Presumably that would be whatever element is non-toxic and convenient to store. Gold or iron might be a good choice.
>
>- Jed

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 15:41:35 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA20949;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:38:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:38:47 -0800
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 21:25:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: John Schnurer <herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: To moderator
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311042122510.20187@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"fD-Tw.0.A75.7Y3g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52378
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



	Dear Moderator,

	Can you please put me in digest mode?  I do not have broswer based
E Mail so I am unable to "click" on different selections.  My E mail
volume is so heavy I need to go to digest for one message a week or one a
day, how ever it works, instead of a separate E Mail for each and every
message.

		Thanks,
						JH

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 15:49:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA27806;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:46:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:46:34 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: New from Akronos Publishing
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 17:09:25 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEBJDOAA.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: <BBCD6869.996C%editor@infinite-energy.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"M9TGx1.0.Lo6.Qf3g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52379
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

Gene writes:
/////////////////
Finally, to answer why, in general, the Correas --and I too -- do not
attempt to carry on lengthy technical discussions on this Vortex-l forum,
Paulo Correa provides a comprehensive answer.  I happen to agree with most
all of its generalities and particulars, but it is HIS message to Vortex.  I
am sure that other attacked individuals and companies may feel the same way,
differing perhaps only in the matter of degree.  Fortunately, there are now
other venues in which accuracy and open-mindedness are valued
   http://www.aetherometry.com/serpent_index.html
//////////////////

Having read a portion of the link above, and the exchange
between Ed Storms and Paulo, I'm forced to conclude that he
does not carry on technical discussions on Vortex-l because he
simply cannot.

I find it remarkable that if you, and he, are in agreement
that vortex is the devil's toejam, why do you both follow
the list so closely? Certainly a reading of the link above
shows a remarkable familiarity with the list and some
of it's members. He hates us all with a passion, yet he cannot
stop reading our commentary and following our discussions.
Very amusing....

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 16:17:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA20586;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:15:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:15:21 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502bbcdf1a984fd@[12.110.74.99]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:16:08 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
Resent-Message-ID: <"hdi4A.0.a15.O44g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52380
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:19 PM 11/4/3, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>> (Nothing new here;
>
>I meant, there's nothing new in _MY_ note -- not that Horace was saying
>nothing new!
>
>I didn't realize how ambiguous that sounded until I read the "return copy".


I have not seen the message being responded to here.  My ISP must be having
email problems.  I sent the original of the "EPR and FTL communication"
post at about 4 or 5 AM here, but it still has not shonw up.  The one that
was posted and returned from vortex was sent at about 10 AM.  The first
copy may or may not show up later.

BTW, I expect the posted method to be unworkable.  This is beacause it is
genearally accepted that the quantum state of the paired photon is not
actually set until an observation occurs on the original and thus destroys
it.  In fact the photon quantum state of even a single photon is highly
non-determinate, at least by conventional thinking.  A great example of
this is sending a beam of light through two orthogonal polarizing filters.
Nearly 100 percent of the light is quenched.  However, place a third
polarizing filter between the two orinigal filters at 45 degree orientation
and some (about 1/4) of the light passes right through all three filters.
This is because the probability of a photon passing through two filters at
45 degrees is about 0.5, and thus the probability of passing through all
three is about 0.25.  If each photon had a continuously determinate state
of polarization then the probability of passing through all three filters
would be near zero, and even less than the probability of passing through
the two orthogonal filters.

This thought leads to a possible variation of the proposed experiment.  The
reciever Bob uses three filters, each oriented at 45 degrees to its
predicessor.  In path (a) the polarization of the local channel photons is
detected, thus setting the polarization of the communication channel
photons.  In path (b) the polarization of the photons is not detected, at
least until much later.  It is then of interest as to the probability of
the detected path (a) paired photons making it though the 3 filters vs the
probability of the non-detected path (b) photons making through the 3
filters.  If the probability changes, then instant communication is
enabled.  The path (a) paired photons should have a reduced probability as
compared to the path (b) paired photons of making it through Bob's three
filters.  No rotation would be used in this version of the experiment.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 18:55:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA19989;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:53:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:53:02 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA86625.5070004@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:53:25 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
References: <v01530500bbcd9e9e0211@[12.21.208.200]> <3FA82547.6030506@pobox.com> <00ca01c3a327$561dc730$c828010a@arghou.argcorp.argworldwide.com>
In-Reply-To: <00ca01c3a327$561dc730$c828010a@arghou.argcorp.argworldwide.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Xkwa-3.0.Eu4.DO6g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52381
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

GDC wrote:
 > I like the CCentipede paradox. Thank you very much for posting it.
 > However, you don't need a FTL communication device to use it. Imagine
 > that the entomologist, aware of the approaching CCentipede, simply
 > sends a radio command to the front door to close at the same time
 > that the CCentipede passes the back door. She can time this command
 > so that the front door closes at the exact same moment in her frame
 > of reference, as the back door. The CCentipide has a known speed, and
 > the point at which it's rear-end crosses the back door can be
 > calculated. Isn't it the same problem? You don't need an FTL radio to
 > envision this paradox.

That's basically how I originally posted it on alt.sci.relativity.  But
there's actually a qualitatively simple explanation.

If the doors close, then the CCentipede ends up being squeezed really
hard -- in _its_ frame it skids into the trap after its head hits the
back door, and the front door closes after the whole beast is squeezed
inside.

OTOH, if it tries to evade the trap by stopping as soon as it
encounters the closed back door, the issue it runs up against is speed
of light delay.  All signals controlling the doors, and all signals in
the CCentipede's nervous system, are limited to the SOL.  When include
the signal propagation delays, you find that the information won't get
everywhere it's needed fast enough for the CCentipede to stop before
it slides all the way into the trap in any case where the doors
actually close in the stationary frame.

In this particular case, in the CCentipede's frame the tunnel is 25 feet
long, and is traveling at 0.867C.  When the exit door closes, suppose a
signal saying "STOP!" starts to propagate through the CCentipede's body
at C.  The critical question is which gets to the CCentipede's back end
first:  the STOP signal, or the entrance door to the trap?  The signal
takes 100 feet/C; the door takes 75 feet/0.867C.  The ratio is about
1.16.  So, the signal takes about 16% longer to get to the end of the
CCentipede than the door of the trap, and the CCentipede can't stop
before it slides all the way into the tunnel.

On the other hand, don't ask me to prove that there is _no_ set of
parameters that lead to a paradox -- all I can do in that case is wave
at the linear algebra it's based on and say "It's all consistent, so SR
must be too".


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov  4 19:14:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA04889;
	Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:12:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:12:40 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcdda6d0f65@[12.21.208.145]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:00:51 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: EPR and FTL communication
Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"yDO9j1.0.wB1.cg6g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52382
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:19 PM 11/4/3, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>> (Nothing new here;
>
>I meant, there's nothing new in _MY_ note -- not that Horace was saying
>nothing new!
>
>I didn't realize how ambiguous that sounded until I read the "return copy".


I have not seen the message being responded to here.  My ISP must be having
email problems.  I sent the original of the "EPR and FTL communication"
post at about 4 or 5 AM here, but it still has not shonw up.  The one that
was posted and returned from vortex was sent at about 10 AM.  The first
copy may or may not show up later.

BTW, I expect the posted method to be unworkable.  This is beacause it is
genearally accepted that the quantum state of the paired photon is not
actually set until an observation occurs on the original and thus destroys
it.  In fact the photon quantum state of even a single photon is highly
non-determinate, at least by conventional thinking.  A great example of
this is sending a beam of light through two orthogonal polarizing filters.
Nearly 100 percent of the light is quenched.  However, place a third
polarizing filter between the two orinigal filters at 45 degree orientation
and some (about 1/4) of the light passes right through all three filters.
This is because the probability of a photon passing through two filters at
45 degrees is about 0.5, and thus the probability of passing through all
three is about 0.25.  If each photon had a continuously determinate state
of polarization then the probability of passing through all three filters
would be near zero, and even less than the probability of passing through
the two orthogonal filters.

This thought leads to a possible variation of the proposed experiment.  The
reciever Bob uses three filters, each oriented at 45 degrees to its
predicessor.  In path (a) the polarization of the local channel photons is
detected, thus setting the polarization of the communication channel
photons.  In path (b) the polarization of the photons is not detected, at
least until much later.  It is then of interest as to the probability of
the detected path (a) paired photons making it though the 3 filters vs the
probability of the non-detected path (b) photons making through the 3
filters.  If the probability changes, then instant communication is
enabled.  The path (a) paired photons should have a reduced probability as
compared to the path (b) paired photons of making it through Bob's three
filters.  No rotation would be used in this version of the experiment.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 05:35:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA17229;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 05:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 05:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <003301c3a385$a65d0e00$f310b83f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:14:47 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94015f27517d3eea23e66e3c98cd615e0c2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"5BvIP1.0.5D4.tkFg_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52383
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On  Tue, 4 Nov 2003 13:42:53 
 Jed Rothwell Wrote: 
>
> When paper is held aloft by wind (such as kite or a glider), it heats up. 
>
Snip:

Is this the reason why Atlas Shrugged, Jed?  

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 09:00:36 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA01159;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:57:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:57:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 10:34:08 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"zLiCZ1.0.xH.5mIg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52384
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde writes:

 > A voice operated version [of the universal make-anything machine] would 
be nice.
 >
 > "Tea, Earl Grey."

Yes, that would be quaint and old fashioned, wouldn't it? Kind of retro. 
But I expect the standard models will be *thought* operated. You think: 
"give me tea, Earl Gray" and Shazam! -- it will appear. That's how Clarke 
and many other SF writers have portrayed it. See, for example, "The City 
and the Stars."

I suppose this is probably physically possible, even without wires 
implanted in the brain, and probably without special equipment glued to 
your shaved head, or a portable MRI helmet. The electromagnetic signal from 
brain activity can probably be detected from a distance of a few meters, 
and I suppose it can be separated from the noise and decoded. I suppose the 
technology will take centuries or even millennia to develop. But even now 
there is progress in thought-driven machinery for paralyzed people, using 
implanted wires.

A technology that will take centuries can be developed as long as the 
intermediate products are useful. If we had a lucrative industrial use for 
tokamaks as they now exist, progress would have been faster, and the future 
of plasma fusion power plants would be assured. The precursors to 
atom-by-atom fabrication machines and thought-driven control systems 
already exist, and they are already useful, so I have little doubt the 
ultimate versions will eventually be made.

On the other hand, a transatlantic railroad in an evacuated tube that 
floats a kilometer under the water will probably not be developed, because 
a half-finished undersea tunnel would be useless, and even if land-based 
evacuated tunnels are developed, I do not think they would contribute 
enough to make the technology viable. Also, the transatlantic railroad 
would require about one year of the production of all of the steel mills on 
earth, and it would cost trillions of dollars. I think an improved SST or 
spaceplanes would be more practical.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 09:41:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA02794;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:36:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:36:13 -0800
X-Sender: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcee4eb0678@[12.110.74.99]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:37:05 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Simple FTL communication method (Draft #1)
Resent-Message-ID: <"kCCVc1.0.Sh.CKJg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52385
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A method of communication is proposed here that uses the instantaneous
teleportation of quantum state of entangled photons to communicate a signal
faster than light speed.  The method depends on the fact that when the
polarization state of one member of an entangled pair of photons is
determined, i.e. measured, the conjugate photon will then be measured in
the conjugate state.

The method consists of the following steps:

1. Use of an entangled photon generator which creates two channels of
entangled photons: the local channel and the communication channel. The
photons in the communication channel are conjugates of their entangled
counterparts in the local channel.  The polarization direction of conjugate
pairs is orthogonal.

2. A delay is provided in the local channel by use of a fiber delay loop or
other delaying mechanism such that a communication signal is only imposed
upon the local channel photons at about the time of but before receipt of
the paired communication channel photons at the destination.  The local
channel is assumed to be located entirely at the transmitting site.
Alternatively the entangled photon generator can be located at the half-way
point between sender and receiver, Alice and Bob, and beam one channel to
each.

3. Photons in the local channel, after sufficient delay, are routed through
one of two paths, the long path or the short path.  This switching can be
achieved using a fast electromechanical mirror.  In the long path the
photons are routed through a horizontal filter H1, then a diagonal filter
D1, then a vertical filter V1 and then through another horizontal filter
H2,  In the short path the local photons are directed through a horizontal
filter H3 and then a vertical filter V3.

4. Photons in the communication channel are passed through a vertical
polarized filter V4 at Bob's location and the remaining signal detected.
(Alternatively a horizontal filter could be used by Bob or Bob can separate
the communication channel beam into horizontal and vertically polarized
components using a calcite crystal and measure the comparative brightness
of the two.)

5. The timing of switching between the long and short paths of the local
channel is manipulated by Alice so as to send meaningful messages to Bob.

In the short path every local path photon is in effect measured by Alice as
being either horizontally or vertically polarized, and with a 0.5
probability of being either.  In fact, as an alternative to using
polarizing filters, Alice could actually separate the local beam into two
halves and actually measure individual photon polarizations or even just
relative beam brightness.  Half the photons are absorbed by H3 and thus
measured as vertical, and the remaining half are absorbed by V3 and thus
measured as horizontal.  Bob should detect 50/50 polarization on his end
when Alice is directing the local photons through the short path.

When the long path is used it is well known that the beam emerging from
filter V1 is not null and in fact has about a quarter of the brightness of
the original beam.  The beam emerging from V1, being vertically polarized,
is then fully absorbed by the subsequent H2 filter.  Since 50 percent of
the local photons are absorbed by H1 and thus detected as vertical, and yet
more of the photons are finally absorbed by H2 and thus detected as
vertically polarized,  most of the local beam is detected as vertically
polarized.  Bob should thus at a slightly later time detect most of the
conjugates as horizontally polarized.  Alice need do no actual photon
detection to achieve the communication.  Bob need do no individual photon
detection to achieve the communication.  The communication is achieved by
simply measuring beam brightness changes following polarization based
separation at Bob's location.  This has many advantages in both signal
reliability and device cost.

An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending
a bit (actually only a change of channel state) via a one-way FTL
communication channel and returning it via a second one-way return FTL
communication channel, and repeating this process to establish an
oscillation.  To demonstrate FTL communication it is then necessary to
transmit over a sufficient distance D that the oscillation frequency, f, is
faster than the oscillation frequency F = c/D that can be achieved by
light.  A 10 km communication link (each way) need only cycle faster than
about 15 kHz to break the light speed barrier.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 11:03:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA14378;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:00:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:00:01 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105135618.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:59:59 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Need help with a .ps file
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"6MYpd1.0.aW3.mYKg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52386
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Anyone who knows how to convert a PostScript .ps file into some reasonable 
word processor format should please contact me, by direct e-mail. I have 
the full version of Acrobat, which converts it to a peculiar, difficult to 
read .pdf file.

I contacted Mathias Bage about this before lunch. He has not responded yet.

I have been delayed uploading new papers because we are doing some 
extensive editing of the English in three long papers. They are much more 
readable, and they are important, so it will be worth the wait.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 11:22:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA30592;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:20:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:20:00 -0800
Message-ID: <20031105191950.28193.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:19:50 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Need help with a .ps file
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105135618.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"TatK92.0.rT7.VrKg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52387
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

i have never gotten a ps to convert to anything. ive
downloaded lots of programs that claim too, but they
never work.
--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Anyone who knows how to convert a PostScript .ps
> file into some reasonable 
> word processor format should please contact me, by
> direct e-mail. I have 
> the full version of Acrobat, which converts it to a
> peculiar, difficult to 
> read .pdf file.
> 
> I contacted Mathias Bage about this before lunch. He
> has not responded yet.
> 
> I have been delayed uploading new papers because we
> are doing some 
> extensive editing of the English in three long
> papers. They are much more 
> readable, and they are important, so it will be
> worth the wait.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 12:05:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA28573;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:00:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:00:03 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105145611.01c0bc88@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 14:59:58 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Need help with a .ps file
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"meTO32.0.F-6.2RLg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52388
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

alexander hollins writes:

 > i have never gotten a ps to convert to anything. ive
 > downloaded lots of programs that claim too, but they
 > never work.

That has been my experience too. Pam Boss recommended something called 
Ghost View. It output the same strange .pdf file that Acrobat did. I can 
extract the text from the finished .pdf file, but not the equations.

This file is from Szpak, by the way. So it is important.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 12:18:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA08068;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:16:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:16:53 -0800
Message-ID: <20031105201648.55328.qmail@web11705.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:16:48 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Need help with a .ps file
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105145611.01c0bc88@pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"5_Tpy3.0.-z1.qgLg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52389
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

i hate to suggest...  print it, and remake it yourself
in another format...
--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com> wrote:
> alexander hollins writes:
> 
>  > i have never gotten a ps to convert to anything.
> ive
>  > downloaded lots of programs that claim too, but
> they
>  > never work.
> 
> That has been my experience too. Pam Boss
> recommended something called 
> Ghost View. It output the same strange .pdf file
> that Acrobat did. I can 
> extract the text from the finished .pdf file, but
> not the equations.
> 
> This file is from Szpak, by the way. So it is
> important.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 12:38:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAB22591;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:34:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:34:46 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick@highsurf.com@mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210100bbcf0dbb2b0b@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:35:56 -1000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick@highsurf.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA22542
Resent-Message-ID: <"5URTS3.0.sW5.bxLg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52390
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>At 10:34 AM -0500 11/5/03, Jed Rothwell wrote:

<snip>

>he electromagnetic signal from brain activity can probably be detected from a distance of a few meters, and I suppose it can be separated from the noise and decoded. I suppose the technology will take centuries or even millennia to develop. But even now there is progress in thought-driven machinery for paralyzed people, using implanted wires.

A member of this list, John Schnurer, was involved in early development of thought-operated cockpit systems like the ones used in the fictional movie "Firefox".

I'd guess we're about forever away from doing any of the bulk atomic sequencing required to create something as complex as a droplet of tea. But then they've already been transporter-ing atoms across empty space, besides being able to place individual atoms on a substrate. So ya never know.

- RM
Honolulu, HI

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 12:43:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA28387;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:41:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:41:46 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105153955.01c5aea0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:41:34 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Please ignore SpamBlocker messages from me . . .
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"RjRM6.0.Tx6.92Mg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52391
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

People who are trying to contact me about my .ps request can ignore the 
automatically generated response from Earthlink asking you to register. I 
can see your messages before you register, and I will clear them all 
manually. Sorry for the inconvenience.

A "whitelist" can be a little annoying when communicating with new 
correspondents.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 12:48:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA31004;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:45:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:45:33 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:45:30 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: To moderator
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311042122510.20187@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311051242190.11907-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"b6EV2.0.Ga7.j5Mg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52392
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, John Schnurer wrote:
> 	Can you please put me in digest mode?  I do not have broswer based
> E Mail so I am unable to "click" on different selections.  My E mail
> volume is so heavy I need to go to digest for one message a week or one a
> day, how ever it works, instead of a separate E Mail for each and every
> message.

I don't have browser-based email either!



Here's the stuff from the website.  You need to turn on the digest email,
then once it starts up, turn off the normal vortex email.  That way you
don't miss anything.

http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html#sub

  Vortex-L subscription instructions:

  To subscribe, send a *blank* message to:
     vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
  Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
  quotes around "subscribe," of course.

  You will get an automatic greeting message in response.  Once
  subscribed, send your email to vortex-L@eskimo.com.

  To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to:
      vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
  Put the single word "unsubscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
  quotes around "unsubscribe," of course.

  Vortex-L digest mode:

  If you prefer "digest" mode messages, collections of messages up to
  40K total or every 2 days, then subscribe to the vortex-digest
  instead of to vortex-L.  Send a blank message to:
      vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com
  Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.
  Vortex-L and Vortex-digest are two separate lists.  It is possible
  to subscribe to one or the other or both.




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Wed Nov  5 12:55:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA01015;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:48:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:48:30 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105150302.01c0bd98@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:48:23 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: New from Akronos Publishing
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"iVklJ.0.hF.T8Mg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52393
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel writes:

 > Having read a portion of the link above, and the exchange
 > between Ed Storms and Paulo, I'm forced to conclude that he
 > does not carry on technical discussions on Vortex-l because he
 > simply cannot.
 >
 > I find it remarkable that if you, and he, are in agreement
 > that vortex is the devil's toejam, why do you both follow
 > the list so closely? . . .
 > He hates us all with a passion, yet he cannot
 > stop reading our commentary and following our discussions.
 > Very amusing....

It gets worse. Much worse. That is how Correa talks to *investors*. And to 
a crowd of people he never met before (including me). Then he complains 
that investors will not cooperate.

I knew nothing about him, and I was favorably disposed toward him, but 
after hearing him talk for ten minutes I thought, "If I were an investor, I 
would run for the exit." It reminds me of the movie: "How to Lose a Guy in 
10 Days." If you deliberately wrote a presentation to frighten investors, 
alienate mainstream physicists, and ruin your own prospects, you could not 
top this. This is why I say Correa's problems are his own fault, and why I 
refer people to his website for proof. I am not conducting a backstabbing 
attack. On the contrary: the things I accuse him of, he brags about.

This would be "amusing," as Keith says, except for one thing. Correa may 
actually have a valuable discoveries. He seems very smart in some ways, and 
smart people like Mike Carrell are impressed by some of his work. It is 
impossible to judge whether he actually has anything, because like Papp and 
so many others, he will not allow independent evaluations or replications, 
and I gather he destroys his prototypes as soon as they start to work. (He 
said he could not demonstrate the ping-pong test because the experiment was 
disassembled and was being used for something else.) If he actually has 
something, it is tragic, not hilarious.

If I were religious I would wonder why God keeps putting these marvelous 
discoveries into the hands people who take them to the grave, instead of 
selling them. It is as if Bill Gates perfected his first paper-tape BASIC 
language, but instead of selling it, he burned all copies and savagely 
attacked anyone who asked to buy a copy, or discussed it, or tried to 
develop something similar.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 13:16:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA22362;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:13:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:13:09 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501bbcf187221c6@[12.110.74.4]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:14:03 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ic4rk.0.FT5.aVMg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52394
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 1:19 PM 11/4/3, Rick Monteverde wrote:
>A voice operated version would be nice.
>
>"Tea, Earl Grey."
>
>- RM

Hot!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 13:59:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA27631;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:54:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:54:57 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105155704.00b03618@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 16:27:44 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"3nbfP.0.el6.n6Ng_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52395
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde writes:

 > I'd guess we're about forever away from doing any of the bulk atomic
 > sequencing required to create something as complex as a droplet of tea.

Yes. But the mass spec machines we have already for both bulk and surface 
would have seemed impossible in 1900. For most manufactured goods (but not 
tea or food), if you get the right mix of molecules to within 0.001% that 
should be enough.


 > But then they've already been transporter-ing atoms across empty
 > space, besides being able to place individual atoms on a substrate.

I suppose atom-by-atom manufacturing will be done the way nature assembles 
living plants and animals: with micro-machines. That is why I think this 
"onion" thing may be the distant direct ancestor of future atom-by-atom 
assembly. I envision a trillion molecular-scale machines fetching one atom 
at a time, assembling molecules, and then placing them where they are 
needed, rather than a macroscopic machine that pushes atoms across empty 
space, or something like today's IC chip machines that "spray" circuits. If 
DNA driven cells can form or liver or deposit calcium to make bones, I 
suppose molecular-scale human-made machines will someday do something similar.

Actually, for many applications in the next few hundred years, something 
like a macroscopic ink-jet printer may work. Gadgets that make 
three-dimensional non-working prototypes out of paper or plastic already 
exist. I have seen an automated machine tools the size of a small room that 
can convert a block of steel or aluminum into anything you can make out of 
steel or aluminum.

The Pentagon is trying to develop a universal assembly machine that can 
make anything starting from common, standard materials such as steel 
sheets, screws and plastic. The idea is to allow a model change or 
engineering change to be made instantaneously, as soon the engineer saves 
the new version on her computer and sends it to the Universal Assembler. 
This is important in war. The fellow in charge of the project freely 
admitted he got the idea from "Profiles of the Future."

The first weapons production line that worked more or less like this was 
designed by T.O.M. Sopwith during WWI. He could put through vital 
engineering changes and improvements and start cranking out new model 
fighter planes in days, or even hours, by using a stock of standard parts 
and techniques. Sopwith was a genius. His Pup, Camel and Snipe were the 
best fighter planes of WWI; his Hurricane was one of the best of WWII; and 
his jump jets were vital in the Falklands war, and are still in widespread use.

Sopwith died at age 101, in 1989, that great momentous year and turning 
point in history.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 14:46:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA03815;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:43:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:43:56 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105172240.00b03688@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:43:35 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions" / amazing mass spec machines / QUESTION
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"x-NQy1.0.Ax.fqNg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52397
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote: "the mass spec machines we have already for both bulk and surface 
would have seemed impossible in 1900."

Some of them are astounding to me, right now. See:

http://www.physics.curtin.edu.au/dept/facilities.htm

Quotes:


Thermal Ionisation Mass Spectrometers (TIMS) produced ions by evaporating 
atoms of the sample from a hot rhenium or tantalum metal surface.  . . .

Microgram to femtogram (thousand million millionth of a gram) size 
quantities of an element can be analysed. Both the isotopic composition and 
concentration can be measured with high accuracy. Most samples require 
chemical processing before they can be analysed. . . .


Small angle X-Ray Scattering (SAXS) is an excellent technique for 
investigating the nano-structure (1 - 100 nanometres) within the bulk of 
materials. The technique gives information on the morphology, orientation, 
size distribution, molecular weight and kinetics of nano-sized 
inhomogeneities in materials. In many cases the structural and kinetic 
information is not accessible from other imaging techniques. The major 
strength of SAXS is that it is a non-destructive technique that can provide 
information on nano-sized structures in a wide variety of materials 
covering the research disciplines of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and 
Engineering. . . .


[XRD] identification is acheived (sic) by comparing the x-ray diffraction 
pattern obtained from an unknown sample with an internationally recognised 
database containing reference patterns for more than 70,000 phases.


Imagine how well these things will work in 500 years! Also, by that time 
scientists may learn how to spell, or use a spell-checker.

Here is a question for mass spectroscopy mavins. Is there a common  bulk 
mass spec method that identifies Mo isotopes? The bulk methods I have read 
about identify only elements, not isotopes, as far as I know. This issue 
arises in the latest Iwamura paper. He briefly mentions that some skeptics 
have suggested the unnatural isotopes of his Mo sample, as shown by SIMS, 
might be caused by isotope separation of ordinary Mo contamination. I.e., 
the stream of deuterium gas might be carrying away everything but Mo-96, 
leaving only Mo-96 on the surface. Imagine old fashioned paper or sand 
chromatography, and pretend it works with isotopes. That is "impossible," 
as Iwamura says. (Actually, it does work to a tiny extent for some 
isotopes, but you would have to run it thousands of times to achieve this 
much separation, according to Bockris.)

Anyway, I was wondering, is there a mass spec machine that can look 
straight through his Pd complex sample and see all Mo isotopes, at the 
surface and below? If the other Mo isotopes were smeared out through the 
sample, then a bulk analysis of isotopes would show them glommed together 
again in the normal ratios.

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 14:47:49 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA02598;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:42:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:42:01 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA90F9B.80405@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 09:56:27 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
References: <003301c3a385$a65d0e00$f310b83f@computer>
In-Reply-To: <003301c3a385$a65d0e00$f310b83f@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"MlkFc2.0.rd.soNg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52396
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Frederick Sparber wrote:

>Is this the reason why Atlas Shrugged, Jed?  
>

Who is John Gault?

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 14:59:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA13092;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:57:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:57:08 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105174459.01c1d930@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:57:06 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Correa-Storms-Rothwell
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"jKiKP.0.OC3.31Og_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52398
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton asks:

 > Frederick Sparber wrote:
 >
 > >Is this the reason why Atlas Shrugged, Jed?
 > >
 >
 > Who is John Gault?

He was yet another one of these guys who made an actual, working, o-u power 
generator, on the kilowatt or megawatt scale, and then refused to sell it 
or even let anyone see it. It was "silent building" that produced nothing 
but electricity. That's one of the few episodes from "Atlas Shrugged" I 
recall. Perhaps this indicates that extremist capitalists sometimes end up 
so obsessed with economic purity, they forget to sell things for profit, to 
make a living. They resemble physicists who forget to do experiments, or 
even look at experiments. Fanatics make me ill.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 15:39:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA08541;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:36:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:36:38 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbcf38dcbf58@[12.110.74.4]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:37:33 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Resent-Message-ID: <"79FE12.0.N52.6cOg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52399
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:34 AM 11/5/3, Jed Rothwell wrote:

>
>On the other hand, a transatlantic railroad in an evacuated tube that
>floats a kilometer under the water will probably not be developed, because
>a half-finished undersea tunnel would be useless, and even if land-based
>evacuated tunnels are developed, I do not think they would contribute
>enough to make the technology viable. Also, the transatlantic railroad
>would require about one year of the production of all of the steel mills on
>earth, and it would cost trillions of dollars. I think an improved SST or
>spaceplanes would be more practical.
>
>- Jed


A much better route to connect continents might be across the Bearing
straight.  There are vast opportunities for this route for communications
links, pipelines, commodities, and possibly power transmission and even
passengers.  Plenty of challenges, especially politically, but all readily
doable with present technology.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 17:11:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA10247;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 17:09:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 17:09:54 -0800
Message-ID: <02f301c3a402$99ff4880$af01a8c0@colinqamd1200>
Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
From: "Colin Quinney" <crquin@rogers.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Voyager-1
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 20:09:17 -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 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 [65.49.180.21] using ID <crquin@rogers.com> at Wed, 5 Nov 2003 20:08:43 -0500
Resent-Message-ID: <"81fke3.0.0W2.YzPg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52400
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I just heard on the TV news tonight that Voyager-1 just left the solar
system and that it's power supply is still pumping out beeps and will
continue to do so for several additional decades. I believe it was launched
about 25 years ago. Although I don't recall the details I believe that
Frederick Sparber designed and patented the innovative part of it's power
supply, that portion that allows it to operate for such an extended period.

Fred, can you give a briefing on how and why it continues to work?

Best,
Colin

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 18:12:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA19048;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:09:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:09:14 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA9AD3F.5070405@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:09:03 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104114331.01c0b680@pop.mindspring.com> <v04210100bbcde3e831ab@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <v04210100bbcde3e831ab@[10.220.188.4]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"pR42l2.0.Yf4.9rQg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52401
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Rick Monteverde wrote:

>A voice operated version would be nice.
>
>"Tea, Earl Grey."
>

Replicator:  "Hot?"

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov  5 18:28:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA22177;
	Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:14:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:14:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3FA9AE8F.4040402@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:14:39 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031104114331.01c0b680@pop.mindspring.com> <v04210100bbcde3e831ab@[10.220.188.4]> <3FA9AD3F.5070405@rtpatlanta.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FA9AD3F.5070405@rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ebE3G3.0.OQ5.SwQg_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52402
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ah, hell, I gotta read all my email before I respond.  HH beat me to 
this one.

Terry Blanton wrote:

>
>
> Rick Monteverde wrote:
>
>> A voice operated version would be nice.
>>
>> "Tea, Earl Grey."
>>
>
> Replicator:  "Hot?"
>
>

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 01:34:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA02918;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 01:33:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 01:33:06 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 01:33:01 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
In-Reply-To: <v01530501bbcf187221c6@[12.110.74.4]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311060130470.25723-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"S6no23.0.Sj.HLXg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52403
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Horace Heffner wrote:

> At 1:19 PM 11/4/3, Rick Monteverde wrote:
> >A voice operated version would be nice.
> >
> >"Tea, Earl Grey."
> >
> >- RM
>
> Hot!


Phasers to "bergamot" factor three.   Fire!


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov  6 06:22:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA02113;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 06:19:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 06:19:41 -0800
Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3FAA5730.120E683F@centurytel.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:14:08 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11@centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Need help with a .ps file
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105145611.01c0bc88@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"k44fu.0.fW.yXbg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52404
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jed & All,

I have successfully used a Linux utility,
ps2ascii.

Jack Smith

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 07:30:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA08194;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:29:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:29:35 -0800
Message-ID: <002201c3a47a$d0fb4780$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:29:47 -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 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"OZQHt.0.e_1.TZcg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52405
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"


> Rick Monteverde writes:
>
>  > A voice operated version [of the universal make-anything machine] would
> be nice.
>  >
>  > "Tea, Earl Grey."
>
> Yes, that would be quaint and old fashioned, wouldn't it? Kind of retro.
> But I expect the standard models will be *thought* operated. You think:
> "give me tea, Earl Gray" and Shazam! -- it will appear. That's how Clarke
> and many other SF writers have portrayed it. See, for example, "The City
> and the Stars."
>
> I suppose this is probably physically possible, even without wires
> implanted in the brain, and probably without special equipment glued to
> your shaved head, or a portable MRI helmet. The electromagnetic signal
from
> brain activity can probably be detected from a distance of a few meters,
> and I suppose it can be separated from the noise and decoded. I suppose
the
> technology will take centuries or even millennia to develop. But even now
> there is progress in thought-driven machinery for paralyzed people, using
> implanted wires.
>
> A technology that will take centuries can be developed as long as the
> intermediate products are useful. If we had a lucrative industrial use for
> tokamaks as they now exist, progress would have been faster, and the
future
> of plasma fusion power plants would be assured. The precursors to
> atom-by-atom fabrication machines and thought-driven control systems
> already exist, and they are already useful, so I have little doubt the
> ultimate versions will eventually be made.
>
> On the other hand, a transatlantic railroad in an evacuated tube that
> floats a kilometer under the water will probably not be developed, because
> a half-finished undersea tunnel would be useless, and even if land-based
> evacuated tunnels are developed, I do not think they would contribute
> enough to make the technology viable. Also, the transatlantic railroad
> would require about one year of the production of all of the steel mills
on
> earth, and it would cost trillions of dollars. I think an improved SST or
> spaceplanes would be more practical.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 07:47:16 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16581;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:38:14 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:38:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <004001c3a47b$fa257f80$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:38:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Resent-Message-ID: <"qGwGD.0._24.Yhcg_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52406
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
To: <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
> Yes, that would be quaint and old fashioned, wouldn't it? Kind of retro.
> But I expect the standard models will be *thought* operated. You think:
> "give me tea, Earl Gray" and Shazam! -- it will appear. That's how Clarke
> and many other SF writers have portrayed it. See, for example, "The City
> and the Stars."

I wrote a letter to Arthur Clarke when I was in high school regarding his
book "City and the Stars" and he wrote back.  I still have the letter.

Jeff Fink

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 07:49:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA19015;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:46:13 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:46:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <011801c3a47b$18389580$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Reciprocal-space, magic-phonons and Dirac's sea
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:31:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0115_01C3A438.09A77880"
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: <"eQ6yC1.0.0f4.0pcg_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52407
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_0115_01C3A438.09A77880
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In general, reciprocity is a relationship of mutual dependence or shared =
cost/benefits, with the implication that it exists among entities that =
would normally be competitors. It is one of those pregnant terms whose =
meaning is widespread in many aspects of life, from the atom to the =
planet. For instance, on the genetic side, reciprocity is considered to =
be a necessary survival trait in evolution, and in politics... well =
let's just say that politics could be defined as the practice of =
reciprocity. On the mathematical side, there is a branch of reciprocity =
study called "game theory" and in many types of engineering or music, =
its aspects are seen in "harmonics" and "phases" and "resonance."=20

But reciprocity has a special relevance in physics at the atomic level, =
over and above the better-known concept of wave/particle duality, which =
is found in the concept called "reciprocal-space."=20

Like the related concept of the "phonon," reciprocal-space is thought by =
most to be an imaginary construct, but both of these terms are so =
descriptive and intuitive that, like quantum dynamics itself, they are =
fundamental in understanding reality, and particularly for progress in =
understanding the complicated thermodynamics and energy transfer =
mechanisms of cold fusion.=20

The purpose of the following speculative suggestion is this: if =
reciprocal space is not truly imaginary, but is, in effect, connectible =
to the stratum of reality known as Dirac's "sea," then that possibility =
alone can go very far towards explaining the major mystery of cold =
fusion - that being the missing 23.8 MeV photon (or any other high =
energy photon). There are other (even more dubious) rationalizations for =
this mystery, of course, such as "phonon wave dispersion" or whatever =
one wishes to call the theories of Scott and Talbot Chubb- which, in =
fairness, seems to be evolving rapidly enough to accommodate what =
follows (in an overly-simplified form).=20

The intrinsic "order" that exists in any solid material depends on the =
relative location of each atom - atoms which are often arranged in a =
minimum lattice-like grid called crystal-cells (not to be confused with =
the more nebulous term, "crystals"). In the cubic crystal system three =
types of arrangements are found: Simple cubic, Body-centered cubic and =
Face-centered cubic. But these cells are grouped into larger =
hierarchical units called nanoparticles, which are groups of cells, =
usually about 50-1000 atoms (again, not to be confused with the more =
nebulous term, "crystals"). Unfortunately, it is only recently that =
cells, nanoparticles, grains and crystals have been fully distinguished =
as different functional entities, and there is still some confusion as =
to the correct terminology, but the main point is this: often the most =
important property of the element (vis-a-vis the outside world) derives =
from the nanoparticle itself rather than from the atoms.=20

For purposes of CF analysis, the nanoparticle of annealed Pd is believed =
to be a low multiple of the 14 atom crystal-cell and this small size may =
relate to how and why so much internal stress gets "ingrained" in Pd, =
over and above that which comes from D2 absorption, and also to how that =
stress gets "removed" and why Pd electrodes are unlikely to ever =
function well for extended periods (after they change in nanostructure). =
The references that I have been able to find online say that the Pd =
nanoparticle ( f.c.c. cell of .4 nm) varies but tends to favor around 40 =
cells or 560 atoms. An good study can be found at:

http://www.ias.ac.in/sadhana/Pdf2003Apr/Pe1056.pdf

Energy release from solids often takes the form of IR photons (aka =
"heat") and heat normally issues from the aforementioned nanoparticles, =
far more so than from the atoms themselves, or from the crystal-cells =
themselves. That IR output is usually in the form of a 'group frequency =
vibration,' some part of which will be transformed into reciprocal =
space. As a consequence, the "band structure" will vibrate and act like =
a nanoparticle unit rather than like individual atoms - and will also be =
poised interact with free electrons in a strong way *as a nanoparticle* =
and with anything that may exist in reciprocal-space... if anything =
does. =20

This IR energy-shedding process cannot be accomplished efficiently on =
the atomic level, as opposed to the nanoparticle level, because the =
wavelengths of IR heat, typically around a micron, are thousands of =
times too long compared with atomic dimensions. With Pd nanoparticles =
the geometry is still typically 100 times too small for IR resonance, so =
the Pd electrode has greater difficulty shedding excess energy quickly =
in the form of heat, compared with metals which have a more amenable =
nanostructure. Copper will conduct away 10 times more heat per unit time =
at CF temps even though both are f.c.c. cell crystals.

Even in normal electrical conductivity there are technically a lot of =
potentially "free" electrons available to "flow", however in actuality, =
the ones that get spatially separated are those from the nanoparticle as =
a unit, and not from the atoms individually. And there is some evidence =
that loaded Pd is superconductive. If you do a Google search for =
"superconductivity * palladium" you will find half a dozen claimants to =
be the discoverers of this, including many Poles as far back as 1972 and =
Celani of Frascati (Italy). But this major discovery seems to have =
eluded the rest of the science world. I think it is fair to say that an =
unusual form of electrical conductivity is present, whether it is true =
superconductivity or not. It may be a type of recirculating =
superconductivity which is limited to the nanoparticle itself, rather =
than any large mass of metal.

Therefore to contrast Pd (at least in its loaded and annealed form) to =
other electrodes, Pd can shed energy efficiently only by using =
thermionic electrons as opposed to IR photons. What does this imply, =
when the electrons have "nowhere to go" because they are already in a =
negatively charged space (cathode)? Well it could imply, if the =
situation arises where a lot of focused energy is created (let's say =
23.8 MeV) then the best hypothetical option for removal of that energy, =
short of (or in addition to) a violent explosion, may be the utilization =
of about 50 of the nanoparticle's free electrons to be sequestered into =
reciprocal-space or its equivalent.That reciprocal-space, if it exists =
as an actual physical sub-dimension, probably has certain already =
surmised physical characteristics, such as the negative pF beta-aether =
of Frank Grimer and certain energy characteristics of Dirac's sea of =
negative electrons and their corresponding "holes" which are positrons.

In other words, that so-called "violent explosion" such as the image =
seen on the cover of Rothwell's Mizuno translation is not exactly an =
explosion at all, but rather an implosion/explosion. The 50 or so =
electrons of the Pd nanoparticle have collapsed into an energy vortex, =
becoming negative electrons with the the initial implosion accentuated =
by a secondary outgassing of deuterium. Almost everyone who sees that =
image says it looks like a "frozen tornado" but ... hello... tornados =
are formed by a low pressure core, not high by pressure explosions which =
look much different.=20

The alternate approach of the Chubb's requires at least 24 million IR =
photons be dissipated in the short time of, at the very most, a few =
nanoseconds. To accomplish this, the nanoparticles' vibrations can be =
quantized into imaginary "phonons" which then return to reality to =
induce real photons through wave dynamics. A phonon can be regarded as a =
quasi-particle and is often represented as a gas - a "phonon gas" within =
the crystal. The interaction between a phonon and its surroundings can =
be described in terms of wave-function transition rates between one =
state to an other state in the reciprocal space per unit time. The only =
problem is the typical scattering rate is in the range of 10-100 =
scatterings per picosecond. The transition rate can be calculated =
quantum mechanically.

This rate is much too slow for phonons (even if they were not imaginary) =
to remove intense energy by IR photon scattering above a certain low =
level. But electrons, having over 500,000 times the mass/energy =
equivalent of the IR photon can remove far more energy per unit time IF =
they have "somewhere to go" that being into the Dirac "sea" as negative =
electrons. Moreover, many physicists actually believe the Dirac sea to =
be a "real" place, as opposed to the phonon being imaginary. But I don't =
think this argument degenerates into a "beauty contest" and even if it =
did... well my inclination is don't vote against anything that Dirac =
ever believed.

The most basic quantity in reciprocal-space is a Fourier transform of =
3-space mass/density but you have to be careful with the details. It is =
because of the ease of this technique that some aspects of cold fusion =
can be shoehorned into the phonon/reciprocal-space concept but one =
cannot ignore the time limitations. Scott Chubb explains the lack of a =
23 MeV photon (in that subset of LENR where helium is seen) as some kind =
of an instant wave dispersion. The problem here is that the ratio of =
wavelengths involved is way too high for there to be any type of =
connectivity in the allotted time frame. To accomplish it, the =
scattering rate would need to magically increase by nearly a =
thousand-fold - and/or another way of looking at it is that it is like =
having an egg fall off a table and fracturing into 23 million little =
pieces, all of exactly the same size with none much larger (or they =
would stand out like a sore thumb on radiation monitors).=20

The bottom line is this. I hope that Chubb or some other credentialed =
scientist who is active on the conference circuit will evolve their =
theories beyond the present fanciful state - which is now struck where =
any amateur dabbler like myself can see is way too lame to get much =
credibility from the larger science community. And it seems to me that =
co-opting Dirac's ideas is not a bad place to start the process. From =
the standpoint of a fringe-science field seeking respectability, it =
makes a lot more sense to me to ride on Dirac's coat-tails than to latch =
onto the magic phonons like some kind of Aladdin's carpet.=20

After all, at ICCF-10, one wonders if the Chubb's got a chance to digest =
the Kim presentation - the one where CF was observed at liquid nitrogen =
temps... hey, not much phonon activity at LN temps, is there?

Jones

BTW if anyone has mustered the necessary "suspension of disbelief" to =
follow this argument this far then they may be asking how, if electrons =
get sequestered into the Dirac sea, then how does the excess heat get =
from the sea back into the CF cell?=20

The short answer is that, in QM terms, the heat in question has already =
been withdrawn in advance (in the form of many 6.8 eV quanta which do =
couple well to bare deuterons) and the lost electrons end up being the =
repayment for that early withdrawal ...=20

The long answer may follow.... or maybe, in the spirit of QM =
reciprocity, it has already preceded....

------=_NextPart_000_0115_01C3A438.09A77880
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><FONT size=3D1>
<P><FONT size=3D3>In general, reciprocity is&nbsp;a relationship of =
mutual=20
dependence or shared cost/benefits,&nbsp;with the implication that=20
it&nbsp;exists&nbsp;among entities that would normally be competitors. =
It is one=20
of those pregnant terms&nbsp;whose meaning is widespread in many aspects =
of=20
life, from the atom to the planet. For instance, on the genetic=20
side,&nbsp;reciprocity is considered to be a necessary survival trait in =

evolution, and in politics... well let's just say that politics could be =
defined=20
as the practice of reciprocity. On the mathematical side,&nbsp;there is =
a branch=20
of reciprocity study called "game theory"&nbsp;and in many types of =
engineering=20
or music,&nbsp;its aspects are seen&nbsp;in "harmonics" and "phases" and =

"resonance." </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>But reciprocity&nbsp;has a =
special&nbsp;relevance&nbsp;in=20
physics&nbsp;at the atomic level, over and above the better-known =
concept of=20
wave/particle duality, which is found in the concept called =
"reciprocal-space."=20
</FONT></P>
<P></FONT><FONT size=3D3>Like the related concept of the "phonon,"=20
reciprocal-space is thought by most to be an imaginary construct, =
but&nbsp;both=20
of these terms are&nbsp;so descriptive and intuitive that, like quantum =
dynamics=20
itself,&nbsp;they are fundamental in understanding reality, and =
particularly for=20
progress in understanding the complicated thermodynamics and energy =
transfer=20
mechanisms of cold fusion. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>The purpose of the following speculative suggestion is =
this: if=20
reciprocal space is not truly imaginary, but is, in effect, connectible =
to the=20
stratum of reality known as Dirac's "sea," then that possibility alone =
can=20
go&nbsp;very far&nbsp;towards explaining the major mystery of cold =
fusion - that=20
being the missing 23.8 MeV photon (or any other high energy photon). =
There are=20
other (even more dubious) rationalizations for this mystery, of course,=20
such&nbsp;as "phonon wave dispersion" or whatever one wishes to call the =

theories of Scott and Talbot Chubb- which, in fairness, seems to be =
evolving=20
rapidly enough to accommodate what follows (in an overly-simplified =
form).=20
</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>The intrinsic "order" that exists in any solid =
material depends=20
on the relative location of each atom - atoms which are often =
arranged&nbsp;in a=20
minimum lattice-like grid called crystal-cells (not to be confused with =
the more=20
nebulous term, "crystals"). In the cubic crystal system three types of=20
arrangements are found: Simple cubic, Body-centered cubic and =
Face-centered=20
cubic. But these cells are grouped into larger hierarchical units=20
called&nbsp;nanoparticles, which are groups of cells, usually about =
50-1000=20
atoms (again, not to be confused with the more nebulous term, =
"crystals").=20
</FONT><FONT size=3D3>Unfortunately, it is only recently that cells,=20
nanoparticles, grains&nbsp;and crystals have been fully distinguished as =

different functional entities, and there is still some confusion as to =
the=20
correct terminology, but the main point is this: often the most =
important=20
property of the element (vis-a-vis the outside world) derives from the=20
nanoparticle itself rather than from the atoms. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>For&nbsp;purposes&nbsp;of CF analysis, the =
nanoparticle&nbsp;of=20
annealed Pd is believed to be&nbsp;a&nbsp;low multiple&nbsp;of the 14 =
atom=20
crystal-cell and this small size may relate to how and why so much =
internal=20
stress gets "ingrained" in Pd, over and above that which comes from D2=20
absorption, and also to how&nbsp;that stress&nbsp;gets "removed" and why =
Pd=20
electrodes are unlikely to ever function well for extended periods =
(after they=20
change in nanostructure). The references that I have been able to find =
online=20
say that the Pd nanoparticle&nbsp;( f.c.c. cell of .4 nm) varies but =
tends to=20
favor around 40 cells or 560 atoms. An good study can be found =
at:</FONT></P>
<P><A=20
href=3D"http://www.ias.ac.in/sadhana/Pdf2003Apr/Pe1056.pdf">http://www.ia=
s.ac.in/sadhana/Pdf2003Apr/Pe1056.pdf</A></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>Energy release from solids often takes the form of IR =
photons=20
(aka "heat")&nbsp;and heat normally issues from the=20
aforementioned&nbsp;nanoparticles,&nbsp;far more so than from the atoms=20
themselves, or from the&nbsp;crystal-cells themselves. That IR output is =
usually=20
in the form of a 'group frequency vibration,' some part of which will be =

transformed into reciprocal space. As a consequence, the "band =
structure" will=20
vibrate and act like a nanoparticle&nbsp;unit rather than like =
individual atoms=20
- and&nbsp;will also be poised interact with free electrons in a strong =
way *as=20
a nanoparticle* and with anything that may exist in reciprocal-space... =
if=20
anything does.&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>This IR energy-shedding process cannot be accomplished =

efficiently on the atomic level, as opposed to the nanoparticle=20
level,&nbsp;because the wavelengths of IR heat, typically around a=20
micron,&nbsp;are&nbsp;thousands of&nbsp;times too long compared with =
atomic=20
dimensions.</FONT> With Pd nanoparticles&nbsp;the geometry is still =
typically=20
100 times too small for IR resonance, so the Pd electrode has greater =
difficulty=20
shedding excess energy quickly in the form of heat, compared with metals =
which=20
have a more amenable nanostructure. Copper will conduct away 10 times =
more heat=20
per unit time at CF temps even though both are f.c.c. cell crystals.</P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>Even in normal electrical conductivity there are =
technically a=20
lot of potentially "free" electrons available to "flow", however in=20
actuality,&nbsp;the ones that get&nbsp;spatially separated are those =
from the=20
nanoparticle as a unit, and not from the atoms individually. And there =
is some=20
evidence that loaded Pd is superconductive. If you do a Google search =
for=20
"superconductivity&nbsp;* palladium" you will find half a dozen =
claimants to be=20
the discoverers of this, including many Poles as far back as 1972 and =
Celani of=20
Frascati (Italy). But this major discovery seems to have eluded the rest =
of the=20
science world.&nbsp;I think it is fair to say that an unusual form of =
electrical=20
conductivity is present, whether it is true superconductivity or not. It =
may be=20
a type of recirculating superconductivity which is limited to the =
nanoparticle=20
itself, rather than any large mass of metal.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>Therefore to contrast Pd (at least in its loaded and =
annealed=20
form) to other electrodes,&nbsp;Pd can shed energy efficiently only by =
using=20
thermionic electrons as opposed to IR photons. What does this imply, =
when the=20
electrons have "nowhere to go" because they are already in a negatively =
charged=20
space (cathode)? Well it could imply, if&nbsp;the situation arises where =
a lot=20
of focused energy is created (let's say 23.8 MeV) then the best =
hypothetical=20
option for removal&nbsp;of that energy, short of (or in addition to) a=20
violent&nbsp;explosion, may be&nbsp;the utilization of about 50 of the=20
nanoparticle's free&nbsp;electrons to be sequestered into =
reciprocal-space or=20
its equivalent.That reciprocal-space, if it exists as an actual physical =

sub-dimension,&nbsp;probably has certain already surmised physical=20
characteristics, such as the negative pF beta-aether of Frank Grimer and =
certain=20
energy characteristics of Dirac's sea of negative electrons and their=20
corresponding "holes" which are positrons.</FONT></P>
<P>In other words, that so-called "violent explosion" such as the image =
seen on=20
the cover of Rothwell's Mizuno translation is not exactly an explosion =
at all,=20
but rather an implosion/explosion. The 50 or so electrons of the Pd =
nanoparticle=20
have collapsed into an energy vortex, becoming negative electrons with =
the the=20
initial implosion accentuated by a secondary outgassing of deuterium. =
Almost=20
everyone who sees that image says it looks like a "frozen tornado" but =
...=20
hello... tornados are formed by a low pressure core, not high by =
pressure=20
explosions which look much different. </P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>The&nbsp;alternate approach of the Chubb's requires at =
least 24=20
million IR photons be dissipated in the short time of, at the very =
most,&nbsp;a=20
few nanoseconds. To accomplish this, the nanoparticles'&nbsp;vibrations =
can be=20
quantized into imaginary "phonons" which then return to reality to =
induce real=20
photons through wave dynamics.&nbsp;A phonon can be regarded as a=20
quasi-particle&nbsp;and is often&nbsp;represented as a gas - a "phonon =
gas"=20
within the crystal.&nbsp;The interaction between a phonon and its =
surroundings=20
can be described in terms of wave-function transition rates between one =
state to=20
an other state in the reciprocal space per unit time.&nbsp;The only =
problem is=20
the&nbsp;typical scattering rate is in the range of 10-100 scatterings =
per=20
picosecond. The transition rate can be calculated quantum=20
mechanically.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>This rate is much too slow for phonons (even if they =
were not=20
imaginary) to remove intense energy by IR =
photon&nbsp;scattering&nbsp;above a=20
certain low level. But electrons, having over 500,000 times the =
mass/energy=20
equivalent of the IR photon can remove far more energy per unit time IF =
they=20
have "somewhere to go" that being into the Dirac "sea" as negative =
electrons.=20
Moreover, many physicists actually believe the Dirac sea to be a "real" =
place,=20
as opposed to the phonon being imaginary. But I don't think this =
argument=20
degenerates into a "beauty contest" and even if it did... well my =
inclination is=20
don't vote against anything that Dirac ever believed.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3D3>The most basic quantity in reciprocal-space is a =
Fourier=20
transform of&nbsp;3-space mass/density but you have to be careful with =
the=20
details. It is because of the ease of this technique that some aspects =
of cold=20
fusion can be shoehorned into the phonon/reciprocal-space =
concept&nbsp;but one=20
cannot ignore the time limitations. Scott Chubb explains the lack of a =
23 MeV=20
photon (in that subset of LENR where helium is seen) as some kind of an =
instant=20
wave dispersion. The problem&nbsp;here is that the ratio of=20
wavelengths&nbsp;involved is way too high for there to be any type of=20
connectivity in the allotted time frame. To accomplish it, the =
scattering rate=20
would need to magically increase by nearly a thousand-fold - and/or =
another way=20
of looking at it is that it is like having an egg fall off a table and=20
fracturing into 23 million little pieces, all of exactly the same size =
with none=20
much larger (or they would stand out like a sore thumb on radiation =
monitors).=20
</FONT></P>
<P>The bottom line is this. I hope that Chubb or some other credentialed =

scientist who is active on the conference circuit will evolve their =
theories=20
beyond the present fanciful state - which is now struck where&nbsp;any =
amateur=20
dabbler like myself can see is way too lame to get much credibility from =
the=20
larger science community. And it seems to me that co-opting Dirac's=20
ideas&nbsp;is not a bad place to start the process. From the standpoint =
of a=20
fringe-science field seeking respectability, it makes a lot more sense =
to me to=20
ride on Dirac's coat-tails than&nbsp;to latch onto the magic phonons =
like some=20
kind of Aladdin's carpet. </P>
<P>After all, at ICCF-10, one wonders if the Chubb's&nbsp;got a chance =
to digest=20
the Kim presentation - the one where CF was observed at liquid nitrogen =
temps...=20
hey, not much phonon activity at LN temps, is there?</P>
<P>Jones</P>
<P>BTW if anyone has mustered the necessary "suspension of disbelief" to =
follow=20
this argument this far then they may be asking how, if electrons get =
sequestered=20
into the Dirac sea, then how does the excess heat get from the =
sea&nbsp;back=20
into the CF cell? </P>
<P>The short answer is that, in QM terms, the heat in question has =
already been=20
withdrawn in advance (in the form of many 6.8 eV quanta which do couple =
well to=20
bare deuterons) and the lost electrons end up being the repayment for =
that early=20
withdrawal ... </P>
<P>The long answer may follow.... or maybe, in the spirit of QM=20
reciprocity,&nbsp;it has already preceded....</P></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0115_01C3A438.09A77880--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 08:33:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA10947;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:31:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:31:49 -0800
Message-ID: <3FAA7565.1060500@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 11:23:01 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105095936.00b03608@pop.mindspring.com> <004001c3a47b$fa257f80$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
In-Reply-To: <004001c3a47b$fa257f80$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"JRuf21.0.kg2.oTdg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52408
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



revtec wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
> To: <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:34 AM
> Subject: Re: "Carbon onions"
> 
>>Yes, that would be quaint and old fashioned, wouldn't it? Kind of retro.
>>But I expect the standard models will be *thought* operated. You think:
>>"give me tea, Earl Gray" and Shazam! -- it will appear. That's how Clarke
>>and many other SF writers have portrayed it. See, for example, "The City
>>and the Stars."
> 
> 
> I wrote a letter to Arthur Clarke when I was in high school regarding his
> book "City and the Stars" and he wrote back.  I still have the letter.
> 
> Jeff Fink

That's really cool!

That was my favorite book for many years.  The most annoying thing about 
special relativity is the bucket of cold water it throws on that kind of 
thing.

How did that line go, now?  Something like this:

"... a ship that could circumnavigate the Universe in a day ..."

Entirely thought-controlled, as I recall, along with the robot which 
piloted it.

'Course there was a bit of confusion between "universe" and "galaxy", 
which rather dates the from today's point of view.

Then there was that other memorable line, regarding reliability:

"... a machine must have no moving parts ..."

Ah, well, this isn't alt.sci-fi-lovers, so I should put a sock in it at 
this point...

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 10:23:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA22374;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:21:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:21:49 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031106105615.01c0d440@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 11:17:45 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: OFF TOPIC Tube railroad via Russia
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"I0g3u3.0.GT5.x4fg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52409
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner writes:

 > A much better route to connect continents might be across the Bering
 > Strait.  There are vast opportunities for this route for communications
 > links, pipelines, commodities, and possibly power transmission and even
 > passengers.  Plenty of challenges, especially politically, but all readily
 > doable with present technology.

There has been some talk of building a conventional railroad under the 
Bering Strait. A lot of raw materials flow from Russia these days.

Projects to build transatlantic cables began around 1850, and failed 
spectacularly twice, costing huge sums of money and triggering 
investigations by the British Government. As the third attempt got going, 
another project was underway in Alaska to build a telegraph across the 
Strait and through Russia. It collapsed when news of the third, successful, 
transatlantic cable came.

The route seems unpromising for an ultra high speed passenger tube train. 
The distance can be estimated here:

http://www.indo.com/distance/

Boeing 747 cruising speed = 575 mph
First generation tube train speed = ~2500 mph

NY => London direct, 3470 miles. About 6 hours by 747, 1.4 hours by tube. 
The trip takes 3.3 hours by SST Concorde

NY => Vladivostok => London, 11,757 miles. 4.7 hours by tube. That is not 
much of an improvement over the subsonic Boeing 747. An improved SST direct 
flight would be much better.

A tube train at 5,000 mph might make this viable. It sure would improve the 
trip to Japan!

A tube train is now actually being planned in Switzerland. It might be 
ideal for that application. The technology may, eventually, mature, and 
spread to places like the Tokyo - Osaka corridor, or Washington - NY. But I 
doubt it would be useful for continental or intercontinental distances.

In the distant future, I predict most business travel will to be replaced 
by tele-presence, and most long distance (over 100 km) personal travel and 
commuting will be made personal aircraft, probably subsonic.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 15:22:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA28604;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:19:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:19:06 -0800
Message-ID: <018501c3a4bb$523bdb80$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: OT: Sunspotting
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:11:30 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0182_01C3A478.41FF7F80"
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: <"v4gBM1.0.r-6.fRjg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52410
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_0182_01C3A478.41FF7F80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>From the "Recent Cosmic Anomalies" Department:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html

"The massive solar flare that erupted from the sun this week has been =
classified as the largest in three decades of monitoring..... An active =
region of sunspots on the solar face has spawned a number of powerful =
flares over the last two weeks, including the most powerful one on =
Tuesday and third largest salvo on record on October 28"=20

What's going on?

There is an ~11 year cycle of solar sunspots. However this year SHOULD =
NOT have been nearly as active as it has been. See the graph:
http://science.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm

We should have actually been on a downturn in solar activity and not =
this stunning anomaly of recent months. Why?

One curious background question is why the cycle is "approximate". It is =
not an exact cycle so it may be influenced by events some distance away =
from the sun. Perhaps this year is a "correction" based on reconciling =
the "local" 22 cycle of solar pole shifting cycle with one or more =
"nonlocal" events which modify that local cycle.=20

There are few candidates for the nonlocal component, and I don't think =
anyone has yet suggested the one that I am going to name: it is the most =
massive star in the Milky Way and it is called Eta Carinae...but what =
makes it an interesting candidate is that it is on its own 5.5 year =
cycle with what is probably a binary partner star that it is rapidly =
gobbling up. However its cycle is not quite half of our suns...but it is =
very close, and that offset may require occasional corrective =
reconciliation.

We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass =
extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with less =
obvious forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would =
involve some kind of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism from =
extreme distances, such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps =
laser-like hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black =
hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism =
that either does not diminish with "distance-squared"  or just happens =
to be directed and focused at us.

This star, Eta Carinae is distant, 7500 light years, but compared to the =
rest of the Milky Way that is not too far, plus it is very massive... =
yet we should be spatially insulated from it, given the risks we know =
about but maybe not considering there is probably a lot of cosmic risks =
we are unaware of. This is a super-massive star in the Carina =
Constellation and it is one of the most enigmatic and potentially =
dangerous objects in our galaxy. It is located out of our (USA) view in =
the Southern hemisphere, but that doesn't necessarily make North America =
safe. Although it is the brightest and *most massive stellar object* in =
our galaxy, putting out more radiation than five million suns, it could =
possibly have already shed a third of its mass some 1500 years ago =
(spawning the Dark Ages?). And  just 40 years ago it was invisible to =
the naked eye from earth. That's right, invisible!=20

Eta Carinae has been called a singularity, a one-of-a kind that has =
waxed and waned on a cycle that may have some surprising regularity, a =
double periodicity, and moreover a statistical but "delayed" =
connectivity to several earthly catastrophes. 150 years ago, it once =
again flared up - almost like a supernova explosion, but the star =
survived, maybe even grew. The cycle seems to involve a type of unique =
recurring instability we just haven't figured out yet - but EC is NOT a =
supernova and is perhaps too large to even become one. Between 1837 and =
1856 it increased dramatically in apparent brightness to become the =
brightest star in the sky except for Sirius, even though it is 1000 =
times more distant from Earth than Sirius. Then suddenly it all but =
disappeared from view till recently, and it is now increasing in =
brightness once again and peaked just last July.=20

If the x-radiation from EC peaked in July therefore - for there to be =
some connectivity with the recent sunspot anomalies, the "trigger" =
whether it be "gravity wave" or whatever, must travel slightly slower, =
about one part in 10,000 slower than c... OR else our Sun took several =
months to swallow that 'trigger radiation' and is just now =
regurgitating...

Or else... maybe this story gets moved over to the "Lies, Damn Lies, and =
Statistics" Department....

Jones

OTOH.... if Krakatoa or Yellowstone start to rumble... this cosmic =
trigger thing might seem not so far-fetched...and it might be prudent to =
look for a good safe fallout shelter with a couple of years of food =
stocked up...
------=_NextPart_000_0182_01C3A478.41FF7F80
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>From the "Recent Cosmic Anomalies" Department:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html">=
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html</A></DIV>=

<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"The massive solar flare that erupted from the sun this week has =
been=20
classified as the largest in three decades of monitoring..... An active =
region=20
of sunspots on the solar face has spawned a number of powerful flares =
over the=20
last two weeks, including the most powerful one on Tuesday and third =
largest=20
salvo on record on October 28" </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What's going on?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>There is an ~11 year cycle of solar sunspots. However this year =
SHOULD NOT=20
have been nearly as active as it has been. See the graph:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://science.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm">http://scienc=
e.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>We should have actually been on a downturn in solar activity and =
not this=20
stunning anomaly of recent months. Why?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>One curious background question is why the cycle is "approximate". =
It is=20
not an exact cycle so it may be influenced by events some distance away =
from the=20
sun. Perhaps this year is a "correction" based on reconciling the =
"local" 22=20
cycle of solar pole shifting cycle with one or more "nonlocal" events =
which=20
modify that local cycle. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>There are few candidates for the nonlocal component, and I don't =
think=20
anyone has yet suggested the one that I am going to name: it is the most =
massive=20
star in the Milky Way and it is called Eta Carinae...but what makes it =
an=20
interesting candidate is that it is on its own 5.5 year cycle with what =
is=20
probably a binary partner star&nbsp;that it is rapidly gobbling up. =
However its=20
cycle is not quite half of our suns...but it is very close, and that =
offset may=20
require occasional corrective reconciliation.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass=20
extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with less =
obvious=20
forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would involve =
some kind=20
of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism&nbsp;from extreme =
distances,=20
such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like hard x-ray =
emission or=20
maybe even an accelerated "mini black hole,"&nbsp; at any rate, some as =
yet=20
undiscovered energy transfer mechanism that either does not diminish =
with=20
"distance-squared"&nbsp; or just happens to be directed and focused at =
us.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>This star, Eta Carinae is distant, 7500 light years, but compared =
to the=20
rest of the Milky Way that is not too far, plus it is very massive... =
yet we=20
should be spatially insulated from it, given the risks we know about but =
maybe=20
not considering there is probably a lot of cosmic risks we are unaware =
of. This=20
is a super-massive star in the Carina Constellation and it is one of the =
most=20
enigmatic and potentially dangerous objects in our galaxy. It is located =
out of=20
our (USA) view in the Southern hemisphere, but that doesn't necessarily =
make=20
North America safe. Although it is the brightest and *most massive =
stellar=20
object* in our galaxy, putting out more radiation than five million =
suns, it=20
could possibly have already shed a third of its mass some 1500 years ago =

(spawning the Dark Ages?). And&nbsp; just 40 years ago it was invisible =
to the=20
naked eye from earth. That's right, invisible! </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Eta Carinae has been called a singularity, a one-of-a kind that has =
waxed=20
and waned on a cycle that may have some surprising regularity, a double=20
periodicity, and moreover a statistical but "delayed" connectivity to =
several=20
earthly catastrophes. 150 years ago, it once again flared up - almost =
like a=20
supernova explosion, but the star survived, maybe even grew. The cycle =
seems to=20
involve a type of unique recurring instability we just haven't figured =
out yet -=20
but EC is NOT a supernova and is perhaps too large to even become one. =
Between=20
1837 and 1856 it increased dramatically in apparent brightness to become =
the=20
brightest star in the sky except for Sirius, even though it is 1000 =
times more=20
distant from Earth than Sirius. Then suddenly it all but disappeared =
from view=20
till recently, and it is now increasing in brightness once again and =
peaked just=20
last July. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If the x-radiation from EC peaked in July therefore -&nbsp;for =
there to be=20
some connectivity with the recent sunspot anomalies, the "trigger" =
whether it be=20
"gravity wave" or whatever, must travel slightly slower, about one part =
in=20
10,000 slower than c... OR else our Sun took several months to swallow =
that=20
'trigger radiation' and is just now regurgitating...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Or else... maybe this story gets moved over to the "Lies, Damn =
Lies, and=20
Statistics" Department....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>OTOH....&nbsp;if Krakatoa or Yellowstone start to rumble... this =
cosmic=20
trigger thing might seem not so far-fetched...and&nbsp;it might be =
prudent to=20
look for a good safe fallout shelter with a couple of years of food =
stocked=20
up...</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0182_01C3A478.41FF7F80--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 15:40:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA09289;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:38:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:38:33 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 18:37:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Reciprocal-space, magic-phonons and Dirac's sea
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor@infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BBD04582.9A66%editor@infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <011801c3a47b$18389580$8837fea9@cpq>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3150988675_1556176"
Resent-Message-ID: <"41qbx1.0.3H2.vjjg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52411
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--B_3150988675_1556176
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

FYI  concerning the =B3Dirac Sea=B2 --

Don Hotson=B9s papers, originally published in Infinite Energy, Issues # 43
and 44 as:

=B3Dirac=B9s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part I =B3 =8B IE #43,
May/June 2002
=B3Dirac=B9s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part II =B3 =8B IE #44,
July/August 2002

 Have now been posted by him with our permission at:

http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf>
http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart2.pdf>

One person=B9s interesting viewpoint on aether energy and the source of many
anomalies being seen in the New Energy field.

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
New Energy Foundation, Inc.
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   www.infinite-energy.com



--B_3150988675_1556176
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Reciprocal-space, magic-phonons and Dirac's sea</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0px'>FYI &nbsp;concerning th=
e &#8220;Dirac Sea&#8221; --<BR>
<BR>
Don Hotson&#8217;s papers, originally published in Infinite Energy, Issues =
# 43 and 44 as:<BR>
<BR>
&#8220;Dirac&#8217;s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part I &#8220=
; &#8212; IE #43, May/June 2002<BR>
&#8220;Dirac&#8217;s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part II &#822=
0; &#8212; IE #44, July/August 2002<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;Have now been posted by him with our permission at:<BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><U><a href=3D"http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/Hots=
onPart1.pdf">http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf</a></U></F=
ONT>&gt;<BR>
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><U><a href=3D"http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/Hots=
onPart2.pdf">http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart2.pdf</a></U></F=
ONT>&gt;<BR>
<BR>
One person&#8217;s interesting viewpoint on aether energy and the source of=
 many anomalies being seen in the New Energy field.<BR>
<BR>
Dr. Eugene F. Mallove<BR>
New Energy Foundation, Inc.<BR>
PO Box 2816<BR>
Concord, NH 03302-2816<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;www.infinite-energy.com<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>


--B_3150988675_1556176--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 16:00:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA21430;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:58:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:58:12 -0800
Message-ID: <002a01c3a4c1$dd25ef00$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <018501c3a4bb$523bdb80$8837fea9@cpq>
Subject: Re: Sunspotting
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 18:58:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0027_01C3A497.F42E5540"
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: <"yFAhw.0.cE5.J0kg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52412
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_0027_01C3A497.F42E5540
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Jones Beene=20
  To: vortex=20
  Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:11 PM
  Subject: OT: Sunspotting


  From the "Recent Cosmic Anomalies" Department:
  http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html

  "The massive solar flare that erupted from the sun this week has been =
classified as the largest in three decades of monitoring..... An active =
region of sunspots on the solar face has spawned a number of powerful =
flares over the last two weeks, including the most powerful one on =
Tuesday and third largest salvo on record on October 28"=20

  What's going on?

  There is an ~11 year cycle of solar sunspots. However this year SHOULD =
NOT have been nearly as active as it has been. See the graph:
  http://science.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm

  We should have actually been on a downturn in solar activity and not =
this stunning anomaly of recent months. Why?

  One curious background question is why the cycle is "approximate". It =
is not an exact cycle so it may be influenced by events some distance =
away from the sun. Perhaps this year is a "correction" based on =
reconciling the "local" 22 cycle of solar pole shifting cycle with one =
or more "nonlocal" events which modify that local cycle.=20

  There are few candidates for the nonlocal component, and I don't think =
anyone has yet suggested the one that I am going to name: it is the most =
massive star in the Milky Way and it is called Eta Carinae...but what =
makes it an interesting candidate is that it is on its own 5.5 year =
cycle with what is probably a binary partner star that it is rapidly =
gobbling up. However its cycle is not quite half of our suns...but it is =
very close, and that offset may require occasional corrective =
reconciliation.

  We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass =
extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with less =
obvious forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would =
involve some kind of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism from =
extreme distances, such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps =
laser-like hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black =
hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism =
that either does not diminish with "distance-squared"  or just happens =
to be directed and focused at us.

  This star, Eta Carinae is distant, 7500 light years, but compared to =
the rest of the Milky Way that is not too far, plus it is very =
massive... yet we should be spatially insulated from it, given the risks =
we know about but maybe not considering there is probably a lot of =
cosmic risks we are unaware of. This is a super-massive star in the =
Carina Constellation and it is one of the most enigmatic and potentially =
dangerous objects in our galaxy. It is located out of our (USA) view in =
the Southern hemisphere, but that doesn't necessarily make North America =
safe. Although it is the brightest and *most massive stellar object* in =
our galaxy, putting out more radiation than five million suns, it could =
possibly have already shed a third of its mass some 1500 years ago =
(spawning the Dark Ages?). And  just 40 years ago it was invisible to =
the naked eye from earth. That's right, invisible!=20

  Eta Carinae has been called a singularity, a one-of-a kind that has =
waxed and waned on a cycle that may have some surprising regularity, a =
double periodicity, and moreover a statistical but "delayed" =
connectivity to several earthly catastrophes. 150 years ago, it once =
again flared up - almost like a supernova explosion, but the star =
survived, maybe even grew. The cycle seems to involve a type of unique =
recurring instability we just haven't figured out yet - but EC is NOT a =
supernova and is perhaps too large to even become one. Between 1837 and =
1856 it increased dramatically in apparent brightness to become the =
brightest star in the sky except for Sirius, even though it is 1000 =
times more distant from Earth than Sirius. Then suddenly it all but =
disappeared from view till recently, and it is now increasing in =
brightness once again and peaked just last July.=20

  If the x-radiation from EC peaked in July therefore - for there to be =
some connectivity with the recent sunspot anomalies, the "trigger" =
whether it be "gravity wave" or whatever, must travel slightly slower, =
about one part in 10,000 slower than c... OR else our Sun took several =
months to swallow that 'trigger radiation' and is just now =
regurgitating...

  Or else... maybe this story gets moved over to the "Lies, Damn Lies, =
and Statistics" Department....

  Jones

  OTOH.... if Krakatoa or Yellowstone start to rumble... this cosmic =
trigger thing might seem not so far-fetched...and it might be prudent to =
look for a good safe fallout shelter with a couple of years of food =
stocked up...
------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C3A497.F42E5540
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 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&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> Thursday, November 06, =
2003 6:11=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> OT: Sunspotting</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>From the "Recent Cosmic Anomalies" Department:</DIV>
  <DIV><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html">=
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html</A></DIV>=

  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>"The massive solar flare that erupted from the sun this week has =
been=20
  classified as the largest in three decades of monitoring..... An =
active region=20
  of sunspots on the solar face has spawned a number of powerful flares =
over the=20
  last two weeks, including the most powerful one on Tuesday and third =
largest=20
  salvo on record on October 28" </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>What's going on?</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>There is an ~11 year cycle of solar sunspots. However this year =
SHOULD=20
  NOT have been nearly as active as it has been. See the graph:</DIV>
  <DIV><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://science.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm">http://scienc=
e.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm</A></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>We should have actually been on a downturn in solar activity and =
not this=20
  stunning anomaly of recent months. Why?</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>One curious background question is why the cycle is =
"approximate". It is=20
  not an exact cycle so it may be influenced by events some distance =
away from=20
  the sun. Perhaps this year is a "correction" based on reconciling the =
"local"=20
  22 cycle of solar pole shifting cycle with one or more "nonlocal" =
events which=20
  modify that local cycle. </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>There are few candidates for the nonlocal component, and I don't =
think=20
  anyone has yet suggested the one that I am going to name: it is the =
most=20
  massive star in the Milky Way and it is called Eta Carinae...but what =
makes it=20
  an interesting candidate is that it is on its own 5.5 year cycle with =
what is=20
  probably a binary partner star&nbsp;that it is rapidly gobbling up. =
However=20
  its cycle is not quite half of our suns...but it is very close, and =
that=20
  offset may require occasional corrective reconciliation.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass =

  extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with =
less=20
  obvious forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would =
involve=20
  some kind of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism&nbsp;from =
extreme=20
  distances, such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like =
hard=20
  x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black hole,"&nbsp; =
at any=20
  rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism that either =
does not=20
  diminish with "distance-squared"&nbsp; or just happens to be directed =
and=20
  focused at us.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>This star, Eta Carinae is distant, 7500 light years, but compared =
to the=20
  rest of the Milky Way that is not too far, plus it is very massive... =
yet we=20
  should be spatially insulated from it, given the risks we know about =
but maybe=20
  not considering there is probably a lot of cosmic risks we are unaware =
of.=20
  This is a super-massive star in the Carina Constellation and it is one =
of the=20
  most enigmatic and potentially dangerous objects in our galaxy. It is =
located=20
  out of our (USA) view in the Southern hemisphere, but that doesn't =
necessarily=20
  make North America safe. Although it is the brightest and *most =
massive=20
  stellar object* in our galaxy, putting out more radiation than five =
million=20
  suns, it could possibly have already shed a third of its mass some =
1500 years=20
  ago (spawning the Dark Ages?). And&nbsp; just 40 years ago it was =
invisible to=20
  the naked eye from earth. That's right, invisible! </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Eta Carinae has been called a singularity, a one-of-a kind that =
has waxed=20
  and waned on a cycle that may have some surprising regularity, a =
double=20
  periodicity, and moreover a statistical but "delayed" connectivity to =
several=20
  earthly catastrophes. 150 years ago, it once again flared up - almost =
like a=20
  supernova explosion, but the star survived, maybe even grew. The cycle =
seems=20
  to involve a type of unique recurring instability we just haven't =
figured out=20
  yet - but EC is NOT a supernova and is perhaps too large to even =
become one.=20
  Between 1837 and 1856 it increased dramatically in apparent brightness =
to=20
  become the brightest star in the sky except for Sirius, even though it =
is 1000=20
  times more distant from Earth than Sirius. Then suddenly it all but=20
  disappeared from view till recently, and it is now increasing in =
brightness=20
  once again and peaked just last July. </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>If the x-radiation from EC peaked in July therefore -&nbsp;for =
there to=20
  be some connectivity with the recent sunspot anomalies, the "trigger" =
whether=20
  it be "gravity wave" or whatever, must travel slightly slower, about =
one part=20
  in 10,000 slower than c... OR else our Sun took several months to =
swallow that=20
  'trigger radiation' and is just now regurgitating...</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Or else... maybe this story gets moved over to the "Lies, Damn =
Lies, and=20
  Statistics" Department....</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Jones</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>OTOH....&nbsp;if Krakatoa or Yellowstone start to rumble... this =
cosmic=20
  trigger thing might seem not so far-fetched...and&nbsp;it might be =
prudent to=20
  look for a good safe fallout shelter with a couple of years of food =
stocked=20
  up...</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C3A497.F42E5540--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 16:22:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA02395;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:19:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:19:53 -0800
Message-ID: <000a01c3a4c4$e4e89960$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <018501c3a4bb$523bdb80$8837fea9@cpq>
Subject: Re: Sunspotting
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 19:20:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C3A49A.FAED9960"
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: <"W8ou72.0.Ib.eKkg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52413
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_0007_01C3A49A.FAED9960
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



  We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass =
extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with less =
obvious forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would =
involve some kind of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism from =
extreme distances, such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps =
laser-like hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black =
hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism =
that either does not diminish with "distance-squared"  or just happens =
to be directed and focused at us.

  On Tuesday morning at 8:35 my wife and I were frightened by a double =
explosion spaced 1/2 second apart that shook the house.  I thought the =
local quarry detonated a years worth of explosives at one shot, but they =
said no.  The only other possibility was a sonic boom.  So, I checked =
with the FAA to see if some jet jockey screwed up, but they said no.  I =
later heard that a 2.7 earthquake went off 3 mi below my house.  Who =
would think that an earthquake could be mistaken for a sonic boom or =
explosion. =20

  Nevertheless, I am thoroughly convinced that both the earthquake, the =
sunspots, and all other things we don't like are caused by that =
insidious, relentless, diabolical force known as global warming.

  Jeff in Berks county PA
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C3A49A.FAED9960
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 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<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>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts and mass =

  extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic link with =
less=20
  obvious forms of concentrated energy from great distances? This would =
involve=20
  some kind of yet unknown cosmic energy transfer mechanism&nbsp;from =
extreme=20
  distances, such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like =
hard=20
  x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black hole,"&nbsp; =
at any=20
  rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism that either =
does not=20
  diminish with "distance-squared"&nbsp; or just happens to be directed =
and=20
  focused at us.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>On Tuesday morning at 8:35 my wife and I were =
frightened by=20
  a double explosion spaced 1/2 second apart that shook the house.&nbsp; =
I=20
  thought the local quarry detonated a years worth of explosives at one =
shot,=20
  but they said no.&nbsp; The only other possibility was a sonic=20
  boom.&nbsp;&nbsp;So, I&nbsp;checked with the FAA to see if some jet =
jockey=20
  screwed up, but they said no.&nbsp; I later heard that a 2.7 =
earthquake went=20
  off 3 mi below my house.&nbsp; Who would think that an earthquake =
could be=20
  mistaken for a sonic boom or explosion.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Nevertheless, I am thoroughly convinced that both =
the=20
  earthquake,&nbsp;the sunspots, and&nbsp;all other things we don't=20
  like&nbsp;are caused by that insidious, relentless,&nbsp;diabolical =
force=20
  known as global warming.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Jeff in Berks county=20
PA</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C3A49A.FAED9960--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov  6 16:54:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA20907;
	Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:52:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:52:12 -0800
Message-ID: <01c201c3a4c8$51f793a0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <BBD04582.9A66%editor@infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Reciprocal-space, magic-phonons and Dirac's sea
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:44:36 -0800
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 QAA20718
Resent-Message-ID: <"XZSXA3.0.P65.xokg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52414
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Eugene F. Mallove writes,


FYI  concerning the "Dirac Sea" --

Don Hotson¹s papers, originally published in Infinite Energy, Issues # 43
and 44 as:

"Dirac¹s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part I"  < IE #43,
May/June 2002
"Dirac¹s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part II " < IE #44,
July/August 2002

 Have now been posted by him with our permission at:

http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf>
http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart2.pdf>

One person¹s interesting viewpoint on aether energy and the source of many
anomalies being seen in the New Energy field.



Indeed...this is a *must-read* for anyone looking for well-written insightful theoretical underpinnings for LENR.

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 00:47:56 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA15103;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 00:45:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 00:45:29 -0800
Message-ID: <001901c3a50b$855e9f20$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Solar  fluctuations
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 03:45:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01C3A4E1.9C702D20"
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: <"Cb6Gf.0.uh3.ekrg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52415
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_0016_01C3A4E1.9C702D20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The point I was making in Re. sunspotting needs further explanation.

Environmentalist are clamoring for the US in particular to reduce =
emissions of green house gases including CO2.  That may sound ok to the =
uninformed general public, but you guys know that CO2 production is the =
measure of our industrial age civilization (excluding nuclear which has =
been dead in this country for nearly 25 yrs).  To reduce CO2 by 50% is =
the same as reducing our collective quality of life by 50%.

Why jeopardize our civilization in a vain attempt to control our =
planet's thermostat when the slightest hiccup from our nearest star can =
fry us or freeze us?  Now Jones is saying that a distant star can =
indirectly do the same thing to us which strengthens my argument.  Why =
cause ourselves all kinds of grief trying to control the Earth's heat =
level now when we are centuries away from controlling the sun's output?  =
As Jones points out, we see that stars are capable of fantastic =
fluctuations over very short periods of time and now our sun seems to be =
freaking out.  Athiests must be scared out of their minds.  But, if =
there is a God we can trust Him to adjust the sun's thermostat as well =
as the Earth's to compensate for our changing needs.  I find comfort in =
knowing that God is in control and we are not.

Jeff
------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C3A4E1.9C702D20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
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=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The point I was making in Re. =
sunspotting needs=20
further explanation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Environmentalist are clamoring for the =
US in=20
particular to reduce emissions of green house gases including CO2.&nbsp; =
That=20
may sound ok to the uninformed general public, but you guys know that =
CO2=20
production is the measure of our industrial age civilization (excluding =
nuclear=20
which has been dead in this country for nearly 25 yrs).&nbsp; To reduce =
CO2 by=20
50% is the same as reducing our collective quality of life by =
50%.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Why jeopardize our civilization in a =
vain attempt=20
to control our planet's thermostat when the slightest hiccup from our =
nearest=20
star can fry us or freeze us?&nbsp; Now Jones is saying that a distant =
star can=20
indirectly do the same thing to us which strengthens my argument.&nbsp; =
Why=20
cause ourselves all kinds of grief trying to control the Earth's heat =
level now=20
when we are centuries away from controlling the sun's output?&nbsp; As =
Jones=20
points out, we see that stars are capable of fantastic fluctuations over =
very=20
short periods of time and now our sun seems to be freaking out.&nbsp; =
Athiests=20
must be scared out of their minds.&nbsp; But, if there is a God we can =
trust Him=20
to adjust the sun's thermostat as well as the Earth's to compensate for =
our=20
changing needs.&nbsp; I find comfort in knowing that God is in control =
and we=20
are not.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Jeff</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C3A4E1.9C702D20--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 07:30:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA22504;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:26:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:26:46 -0800
Message-ID: <20031107152639.99059.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:26:39 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <018501c3a4bb$523bdb80$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"k2hlA1.0.VV5.rcxg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52416
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

actually, i dont have the links on me, but there has
been increased volcanic activity the past few months. 
also, im sure everyone has been alerted to the fire
parrellel with chicago et al.

as too why...   im blank.
--- Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
> From the "Recent Cosmic Anomalies" Department:
>
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/11/06/solar.flare/index.html
> 
> "The massive solar flare that erupted from the sun
> this week has been classified as the largest in
> three decades of monitoring..... An active region of
> sunspots on the solar face has spawned a number of
> powerful flares over the last two weeks, including
> the most powerful one on Tuesday and third largest
> salvo on record on October 28" 
> 
> What's going on?
> 
> There is an ~11 year cycle of solar sunspots.
> However this year SHOULD NOT have been nearly as
> active as it has been. See the graph:
> http://science.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/sunspots.htm
> 
> We should have actually been on a downturn in solar
> activity and not this stunning anomaly of recent
> months. Why?
> 
> One curious background question is why the cycle is
> "approximate". It is not an exact cycle so it may be
> influenced by events some distance away from the
> sun. Perhaps this year is a "correction" based on
> reconciling the "local" 22 cycle of solar pole
> shifting cycle with one or more "nonlocal" events
> which modify that local cycle. 
> 
> There are few candidates for the nonlocal component,
> and I don't think anyone has yet suggested the one
> that I am going to name: it is the most massive star
> in the Milky Way and it is called Eta Carinae...but
> what makes it an interesting candidate is that it is
> on its own 5.5 year cycle with what is probably a
> binary partner star that it is rapidly gobbling up.
> However its cycle is not quite half of our
> suns...but it is very close, and that offset may
> require occasional corrective reconciliation.
> 
> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid
> impacts and mass extinctions on Earth. But could
> there also exist a cosmic link with less obvious
> forms of concentrated energy from great distances?
> This would involve some kind of yet unknown cosmic
> energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps
> laser-like hard x-ray emission or maybe even an
> accelerated "mini black hole,"  at any rate, some as
> yet undiscovered energy transfer mechanism that
> either does not diminish with "distance-squared"  or
> just happens to be directed and focused at us.
> 
> This star, Eta Carinae is distant, 7500 light years,
> but compared to the rest of the Milky Way that is
> not too far, plus it is very massive... yet we
> should be spatially insulated from it, given the
> risks we know about but maybe not considering there
> is probably a lot of cosmic risks we are unaware of.
> This is a super-massive star in the Carina
> Constellation and it is one of the most enigmatic
> and potentially dangerous objects in our galaxy. It
> is located out of our (USA) view in the Southern
> hemisphere, but that doesn't necessarily make North
> America safe. Although it is the brightest and *most
> massive stellar object* in our galaxy, putting out
> more radiation than five million suns, it could
> possibly have already shed a third of its mass some
> 1500 years ago (spawning the Dark Ages?). And  just
> 40 years ago it was invisible to the naked eye from
> earth. That's right, invisible! 
> 
> Eta Carinae has been called a singularity, a
> one-of-a kind that has waxed and waned on a cycle
> that may have some surprising regularity, a double
> periodicity, and moreover a statistical but
> "delayed" connectivity to several earthly
> catastrophes. 150 years ago, it once again flared up
> - almost like a supernova explosion, but the star
> survived, maybe even grew. The cycle seems to
> involve a type of unique recurring instability we
> just haven't figured out yet - but EC is NOT a
> supernova and is perhaps too large to even become
> one. Between 1837 and 1856 it increased dramatically
> in apparent brightness to become the brightest star
> in the sky except for Sirius, even though it is 1000
> times more distant from Earth than Sirius. Then
> suddenly it all but disappeared from view till
> recently, and it is now increasing in brightness
> once again and peaked just last July. 
> 
> If the x-radiation from EC peaked in July therefore
> - for there to be some connectivity with the recent
> sunspot anomalies, the "trigger" whether it be
> "gravity wave" or whatever, must travel slightly
> slower, about one part in 10,000 slower than c... OR
> else our Sun took several months to swallow that
> 'trigger radiation' and is just now regurgitating...
> 
> Or else... maybe this story gets moved over to the
> "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" Department....
> 
> Jones
> 
> OTOH.... if Krakatoa or Yellowstone start to
> rumble... this cosmic trigger thing might seem not
> so far-fetched...and it might be prudent to look for
> a good safe fallout shelter with a couple of years
> of food stocked up...


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 07:44:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA02773;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:41:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:41:20 -0800
Message-ID: <20031107154111.3865.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:41:11 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Solar  fluctuations
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <001901c3a50b$855e9f20$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"jgH0j1.0.Eh.Vqxg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52417
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

except that co2 is not direct correllation. there are
ways to produce less co2 without impacting qol.  
that being said, looking at the bible...  if god is in
charge, i dont like the idea of him having the
thermostat swicth for the sun at hand...  remember the
flood?



--- revtec <revtec@PTD.NET> wrote:
> The point I was making in Re. sunspotting needs
> further explanation.
> 
> Environmentalist are clamoring for the US in
> particular to reduce emissions of green house gases
> including CO2.  That may sound ok to the uninformed
> general public, but you guys know that CO2
> production is the measure of our industrial age
> civilization (excluding nuclear which has been dead
> in this country for nearly 25 yrs).  To reduce CO2
> by 50% is the same as reducing our collective
> quality of life by 50%.
> 
> Why jeopardize our civilization in a vain attempt to
> control our planet's thermostat when the slightest
> hiccup from our nearest star can fry us or freeze
> us?  Now Jones is saying that a distant star can
> indirectly do the same thing to us which strengthens
> my argument.  Why cause ourselves all kinds of grief
> trying to control the Earth's heat level now when we
> are centuries away from controlling the sun's
> output?  As Jones points out, we see that stars are
> capable of fantastic fluctuations over very short
> periods of time and now our sun seems to be freaking
> out.  Athiests must be scared out of their minds. 
> But, if there is a God we can trust Him to adjust
> the sun's thermostat as well as the Earth's to
> compensate for our changing needs.  I find comfort
> in knowing that God is in control and we are not.
> 
> Jeff


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 08:44:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA20362;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:41:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:41:00 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Three Sphere Coulomb Motor
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: <20031107164024.615773DE3@xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Fri,  7 Nov 2003 11:40:24 -0500 (EST)
Resent-Message-ID: <"KDLQL.0.vz4.Siyg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52418
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Here is a very interesting discussion of the three sphere coulomb motor noted on this list a while back:

http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/vol-9/iss-5/p23.html

Thankfully missing is the obfuscatory gobbledegook Wistrom and Khachatourian had in their journal papers.  Instead, we get reasonably clear arguments about the principles involved.

M.

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 09:26:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA18926;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:21:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:21:54 -0800
Message-ID: <20031107172145.21618.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:21:45 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <20031107154111.3865.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"sFaoo1.0.Vd4.nIzg_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52419
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

im sure everyone remember the story a while back about
lightening producing x-rays and gamma rays?

well, heres a new one.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-11/fiot-trs110503.php

Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Florida Tech physicist throws open debate on
lightning's cause
Melbourne, Fla. – If Joseph Dwyer, Florida Tech
associate professor of physics, is right, then a lot
of what we thought we knew about thunderstorms and
lightning is probably wrong.
In the latest issue of Geophysical Research Letters,
the National Science Foundation CAREER Award winner
caps two years of lightning research with a startling
conclusion: The conditions inside thunderstorms that
were long thought necessary to produce lightning
actually do not exist in nature.

"For generations, we've believed that in order to
produce a lightning discharge, the electric fields
inside storms must be very big, similar to the fields
that cause you to be shocked when you touch a metal
doorknob," said Dwyer.

The problem is scientists have searched inside
thunderstorms for many years, looking for these large
electric fields, only to come up empty handed. Some
researchers have suggested that maybe we haven't been
looking hard enough; maybe the big electric fields are
really there, but they were somehow just missed. Now,
Dwyer's new theory shows that these searches were
actually in vain; super-sized fields simply don't
exist, period.

"What we've discovered is a new limit in nature. Just
as a bucket can only hold so much water, the
atmosphere can only hold a certain sized electric
field. Beyond that, the electric field is stunted by
the rapid creation of gamma-rays and a form of
anti-matter called positrons," he said.

While Dwyer's research shows that lightning is not
produced by large, unseen electric fields inside
storms, the triggering mechanism remains a mystery. 

"Although everyone is familiar with lightning, we
still don't know much about how it really works," said
Dwyer. 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

rather interesting.  while its a possible mechanism
for the earlier x-ray discovery, it leaves teh
lightening mechanism up in the air.  also, electrons
are leptons.  dont break down...   so how are they
breaking down into positrons and gamma rays?

i couldnt find any links about the exact mechanism hes
describing.  anyone else?

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 11:30:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA16281;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:26:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:26:06 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107142100.00b03598@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:25:57 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: New papers at LENR-CANR
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"3rPXM.0.H-3.D7_g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52420
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Okay, I finally got a chance to upload several new papers. I wish I could 
conveniently sort them by date. Anyway, here are some of them.

Li et al. report dramatic progress toward a self-sustaining gas loaded system:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf

Other interesting experimental papers:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMfluidizedb.pdf

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFthermaland.pdf

Another good one by Iwamura is waiting for final approval.

Grand total downloads will reach 300,000 in a few days.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 12:13:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA15106;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:09:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:09:14 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Vortex Formation in Plasmas
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:32:11 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIEDADOAA.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: <"Sq4Q72.0.vh3.gl_g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52421
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Mike.

Thanks for the link, I was not familiar with the
journal and find it very interesting.

Of relevance to our recent discussions about pinch
and EV type phenomena, check this out.

http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/vol-9/iss-5/p20.html

////////////////
When the researchers adjusted the poloidal field to just
balance the toroidal field created by the plasma currents,
the plasma current kinked like an overtwisted spring.
“Since the currents in adjacent loops of the kink attract
each other, like all parallel currents do, the kink keeps
growing tighter and tighter until the loops reconnect with
their neighbors to form a separate toroidal vortex or spheromak,”
Hsu explains. The kinking mechanism is quite different from
the symmetrical sausage instability that other researchers
had speculated might lead to the toroidal vortices.
////////////////

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 12:14:29 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA16025;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:10:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:10:28 -0800
Message-ID: <3FABFC51.1050500@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:10:57 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: New papers at LENR-CANR
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107142100.00b03598@pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107142100.00b03598@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZK9KX.0.Dw3.pm_g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52422
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Okay, I finally got a chance to upload several new papers. I wish I 
> could conveniently sort them by date. Anyway, here are some of them.
> 
> Li et al. report dramatic progress toward a self-sustaining gas loaded 
> system:
> 
> http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf

Very cool!


I have a dumb question regarding one of the plots, directed at anyone on 
the list who's looked at the paper.

In Figure 1, they show the heat flow curve against the deuterium flux 
curve, and after the D flux falls to zero, the heating curve goes 
_negative_.

The question is, what does that mean, in physical terms?  Naively it 
seems like it must mean heat was flowing into the system, but since it 
was cooling off at that point that doesn't seem to make sense -- cooling 
off => heat's flowing out, I would think.

I'm sure I'm exposing large amounts of ignorance here.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 12:27:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA25264;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:23:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:23:14 -0800
Message-ID: <00a201c3a56b$ebb69100$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107142100.00b03598@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: New papers at LENR-CANR
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:15:42 -0800
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 MAA25232
Resent-Message-ID: <"EzRqD2.0.dA6.ny_g_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52423
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" 

> Okay, I finally got a chance to upload several new papers. I wish I could 
> conveniently sort them by date. Anyway, here are some of them.
> 
> Li et al. report dramatic progress toward a self-sustaining gas loaded system:
> 
> http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf




Quote from that paper:
"The total excess heat released in 9 hours was 192 kJ. Based on the total number of deuterium atoms permeating the Pd disk (2.6×1020), we estimate the average energy released from each deuterium atom was *4.6 keV.* [snip] We conclude that there was a non-chemical origin for such a large amount of excess" END

This would indeed be "dramatic progress" if a few things were made a little clearer. There is a flow of deuterium and a pressure differential, but it isn't clear if the author factored out the kinetic energy of maintaining that pressure differential.... that is, the pressurization itself is convertible to heat, even when it is maintained by a vacuum on one side - so was the energy equivalent of this removed in order to arrive at the excess heat? Probably, and at any rate the pressure differential is only around 100 kpa which begs the question, "what happens at higher pressurization?"

But the answer is probably that the effect diminishes because if you look at the graph on page 7, it looks like at the lowest pressure/ low heat setup (red line) gives the best results percentage-wise, and BTW this is apparently already self-sustaining (except for the pressure differential)

You may remember that Scott Little ran a similar experiment years ago that came up negative (surprise, surprise). If memory serves, Scott had been using a hydrogen purification membrane which was designed to pass the maximum amount of gas whereas here, a complicated layered setup was manufactured - (probably after hundreds of failed variations - in the tradition of Edison, whom one would suspect is highly admired in Asia for his relentless technique of trial and error)

One (possible) lesson that arises from this - i.e. the difference in results over EarthTech: If you start out with the mind-set of trying to disprove a theory that you have been trained to believe can't be right, rather than trying to maximize the significant variables to improve upon promising but previously ambiguous results, then it is unlikely that you will ever succeed in finding OU - until it is pretty much 'fait accompli' and way too late to really help advance the field - but in fairness that kind of advancement is apparently not EarthTech's mission.

Jones 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 13:19:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA26967;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:12:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:12:16 -0800
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller@midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:13:24 -0600
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com>
References: <20031107154111.3865.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com> <20031107172145.21618.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20031107172145.21618.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com>
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 NAA26902
Resent-Message-ID: <"6EAz71.0.Bb6.lg0h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52424
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:21:45 -0800 (PST), alexander hollins
<the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com> wrote:

>im sure everyone remember the story a while back about
>lightening producing x-rays and gamma rays?
>
>well, heres a new one.
>
>http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-11/fiot-trs110503.php
>
>Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
>Florida Tech physicist throws open debate on
>lightning's cause
  ...
>"Although everyone is familiar with lightning, we
>still don't know much about how it really works," said
>Dwyer. 
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
>
>rather interesting.  while its a possible mechanism
>for the earlier x-ray discovery, it leaves teh
>lightening mechanism up in the air.  also, electrons
>are leptons.  dont break down...   so how are they
>breaking down into positrons and gamma rays?
>
>i couldnt find any links about the exact mechanism hes
>describing.  anyone else?

He doesn't describe a mechanism.  He's guessing.

Some day, these guys are going to figure out the real source of  most
lightning -- space.  That is, clouds, especially big cumulonimbus
(thunder storm) clouds, act as a short-circuit to the electrical
potential difference between the upper atmosphere and the ground.
Look up "sprites" and "blue jets" that we've only recently seen coming
from the top of thunder storms.  They're part of the electrical path
from the charge in space.  

(As an aside, solar flares are essentially the same thing.  The Sun
builds up a large charge in it's outer layers compared to the
surrounding vacuum, and the flares help neutralize the charge.)

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

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 13:57:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA21209;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:53:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:53:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3FAC145A.1070602@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:53:30 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
References: <20031107154111.3865.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com> <20031107172145.21618.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com> <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"o8wqg.0.DB5.nH1h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52425
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dean Miller wrote:

>Some day, these guys are going to figure out the real source of  most
>lightning -- space.  
>

Let's hope they figure it out before they try to deploy the space elevator:

http://www.isr.us/SEHome.asp



From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 15:14:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA18886;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:11:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:11:38 -0800
Message-ID: <20031107231132.2820.qmail@web11701.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:11:32 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"sWmCF2.0.0d4.fQ2h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52426
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

charge in space?  whats teh medium?

you would think that would have registered in
instruments in rockets and shuttles we've sent up?
--- Dean Miller <dtmiller@midiowa.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:21:45 -0800 (PST), alexander
> hollins
> <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> >im sure everyone remember the story a while back
> about
> >lightening producing x-rays and gamma rays?
> >
> >well, heres a new one.
> >
>
>http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-11/fiot-trs110503.php
> >
> >Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
> >Florida Tech physicist throws open debate on
> >lightning's cause
>   ...
> >"Although everyone is familiar with lightning, we
> >still don't know much about how it really works,"
> said
> >Dwyer. 
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
> >
> >rather interesting.  while its a possible mechanism
> >for the earlier x-ray discovery, it leaves teh
> >lightening mechanism up in the air.  also,
> electrons
> >are leptons.  dont break down...   so how are they
> >breaking down into positrons and gamma rays?
> >
> >i couldnt find any links about the exact mechanism
> hes
> >describing.  anyone else?
> 
> He doesn't describe a mechanism.  He's guessing.
> 
> Some day, these guys are going to figure out the
> real source of  most
> lightning -- space.  That is, clouds, especially big
> cumulonimbus
> (thunder storm) clouds, act as a short-circuit to
> the electrical
> potential difference between the upper atmosphere
> and the ground.
> Look up "sprites" and "blue jets" that we've only
> recently seen coming
> from the top of thunder storms.  They're part of the
> electrical path
> from the charge in space.  
> 
> (As an aside, solar flares are essentially the same
> thing.  The Sun
> builds up a large charge in it's outer layers
> compared to the
> surrounding vacuum, and the flares help neutralize
> the charge.)
> 
> -- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 15:34:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA31998;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:30:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:30:16 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107182642.021b06d0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:30:08 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"OhfSk1.0.tp7.7i2h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52427
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton writes:

 > Let's hope they figure it out before they try to deploy the space elevator:
 >
 > http://www.isr.us/SEHome.asp

It seems they have addressed the issue:

http://www.isr.us/SEScienceFAQs.asp#1

"Will the ribbon produce an electrical current?

The last space shuttle-tether experiment, which unspooled about 12 miles of 
cable, generated thousands of volts of electrical potential and kilowatts 
of power, burned through the insulation of the cable, and generated a 
tremendous explosive arc of electricity, that snapped the tether. Now 
imagine a 60,000-mile-long cable and its electrical-generating capacity and 
you begin to see the disastrous potential. . . ."

There is a nice little animation here:

http://www.isr.us/SEanimation.asp

This is a heck of a lot more promising then a transatlantic tube railroad. 
I like the way these people are thinking small, to start with.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 16:30:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA00688;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:26:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:26:16 -0800
Message-ID: <3FAC3828.7000905@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:26:16 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107182642.021b06d0@pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031107182642.021b06d0@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"AUMfz2.0.SA.dW3h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52428
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Terry Blanton writes:
>
> > Let's hope they figure it out before they try to deploy the space 
> elevator:
> >
> > http://www.isr.us/SEHome.asp
>
> It seems they have addressed the issue:
>
> http://www.isr.us/SEScienceFAQs.asp#1
>
> "Will the ribbon produce an electrical current? 


They do not address Dean's issue.  They discuss lightning separately in 
the FAQ.  If the ribbon's resistance is less than a thundercloud, the 
ribbon *becomes*  a lightning path.  Possibly they are underestimating 
the potential difference?  After all, the tether *did* break. 

Methinks we need more tether experiments!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov  7 23:37:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA12913;
	Fri, 7 Nov 2003 23:36:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 23:36:03 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b00bbd2470e284f@[64.61.217.239]>
In-Reply-To: <20031107152639.99059.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031107152639.99059.qmail@web11707.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 01:36:49 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"jZtCV1.0.f93.Zp9h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52429
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I have previously posted on the work of the electrophysicist James 
McCanney. His thesis is that comets are rocks not snowballs. He has 
also been talking about objects entering the solar system from a 
direction that they head in towards the south pole.

I'm listening to Coast to Coast AM's George Norey interview James 
McCanney, I think that his URL is James McCanney Science .com, but 
you can link to it from the C to C webpage. His thesis is that there 
is a succession of large comets hitting the Sun which are triggering 
the sunspots, and vulcanism. He compares the Sun's energy output to 
that of a wood fire when you add some gasoline, hum, I wonder if the 
addition of a blast of air might be a better analogy.  As you may 
know, the entire solar system is heating up, This is starting to make 
sense,

James believes that the big one is still to come.

And the fourth (angel) emptied his vial upon the sun: and it was 
given to it to scorch mankind by fire, Revelation 16:8

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  8 08:30:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA12531;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 08:29:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 08:29:14 -0800
Message-ID: <001f01c3a614$6441daa0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: CF "permeation" triode
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 08:21:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3A5D1.531C0900"
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: <"7vK2A3.0.j33.QdHh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52430
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_001A_01C3A5D1.531C0900
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>From the previously mentioned Li paper:
"The total excess heat released in 9 hours was 192 kJ. Based on the =
total number of deuterium atoms permeating the Pd disk (2.6=D71020), we =
estimate the average energy released from each deuterium atom was *4.6 =
keV.*
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf


If one could expel the 4.6 keV boosted deuterons, going "ballistic" (in =
the technical sense) using well-known RF techniques, then two very =
simple direct conversion schemes present themselves- one is based on the =
"ion gun" and the "multipactor."
http://content.aip.org/RSINAK/v69/i1/69_1.html
An even simpler device would be a reversed triode, one where the emitter =
was the CF electrode, which becomes a Pd tube that emits the boosted =
protons which are drawn off by a charged grid and accelerated to a =
collection electrode.=20

Almost anyone who has taken the prospects for "free energy" all the way =
back to basics, has toyed with the various EM premises behind this =
proposition, which can be phrased something like: accelerate with charge =
and convert with kinetics...in other words since the electron and proton =
have equal charge but a mass difference ratio of 1836, then even when =
using a Carnot heat conversion scheme where a 25% return can be =
achieved, it would be conceivable (superficially ) to use the electron =
charge to accelerate a proton into a multipactor electrode and =
eventually return a gross C.O.P. of 1836/25 =3D >70 (in your wildest =
dreams). It doesn't work that way, of course, because acceleration is a =
function of both charge and mass (charge even has a property which we =
call inertial mass) - or else we would now be well into the age of =
free-energy, rather than vainly knocking at the door.  =20

But the real problem with the above scenario is clearly that the 4.6 keV =
was not achieved in a single step - it almost certainly was not, in =
fact, but more likely in several thousand iterations where 6.8 eV quanta =
were added and scattered, everytime the free proton became "bare" going =
from one Pd nanoparticle to the next in transit....

Jones

For those who are doggedly interested in finding any possible "crack" in =
physical laws, mentioned a couple of days ago, there are two =
possibilities with the scenario -
=20
1) using centrifugal force, i.e. a high speed rotating emitter =
electrode,=20

2) or else try to capitalize on that variation in the inertial mass of a =
pure electron charge compared with the proton and there is hypothetical =
difference here of 2*pi*r, which, if it could be fully realized, might =
allow a COP of over 1836/25*2pi =3D 11.7 (in your wildest dreams) were =
it not for other considerations .... ;-{
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3A5D1.531C0900
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>From&nbsp;the previously mentioned Li&nbsp;paper:<BR>"The total =
excess heat=20
released in 9 hours was 192 kJ. Based on the total number of deuterium =
atoms=20
permeating the Pd disk (2.6=D71020), we estimate the average energy =
released from=20
each deuterium atom was *4.6 keV.*</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf">http://www.l=
enr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If one could expel the 4.6 keV boosted deuterons, =
going&nbsp;"ballistic"=20
(in the technical sense) using well-known RF =
techniques,&nbsp;then&nbsp;two very=20
simple direct conversion schemes present themselves-&nbsp;one is based =
on the=20
"ion gun" and the "multipactor."</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://content.aip.org/RSINAK/v69/i1/69_1.html">http://content.ai=
p.org/RSINAK/v69/i1/69_1.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>An even simpler device would be a reversed triode, one where the =
emitter=20
was the CF electrode, which becomes a Pd tube&nbsp;that emits the =
boosted=20
protons which are drawn off by a charged grid and accelerated to a =
collection=20
electrode.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Almost anyone who has taken the prospects for "free energy" all the =
way=20
back to basics, has toyed with the various EM premises behind this =
proposition,=20
which&nbsp;can be phrased something like:&nbsp;accelerate with charge =
and=20
convert with kinetics...in other words since the electron and proton =
have equal=20
charge but a mass difference ratio of 1836, then even when using a =
Carnot heat=20
conversion scheme where a 25% return can be achieved, it would be =
conceivable=20
(superficially ) to use the electron charge to accelerate a proton into =
a=20
multipactor electrode and eventually return a gross&nbsp;C.O.P. of =
1836/25 =3D=20
&gt;70 (in your wildest dreams). It doesn't work that way, of course, =
because=20
acceleration is a function of both charge and mass (charge even has a =
property=20
which we call inertial mass) - or else we would now be well into the age =
of=20
free-energy, rather than vainly knocking at the door.&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But the real problem with the above scenario is clearly that the =
4.6 keV=20
was not achieved in a single step - it almost certainly was not, in=20
fact,&nbsp;but more likely in several thousand iterations where 6.8 eV =
quanta=20
were added and scattered, everytime the free proton became "bare" going =
from one=20
Pd nanoparticle to the next in transit....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>For those who are doggedly interested in finding any possible =
"crack" in=20
physical laws, mentioned a couple of days ago, there are two =
possibilities with=20
the scenario -</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>1) using centrifugal force, i.e. a high speed rotating emitter =
electrode,=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>2) or&nbsp;else try to capitalize on that variation in the inertial =
mass of=20
a pure electron charge compared with the proton and there is =
hypothetical=20
difference here of 2*pi*r, which, if it could be fully realized, might =
allow a=20
COP of over 1836/25*2pi =3D 11.7 (in your wildest dreams) were it not =
for other=20
considerations ....&nbsp;;-{</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C3A5D1.531C0900--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  8 12:41:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAB22040;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:40:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:40:19 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031108153746.021ae358@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:40:17 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Minor corrections to Li paper
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-Vf292.0.FO5.oILh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52431
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I made three minor changes to the Li paper:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiXZprogressin.pdf

If you have a copy on disk, please download another one.

Celani told me there is something wrong with Fig. 1 in his paper, but I do 
not see the problem. I will clarify this.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  8 13:31:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA17063;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:30:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:30:16 -0800
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 21:28:48 +0000 (UTC)
From: John Schnurer <herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
To: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>, Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>,
        Ed Weaver <adenosinee747@netscape.net>
Subject: Digest Mode please for next 3 weeks....
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311082127020.9022@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"7hY-F2.0.SA4.e1Mh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52432
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


	Dear Bill,

	I am going to be sporadic in my connection to a computer for the
next 3 weeks.  Can you please put me in digest mode?

	Thank You,

					JH

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  8 13:42:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA24315;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:40:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:40:33 -0800
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 21:39:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: John Schnurer <herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>,
        William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
Subject: HELP... to Bill Beatty   Help!  Help PLEASE !!!
In-Reply-To: <fc.005b8ffc009585533b9aca0037066bab.958554@mcgregor.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311082138190.9022@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
References: <fc.005b8ffc009585533b9aca0037066bab.958554@mcgregor.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"YNChL3.0.mx5.GBMh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52433
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



	Dear Bill,

	Can you PLEASE digest me?

			Thanks,

					John


On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 vortex-l@eskimo.com wrote:

> Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:50:31 -0500
> From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> To: herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: To moderator
>
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, John Schnurer wrote:
> >> 	Can you please put me in digest mode?  I do not have broswer based
> >> E Mail so I am unable to "click" on different selections.  My E mail
> >> volume is so heavy I need to go to digest for one message a week or one
> >a
> >> day, how ever it works, instead of a separate E Mail for each and every
> >> message.
> >
> I don't have browser-based email either!
>
>
>
> Here's the stuff from the website.  You need to turn on the digest email,
> then once it starts up, turn off the normal vortex email.  That way you
> don't miss anything.
>
> http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html#sub
>
>   Vortex-L subscription instructions:
>
>   To subscribe, send a *blank* message to:
>      vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
>   Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
>   quotes around "subscribe," of course.
>
>   You will get an automatic greeting message in response.  Once
>   subscribed, send your email to vortex-L@eskimo.com.
>
>   To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to:
>       vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
>   Put the single word "unsubscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
>   quotes around "unsubscribe," of course.
>
>   Vortex-L digest mode:
>
>   If you prefer "digest" mode messages, collections of messages up to
>   40K total or every 2 days, then subscribe to the vortex-digest
>   instead of to vortex-L.  Send a blank message to:
>       vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com
>   Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.
>   Vortex-L and Vortex-digest are two separate lists.  It is possible
>   to subscribe to one or the other or both.
>
>
>
>
> (((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Sat Nov  8 13:45:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA26462;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:43:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:43:44 -0800
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 21:42:19 +0000 (UTC)
From: John Schnurer <herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
To: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>, Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Help Bill Beatty Help PLEASE Help !!To moderator 
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311082141480.9022@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"Kyo3M.0.ET6.FEMh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52434
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 18:42:04 -0500
From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
To: herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: To moderator



	Dear Moderator,

	Can you please put me in digest mode?  I do not have broswer based
E Mail so I am unable to "click" on different selections.  My E mail
volume is so heavy I need to go to digest for one message a week or one a
day, how ever it works, instead of a separate E Mail for each and every
message.

		Thanks,
						JH


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov  8 14:30:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA18191;
	Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:29:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:29:41 -0800
Message-ID: <005f01c3a646$be262bc0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: CF "permeation" triode
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:22:05 -0800
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 OAA18155
Resent-Message-ID: <"Behhj3.0.9S4.KvMh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52435
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Vo,

My previous posting has a number of errors, math & otherwise which I will correct later

Apologies,

Jones


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov  9 16:41:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA32628;
	Sun, 9 Nov 2003 16:39:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 16:39:41 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: ID = fce074896ca7361984ef195a9ac92917
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: <20031110003907.C4175109EE9@xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Sun,  9 Nov 2003 19:39:07 -0500 (EST)
Resent-Message-ID: <"jDGeY2.0.kz7.Cvjh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52436
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Jones Beene wrote:

> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts  and 
> mass extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic
> link with less obvious forms of concentrated energy from great
> distances? This would involve some kind of yet unknown
> cosmic energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like
> hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black 
> hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer
> mechanism that either does not diminish with "distance-
> squared"  or just happens to be directed and focused at us.

It seems to me that energy transfers between bodies in space may not need such exotic and speculative explanations.  We normally think of energy crossing space as some sort of EM radiation or ejected charged particles whose effects diminish in the well-known "square of the distance" manner.  However, something much more efficient yet quite conventional may be involved.

For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun, enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the solar system by simple capacitive coupling.  Although it is hard to think of a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far greater efficiency than EM radiation.  This can't be a new idea.

M.




_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov  9 19:32:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA04376;
	Sun, 9 Nov 2003 19:31:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 19:31:07 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>, <michael.foster@excite.com>
Subject: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 22:54:02 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEDHDOAA.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: <20031110003907.C4175109EE9@xmxpita.excite.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"vEKG92.0.941.wPmh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52437
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


A good low frequency approximation is
c = 4*pi*epsilon0*1/(1/r1+1/r2-2/d)
so it's about 700 microfarads.

The distance between the earth and sun is very
great, and the resulting light speed delay means the above
approximation may be badly in error for A/C signals.

This approximation is better,
c = 4*pi*epsilon0*r1*r2/d
yielding 50 microfarads.

It's interesting to consider the inductance of
the resulting A/C circuit. Given the impedance as 377ohms,
l = 7 henries and the system is resonant at 8.5hz. This from
l = 377^2 * c and f = 1/2*PI*sqrt(l*c)

Rather close to the Schumann freq. huh?

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Foster [mailto:michael.foster@excite.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting



Jones Beene wrote:

> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts  and
> mass extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic
> link with less obvious forms of concentrated energy from great
> distances? This would involve some kind of yet unknown
> cosmic energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like
> hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black
> hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer
> mechanism that either does not diminish with "distance-
> squared"  or just happens to be directed and focused at us.

It seems to me that energy transfers between bodies in space may not need
such exotic and speculative explanations.  We normally think of energy
crossing space as some sort of EM radiation or ejected charged particles
whose effects diminish in the well-known "square of the distance" manner.
However, something much more efficient yet quite conventional may be
involved.

For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun,
enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the
solar system by simple capacitive coupling.  Although it is hard to think of
a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why
this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far
greater efficiency than EM radiation.  This can't be a new idea.

M.




_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov  9 19:37:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA06722;
	Sun, 9 Nov 2003 19:35:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 19:35:00 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: "Carbon onions" / amazing mass spec machines / QUESTION
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:34:24 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <0l1uqvst7iksgco8amm64c6fcj0u7v6dp6@4ax.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105172240.00b03688@pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031105172240.00b03688@pop.mindspring.com>
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 TAA06663
Resent-Message-ID: <"G_yBp2.0.re1.aTmh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52438
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:43:35 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>Anyway, I was wondering, is there a mass spec machine that can look 
>straight through his Pd complex sample and see all Mo isotopes, at the 
>surface and below? If the other Mo isotopes were smeared out through the 
>sample, then a bulk analysis of isotopes would show them glommed together 
>again in the normal ratios.

I believe that the beam used in SIMS can "dig" a hole in the substance, so considering the fact the Mo shouldn't have migrated too far, one should see a change in isotope ratio with depth.
IOW as the beam digs in, the ratio should change with time.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov  9 21:22:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA04263;
	Sun, 9 Nov 2003 21:20:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 21:20:00 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>, <michael.foster@excite.com>
Subject: RE: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:42:52 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEDIDOAA.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: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEDHDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"dZhNo.0.X21.__nh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52439
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sorry, got the earth/sun distance a bit wrong.

The revised capacity for a/c approximation:

c = 3.3 microfarads and with z = 377 ohms
l = .47 henries and f0 = 127hz.

hmmm.......anyone care to hazard a guess?

OTOH, a half wave resonance at the earth/sun
distance would be ~ 1 mHz. ???

K.









-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Nagel [mailto:knagel@gis.net]
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 10:54 PM
To: Vortex; michael.foster@excite.com
Subject: Capacity of Earth/Sun system



A good low frequency approximation is
c = 4*pi*epsilon0*1/(1/r1+1/r2-2/d)
so it's about 700 microfarads.

The distance between the earth and sun is very
great, and the resulting light speed delay means the above
approximation may be badly in error for A/C signals.

This approximation is better,
c = 4*pi*epsilon0*r1*r2/d
yielding 50 microfarads.

It's interesting to consider the inductance of
the resulting A/C circuit. Given the impedance as 377ohms,
l = 7 henries and the system is resonant at 8.5hz. This from
l = 377^2 * c and f = 1/2*PI*sqrt(l*c)

Rather close to the Schumann freq. huh?

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Foster [mailto:michael.foster@excite.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting



Jones Beene wrote:

> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts  and
> mass extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic
> link with less obvious forms of concentrated energy from great
> distances? This would involve some kind of yet unknown
> cosmic energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like
> hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black
> hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer
> mechanism that either does not diminish with "distance-
> squared"  or just happens to be directed and focused at us.

It seems to me that energy transfers between bodies in space may not need
such exotic and speculative explanations.  We normally think of energy
crossing space as some sort of EM radiation or ejected charged particles
whose effects diminish in the well-known "square of the distance" manner.
However, something much more efficient yet quite conventional may be
involved.

For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun,
enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the
solar system by simple capacitive coupling.  Although it is hard to think of
a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why
this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far
greater efficiency than EM radiation.  This can't be a new idea.

M.




_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!



From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 04:46:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id EAA20541;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 04:45:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 04:45:04 -0800
Message-ID: <002f01c3a780$08776240$ca00bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Energy and Force/Gravity
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 05:43:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b037d032248c170a3174a9d54aa34bb1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"4gnhD2.0.r05.GXuh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52440
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

According to equation 14.742 of this url:

http://www.oulu.fi/atkk/tkpalv/unix/ansys-6.1/content/thy_el126.html

The force F (newtons) between two capacitor plates with an applied voltage (V) and a
capacitance (C) = eo* area/x

F = dC*V^2/(2*dx)  (newtons)

Doesn't it follow that force is directly proportional to the energy E = 1/2 C V^2/x
contained in the dielectric/vacuum between the plates, ie.,

F = E/x  (newtons)

Example:

Two plates each a meter square, separated by 0.001 meter, with one volt applied have a
vacuum-stored energy E  of:

E = 8.85e-12*1^2/2*0.001  = 4.425e-9 newton-meter (joule)  and experience a force F =
4.425e-9  newton??

IOW, since mass and energy are essentially the same thing and the gravitational force
Fg = G* m1*m2/R^2, might there be an energy-force proportionality constant K such that
Fg =
K*E1*E2/R^2  newtons ??

I might suggest that K = 8.235e-45 (in the appropriate units).  :-)

Fred


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 06:32:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA20528;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:29:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:29:05 -0800
Message-ID: <003901c3a795$eea285a0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <knagel@gis.net>
Cc: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEDIDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:21:28 -0800
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 GAA20494
Resent-Message-ID: <"rSwt-1.0.e05.m2wh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52441
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 If one wanted to try to tie the resonance into Bayles electrogravitational theory, 
it would be close to ~10 Hz
http://www.electrogravity.com/index4.html

OTOH the capacity of the Earth/Sun system shouldn't really have much connection to gravity, should it? 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 07:54:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA18858;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:50:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:50:48 -0800
Message-ID: <004f01c3a7a1$56f0c9e0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <michael.foster@excite.com>
Cc: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <20031110003907.C4175109EE9@xmxpita.excite.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:43:07 -0800
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 HAA18809
Resent-Message-ID: <"2QVQ72.0.Rc4.NFxh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52442
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Michael Foster writes,

"For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun, enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the solar system by simple capacitive coupling. "

It would seem that the enormous water content of our atmosphere would limit this mechanism to the changes in the well-know "fair weather field" due to the high dielelctric contant of H2O found at lower strata. I have never heard of big changes in the fair weather field following sunspots, have you? It would be interesting to know. If there was much coupling between the sun and moon, where there is no dielectric interference, we should have noticed this back in 1969-73, it would seem, as there was significant solar activity during a few of those missions.

"Although it is hard to think of a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far greater efficiency than EM radiation."  

If we limit the discussion to 3 spatial dimensions, as you say it wouldn't be likely BUT if we open the possibility of a transfer mechanism to a 4th spatial dimension (or to a higher level fractal or subdimension of 3-space), perhaps even through Dirac's "sea," then it would be possible to consider some version of this.

"This can't be a new idea."

No. But it's unlikely you will find it discussed publicly elsewhere than by a few of the more shameless meme-pushers on forums like vortex...

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 09:14:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA05320;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:05:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:05:07 -0800
From: Baronvolsung@aol.com
Message-ID: <35.3fc0256d.2ce11f11@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:04:17 EST
Subject: Off Topic: Light energy, Genes, & Protien Synthesis
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1068483857"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5003
Resent-Message-ID: <"czoGR.0.0J1.3Lyh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52443
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-------------------------------1068483857
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Light energy, genes, protien synthesis, and mind control projects controlling 
powerful family lines

I have posted this email as a historical note on my understanding of how 
genes form or synthesis complex proteins and how natural light energy and 
artificial light energy beamed and projected onto persons from mind control projects 
using remote viewing technologies can control and change the process of protein 
formation, world power structures, family lines and history.   

The genes in the chromosomes are coiled and must be uncoiled to copy genetic 
codes into RNA to form the amino acids that are used to build complex proteins 
which are chains of amino acids.  Special proteins in the cells break the 
hydrogen bonds that coil the genes to uncoil the genes.   Sound waves, heat, and 
light energies in the proper intensity and frequency can also break hydrogen 
bonds in genes to uncoil genes to allow them to form the 20 amino acids from 
RNA copies that make up proteins which are made of many thousands of amino 
acids.  

It may be that not all of the genetic codes have been transcribed accurately 
or publicly for all of the species of human life forms on Earth for political 
reasons to hide the truths of human evolution, interbreeding, and 
extraterrestrial societies.   Some of the genetic codes in the genes may form different 
amino acids and different sequences of amino acids to make different types of 
proteins from different species.  Different species of humans will form 
different protein structures based on their chromosomes and genetic codes.  Apes have 
24 chromosomes along with the male y and female x sex chromosomes, while other 
animal life forms have a different number of chromosomes.   The standard 
model of the human being has 23 chromosomes with the male y and female x 
chromosome, which means that the standard model of the human being could not have 
naturally evolved from apes, but had to be genetically engineered, since humans 
have 1 less chromosome than apes.    It is possible that when human beings 
evolved and were engineered that they had different chromosomes from different 
animal life forms placed into the cells of different species to allow the body to 
form different types of animal proteins.  

The light energies and memories of the spirit of a person also interacts with 
the protein synthesis to direct the RNA to copy the correct codes from the 
DNA.  If a person has a chromosome and gene from an animal species, they must 
also have a spiritual memory and light pattern that matches the species to 
trigger the DNA and RNA to form the proper amino acids and sequences in proteins.  
Persons who have spiritual memories from apes would trigger the ape genes and 
proteins in persons who are related to apes both spiritually and genetically.  
Person's related to other life forms such as mice, cats, bears, bulls, yeti's 
and bigfoots who have the spirit and genes of the animal, will then form the 
protein of the animal in their cells.   Each protein of each animal life form 
is slightly different and can be detected by a simple protein spectrum 
signature.  Females can express the genetic information from both of their parents x 
genes in their physical phenotypic form, to allow them to express different 
interracial and species genetic traits, while males can only express the male y 
gene from one of their parents.

Some person's may also be related to higher dimensional being's who spirit is 
not from the lower dimensional animal life forms.  A higher dimensional 
spirit may be a highly engineered spirit that evolved over billions of years, and 
may have been engineered with advanced holographic technologies.  The memories 
of the holographic spirit which are photonic in part, also form the shape of 
the body by directing the proteins to form in the shape of the spirit and its 
memories.  Since most human beings have a physical form which is highly evolved 
beyond the lower animal life forms, they must have spiritual light memories 
from higher dimensionally evolved beings from other planets and dimensions of 
being to form their bodies shape and form otherwise we would all look like 
lower animal life forms more than we do.  

The true nature of the human form and spirit is far beyond and far different 
from the lower animal life forms, as if we really are not spiritually related 
to lower animal life forms at all, but rather that lower animal life forms 
evolved to match the spirits of the higher dimensional life forms to look like 
them physically by interbreeding with higher dimensional life forms.  In a 
sense, none of us who have a complex spiritual form and body are really related to 
lower dimensional animal life forms spiritually speaking.  The lower 
dimensional life form bodies are a physical illusion or a copy of the image of divine 
being or higher dimensional being.  

It may also be that the human spirit or higher dimensional spirit directs the 
cells to regenerate to create eternal life based on the beliefs and 
holographic memories of the person's spirit.   Some proteins, vitamins, calcium's and 
chemicals may trigger hidden gene codes in some persons that may cause the 
cells to regenerate to create eternal life.  Persons who fast for more than 30 
days can cause their bodies to regenerate their cells to make themselves younger 
as if the fasting causes the spiritual beliefs of the person to enhance and 
override any protein blockages to allow the cells to regenerate. 

Mind control projects on Earth, broadcast popular media, sound, heat, and 
holographic light energy patterns from satellites, airships, and underground 
bases at whole populations and specific persons to jam the natural genetic and 
protein synthesis in life forms on Earth to prevent them from forming naturally 
based on their spirit, genes, and natural local environment.  To much heat will 
deform proteins.  To much light or sound in the wrong frequency range can 
also prevent proteins from forming properly which are needed to uncoil the DNA 
strands.  Light energies in the from of holograms created by computer generated 
animations from 3D studio Max projected onto a persons body by a satellite or 
laser beam could block the natural protein synthesis and cause the proteins to 
form in the image of the holographic animation.   An image of a complex 
protein and even whole body parts can be placed into a computer and then copied 
into a holographic image to be projected on a persons body by means of satellite 
beams to jam the natural genetic and protein synthesis and to cause an 
artificial protein synthesis which is in the image of the hologram. 

It takes the genes several minutes to form a new amino acid and it takes 
several hours to form a new protein strand in normal time frames.  Some persons 
may be able to change the speed of protein synthesis and time frame around their 
bodies to accelerate protein synthesis naturally based on spiritual belief 
and mental projection.   Holographic light energies from mind control projects 
can change the proteins in the human body in a matter of split seconds to 
prevent the natural genes and protein synthesis from repairing the artificial 
changes caused by artificial media, mind and body control projects.  One way a 
natural life from on Earth can form their body naturally would be if they could 
project a force field around their body that would jam or filter out all 
artificial media and energies directed at them that does not match their natural 
spiritual, physical, and environmental energy patterns. 

As a matter of record, when I was born in 1962 my natural hair color was a 
white gold brown.  My skin color was very white, and my natural facial and body 
form was very thin, sqaurish and geometric which I believe is closest to the 
bull animal clans and spirit.  My eye color was blue green.  My spiritual color 
is very white and matches the above physical form in my mind fairly closely.  
  Around 1968, when the satellites where first put up and when Asia and the 
Middle East began to control the US government, my body form, hair color, and 
eye color changed from the image of a bull to the image of a cat, as if an 
artificial holographic images from mind control projects were beamed onto my body 
to jam the natural genetic and protein synthesis of my body.   And later 
around 1980 to the present my facial and body form looks much more bearish and 
Middle Eastern.   Presently at the age of 41, as I look at my fingers and body 
forms, it looks like I have the hands of a 6 to 10 year old child, as if the mind 
control projects on Earth placed my natural body in suspension, since 1968 or 
1973, and then placed over my natural spirit and body, a computer generated 
holographic image of my distant ancestors from the bear and cat clans, to force 
the body and proteins to form in the image of my distant ancestors to 
experiment on the complex protein formations of my distant ancestors.   

Presently I can feel around my body, several holographic images beamed at me 
from mind control projects placed in layers around my body which represent the 
images of many of my distant ancestors in each layer, and which block out my 
natural spiritual and genetic form from being seen and formed physically.    
Presently the hairs on my body grown back in a few hours if pulled out which 
should normally take a few months, so that some form of artificial energy 
holograms directed at my body from mind control projects must be placed around my 
body to cause the hairs to accelerate their growth rate to 480 times normal 
speed.  I can go without eating food for weeks and not lose an ounce of weight as 
if the mind control projects have jammed and controlled the proteins synthesis 
in my body and form the proteins form the holographic energies directed at my 
body, so that vitamins, and foods that I eat do not get into the proteins in 
my body to form them.   The hair color on my body changes from white to gold 
to brown to black daily as if the mind control projects are controlling the 
hair color protein synthesis with holograms from my ancestors day by day.   I can 
feel the feelings and memory habits of my ancestors placed around my body in 
each layer of holographs placed over my body by directed energy beams from the 
mind control projects.  

If the mind control directed energy beam holograms placed around my body were 
to be taken away, then my body would begin to grow from the form of my body 
of a 6 to 10 year child from the bull animal clan or a higher dimensional 
spirit similar to a bull form, since that is my base body form underneath all of 
the mind control artificial holograms placed over my natural body since 1968 to 
1973.   It possible that bears and lion clans from distant planets may have 
evolved to be thinner and more geometric and squarish in form to look much like 
bulls, so that I may have a white bear or lion spirit which is thinner and not 
a bull spirit. It is my understanding that bulls, lions, and bears may have 
evolved from mice. 

According to my present body and spirit underneath the mind control 
holograms, I have not fully matured yet and I should grow taller once the mind control 
holograms are taken from my body.  My natural hair color should grow back to a 
white golden brown.  My skin color should grown back to a very white color 
and my eye color should return back to a blue green.  My facial and body form 
would also change to be much younger, thinner, squarish and geometric than it 
presently is.  My hair should also be very strait, thin and light as it was when 
I was 6 to 10 years old.   It is also possible that my teeth may regrow back 
to their proper form.  My teeth have changed from a very straight and squarish 
form when I was 6 to a very non straight and more primitive fangular from 
similar to a bear or lion form since then.  Many of my cousins and aunts from 
Ireland and Scotland do have a white golden brown hair and are all about 5 foot 
10 to  6 foot tall and look very much like I did when I was 6 years old, so 
that I must have inherited the spiritual form of one of my great grand parents 
from Ireland, Britain, England, or Scotland, where as my parents both do not 
look at all like their grand parents or distant ancestors, as if the mind control 
projects changed my parents bodies and spirits before I was born, and then 
the mind control projects placed the spirit of my distant grandparents from 
Scotland, Britain, England or Ireland, into my body when I was born, since that 
would have been my natural spirit if time travel and mind control had not been 
used to change my ancestors, and my parents bodies and spirits before I was 
born.  It is also possible that my spirit came from another planet or from the 
photon belt and not from any of my ancestors on Earth, since I was born in 1962 
when the photon belt started and I may have picked up the photon belt spirits. 
 It may be that my ancestors evolved towards my spiritual and physical form 
seen in the future by remote sensing, around 1962 due to mind control projects 
in the future going back in time to encourage my ancestors to intermarry from 
the past to be related to me or to potentially take over my family line in the 
future but in fact none of my ancestors may really be related to me 
spiritually, since my spirit may be from another planet.  It is also possible that my 
spirit may have come from the future of Earth, and may have been placed into my 
body at birth by future mind control projects so that my ancestors may be 
more related to me than I am to them since I am from the future and they are from 
the past.

Mind control was used again around 1968 to 1973 to the present to place the 
artificial holograms of my mind control artificially created step parents over 
my body, so that my natural body and spirit cannot be seen presently.  The 
mind control projects took over my parents bodies and spirits and changed my 
ancestors back in time by means of time travel around 1968 to the present, when 
Asia took over the USA and the US government.  If time travel and mind control 
were not used on me and my ancestors, I would be from Scotland, Ireland, or 
another planet in a very higher dimensional spiritual and physical form which is 
my natural birth form; while the mind control projects have placed more 
primitive and artificial spirits and physical body forms over the bodies of my 
parents, ancestors, and me which are more Middle Eastern and Asian by means of time 
travel and mind control changes in history to posses and take over our 
bodies, ancestors, and future family lines.  It possible for the mind control 
projects to completely beam my natural spirit out of my body, and place in my body 
an artificial spirit to completely take over my body and future life and 
descendants, which has not occurred yet but could occur.  It appears that mind 
control projects in the present can remotely view the future, and they may see a 
future which is very Western, and Irish or Scottish or American, and 
consequently, mind control projects from Asia and the Middle East may be trying to take 
over the bodies and families of Western societies by means of mind control 
possessions and forced intermarriage to control the future of Earth.  I assume 
that Asia, the Middle East, and Africa have more control over the world mind 
control projects presently, since most of the popular media and politics in the 
USA is pro-Afircan, Asian, and Middle Eastern and anti-Western and 
anti-American.  It may be that in the near future, Asia, the Middle East, and African loose 
control of the world mind control projects, and consequently they may be 
trying to interbreed, take over, and possess Western family lines before they lose 
control of the world and global mind control projects. 

This is why I have posted this email as a historical record of my natural 
spirit and genetic information in case any one or any mind control project should 
take over my body upon or before my death or rake over any of my relatives, 
ancestors, and descendants to control our potential future descendants and 
family lines. 


Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, 
Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html, Personal Web Page: 
www.rhfweb.com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at www.rhfweb.com\sh
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at www.rhfweb.com


 

-------------------------------1068483857
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUTF-8 http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charse=
t=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>
<DIV>Light energy, genes, protien synthesis, and mind control projects contr=
olling powerful family lines</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I have posted this email&nbsp;as a historical&nbsp;note&nbsp;on my&nbsp=
;understanding of how genes form or synthesis&nbsp;complex proteins and how=20=
natural light energy and artificial light energy beamed and projected onto p=
ersons from mind control projects&nbsp;using remote viewing technologies&nbs=
p;can control and change the process of protein formation, world power struc=
tures, family lines and history.&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The genes in the chromosomes are coiled and must be uncoiled to copy ge=
netic codes into RNA to form the amino acids that are used to build complex=20=
proteins which are chains of amino acids.&nbsp; Special proteins in the cell=
s break the hydrogen bonds that coil the genes to uncoil the genes.&nbsp;&nb=
sp; Sound waves, heat, and light energies in the proper intensity and freque=
ncy can also break hydrogen bonds in genes to uncoil genes to allow them to=20=
form the 20 amino acids from RNA copies that make up proteins which are made=
 of many thousands of amino acids.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It may be that not all of the genetic codes have been transcribed accur=
ately&nbsp;or publicly&nbsp;for all of the species of human life forms on Ea=
rth for political reasons to hide the truths of human evolution, interbreedi=
ng,&nbsp;and extraterrestrial societies.&nbsp;&nbsp; Some of the genetic cod=
es in the genes may form different amino acids and different sequences of am=
ino acids to make different types of proteins from different species.&nbsp;=20=
Different species of humans will form different protein structures based on=20=
their chromosomes and genetic codes.&nbsp; Apes have 24 chromosomes along wi=
th the male y and female x sex chromosomes, while other animal life forms ha=
ve a different number of chromosomes.&nbsp;&nbsp; The standard model of the=20=
human being has 23 chromosomes with the male y and female x chromosome, whic=
h means that the standard model of the human being could not have naturally=20=
evolved from apes, but had to be genetically engineered, since humans have 1=
 less chromosome than apes.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It is possible that when human=
 beings evolved and were engineered that they had different chromosomes from=
 different animal life forms placed into the cells of different species to a=
llow the body to form different types of animal proteins.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The light energies and memories of the spirit of a person also interact=
s with the protein synthesis to direct the RNA to copy the correct codes fro=
m the DNA.&nbsp; If a person has a chromosome and gene from an animal specie=
s, they must also have a spiritual memory and light pattern that matches the=
 species to trigger the DNA and RNA to form the proper amino acids and seque=
nces in proteins.&nbsp; Persons who have spiritual memories from apes would=20=
trigger the ape genes and proteins in persons who are related to apes both&n=
bsp;spiritually and genetically.&nbsp; Person's related to other life forms=20=
such as mice,&nbsp;cats, bears, bulls, yeti's and bigfoots who have the spir=
it and genes of the animal, will then form the protein of the animal in thei=
r cells.&nbsp;&nbsp; Each protein of each animal life form is slightly diffe=
rent and can be detected by a simple protein spectrum signature.&nbsp; Femal=
es can express the genetic information from both of their parents x genes in=
 their physical phenotypic form,&nbsp;to allow them to express different int=
erracial and species genetic traits, while males can only express the male y=
 gene from one of their parents.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Some person's may also be related to higher dimensional being's who spi=
rit is not from the lower dimensional animal life forms.&nbsp; A higher dime=
nsional spirit may be a highly engineered spirit that evolved over billions=20=
of years, and may have been engineered with advanced holographic technologie=
s.&nbsp; The memories of the holographic spirit which are photonic in part,=20=
also form the shape of the body by directing the proteins to form in the sha=
pe of the spirit and its memories.&nbsp; Since most human beings have a phys=
ical form which is highly evolved beyond the lower animal life forms, they m=
ust have spiritual light&nbsp;memories from higher dimensionally evolved bei=
ngs from other planets and dimensions of being to form their bodies shape an=
d form otherwise we would all look like lower animal life forms more than we=
 do.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The true nature of the human form and spirit is far beyond and far diff=
erent from&nbsp;the lower animal life forms, as if we really are not spiritu=
ally related to lower animal life forms at all, but rather that lower animal=
 life forms evolved to match the spirits of the higher dimensional life form=
s to look like them physically by interbreeding with higher dimensional life=
 forms.&nbsp; In a sense, none of us who have a complex spiritual form and b=
ody are really related to lower dimensional animal life forms spiritually sp=
eaking.&nbsp;&nbsp;The lower dimensional life form bodies&nbsp;are a physica=
l&nbsp;illusion or a copy of the image of divine being or higher dimensional=
 being.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It may also be that the human spirit or higher dimensional spirit&nbsp;=
directs the cells to regenerate to create eternal life based on the beliefs=20=
and holographic memories of the person's spirit.&nbsp;&nbsp; Some proteins,=20=
vitamins, calcium's and chemicals may trigger hidden gene codes in some pers=
ons&nbsp;that may cause the cells to regenerate to create eternal life.&nbsp=
; Persons who fast for more than 30 days can cause their bodies to regenerat=
e their cells to make themselves younger as if the fasting causes the spirit=
ual beliefs of the person to enhance and override any protein blockages to a=
llow the cells to regenerate. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Mind control projects on Earth, broadcast popular media, sound, heat, a=
nd holographic light energy&nbsp;patterns from satellites, airships, and und=
erground bases at whole populations and specific persons to jam the natural=20=
genetic and protein synthesis in life forms on Earth to prevent them from fo=
rming naturally based on their spirit, genes, and natural local environment.=
&nbsp;&nbsp;To much heat will deform proteins. &nbsp;To much light or sound=20=
in the wrong frequency range can also prevent proteins from forming properly=
 which are needed to uncoil the DNA strands.&nbsp; Light energies in the fro=
m of holograms created by computer generated animations from 3D studio Max p=
rojected onto a persons body by a satellite or laser beam could block the na=
tural protein synthesis and cause the proteins to form in the image of the h=
olographic animation.&nbsp;&nbsp; An image of a complex protein and even who=
le body parts&nbsp;can be placed into a computer and then copied into a holo=
graphic image to be projected on a persons body by means of satellite beams=20=
to jam the natural genetic and protein synthesis and to cause an artificial=20=
protein synthesis which is in the image of the hologram.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It takes the genes several minutes to form a new amino acid and it take=
s several hours to form a new protein strand&nbsp;in normal time frames.&nbs=
p; Some persons may be able to change the speed of protein synthesis and tim=
e frame around their bodies to accelerate&nbsp;protein synthesis&nbsp;natura=
lly based on spiritual belief and mental projection.&nbsp;&nbsp; Holographic=
 light energies from mind control projects can change the proteins in the hu=
man body in a matter of split seconds to prevent the natural genes and prote=
in synthesis from repairing the artificial changes caused by artificial medi=
a, mind and body control projects.&nbsp;&nbsp;One way a natural life from on=
 Earth can form their body naturally would be if they could project a force=20=
field around their body that would jam or filter out all artificial media an=
d energies directed at them that does not match their natural spiritual, phy=
sical, and environmental&nbsp;energy patterns. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>As a matter of record, when I was born in 1962 my natural hair color wa=
s a white gold brown.&nbsp; My skin color was very white,&nbsp;and my&nbsp;n=
atural facial&nbsp;and body form was very thin,&nbsp;sqaurish&nbsp;and geome=
tric which I believe is closest to the bull animal clans and spirit.&nbsp; M=
y eye color was blue green.&nbsp; My spiritual color is very white and match=
es the above physical form in my mind fairly closely. &nbsp;&nbsp; Around 19=
68, when the satellites where first put up and when Asia and the Middle East=
 began to control the US government, my body form, hair color, and eye color=
 changed from the image of a bull to the image of a cat, as if an artificial=
 holographic images from mind control projects were beamed onto my body to j=
am the natural genetic and protein synthesis of my body.&nbsp;&nbsp; And lat=
er around 1980 to the present my facial and body form looks much more bearis=
h and Middle Eastern.&nbsp; &nbsp;Presently at the age of 41, as I look at m=
y fingers and body forms, it looks like I have the hands of a 6 to 10 year o=
ld child, as if the mind control projects on Earth placed my natural body in=
 suspension, since 1968 or 1973, and then placed over my natural spirit and=20=
body, a computer generated holographic image of my distant ancestors from th=
e bear and cat clans, to force the body and proteins to form in the image of=
 my distant ancestors to experiment on the complex protein formations of my=20=
distant ancestors.&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Presently I can feel around my body, several holographic images beamed=20=
at me from mind control projects placed in layers around my body which repre=
sent the images of many of my distant ancestors in each layer, and which blo=
ck out my natural spiritual and genetic form from being seen and formed phys=
ically.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Presently the hairs on my body grown back in a few=
 hours if pulled out which should normally take a few months, so that some f=
orm of artificial energy holograms directed at my body from mind control pro=
jects must be placed around my body to cause the hairs to accelerate their g=
rowth rate to 480 times normal speed.&nbsp; I can go without eating food for=
 weeks and not lose an ounce of weight as if the mind control projects have=20=
jammed and controlled the proteins synthesis in my body and form the protein=
s form the holographic energies directed at my body,&nbsp;so that vitamins,=20=
and foods that I eat do not get into the proteins in my body to form them.&n=
bsp;&nbsp; The hair color on my body changes from white to gold to brown to=20=
black daily as if the mind control projects are controlling the hair color p=
rotein synthesis with holograms from my ancestors day by day.&nbsp;&nbsp; I=20=
can feel the feelings and memory habits of my ancestors placed around my bod=
y in each layer of holographs placed over my body by&nbsp;directed energy be=
ams from the&nbsp;mind control projects.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If the mind control directed energy beam holograms placed around my bod=
y were to be taken away, then my body would begin to grow from the form of m=
y body of a 6 to 10 year child from the bull animal clan or a higher dimensi=
onal spirit similar to a bull form, since that is my base body form undernea=
th all of the mind control artificial holograms placed over my natural body=20=
since 1968 to 1973.&nbsp;&nbsp; It possible that bears and lion clans from d=
istant planets may have evolved to be thinner and more geometric and squaris=
h in form to look much like bulls, so that I may have a white bear or lion s=
pirit which is thinner and not a bull spirit.&nbsp;It is my understanding th=
at bulls, lions, and bears may have evolved from mice. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>According to my present body and spirit underneath the mind control hol=
ograms, I have not fully matured yet and I should grow taller once the mind=20=
control holograms are taken from my body.&nbsp; My natural hair color should=
 grow back to a white golden brown.&nbsp; My skin color should grown back to=
 a very white color and my eye color should return back to a blue green.&nbs=
p; My facial and body form would also change to be much younger, thinner, sq=
uarish and geometric than it presently is.&nbsp; My hair should also be very=
 strait, thin and light as it was when I was 6 to 10 years old.&nbsp;&nbsp;=20=
It is also possible that my teeth may regrow back to their proper form.&nbsp=
; My teeth have changed from a very straight and squarish form when I was 6=20=
to a very non straight and more primitive fangular from similar to a bear or=
 lion form since then.&nbsp; Many of my cousins and aunts&nbsp;from Ireland=20=
and Scotland do have a white golden brown hair and are all about 5 foot 10 t=
o &nbsp;6 foot tall and look very much like I did when I was 6 years old, so=
 that I must have inherited the spiritual form of one of my great grand pare=
nts from Ireland, Britain, England,&nbsp;or Scotland, where as my parents bo=
th do not look at all like their grand parents or distant ancestors, as if t=
he mind control projects changed my parents bodies and spirits before I was=20=
born, and then the mind control projects placed the spirit of my distant gra=
ndparents from Scotland, Britain, England&nbsp;or Ireland, into my body when=
 I was born, since that would have been my natural spirit if time travel and=
 mind control had not been used to change my ancestors, and my parents bodie=
s and spirits before I was born.&nbsp; It is also possible that my spirit ca=
me from another planet&nbsp;or from the photon belt and not from any of my a=
ncestors on Earth, since I was born in 1962 when the photon belt started and=
 I may have picked up the photon belt spirits.&nbsp; It may be that my ances=
tors evolved towards my spiritual and physical form seen in the future by re=
mote sensing, around 1962 due to mind control projects&nbsp;in the future&nb=
sp;going back in time to encourage&nbsp;my ancestors to intermarry from the=20=
past to be related to me or to potentially take over my family line in the f=
uture&nbsp;but in fact none of&nbsp;my ancestors may&nbsp;really be related=20=
to me spiritually, since&nbsp;my spirit&nbsp;may be from another planet.&nbs=
p; It is also possible that my spirit may have come from the future of Earth=
, and may have been placed into my body at birth by future mind control proj=
ects so that my ancestors may be more related to me than I am to them since=20=
I am from the future and they are from the past.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Mind control was used again around 1968 to 1973 to the present to place=
 the artificial holograms of my mind control artificially created step&nbsp;=
parents over my body, so that my natural body and spirit cannot be seen pres=
ently.&nbsp;&nbsp;The mind control projects took over my parents bodies and=20=
spirits&nbsp;and changed my ancestors back in time by means of time travel a=
round 1968 to the present, when Asia took over the USA and the US government=
.&nbsp; If time travel and mind control were not used on me and my ancestors=
, I would be from Scotland, Ireland, or another planet&nbsp;in a very higher=
 dimensional spiritual and physical form which is my natural birth form; whi=
le the mind control projects have&nbsp;placed more primitive and artificial=20=
spirits and physical body forms over the bodies of my parents, ancestors,&nb=
sp;and me which are more&nbsp;Middle Eastern and Asian&nbsp;by means of time=
 travel and mind control changes in history to posses and take over&nbsp;our=
 bodies, ancestors, and future family lines.&nbsp; It possible for the mind=20=
control projects to completely beam my natural spirit out of my body, and pl=
ace in my body an artificial spirit to completely take over my body and futu=
re life and descendants, which has not occurred yet but could occur.&nbsp; I=
t appears that mind control projects in the&nbsp;present can remotely view t=
he future, and they may&nbsp;see a future which is very Western, and Irish o=
r Scottish or American, and consequently, mind control projects from Asia an=
d the Middle East may be trying to take over the bodies and families of West=
ern societies by means of mind control possessions and forced intermarriage=20=
to control the future of Earth.&nbsp; I assume that Asia, the Middle East,&n=
bsp;and Africa have more control over the world mind control projects presen=
tly, since most of the popular media and politics&nbsp;in the USA is pro-Afi=
rcan, Asian, and Middle Eastern and anti-Western and anti-American.&nbsp; It=
 may be that in the near future, Asia, the Middle East, and African loose co=
ntrol of the world mind control projects, and consequently they may be tryin=
g to interbreed, take over,&nbsp;and possess Western family lines before the=
y lose control of the world and global mind control projects. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>This is why I have posted this email as&nbsp;a historical record&nbsp;o=
f my natural spirit and genetic information in case any one or any mind cont=
rol project should take over my body upon or before my death or rake over an=
y of my relatives, ancestors, and descendants to control&nbsp;our potential=20=
future descendants and family lines.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 PTSIZE=3D"10" FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"=
><BR>Baron Von Volsung, <A title=3Dhttp://www.rhfweb.com/baron href=3D"http:=
//www.rhfweb.com/baron">www.rhfweb.com\baron</A>, Email: <A title=3Dhttp://w=
ww.rhfweb.com/emailform.html href=3D"http://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.html">w=
ww.rhfweb.com\emailform.html</A><BR>President Thomas D. Clark, <BR>Email: <A=
 title=3Dhttp://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.html href=3D"http://www.rhfweb.com/=
emailform.html">www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html</A>, Personal Web Page: <A tit=
le=3Dhttp://www.rhfweb.com/personal href=3D"http://www.rhfweb.com/personal">=
www.rhfweb.com\personal</A><BR>New Age Production's Inc., <A title=3Dhttp://=
www.rhfweb.com/newage href=3D"http://www.rhfweb.com/newage">www.rhfweb.com\n=
ewage</A><BR>Star Haven Community Services, at <A title=3Dhttp://www.rhfweb.=
com/sh href=3D"http://www.rhfweb.com/sh">www.rhfweb.com\sh</A><BR>Radiation=20=
Health Foundation Trust at <A title=3Dhttp://www.rhfweb.com/ href=3D"http://=
www.rhfweb.com/">www.rhfweb.com</A></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 PTSIZE=3D"10" FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"=
><BR></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1068483857--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 10:09:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA22432;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:07:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:07:36 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110100453.00ad1a78@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:12:00 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Evaluation Criteria challenge 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"A434G2.0.HU5.dFzh_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52444
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

- Irving Langmuir defined the criteria to evaluate "Pathological Science".

- Rochus Boerner defined a criteria to evaluate "Pathological Skepticism" 
in his "Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Skepticism"

- How about it Jed Rothwell:  Think you can define an evaluative criteria 
to sort the good from the bad in the wild, wild field of cold fusion?



Krivit 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 12:04:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA19859;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:01 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:59:50 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria challenge 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"BX3N61.0.9s4.1v-h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52445
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Steve Krivit writes:

 > - Irving Langmuir defined the criteria to evaluate "Pathological Science".

Yup. They are listed in "Fire from Ice" and "Polywater" -- two must-read 
books. Langmuir's criteria are a useful rule of thumb, but anyone can think 
of actual discoveries that fit several of his criteria.


 > - Rochus Boerner defined a criteria to evaluate "Pathological Skepticism"
 > in his "Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Skepticism"

This can be found at:

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/objectivity/bogusskepticism.htm

I had not seen this before. It is another set of useful rule-of-thumb 
criteria. You might say these counter-balance Langmuir's.


 > - How about it Jed Rothwell:  Think you can define an evaluative criteria
 > to sort the good from the bad in the wild, wild field of cold fusion?

I know of only one: Replication. An effect must be replicated by many 
researchers. All other criteria are merely rules-of-thumb. This is the one 
iron-clad, fundamental standard that overrules everything else -- even the 
"laws of nature" as we understand them.

Applying this criterion calls for a measure of subjectivity, and judgment. 
You have to decide what constitutes a "replication" and how many it takes 
to convince you. As I have said before, a person who settles for 2 
replications is too permissive in my opinion, while a person who holds out 
for 100 is irrational. The only exception must be made when an experiment 
is too expensive, complicated or impossible to replicate, such as with the 
top quark, or a nearby supernova. I do not know enough about quarks to 
judge, but I would be nervous about statistics-based result that can only 
be seen once, in one laboratory.

I think the number of replications falls between 5 and 10, possibly 20. It 
depends on factors such as the s/n ratio of the results, the skill of the 
researchers, how much detail they publish, and so on. Replications that are 
not published do not count.

By the way, the obverse rule does not apply. A replicated phenomenon is 
definitely real, but a phenomenon that has not been replicated has not been 
proven false.

In principle, one observation can clinch a result. If you happen to be at 
Kitty Hawk on December 17, 1903, and you know a lot about aviation, you can 
be sure that Man Can Fly. If you are Mizuno, and you see a cell boil away 
several bucketfuls of water, you know with absolute certainty that CF is 
real, and it is not a chemical process. The reason we require replications 
is that we cannot be in all places at all times; we cannot personally 
confirm every observation. And also because people are fallible. Mizuno 
might be lying, or crazy. Replication rules out the human element. 
Individuals are sometimes crazy or delusional about matter of fact 
observations, but never large groups, or our species would not have 
survived. (Groups are often crazy when it comes to intangibles such as 
politics, but not about the temperature of steel cell.)

Rule-of-thumb criteria such as Langmuir's are a useful way to filter out 
many claims that are likely to be bogus. But they might lead you to filter 
out a real phenomenon. The most reliable filter of all are the accepted, 
textbook laws of physics. A claim that apparently violates one them is 
almost certainly wrong. Almost, but not absolutely.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 12:24:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA02972;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:21:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:21:19 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:21:15 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
In-Reply-To: <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101216380.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"VoPnR.0.Ik.-C_h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52446
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Dean Miller wrote:

> Some day, these guys are going to figure out the real source of  most
> lightning -- space.  That is, clouds, especially big cumulonimbus
> (thunder storm) clouds, act as a short-circuit to the electrical
> potential difference between the upper atmosphere and the ground.


Nope.  The polarity is wrong.  Thunderstorms seem to charge up the
earth/ionosphere capacitor, not discharge it.   Far from any thunderstorm
the vertical sky current is in a direction such that it acts as leakage
current.  Underneath a thunderstorm that current is reversed.  We ASSUME
that thunderstorms are charging up the earth/ionosphere, but this might
not be the whole story.   Maybe the solar wind at the poles is the true
source of the energy, and thunderstorms are just coincidentally in the
correct polarity to SEEM to be the energy source.




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 10 12:26:58 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA04563;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:23:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:23:53 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:23:51 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: HELP... to Bill Beatty   Help!  Help PLEASE !!!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0311082138190.9022@bw113.antioch-college.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101222140.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"RzRvT1.0.B71.PF_h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52447
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, John Schnurer wrote:

> 	Dear Bill,
>
> 	Can you PLEASE digest me?

It didn't work?  Did you follow the instructions I sent (they're below)?
Or is there something wrong with VORTEX?



> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 vortex-l@eskimo.com wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:50:31 -0500
> > From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> > To: herman@bw113.antioch-college.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com
> > Subject: Re: To moderator
> >
> > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, John Schnurer wrote:
> > >> 	Can you please put me in digest mode?  I do not have broswer based
> > >> E Mail so I am unable to "click" on different selections.  My E mail
> > >> volume is so heavy I need to go to digest for one message a week or one
> > >a
> > >> day, how ever it works, instead of a separate E Mail for each and every
> > >> message.
> > >
> > I don't have browser-based email either!
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's the stuff from the website.  You need to turn on the digest email,
> > then once it starts up, turn off the normal vortex email.  That way you
> > don't miss anything.
> >
> > http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html#sub
> >
> >   Vortex-L subscription instructions:
> >
> >   To subscribe, send a *blank* message to:
> >      vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
> >   Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
> >   quotes around "subscribe," of course.
> >
> >   You will get an automatic greeting message in response.  Once
> >   subscribed, send your email to vortex-L@eskimo.com.
> >
> >   To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to:
> >       vortex-L-request@eskimo.com
> >   Put the single word "unsubscribe" in the subject line of the header.  No
> >   quotes around "unsubscribe," of course.
> >
> >   Vortex-L digest mode:
> >
> >   If you prefer "digest" mode messages, collections of messages up to
> >   40K total or every 2 days, then subscribe to the vortex-digest
> >   instead of to vortex-L.  Send a blank message to:
> >       vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com
> >   Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header.
> >   Vortex-L and Vortex-digest are two separate lists.  It is possible
> >   to subscribe to one or the other or both.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 10 13:12:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA05007;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:08:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:08:35 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:07:57 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <sdvvqvgtf5o1d031c1hp3lgj2mqpjbssbm@4ax.com>
References: <452oqvgkdb3ean6aiho0kc9bsc14r2apae@4ax.com> <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101216380.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101216380.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
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 NAA04929
Resent-Message-ID: <"EtqI13.0.yD1.Iv_h_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52448
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

In reply to  William Beaty's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:21:15 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>Nope.  The polarity is wrong.  Thunderstorms seem to charge up the
>earth/ionosphere capacitor, not discharge it.   Far from any thunderstorm
>the vertical sky current is in a direction such that it acts as leakage
>current.  Underneath a thunderstorm that current is reversed.  We ASSUME
>that thunderstorms are charging up the earth/ionosphere, but this might
>not be the whole story.   Maybe the solar wind at the poles is the true
>source of the energy, and thunderstorms are just coincidentally in the
>correct polarity to SEEM to be the energy source.
[snip]
Actually, I think thunderstorms do both. I suspect that rain is often slightly charged, so that when it falls it carries charge to the ground, until such a high voltage differential builds up that lightning ensues.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 13:19:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA11581;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:18:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:18:07 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:17:32 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEDHDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEDIDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMKEDIDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
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 NAA11515
Resent-Message-ID: <"tfoaj1.0.rq2.F20i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52449
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Keith Nagel's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:42:52 -0500:
Hi Keith,
[snip]

>Sorry, got the earth/sun distance a bit wrong.
>
>The revised capacity for a/c approximation:
>
>c = 3.3 microfarads and with z = 377 ohms

Where does  "z = 377 ohms" come from?

>l = .47 henries and f0 = 127hz.
>
>hmmm.......anyone care to hazard a guess?
>
>OTOH, a half wave resonance at the earth/sun
>distance would be ~ 1 mHz. ???
>
>K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keith Nagel [mailto:knagel@gis.net]
>Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 10:54 PM
>To: Vortex; michael.foster@excite.com
>Subject: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
>
>
>
>A good low frequency approximation is
>c = 4*pi*epsilon0*1/(1/r1+1/r2-2/d)
>so it's about 700 microfarads.
>
>The distance between the earth and sun is very
>great, and the resulting light speed delay means the above
>approximation may be badly in error for A/C signals.
>
>This approximation is better,
>c = 4*pi*epsilon0*r1*r2/d
>yielding 50 microfarads.
>
>It's interesting to consider the inductance of
>the resulting A/C circuit. Given the impedance as 377ohms,
>l = 7 henries and the system is resonant at 8.5hz. This from
>l = 377^2 * c and f = 1/2*PI*sqrt(l*c)
>
>Rather close to the Schumann freq. huh?
>
>K.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Foster [mailto:michael.foster@excite.com]
>Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 7:39 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
>
>
>
>Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts  and
>> mass extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic
>> link with less obvious forms of concentrated energy from great
>> distances? This would involve some kind of yet unknown
>> cosmic energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
>> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like
>> hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black
>> hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer
>> mechanism that either does not diminish with "distance-
>> squared"  or just happens to be directed and focused at us.
>
>It seems to me that energy transfers between bodies in space may not need
>such exotic and speculative explanations.  We normally think of energy
>crossing space as some sort of EM radiation or ejected charged particles
>whose effects diminish in the well-known "square of the distance" manner.
>However, something much more efficient yet quite conventional may be
>involved.
>
>For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun,
>enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the
>solar system by simple capacitive coupling.  Although it is hard to think of
>a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why
>this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far
>greater efficiency than EM radiation.  This can't be a new idea.
>
>M.
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
>The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 13:22:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA12880;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:20:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:20:17 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:20:14 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism, www-plagarism
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101236310.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"2wLDw3.0.A93.H40i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52450
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:

>  > - Rochus Boerner defined a criteria to evaluate "Pathological Skepticism"
>  > in his "Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Skepticism"
>
> This can be found at:
>
> http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/objectivity/bogusskepticism.htm


Or the original,

   http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/seven%20warning%20signs.html


> I had not seen this before. It is another set of useful rule-of-thumb
> criteria. You might say these counter-balance Langmuir's.


Here's something strange.  In reading Mr. Boener's site I get the eerie
feeling that I'm reading my own site, Closeminded Science.  This is
especially true in reading his quotations and links at
http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/suppression.html, since he includes
some commentary that I had added to my own page, so it's totally clear
that he was using Closeminded Science when constructing his page.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?  I try not to mind this sort
of thing, and it happens all the time with my stuff on the web.  Usually
people copy my pages directly, rather than just heavily using them as
source material.

But I *DO* mind it when authors who base their own work on my pages won't
even link back to my original page!  That highlights the fact that they
known they're doing wrong, and so are guiltily covering their tracks.  It
converts their actions into plagarism.  Perhaps he's afraid that his
readers will discover "Closeminded Science," and notice the great
similarity to his own page?  He's right.  If he linked to my page, it
would cause him embarassment when readers see what he's doing.

At least he does link to some articles on Closeminded Science, though he
seems to carefully avoid linking to the ones written by *me.*  Huh.

  Censorship, suppression and Dogmatism in Science, R. Boerner
  http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/science.html

  Closeminded Science, W. Beaty
  http://amasci.com/weird/wclose.html



On the original topic, here are the original lists of symptoms:

  Zen and the art of debunkery, Dan Drasin
  http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

  Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism, W. Beaty
  http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Mon Nov 10 13:27:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA16545;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:25:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:25:29 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:25:25 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
In-Reply-To: <sdvvqvgtf5o1d031c1hp3lgj2mqpjbssbm@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101321050.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"BaJMW2.0.R24.990i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52451
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> Actually, I think thunderstorms do both. I suspect that rain is often
> slightly charged, so that when it falls it carries charge to the ground,
> until such a high voltage differential builds up that lightning ensues.

When rain carries charge to the ground, it charges the entire Earth.

It's only the fact that positively charged particles are left behind in
the cloud that a net-charge can build up.

Here's something interesting:

  NOTE! In private communications M. Foster mentioned that if you blast a
  hair dryer through a PVC pipe after first wetting the inner surface of
  the pipe, the pipe becomes highly electrified. The cause is unknown, but
  it might involve the bursting of microbubbles (which are known to launch
  negative water droplets into the air.)


If the above effect is anomalous, maybe it holds a key to thunderstorm
electrification.

Also, the hairdryer/pipe effect might indicate a mechanism whereby human
bodies can becomes mysteriously electrified WITHOUT scuffing any shoe
soles on carpet. If the wetted PVC pipe is replaced by human lungs, and if
the hair dryer is replaced by the act of breathing, we have an analogy for
the infamous "electric human."   The person would breath out charged air,
which would then leave their body with an increasing opposite charge.  The
voltage would build up until the outgoing air started being attracted back
to their oppositely charged body.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 10 14:21:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA20964;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:19:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:19:32 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110171228.01c0c9b0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:19:26 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: www-plagiarism
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"BYt-o2.0.L75.px0i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52452
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty noted the uncanny similarity between the material at:

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/objectivity/bogusskepticism.htm

and some of his own.

Actually, with the rapid improvements to Google and other search tools, 
things like plagiarism and fake news reports are becoming increasingly 
difficult to foist on the public. When a document or report becomes 
noteworthy, someone will soon find out it is bogus.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 14:52:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA09123;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:50:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:50:25 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110145411.038ffb20@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:54:55 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101236310.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"TVdnF1.0.RE2.mO1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52453
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>
>   Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism, W. Beaty
>   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

Corrected URL:

http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 14:53:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA09708;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:51:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:51:15 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB0164E.7090008@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:50:54 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Off Topic: Light energy, Genes, & Protien Synthesis
References: <35.3fc0256d.2ce11f11@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <35.3fc0256d.2ce11f11@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"arzYZ1.0.XN2.YP1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52454
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Baronvolsung@aol.com wrote:

> Light energy, genes, protien synthesis, and mind control projects 
> controlling powerful family lines


Interesting treatise.  You might also find this interesting:

http://www.unknowncountry.com/mindframe/opinion/?id=102

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 14:58:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA15059;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:56:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:56:47 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:19:39 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.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: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"jhNyh2.0.1h3.jU1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52455
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Robin.

In my lumped constant approximation to free
space, I assume that the impedance ratio is
the same as that of the free space and so use
the value of Z for a vacuum.

It seemed reasonable at the time, perhaps not???
The problem is complex, in that the distances
are far enough that for any reasonable value of freq.
you have a transmission line type circuit.

Another way to look at it is as a pair of capacities
joined in some fashion by a 377ohm transmission line.
The capacities would tend to lower the freq. of resonance,
making the result even lower than my initial OTOH
post of 1mHz.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robin van Spaandonk [mailto:rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 4:18 PM
To: Vortex
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system


In reply to  Keith Nagel's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:42:52 -0500:
Hi Keith,
[snip]

>Sorry, got the earth/sun distance a bit wrong.
>
>The revised capacity for a/c approximation:
>
>c = 3.3 microfarads and with z = 377 ohms

Where does  "z = 377 ohms" come from?

>l = .47 henries and f0 = 127hz.
>
>hmmm.......anyone care to hazard a guess?
>
>OTOH, a half wave resonance at the earth/sun
>distance would be ~ 1 mHz. ???
>
>K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keith Nagel [mailto:knagel@gis.net]
>Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 10:54 PM
>To: Vortex; michael.foster@excite.com
>Subject: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
>
>
>
>A good low frequency approximation is
>c = 4*pi*epsilon0*1/(1/r1+1/r2-2/d)
>so it's about 700 microfarads.
>
>The distance between the earth and sun is very
>great, and the resulting light speed delay means the above
>approximation may be badly in error for A/C signals.
>
>This approximation is better,
>c = 4*pi*epsilon0*r1*r2/d
>yielding 50 microfarads.
>
>It's interesting to consider the inductance of
>the resulting A/C circuit. Given the impedance as 377ohms,
>l = 7 henries and the system is resonant at 8.5hz. This from
>l = 377^2 * c and f = 1/2*PI*sqrt(l*c)
>
>Rather close to the Schumann freq. huh?
>
>K.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Foster [mailto:michael.foster@excite.com]
>Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 7:39 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: OT: Sunspotting
>
>
>
>Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> We know there is a connectivity between asteroid impacts  and
>> mass extinctions on Earth. But could there also exist a cosmic
>> link with less obvious forms of concentrated energy from great
>> distances? This would involve some kind of yet unknown
>> cosmic energy transfer mechanism from extreme distances,
>> such as by means of "gravity waves" or perhaps laser-like
>> hard x-ray emission or maybe even an accelerated "mini black
>> hole,"  at any rate, some as yet undiscovered energy transfer
>> mechanism that either does not diminish with "distance-
>> squared"  or just happens to be directed and focused at us.
>
>It seems to me that energy transfers between bodies in space may not need
>such exotic and speculative explanations.  We normally think of energy
>crossing space as some sort of EM radiation or ejected charged particles
>whose effects diminish in the well-known "square of the distance" manner.
>However, something much more efficient yet quite conventional may be
>involved.
>
>For example, if there are changes in the net electric charge of the sun,
>enormous amounts of energy may be transferred to the nearby planets of the
>solar system by simple capacitive coupling.  Although it is hard to think
of
>a near-field effect happening over astronomical distances, I don't see why
>this wouldn't be possible.  Certainly, this would transfer energy with far
>greater efficiency than EM radiation.  This can't be a new idea.
>
>M.
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
>The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 15:06:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA20472;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:04:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:04:08 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB0193F.30808@cox.net>
Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <hoyt-stearns@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:03:27 -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: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism, www-plagarism
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101236310.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"J8X7Q1.0.c_4.db1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52456
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

You might like this:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

However, I meet quite a number of these criteria, but I'm not a crackpot 
:-) .

William Beaty wrote:



From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 15:07:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA22345;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:06:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:06:01 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <50.24a9f190.2ce173b2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:05:22 EST
Subject: Re: Energy and Force/Gravity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_50.24a9f190.2ce173b2_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"7r3aL.0.nS5.Od1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52457
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_50.24a9f190.2ce173b2_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/10/03 7:46:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:


> The force F (newtons) between two capacitor plates with an applied voltage 
> (V) and a
> capacitance (C) = eo* area/x
> 
> F = dC*V^2/(2*dx)  (newtons)
> 


You are sort of following my logic.  A point has a minimum of stray 
capacitance associated with it.  This corresponds to the maximum force a single 
electrical charge can exert.  I call this point the elastic limit of space.

Frank Z

--part1_50.24a9f190.2ce173b2_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 11/10/03 7:46:30 AM Eastern Standar=
d Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The force F (newtons) between t=
wo capacitor plates with an applied voltage (V) and a<BR>
capacitance (C) =3D eo* area/x<BR>
<BR>
F =3D dC*V^2/(2*dx)&nbsp; (newtons)<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
You are sort of following my logic.&nbsp; A point has a minimum of stray cap=
acitance associated with it.&nbsp; This corresponds to the maximum force a s=
ingle electrical charge can exert.&nbsp; I call this point the elastic limit=
 of space.<BR>
<BR>
Frank Z</FONT></HTML>

--part1_50.24a9f190.2ce173b2_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 15:13:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA27795;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:11:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:11:01 -0800
Message-ID: <00e001c3a7de$d2c044a0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101321050.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:03:15 -0800
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 PAA27658
Resent-Message-ID: <"5EuKo2.0.cn6.2i1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52458
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

 Bill,

> Here's something interesting:
> 
>   NOTE! In private communications M. Foster mentioned that if you blast a
>   hair dryer through a PVC pipe after first wetting the inner surface of
>   the pipe, the pipe becomes highly electrified. The cause is unknown, but
>   it might involve the bursting of microbubbles (which are known to launch
>   negative water droplets into the air.)

Are you saying the surface charge in the pipe is positive after heating ?

If it is negative, this would be only be a mystery if the effect persisted when the PVC pipe was heated with a NON-electrified heat source, such as a propane torch....

The heating coil from any hair dryer is sure to emit free electrons to bond in some kind of Helmholtz layer, and even if a "quartz" type heater is used there could be a LF dielectric response and electrophoretic mobility on the surface layer.

However, if a non-electrified heat source also produced the effect, or if the surface charge were indeed positive, one would have to suspect that during the extrusion process, the pipe became an electret due to due to high triboelectric charging by the extrusion-die followed by immediate chilling...


Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 15:19:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA00310;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:17:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:17:37 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110152020.0390f8e0@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:22:08 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101236310.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"cvfTT.0.r_7.Eo1i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52459
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Bill - thanks for the links on these...they are brilliant, hilarious, and 
unfortunately a sad reflection of some of Man's poorer characteristics.


>   Zen and the art of debunkery, Dan Drasin
>   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html
>
>   Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism, W. Beaty
>   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

S 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 16:38:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA29603;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:35:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:35:35 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110160749.0390fd30@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:40:08 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria 
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"VYS6J.0.SE7.Mx2i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52460
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed:

Here's the idea behind the thought.  It seems certain individuals feel no 
hesitancy to "move the goalposts".   Seems to me that, at least as far as 
CF,  the community has permitted the antagonists to set the marks, which 
subsequently gives them power, and presumably authority to "move the 
goalposts".   How about if the CF community were to establish its own 
criteria?  There's plenty of wisdom in the group - it certainly doesn't 
need the Parksies of the world to set the marks for them.

I took what you said and expanded and formatted it a bit.

How about you, Ed?  What do you think of this idea?  Would this sort of 
criteria create more confusion and do more harm or might it help control 
those leggy goalposts?


>1. Replication
>An effect must be replicated by several researchers.  Suggested minimum is 
>5 in order to be considered significant for general consideration and to 
>be considered worthy of further study by the respective field.  Suggested 
>minium of 10 replications to be considered "generally accepted" by broader 
>scientific community.

2. Qualified replications must be from unique laboratories and unique 
researchers.

3. Signal to Noise ratio must be within the same bounds as other 
experiments which use similar measurement devices.   If one is using a Mass 
Spectrometery for Helium,  it shouldn't matter whether you're doing a CF 
experiment or a biology experiment.   The s/n should, IMO, should bear upon 
the sensitivity of the device and therefore should be generally quantifiable.

4. Margin of error should be quantifiable in a similar way.

5. Replications must be published in either peer-reviewed Print or Web 
Journals, or Conference Proceedings

6. Published replications must contain sufficient details to enable others 
to understand the exact process and know how to set up the experiment.





S 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 16:39:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA31931;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:38:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:38:43 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110164024.03922570@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:43:17 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria challenge 
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110142623.01c11ae0@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vz1ei.0.po7.J-2i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52461
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>Jed:

>The most reliable filter of all are the accepted, textbook laws of 
>physics. A claim that apparently violates one them is almost certainly wrong.

Seems such a criteria would, at least in the case of cf, not serve the need.
My understanding from some authors of physics textbooks is that if certain 
aspects of CF theory (Hagelstein, Li) turn out to be correct, many of their 
chapters will need to be discarded and replaced.

Perhaps I misunderstood?

S 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 17:54:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA13554;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:51:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:51:01 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:50:12 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com>
References: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com> <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
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 RAA13441
Resent-Message-ID: <"mWZwy1.0.RJ3.124i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52463
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Keith Nagel's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:19:39 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>Hi Robin.
>
>In my lumped constant approximation to free
>space, I assume that the impedance ratio is
>the same as that of the free space and so use
>the value of Z for a vacuum.

Where do you get the value of Z for a vacuum?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 17:55:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA12485;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:49:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:49:22 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:48:48 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <qrf0rv8poqfg71pkbc91aolf0oujg9t01d@4ax.com>
References: <sdvvqvgtf5o1d031c1hp3lgj2mqpjbssbm@4ax.com> <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101321050.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101321050.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
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 RAA12434
Resent-Message-ID: <"5qOlg2.0.r23.X04i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52462
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

In reply to  William Beaty's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:25:25 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>> Actually, I think thunderstorms do both. I suspect that rain is often
>> slightly charged, so that when it falls it carries charge to the ground,
>> until such a high voltage differential builds up that lightning ensues.
>
>When rain carries charge to the ground, it charges the entire Earth.
>
>It's only the fact that positively charged particles are left behind in
>the cloud that a net-charge can build up.

How does this differ from what I said above?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 18:23:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA31280;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:18:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:18:07 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:41:03 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEDODOAA.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: <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"6T3NM1.0.be7.UR4i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52464
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

It's the free space impedance for TEM waves, Robin.
Try your friendly neighborhood CRC for more info...

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robin van Spaandonk [mailto:rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 8:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system


In reply to  Keith Nagel's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:19:39 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>Hi Robin.
>
>In my lumped constant approximation to free
>space, I assume that the impedance ratio is
>the same as that of the free space and so use
>the value of Z for a vacuum.

Where do you get the value of Z for a vacuum?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 18:26:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA03684;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:23:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:23:22 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB0481F.6010702@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:23:27 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
References: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com> <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"A5_I63.0.Tv.QW4i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52465
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>Where do you get the value of Z for a vacuum?
>

 From the constants or permeability and permittivity of free space:

Zo = (µo/o)1/2

= [(1.257 x 10-6 H/m)/(8.85 x 10-12 F/m)]1/2

= 377 ohms (approximately)

same value of impedance of an antenna for maximum energy transfer.



From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 18:40:32 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA16318;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:37:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:37:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB04B82.6090308@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:37:54 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
References: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com> <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com> <3FB0481F.6010702@rtpatlanta.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FB0481F.6010702@rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"vNdPb1.0.u-3.zj4i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52466
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Terry Blanton wrote:

should read:

> From the constants or permeability and permittivity of free space:
>
> Zo = (µo/eo)^1/2
>
> = [(1.257 x 10-6 H/m)/(8.85 x 10-12 F/m)]^1/2
>
> = 377 ohms (approximately)
>
> same value of impedance of an antenna for maximum energy transfer. 


Forgot my epislon and carrots.

Terry

"eat your veggies"


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 19:09:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA01590;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:07:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:07:00 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Capacity of Earth/Sun system
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:06:22 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <fgk0rv0jd61mjdfuj8v2n2s2ribhcupmjm@4ax.com>
References: <8000rvggpf18at8rut13i79amafctfnsbb@4ax.com> <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEDMDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <l1g0rvo9be8ospenok8su4ku4j34qmua7v@4ax.com> <3FB0481F.6010702@rtpatlanta.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FB0481F.6010702@rtpatlanta.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
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 TAA01494
Resent-Message-ID: <"KTzEK1.0.lO.J95i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52467
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:23:27 -0500:
Hi,

Thanks.
>
>
>Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>>Where do you get the value of Z for a vacuum?
>>
>
> From the constants or permeability and permittivity of free space:
>
>Zo = (µo/o)1/2
>
>= [(1.257 x 10-6 H/m)/(8.85 x 10-12 F/m)]1/2
>
>= 377 ohms (approximately)
>
>same value of impedance of an antenna for maximum energy transfer.
>
>

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 19:31:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA20011;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:28:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:28:11 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB04AF3.3A686346@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:36:18 -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: Evaluation Criteria
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110160749.0390fd30@mail.dlsi.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ROgdd1.0.Vu4.BT5i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52468
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A nice idea, Steve, but the skeptics are the referees and the players are not
permitted to make the rules.  We could make up as many rules we wished, but no
one outside of the field would pay the slightest attention to them.  In
addition, an experiment that would impress one person will leave another totally
lost.  Claims are accepted by "Science" either when they result in a device, for
example the laser, or they are accepted because a group of people agree upon an
explanation, such as string theory, even though no proof is provided or
possible.  Cold fusion has neither a device nor an explanation to its credit.
Replication is important, but it does not impress those people who think that
all replications are based on self deceit.  At some point in the history of any
new idea, the problem no longer involves logic, but is psychological.  Many
people see only what they want to see.  Pons and Fleischmann gave a few of us
permission to see the LENR effect.  Before that permission was given, the effect
was invisible even when it occurred before a person's eyes.  I certainly would
not have seen it. Gradually people are accepting the permission to see LENR.
As more people accept this permission, they will give additional people
permission.  That is the way new ideas are accepted, not by generating rules of
evidence.

Ed

Steve Krivit wrote:

> Jed:
>
> Here's the idea behind the thought.  It seems certain individuals feel no
> hesitancy to "move the goalposts".   Seems to me that, at least as far as
> CF,  the community has permitted the antagonists to set the marks, which
> subsequently gives them power, and presumably authority to "move the
> goalposts".   How about if the CF community were to establish its own
> criteria?  There's plenty of wisdom in the group - it certainly doesn't
> need the Parksies of the world to set the marks for them.
>
> I took what you said and expanded and formatted it a bit.
>
> How about you, Ed?  What do you think of this idea?  Would this sort of
> criteria create more confusion and do more harm or might it help control
> those leggy goalposts?
>
> >1. Replication
> >An effect must be replicated by several researchers.  Suggested minimum is
> >5 in order to be considered significant for general consideration and to
> >be considered worthy of further study by the respective field.  Suggested
> >minium of 10 replications to be considered "generally accepted" by broader
> >scientific community.
>
> 2. Qualified replications must be from unique laboratories and unique
> researchers.
>
> 3. Signal to Noise ratio must be within the same bounds as other
> experiments which use similar measurement devices.   If one is using a Mass
> Spectrometery for Helium,  it shouldn't matter whether you're doing a CF
> experiment or a biology experiment.   The s/n should, IMO, should bear upon
> the sensitivity of the device and therefore should be generally quantifiable.
>
> 4. Margin of error should be quantifiable in a similar way.
>
> 5. Replications must be published in either peer-reviewed Print or Web
> Journals, or Conference Proceedings
>
> 6. Published replications must contain sufficient details to enable others
> to understand the exact process and know how to set up the experiment.
>
> S

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 20:31:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA28021;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:29:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:29:31 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110202224.03913fc0@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:34:05 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria
In-Reply-To: <3FB04AF3.3A686346@ix.netcom.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110160749.0390fd30@mail.dlsi.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"svv7W1.0.jr6.gM6i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52469
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ed:

Hmmm....make sense... okay well I won't dwell too much further on the idea 
then.
Thanks!

Steve


At 08:36 PM 11/10/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>A nice idea, Steve, but the skeptics are the referees and the players are not
>permitted to make the rules.  We could make up as many rules we wished, but no
>one outside of the field would pay the slightest attention to them.  In
>addition, an experiment that would impress one person will leave another 
>totally
>lost.  Claims are accepted by "Science" either when they result in a 
>device, for
>example the laser, or they are accepted because a group of people agree 
>upon an
>explanation, such as string theory, even though no proof is provided or
>possible.  Cold fusion has neither a device nor an explanation to its credit.
>Replication is important, but it does not impress those people who think that
>all replications are based on self deceit.  At some point in the history 
>of any
>new idea, the problem no longer involves logic, but is psychological.  Many
>people see only what they want to see.  Pons and Fleischmann gave a few of us
>permission to see the LENR effect.  Before that permission was given, the 
>effect
>was invisible even when it occurred before a person's eyes.  I certainly would
>not have seen it. Gradually people are accepting the permission to see LENR.
>As more people accept this permission, they will give additional people
>permission.  That is the way new ideas are accepted, not by generating 
>rules of
>evidence.
>
>Ed

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 10 23:29:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA09104;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:25:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:25:54 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:25:51 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
In-Reply-To: <00e001c3a7de$d2c044a0$8837fea9@cpq>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102323320.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qRcNm1.0.AE2.1y8i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52470
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Jones Beene wrote:

> >   NOTE! In private communications M. Foster mentioned that if you blast a
> >   hair dryer through a PVC pipe after first wetting the inner surface of
> >   the pipe, the pipe becomes highly electrified. The cause is unknown, but
> >   it might involve the bursting of microbubbles (which are known to launch
> >   negative water droplets into the air.)
>
> Are you saying the surface charge in the pipe is positive after heating ?

I don't know.  I've never got off my butt to try this.

> If it is negative, this would be only be a mystery if the effect
> persisted when the PVC pipe was heated with a NON-electrified heat
> source, such as a propane torch....

Good idea.

> The heating coil from any hair dryer is sure to emit free electrons

We don't have to assume that.  We can just test it.

> However, if a non-electrified heat source also produced the effect, or
> if the surface charge were indeed positive, one would have to suspect
> that during the extrusion process, the pipe became an electret due to
> due to high triboelectric charging by the extrusion-die followed by
> immediate chilling...

Another control experiment: blow extremely low-humidity air through the
wet pipe, where the air temperature is the same as ambient.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 10 23:41:07 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA15848;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:37:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:37:14 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:37:12 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
In-Reply-To: <qrf0rv8poqfg71pkbc91aolf0oujg9t01d@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102327260.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"QD4Fd3.0.Wt3.g69i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52471
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> >> Actually, I think thunderstorms do both. I suspect that rain is often
> >> slightly charged, so that when it falls it carries charge to the ground,
> >> until such a high voltage differential builds up that lightning ensues.
> >
> >When rain carries charge to the ground, it charges the entire Earth.
> >
> >It's only the fact that positively charged particles are left behind in
> >the cloud that a net-charge can build up.
>
> How does this differ from what I said above?

If the rain only charges the entire Earth, the increase in surface charge
and sky-voltage will be immeasurably small since the Earth is so large.
"Carries charge to the ground" does not mention leaving an opposite charge
behind in the cloud.  It's only the small local region of opposite charge
left behind in the cloud that causes an intense e-field, and the charge in
the ground surface below the cloud is created by induction, by holding a
positive charge near a conductor and thereby creating a negative
charge-image (and creating an intense e-field.)  Placing a little
rain-charge on the entire Earth does not alter the pattern of charge
associated with the thunderstorm and the conductive ground surface below
it.  Maybe you know that this is so, and maybe you assume that the reader
knows it.  But you didn't mention it in your message, and perhaps the
readers DON'T know about it, that's why I made the comment.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 10 23:49:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA22082;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:46:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:46:58 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:46:55 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102323320.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102338280.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"OoL5F2.0.rO5.nF9i_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52472
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, William Beaty wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Jones Beene wrote:
> > billb wrote:
> > >   NOTE! In private communications M. Foster mentioned that if you blast a
> > >   hair dryer through a PVC pipe after first wetting the inner surface of
> > >   the pipe, the pipe becomes highly electrified. The cause is unknown, but
> > >   it might involve the bursting of microbubbles (which are known to launch
> > >   negative water droplets into the air.)
> >
> > Are you saying the surface charge in the pipe is positive after heating ?
>
> I don't know.  I've never got off my butt to try this.

I have a hair dryer and several kinds of electrometers. I guess I should
go out and buy some plastic water pipe!

Hey Michael Foster, are you still on Vortex?



> > However, if a non-electrified heat source also produced the effect, or
> > if the surface charge were indeed positive, one would have to suspect
> > that during the extrusion process, the pipe became an electret due to
> > due to high triboelectric charging by the extrusion-die followed by
> > immediate chilling...

Also, try coating the inside of the pipe with conductive paint rather than
water.  Or glue on some aluminum foil.  Maybe it just needs a conductor.
Or maybe the water is essential.

I've seen fringe articles that mention that charge separation might
occur during evaporation when things are far from equilibrium.  Normal
evaporation doesn't create electrification.  A dish of water sitting on
an electroscope doesn't become charged up.

On the other hand, the old "Hydroelectric" electrostatic generators of the
late 1800s have never been adequately explained as far as I know.
Articles mention that probably the condensing steam gave rise to droplets
which then collided with the interior wall of the steam jet, producing
well known electrification by contact between dissimilar materials
(similar to the electrification that can appear during sand-blasting.)
Maybe that's how it works.  But the mysterious pipe/hairdryer effect might
contain new information.


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Tue Nov 11 01:57:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id BAA24185;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:54:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:54:24 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:54:22 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031110152020.0390f8e0@mail.dlsi.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311110110190.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"ONeqx1.0.lv5.G7Bi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52473
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Steve Krivit wrote:

> Bill - thanks for the links on these...they are brilliant, hilarious, and
> unfortunately a sad reflection of some of Man's poorer characteristics.


Here's another excellent one I just found on that "Bogus skept" site:

  Intellectuals vs. pseudointellectuals  (Sydney Harris)
  http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/intellectuals.html


> >   Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism, W. Beaty
> >   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

Oops, that was supposed to be:

   http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Tue Nov 11 05:40:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA24869;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:34:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:34:41 -0800
Message-ID: <001101c3a850$309ab080$d511b83f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:34:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940766a22f69dc7a5f54a2667d18aa7b6ed350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"XA2O02.0.R46.mLEi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52474
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Mon, 10 Nov 2003 04:47:09

I wrote:

The force F (newtons) between two capacitor plates with an applied voltage (V) and a
capacitance (C) = eo* area/x

F = dC*V^2/(2*dx)  (newtons)

Doesn't it follow that force is directly proportional to the energy E = 1/2 C V^2/x
contained in the dielectric/vacuum between the plates?

F = E/x  (newtons)

Fg = K*E1*E2/R^2  newtons  K = 8.2345e-45

The force is always "Attractive"  regardless of the sign of the charge on matter, and
allows for gravitational attraction of light (as borne out by redshift, deflection,
and trapping of light by "black holes".

Note that, if E1 or E2 becomes negative the force becomes repulsive or an
"antigravity" force.

IOW, In compliance with  General Relativity, "Matter Warps Space" the Ether/Vacuum
"ZPE"  matter as we know it is merely a "Bubble" in the vacuum, and gravity is the
"Negative Energy" and constraining resistance force. Hence, the  relativistic "Gamma"
Mrel = Mo/[1 - (v^2-c^2)]^1/2 etc.

In url:

http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html

Hal Puthoff wrote:

"And now to the preeminent question of all, where did the Universe come from? Or, in
modern terminology, what started the Big Bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty
space have something to do with this also? Well, Prof. Edward Tryon of Hunter College
of the City University of New York thought so when he proposed in 1973 that our
Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as
"simply one of those things which happen from time to time." (10) This idea was later
refined and updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin
of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunneling
from literally nothing into the something we call our universe. (11) Although highly
speculative, these types of models indicate once again that physicists find themselves
turning again and again to the Void (and the fluctuations thereof) for their answers."

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 06:51:10 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA09658;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:50:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:50:19 -0800
Message-ID: <002a01c3a862$0f198d20$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <001101c3a850$309ab080$d511b83f@computer>
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:42:40 -0800
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 GAA09633
Resent-Message-ID: <"NfMP1.0.qM2.hSFi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52475
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Fred,

Are you identifying gravity and "negative energy" being essentially the same as Dirac's "negative sea" or is that negative energy different?

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 08:15:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA29375;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <003901c3a866$53ced3e0$d511b83f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <001101c3a850$309ab080$d511b83f@computer> <002a01c3a862$0f198d20$8837fea9@cpq>
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:13:07 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9401dc0df6dc1510b416ee313c8792f331a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"1856A.0.vA7.hgGi_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52476
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: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity

Jones Beene wrote:


> Fred,
>
> Are you identifying gravity and "negative energy" being essentially the same as
Dirac's "negative sea" or is that negative energy different?

I am going with Tryon's idea that gravity-aether is the "negative sea" and that
matter-energy is the void/s "something" in that (nothing) "negative sea".

IOW, following the GR tenet that "matter warps space" gravity is the pushing on the
voids as in "a vacuum abhors discontinuities".  :-)

Regards,

Frederick
>
> Jones
>

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 10:07:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA28999;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:04:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:04:27 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <9f.40271b09.2ce27e7c@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:03:40 EST
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_9f.40271b09.2ce27e7c_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"Rdne81.0.v47.hIIi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52477
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_9f.40271b09.2ce27e7c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/11/03 9:51:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
jonesb9@pacbell.net writes:


> Fred,
> 
> Are you identifying gravity and "negative energy" being essentially the same 
> as Dirac's "negative sea" or is that negative energy different?
> 
> Jones
> 
> 

My published work on the subject.

enjoy

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html

Frank Znidarsic

--part1_9f.40271b09.2ce27e7c_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 11/11/03 9:51:27 AM Eastern Standar=
d Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Fred,<BR>
<BR>
Are you identifying gravity and "negative energy" being essentially the same=
 as Dirac's "negative sea" or is that negative energy different?<BR>
<BR>
Jones<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
My published work on the subject.<BR>
<BR>
enjoy<BR>
<BR>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part1_9f.40271b09.2ce27e7c_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 10:08:33 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA30392;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:06:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:06:10 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <49.361073da.2ce27ee7@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:05:27 EST
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_49.361073da.2ce27ee7_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"ST50o2.0.fQ7.HKIi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52478
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_49.361073da.2ce27ee7_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/11/03 11:15:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:


> IOW, following the GR tenet that "matter warps space" gravity is the 
> pushing on the
> voids as in "a vacuum abhors discontinuities".  :-)
> 
> 

My published in part work on this subject.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html

enjoy


Frank Znidarsic

--part1_49.361073da.2ce27ee7_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 11/11/03 11:15:21 AM Eastern Standa=
rd Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">IOW, following the GR tenet tha=
t "matter warps space" gravity is the pushing on the<BR>
voids as in "a vacuum abhors discontinuities".&nbsp; :-)<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
My published in part work on this subject.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html<BR>
<BR>
enjoy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part1_49.361073da.2ce27ee7_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 10:12:20 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA01218;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:10:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:10:08 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031111124143.01c0cb30@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:10:02 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"tauuC2.0.yI.0OIi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52479
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I do not think we need any new or unusual evaluation criteria for CF. On 
the contrary, we need to persuade people to apply the old, long established 
criteria instead of waving their hands and talking about "extraordinary 
proof." You might say we need extra or highly ordinary evidence. As 
Fleischmann says, *we* are conventional; the opposition are radicals. We 
want people to act normally. Normal people would not argue with Steve 
Krivit's self-evident rules such as:

 > 3. Signal to Noise ratio must be within the same bounds as other
 > experiments which use similar measurement devices.

What other bounds can there be?

Ed Storms wrote:

 > . . . an experiment that would impress one person will leave another
 > totally lost.

That's true. To the uneducated eye, many phenomena are literally invisible.


 >  Claims are accepted by "Science" either when they result in a device, for
 > example the laser, or they are accepted because a group of people agree 
upon an
 > explanation, such as string theory, even though no proof is provided or
 > possible.

Actually, Peter Hagelstein told me that string theory may be evolving into 
a testable hypothesis. (I do understand enough to explain.)  However, the 
kinds of activities Storms describes here are not science, but rather a 
make-believe parody of it. The public realizes this, and holds science in 
contempt because of it. There is a series of special, hot-air, 
self-congratulatory articles in today's 25th Anniversary New York Times 
Science Times about this very subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/science/index.html

"Does Science Matter?"


 > Cold fusion has neither a device nor an explanation to its credit.

I think it does have devices, and I think CF researchers are to blame for 
not making these devices more readily available to other researchers and to 
the public.


 > Replication is important, but it does not impress those people who think 
that
 > all replications are based on self deceit.

As I said, such people are not playing by the rules. We cannot convince 
them and there is no point in trying. We should ignore them and concentrate 
on the audience of fair, open minded people. I think that audience is huge, 
and growing. As of today, 300,000 papers have been downloaded. I see 
increasing evidence that many readers are students (or perhaps professors) 
at universities. If we win over the undergraduates, the skeptics can keep 
the APS. We will win in the long run, if the CF researchers do not all die 
of old age first. Time is our enemy, but it is  also our only hope.


 >  At some point in the history of any
 > new idea, the problem no longer involves logic, but is psychological.

Exactly right. History is filled with examples. It is psychological, and 
cultural, and -- as Planck said -- simply a matter of time. You have to 
wait for the old-fogey jerks to die off. Time wounds all heals.

If anyone ever perfects an immortality pill, it will spell the end of 
progress, and probably civilization itself. It would be the worst 
catastrophe in history.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 10:14:43 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA02849;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:12:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:12:39 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <3c.376fd135.2ce28062@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:11:46 EST
Subject: Fwd: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"yoaev1.0.Ri.MQIi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52480
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_boundary
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_alt_boundary"


--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_alt_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

opps thry this url for my in part published work on this subject.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html

enjoy

Frank Znidarsic

--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_alt_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">opps thry this url for my in part published work on th=
is subject.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html<BR>
<BR>
enjoy<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_alt_boundary--

--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <FZNIDARSIC@aol.com>
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Full-name: FZNIDARSIC
Message-ID: <49.361073da.2ce27ee7@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:05:27 EST
Subject: Re: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_3c.376fd135.2ce27ee7_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712


--part2_3c.376fd135.2ce27ee7_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/11/03 11:15:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:


> IOW, following the GR tenet that "matter warps space" gravity is the 
> pushing on the
> voids as in "a vacuum abhors discontinuities".  :-)
> 
> 

My published in part work on this subject.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html

enjoy


Frank Znidarsic

--part2_3c.376fd135.2ce27ee7_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 11/11/03 11:15:21 AM Eastern Standa=
rd Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">IOW, following the GR tenet tha=
t "matter warps space" gravity is the pushing on the<BR>
voids as in "a vacuum abhors discontinuities".&nbsp; :-)<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
My published in part work on this subject.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html<BR>
<BR>
enjoy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part2_3c.376fd135.2ce27ee7_boundary--

--part1_3c.376fd135.2ce28062_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 10:36:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA19305;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:34:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:34:00 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Is Gravity the Aether/Negative Energy? was Energy and Force/Gravity
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:56:51 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEEEDOAA.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: <001101c3a850$309ab080$d511b83f@computer>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ze4qM.0.Wj4.OkIi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52481
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Fred.

You write:
>Fg = K*E1*E2/R^2  newtons  K = 8.2345e-45
>The force is always "Attractive"  regardless
> of the sign of the charge on matter <snip>

I was wondering where you were going with this...

I remember reading of some experimental evidence
that antimatter "falls" towards the earth, the
goal of the work was to test just the sort
of hypothesis you are considering. I suppose
it's also the case that antimatter has positive
energy, if so then your equation still works.
Just what does it mean for something to possess
negative energy?

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 13:01:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA02087;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:59:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:59:32 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031111153213.01c104e8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:33:10 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: ICCF10 Iwamura paper uploaded
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"d00sb.0.RW.psKi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52482
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYlowenergyn.pdf

This reports incremental but important progress, in the most impressive 
demonstration of CF transmutation on record.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 18:35:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA05983;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:34:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:34:08 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Thunderstorm research shocks conventional theories
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:20:13 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <r163rvcb4pdqbl6306cqft3jj2f2l9djel@4ax.com>
References: <qrf0rv8poqfg71pkbc91aolf0oujg9t01d@4ax.com> <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102327260.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102327260.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
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 SAA05929
Resent-Message-ID: <"obBYr.0.MT1.VmPi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52483
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  William Beaty's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:37:12 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>If the rain only charges the entire Earth, the increase in surface charge
>and sky-voltage will be immeasurably small since the Earth is so large.
>"Carries charge to the ground" does not mention leaving an opposite charge
>behind in the cloud.  

I can't think of any way of doing this that wouldn't leave an opposite charge behind in the cloud.

>It's only the small local region of opposite charge
>left behind in the cloud that causes an intense e-field, and the charge in
>the ground surface below the cloud is created by induction, by holding a
>positive charge near a conductor and thereby creating a negative
>charge-image (and creating an intense e-field.)  Placing a little
>rain-charge on the entire Earth does not alter the pattern of charge
>associated with the thunderstorm and the conductive ground surface below
>it.  Maybe you know that this is so, and maybe you assume that the reader
>knows it.  But you didn't mention it in your message, and perhaps the
>readers DON'T know about it, that's why I made the comment.

I understand.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 18:38:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA07697;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:37:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:37:26 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:35:39 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <4763rv01p82ci6kmc3ofa6opnm4nod2eq0@4ax.com>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102323320.9371-100000@eskimo.com> <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102338280.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311102338280.9371-100000@eskimo.com>
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 SAA07658
Resent-Message-ID: <"05nca3.0.5u1.cpPi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52484
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

In reply to  William Beaty's message of Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:46:55 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>I have a hair dryer and several kinds of electrometers. I guess I should
>go out and buy some plastic water pipe!
>
>Hey Michael Foster, are you still on Vortex?
>
>
>
>> > However, if a non-electrified heat source also produced the effect, or
>> > if the surface charge were indeed positive, one would have to suspect
>> > that during the extrusion process, the pipe became an electret due to
>> > due to high triboelectric charging by the extrusion-die followed by
>> > immediate chilling...
>
>Also, try coating the inside of the pipe with conductive paint rather than
>water.  Or glue on some aluminum foil.  Maybe it just needs a conductor.
>Or maybe the water is essential.

Air ions may be too light to result in a noticeable charge.
(Use the kinetic energy formula, with the mass of the object, and the speed of the air flow to produce energy in eV).
You need small matter particles going through your hair dryer to do any good. Smoke or dust will do just fine (should produce hundreds of kV to MV effortlessly).

Clean air may only produce a fraction of a microvolt.

(This assumes that ions can swim back "upstream" again once they have used up all their initial kinetic energy, which probably isn't true, and it also assumes only one electron / ion or particle).


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 11 21:38:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA19763;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:36:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:36:02 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:35:56 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
In-Reply-To: <4763rv01p82ci6kmc3ofa6opnm4nod2eq0@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311112113180.23813-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"EdiKo2.0.iq4.1RSi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52485
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> Air ions may be too light to result in a noticeable charge. (Use the
> kinetic energy formula, with the mass of the object, and the speed of
> the air flow to produce energy in eV). You need small matter particles
> going through your hair dryer to do any good. Smoke or dust will do just
> fine (should produce hundreds of kV to MV effortlessly).

The first thing to do is to reproduce his observed effect.  2nd: measure
the ion current.  Maybe it's as high as fractions of a microamp.

As I understand it, air ions are dragged along by the surrounding air, so
their effective mass is enormous.  But that's a blind ally.  I think the
1/2MV^2 of the ions has insignificant impact... instead the ruling
equation is that of an electrostatic generator; it is similar to a
VandeGraaff generator, where our air blast functions as the moving belt.
It's "capacitive voltage multiplication," where falling capacitance gives
rising voltage.  It's like depositing a charge on the plates of a
capacitor, then forcing those capacitor plates apart. Separating those
capacitor plates is performing work, but the mass of each plate doesn't
enter into it, only the capacitance and the "stretched" e-field flux is
important.  Separating the capacitor plates (pulling neg ions from
positive plastic) stretches the e-field and injects electrical energy into
the system.  If we know the coulombs per cubic centimeter of ions being
generated, and know the velocity of the blow dryer, we could figure out
rough values of the amps and the volts/second rise in high voltage.

Remember, EXPERIMENT CONQUERS THEORY.  Since Michael Foster noticed a
strong electrostatic charge within (I assume) tens of seconds or less, the
volts must rise at least a few hundred volts per second.  You can't use
theory to say that he must not have observed a strong charge!  If you
predict microvolts, then immediately you should know that something's
wrong with your math somewhere.   Not KE, MV^2, but capacitor joules, CV^2

Electrostatic generator rule of thumb:  Microamps applied to picofarads
quickly makes megavolts, or,   volts per second = amps per farad .


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Tue Nov 11 23:37:27 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA25583;
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:36:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:36:21 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031111233949.03968488@mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek@mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:40:59 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Steve Krivit <stevek@dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Evaluation Criteria
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031111124143.01c0cb30@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ugzyu1.0.fF6.rBUi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52486
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed:

>wait for the old-fogey jerks to die off. Time wounds all heals.

Wouldn't

"Time wounds all heels"

be more to your point?


S 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 12 13:24:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA21537;
	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:16:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:16:08 -0800
Message-ID: <20031112211605.88927.qmail@web11708.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:16:05 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: buy your own space mission.
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031111233949.03968488@mail.dlsi.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"1WNIE2.0.PG5.NCgi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52487
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2572382454&category=45046&rd=1


Bid On Your Own Space Mission

 

This view of Earth could be yours!
 
Have you ever thought about having your own space
mission? Do you have a payload that you would like to
put in orbit around the Earth? Need a holiday gift for
the person who has everything? Have you ever wondered
what it would be like to explore space with your own
spacecraft?  Now, you can, thanks to SpaceDev.

 

Imagine looking through the eyes of your own satellite
while it silently orbits high above the earth at
17,000 mph. A satellite that you can command from the
comfort of your own home or office, simply using your
PC and the Internet. Through this auction you can
purchase exclusive use of an actual SpaceDev MTV™
satellite – a whole space mission of your own - that
will orbit the Earth every 90 minutes with a camera
imaging Earth and space, 24 hours a day for up to one
year.  A spacecraft like this can cost over $25
million, and that doesn’t even include the launch. 
With this auction, not only can you operate a real
satellite, but be involved in an entire space mission
that will include: design; satellite construction
(including putting small personal items of your own on
the spacecraft, to go into space*); you name the
spacecraft and you name the mission; attend the
launch; and participate in on-orbit operations.  To
qualify to bid on this exciting opportunity, you must
comply with all ITAR regulations and complete a Bidder
Approval Form; however, the winning bidder for this
unique, first time ever auction will receive an entire
personal space mission.  You may have as little, or as
much personal involvement and publicity as you like;
and, SpaceDev will be there to help and guide you
every step of the way

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good lord, would that be cool?


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 12 14:14:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA30552;
	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:11:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:11:23 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
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: <20031112221045.278343E0C@xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:10:45 -0500 (EST)
Resent-Message-ID: <"nwSby3.0.DT7.B0hi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52488
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A


It seems that my mysterious charged pipe is even more mysterious than I thought.  I duplicated my experiment using the very piece of PVC I used the first time.  It didn't work.  I was only able to generate about 2kV.  Actually, you couldn't call what I did the first time an experiment.  It was more of an accident.  I was just trying to dry out the inside of the pipe and within a few seconds of applying the hair dryer to it, a very high voltage negative charge, I estimate about 100kV, appeared on the surface of the pipe.  This happened just as the inside of the pipe became completely dry.  No charge was noticed before that, but then I wasn't looking for one.  I wet the inside of the pipe again and was able to get the same result.  That was then.

Now, with this attempt at replicating what I had done previously, I find no success.  However, there is one important difference between my first experiment and the one I just tried.  The first time, the PVC pipe had spent several days underwater in my swimming pool, for reasons I won't go into.  The water or the pool chlorine or both may have subtly altered the surface characteristics of the PVC.  One immediately obvious difference was that the surface was water wettable as opposed to the normal property of PVC to make water bead on its surface.

This difference makes me suspect that the high voltage charge created originally was a simple triboelectric effect.  In other words, evaporating water from the surface was similar to peeling tape from it.  The difference in surface tension, which is after all an electrostatic property, may make all the difference.  Also the tiniest, almost immeasurable, traces of certain chemicals substances can dramatically alter the triboelectric properties of an object.  So the pool immersion may have accomplished both effects.

As I write this, my PVC pipe is sitting at the bottom of my swimming pool.  I'll remove it in a few days for another go at this.

M.





_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 12 19:31:14 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id TAA26343;
	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:27:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:27:43 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:27:39 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
In-Reply-To: <20031112221045.278343E0C@xmxpita.excite.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311121856100.16023-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"8ZbJB.0.XR6.keli_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52489
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Michael Foster wrote:

> It seems that my mysterious charged pipe is even more mysterious than I
> thought.  I duplicated my experiment using the very piece of PVC I used
> the first time.  It didn't work.  I was only able to generate about 2kV.

However, since evaporation isn't supposed to cause any charging at all,
anything over a couple hundred volts or so is an extremely successful
experiment, an unexplained anomaly.  On the other hand, water spray is
known to act as a generator, so if the air blast is peeling any droplets
loose, that could be the origin of the HV.   Or as Jones Beene mentioned,
we'd need to make sure the hair dryer itself wasn't spewing charge at a
signficiant rate.

> This difference makes me suspect that the high voltage charge created
> originally was a simple triboelectric effect.  In other words,
> evaporating water from the surface was similar to peeling tape from it.

Wet the terminal of an active (amplified) electrometer.  As the water
evaporates, do you detect any charge at all?


I recently tried this with a battery-powered ultrasonic humidifier.  The
mist is very slightly negative as it comes out, and the water container
becomes positive if there is no ground connection.  So, the New-Age claim
is true: ultrasound "misters" do create negative ions.  But not at
anywhere near the output that an actual negative ion generator has!


> As I write this, my PVC pipe is sitting at the bottom of my swimming
> pool.  I'll remove it in a few days for another go at this.

If it's just the "wetted" layer that's necessary, we could try latex paint
or something.

Long ago I heard that water on glass will no longer bead up if the oily
organic crap is first removed from the glass surface.  Cleaning with
nitric acid was supposed to produce "wettable" glass plates which could be
used in solar stills, where the condensation was a thin film which
wouldn't bounce the sunlight back out as much.




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Wed Nov 12 20:36:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA08728;
	Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:35:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:35:55 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:35:50 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: ISBL04 First Call for Papers (fwd) Ball Lightning
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311122035170.16023-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311122035172.16023@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"hB2Xw1.0.I82.hemi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52490
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:54:15 +0900
From: Hideho OFURUTON <ofuruton@kouku-k.ac.jp>
Subject: ISBL04 First Call for Papers

Dear Sirs,

We send "First Call for Papers" of the 8th International Symposium on
Ball Lightning.

Yours sincerely

Ofuruton, Hideho
Tokyo Metropolitan College of Aeronautical Engineering


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 00:17:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id AAA16665;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:15:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:15:55 -0800
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: ID = 4841b02b084c673b38483f9de7fbea4e
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: <20031113081518.A8E1D3CE8@xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:15:18 -0500 (EST)
Resent-Message-ID: <"g5bLR2.0.G44.wspi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52491
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A


Bill Beaty wrote:

> However, since evaporation isn't supposed to cause any charging at all,
> anything over a couple hundred volts or so is an extremely successful
> experiment, an unexplained anomaly. On the other hand, water spray is
> known to act as a generator, so if the air blast is peeling any droplets
> loose, that could be the origin of the HV. Or as Jones Beene mentioned,
> we'd need to make sure the hair dryer itself wasn't spewing charge at a
> signficiant rate.

Many plastics, PVC included, are difficult to get below 2kV.  You can just wave 
them around in the air or look at them really hard and they pick up a couple of
thousand volts. (OK, so I'm exaggerating a little.)

I hung an aluminum soda can by some fishing line and directed the hair dryer 
at it and was unable to detect any charge at all.  I'm not sure if this settles the 
matter, but it's a good indication.

> Wet the terminal of an active (amplified) electrometer. As the water
> evaporates, do you detect any charge at all?

I haven't yet tried this yet myself, but the history of this phenomenon goes back
to the 1760s and before.  All of the experimenters mentioned that simple
quiescent evaporation of water would not result in a charge, that there had
to be "ebullience".   I remember one experiment where a hot coal or a red hot
piece of iron was dropped into a pan of water insulated from ground, resulting in 
an immediate charge.  Another experiment had a wet piece of cloth heated by a 
fire becoming charged.

It appears to me that charging by natural slow evaporation of water doesn't
happen simply because the charges become dissipated as fast as they build up,
possibly caused by convection of the charges by the water molecules
themselves.  Rapid removal of the water vapor, on the other hand, results in
charge separation.  Somehow, over the centuries, these results have been
ignored or discounted and we now have it as conventional wisdom that 
evaporation doesn't cause an electrical charge.

> I recently tried this with a battery-powered ultrasonic humidifier. The
> mist is very slightly negative as it comes out, and the water container
> becomes positive if there is no ground connection. So, the New-Age claim
> is true: ultrasound "misters" do create negative ions. But not at
> anywhere near the output that an actual negative ion generator has!

You don't mention the voltages involved in this one, but I'll bet they would
be higher if the mist were forcibly blown out from the water container.

> Long ago I heard that water on glass will no longer bead up if the oily
> organic crap is first removed from the glass surface. Cleaning with
> nitric acid was supposed to produce "wettable" glass plates which could be
> used in solar stills, where the condensation was a thin film which
> wouldn't bounce the sunlight back out as much.

I have to get glass this clean all the time.  It's much easier and safer to use
Bon Ami cleanser (calcium carbonate).  You just get the glass slightly wet and
then shake a little Bon Ami on it and rub the resulting paste around on the glass
with a paper towel then rinse while wiping with another wet paper towel.  The 
water sheets so perfectly on the glass, it's hard to tell if the glass it wet or dry.

On the other hand, virtually all plastics and resins are not naturally water
wettable.  In my work I use machines with powerful high frequency high voltage
electrodes to treat the surface of plastics for this very purpose.  When PVC film
is treated in this way, its triboelectric properties change completely.   It becomes
a material that charges positive when rubbed with most materials, as opposed to
its natural state of being far down on the negative side of the triboelectric series.
This effect wears off after a day or two. 

M.



_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 09:46:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA26330;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:38:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:38:08 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:38:04 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: Michael Foster <michael.foster@excite.com>
cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
In-Reply-To: <20031113081518.A8E1D3CE8@xmxpita.excite.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311130924450.28231-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"BdDmH2.0.CR6._5yi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52492
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Michael Foster wrote:

> I haven't yet tried this yet myself, but the history of this phenomenon goes back
> to the 1760s and before.  All of the experimenters mentioned that simple
> quiescent evaporation of water would not result in a charge, that there had
> to be "ebullience".   I remember one experiment where a hot coal or a red hot
> piece of iron was dropped into a pan of water insulated from ground, resulting in
> an immediate charge.  Another experiment had a wet piece of cloth heated by a
> fire becoming charged.

Very intersting!


> It appears to me that charging by natural slow evaporation of water doesn't
> happen simply because the charges become dissipated as fast as they build up,
> possibly caused by convection of the charges by the water molecules
> themselves.  Rapid removal of the water vapor, on the other hand, results in
> charge separation.  Somehow, over the centuries, these results have been
> ignored or discounted and we now have it as conventional wisdom that
> evaporation doesn't cause an electrical charge.

This makes sense.  Remember that a movable charge IS a conductor, by
definition.  If charged water molecules depart from the surface, they
should leave behind a patch of image-charge, and should be immediately
drawn back in again.  It would take a serious blast of air to strip away
the boundary layer and carry them away.

> > I recently tried this with a battery-powered ultrasonic humidifier. The
> > mist is very slightly negative as it comes out, and the water container
> > becomes positive if there is no ground connection. So, the New-Age claim
> > is true: ultrasound "misters" do create negative ions. But not at
> > anywhere near the output that an actual negative ion generator has!
>
> You don't mention the voltages involved in this one, but I'll bet they would
> be higher if the mist were forcibly blown out from the water container.

Exactly right.  The voltage was zero unless I blew the mist away.  With an
air flow, the voltage was incredibly low, under 100V, a small deflection
in the needle of an "Electrostatic locator" set to maximum aperture.  I'd
have to double check it to make certain that it wasn't just a "kelvin
waterdrop" effect.  The bowl needs to be metal, and it needs to be
operated inside a metal box to exclude e-fields coming from the table,
clothing, etc.  Yet it was humid that day, so the results are PROBABLY
real.


> On the other hand, virtually all plastics and resins are not naturally
> water wettable.  In my work I use machines with powerful high frequency
> high voltage electrodes to treat the surface of plastics for this very
> purpose.  When PVC film is treated in this way, its triboelectric
> properties change completely.  It becomes a material that charges
> positive when rubbed with most materials, as opposed to its natural
> state of being far down on the negative side of the triboelectric
> series. This effect wears off after a day or two.

I wonder if you're removing an oxide coating, not adding one.

If PVC is freshly sanded, or if it has been scraped clean with a blade,
does it resemble normal PVC in tribo polarity?  Or does it resemble your
treated PVC?  I could see it going either way.  Maybe your treatment makes
it odd, and then it wears off.  Or maybe your treatment makes it clean,
and then contamination ( air and water )  becomes adsorbed again after
awhile.



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 13 10:00:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA05667;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:55:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:55:47 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031113125204.00b035f8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:55:36 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: OFF TOPIC Proteins used as nano-machine tools
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"O3M2r2.0.QO1.YMyi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52493
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993664

Quotes:

"Computer hard drive capacity could be increased a hundredfold by using a 
common protein to fabricate nano-scale magnetic particles, claims UK 
company Nanomagnetics

It uses the protein apoferritin, the main molecule in which iron is stored 
in the body, to create a material consisting of magnetic particles each 
just a few nanometres in diameter. . . ."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 10:12:44 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA13123;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:08:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:08:36 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick@highsurf.com@mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210101bbd9798cb544@[10.220.188.4]>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:10:29 -1000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick@highsurf.com>
Subject: Re: M. Foster's mysterious charged pipe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
Resent-Message-ID: <"hJfzs2.0.uC3.ZYyi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52494
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Michael -

<snip>
>However, there is one important difference between my first experiment and the one I just tried.  The first time, the PVC pipe had spent several days underwater in my swimming pool, for reasons I won't go into.
</snip>

I bet that's it. Most plastics are hygroscopic - IOW, your PVC's probably waterlogged.

-- Rick Monteverde,
Honolulu HI

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 11:08:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA18612;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:03:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:03:32 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:03:28 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism, www-plagarism
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311101236310.23362-100000@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311131052060.15957-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"OvNU43.0.gY4.3Mzi_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52495
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, William Beaty wrote:
> On the original topic, here are the original lists of symptoms:
>
>   Zen and the art of debunkery, Dan Drasin
>   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html
>
>   Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism, W. Beaty
>   http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

    7 warning signs of bougus skepticism
    http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/seven%20warning%20signs.html


Here's another one of these lists!!!  It's on Boerner's site.  This is a
great idea, since it targets both the twisted mental gyrations of
"skeptics" and of their "true believer " opponents.  Not pathological
skeptics or pseudoskeptics or Bogus skeptics.  Instead, Pseudointellectuals.


-----Distinctions Between Intellectuals And Pseudo-Intellectuals
By Sydney Harris, Detroit Free Press, (11/20/81)

 *The intellectual is looking for the right questions to ask; the pseudo
  is giving what he claims to be the right answers.

 *The intellectual is evidently motivated by a disinterested love of
  truth;  the pseudo is interested in being right, or being thought to be
  right, whether he is or not.

 *The intellectual is willing to admit that what he does not know is far
  greater than what he knows; the pseudo claims to know as much as can be
  known about the subject under consideration.

 *The intellectual states as good a case for his adversary as can be made
  out; the pseudo sets up a straw man and beats it to death for the sake
  of seeming superior.

 *The intellectual is deeply and constantly aware of the limitations of
  human reason; the pseudo makes a deity of reason and tries to force it
  into realms it cannot penetrate.

 *The intellectual seeks light from whatever source, realizing that ideas
  are no respecters of persons and turn up in the most unexpected places
  from the most improbable people; the pseudo accepts ideas, when he does,
  only from experts and specialists and certified authorities.

 *The intellectual advances an hypothesis that he hopes may be true; the
  pseudo propounds a dogma that he insists is true.

 *The intellectual recognizes that opposites are not always contradictory,
  and may indeed reinforce each other; the pseudo paints a picture in
  black and white, right or wrong, leaving no room for a contrary viewpoint.

 *The intellectual knows there are no final answers to human questions;
  the pseudo makes each tentative and provisional answer sound like a
   finality.

 *The intellectual is courageous in opposing majority opinion, even when
  it jeopardizes his position; the pseudo slavishly follows "the most
  reliable authorities" in his field sneering at heresies.

 *The intellectual never talks down to his audience, but tries to be as
  clear as possible; the pseudo talks above his audience to mystify and
  impress them."

http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/intellectuals.html


Note that Sydney Harris is not S> Harris of science-cartoon fame.


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Nov 13 14:39:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA29767;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:40 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031113172425.01ca11a8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:34:27 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Google indicates LENR-CANR popularity
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"B7snE.0.qG7.zR0j_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52496
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Here is a straw in the wind. I went to check the spelling of the word 
"deuteride" for a paper I am editing. A foreign author calls it 
"deuteriumed" as in "deuteriumed Pd cathode." Anyway, "deuteride" is not in 
my Webster's dictionary, so just to be sure I have it right, I looked up 
"deuteride" in Google. The first reference is not available. The second 
describes the atomic bomb. The third one is at LENR-CANR.

Let me explain the significance of this, for readers who are unfamiliar 
with the inner workings of Google.

Google generally returns results starting with the most popular site. The 
site that people most often select when they go to Google and generate a 
list gradually moves to first place. I say "generally" because there are 
now elaborate programs within Google to defeat commercial organizations 
that try to artificially inflate their own web page ranking by 
automatically requesting their own page thousands of times. The Google 
protection programs are updated once a month, triggering a spate of 
counter-measures by the commercial site programmers, in what is known as 
"The Google Dance."

I confess, I never anticipated a world in which people spend millions of 
dollars and thousands of man-hours on tasks like "The Google Dance."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 15:32:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA07339;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:30:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:30:27 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031113175726.00b035a0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:22:30 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism, www-plagarism
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-9Npt2.0.Po1.IG1j_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52497
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

William Beaty writes:

 >  *The intellectual is willing to admit that what he does not know is far
 >   greater than what he knows; the pseudo claims to know as much as can be
 >   known about the subject under consideration.

One thing that is not often noted in essays like this are the "shades of 
gray" in knowledge. There are things you know, things you don't know, and a 
vast number of things that fall in between. Some professional scientists 
have a bad habit of shying away from questions when they have only partial 
knowledge. It is good to admit: "I don't know" or "I can't judge," but bad 
to say that when you really can judge, but you don't want to stick your 
neck out and make a fool of yourself.

One of the most impressive aspects of "The Double Helix" is the way Watson 
describes his own ignorance in 1952, along with his partial, incomplete, 
evolving knowledge of DNA. Obviously, In 1952, incomplete knowledge of DNA 
structure was the only kind anyone had. People who refuse to guess, or make 
a working assumption, or risk being wrong, seldom make important discoveries.

Watson describes the complex, detailed, highly developed theories about 
cellular reproduction that the leading experts hotly debated in 1952. 
Watson could not begin to understand these theories, so he ignored them. It 
turned the theories were all hot air -- they were not even close. Experts 
often fail to realize how little they know. When you have an elaborate 
theory that took years to develop, that other experts spend weeks trying to 
parse it, understand and critique it, you may forget that the whole thing 
-- from top to bottom -- may be wrong. Ed Storms suspects that the 
elaborate theories and experiments relating to CF in the Pd lattice -- in 
the bulk -- and the importance of loading are probably hot air, which means 
people have devoted years of effort in pursuit of a phantom.

I mentioned once that John O'M Bockris has often told me "I don't know." He 
says that more often than you would expect from a world-class expert who 
(literally) wrote the book on modern electrochemistry. I trust that he 
honestly does not know, because one of his many endearing traits is the way 
he shouts: "the Coulomb barrier is a shibboleth!" When he thinks he does 
know, he never hides his light under a bushel.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 15:53:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA22799;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:51:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:51:01 -0800
Message-ID: <001101c3aa41$0ffad9c0$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: vision
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:51:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C3AA17.27034000"
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: <"1xa6S1.0.mZ5.aZ1j_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52498
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_000E_01C3AA17.27034000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are.

Anais Nin
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C3AA17.27034000
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
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=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We don't see things as they are, we see =
them as we=20
are.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anais Nin</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C3AA17.27034000--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 13 18:00:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA24417;
	Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:57:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:57:37 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:57:35 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Symptoms of Bogus Skepticism, www-plagarism
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031113175726.00b035a0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0311131749180.9092-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"QOUJs2.0.Qz5.GQ3j_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52499
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> I mentioned once that John O'M Bockris has often told me "I don't know." He
> says that more often than you would expect from a world-class expert who
> (literally) wrote the book on modern electrochemistry.

I must disagree.  In my experimence, both little kids and world-class
experts constantly say "I don't know."  That's one good way to sort the
major experts from the fakers.  It's somewhat along the lines of "wisest
is he who is intimately aware of the limits of his own knowledge."  True
experts also exhibit a large pinch of the concept "trying to project an
image of flawless superiority is the very opposite of striving for genuine
advancement."   Nicely covered by that list of pseudointellectual
symptoms.

When someone apparantly lacks flaws, it usually means that they're
spending immense effort to keep them totally hidden, and chances are
strong that they're not actually an expert, they're only desperately
projecting a false facade of expertise.




(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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  Fri Nov 14 07:59:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA23145;
	Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:56:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:56:54 -0800
Message-ID: <001301c3aabf$8affc800$1d10b83f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:56:50 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402e3a7412ce2a89db2916b695f1aa1bfc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"v092C3.0.Uf5.5jFj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52500
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

According to E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2  it takes 9e16 joules of energy to "create" a
kilogram of mass.

Experimental verification of the GR prediction of deflection of light by a mass, the
gravitational redshift, and light trapping by black holes, strongly implies that light
energy or heat (as well as matter) is susceptible to the 1/R^2  gravitational force.

Thus the gravitational force Fg between matter of masses m1 and m2:

Fg = G* m1*m2/R^2  (nt)

OTOH, in terms of energy E:

Fg = 8.2345e-45* E1*E2/R^2  (nt) where energies E1 or E2 can be matter or energy, or
both.

Given this, heating an object should cause an increase in weight of 1/9.0e16 (or ~
1.10e-17 kg) per joule of heat content.

Vaporizing  a gram of carbon (in a balance capable of  picogram resolution) requires ~
60 kj easily done with a 20 watt heater (light bulb?) in about an hour in a suitably
insulated balance apparatus.

Links to thermal data of the elements:

http://web.mit.edu/3.091/www/pt/pert11.html

http://www.webelements.com/

A positive result would beg the question of, how much of the Sun's (or planet's)
"mass" is matter, and how much is heat energy?

Same question for Neutron Stars and Black Holes:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030201.html

http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/blackhole.html

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 14 15:40:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA10996;
	Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:38:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:38:37 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <29.4b2f3618.2ce6c152@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:37:54 EST
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_29.4b2f3618.2ce6c152_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"ijMmq1.0.kh2.yTMj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52501
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_29.4b2f3618.2ce6c152_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/14/03 11:00:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:


> A positive result would beg the question of, how much of the Sun's (or 
> planet's)
> "mass" is matter, and how much is heat energy?
> 

All energy and matter have gravity.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html

frank Z

--part1_29.4b2f3618.2ce6c152_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 11/14/03 11:00:04 AM Eastern Standa=
rd Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">A positive result would beg the=
 question of, how much of the Sun's (or planet's)<BR>
"mass" is matter, and how much is heat energy?<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
All energy and matter have gravity.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html<BR>
<BR>
frank Z</FONT></HTML>

--part1_29.4b2f3618.2ce6c152_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 14 16:36:22 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA14299;
	Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:35:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:35:35 -0800
From: hamdix@iris.com.tr
Message-Id: <200311150034.CAA09972@rainbow.verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:34:54 -0000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
X-Mailer: TWIG 2.2.3
Cc: hamdix@verisoft.com.tr
Resent-Message-ID: <"0hEjw.0.FV3.MJNj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52502
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frank Z wrote:

All energy and matter have gravity.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html

frank Z 


I am not sure about it. It is true that gravity appears interact with 
everything, but it is not proved experimentally all energy forms induce 
gravity. Indeed, it may possible to hypothesis a gravity theory where 
induction of gravity would be dependant to the structure and to the dynamic 
of the energy/matter forms. I think the mechanism to energy to interact 
itself to produce particles is also responsible for the gravity. To solve the 
gravity problem, one should leave the bulk matter and the bulk gravity 
concepts and need to investigate it in the basic structures of the matter, I 
think. In this level gravity would be qualitatively and quantitatively 
different. It would be wonderful to discover the gravity is responsible for 
structuring both the smallest elements of the matter and the largests like 
galaxies.

Regards,

hamdi ucar


________________________________________________________________

Iris Webmail - http://webmail.iris.com.tr


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 14 22:24:09 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA24619;
	Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:23:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:23:14 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Cc: <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Weighing Heat
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 01:46:19 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.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: <200311150034.CAA09972@rainbow.verisoft.com.tr>
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q0Mht3.0.R06.HPSj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52503
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hamdi writes:
>I am not sure about it. It is true that gravity appears interact with 
>everything, but it is not proved experimentally all energy forms induce 
>gravity.

Certainly, the energy associated with mass in motion is
a form of energy sensitive to other gravitating masses. 
This we see experimentally in the cyclotron. Fred suggests
incoherent vibration of the mass in the form of heat,
given the above context this is not such a stretch. 

Have you considered chemical reactions, Fred??? I'm
imagining an experiment where the mass is measured 
before and after a reaction occurs. 

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 15 05:11:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA21203;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 05:09:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 05:09:57 -0800
Message-ID: <001f01c3ab71$61e8b280$7700bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <knagel@gis.net>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 06:09:51 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940054d0f23ebe22067394c9227e78514cc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ou5A81.0.0B5.bMYj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52504
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Keith.

One thing that I overlooked, and that is the speed of light c' in a material is
c/(k)^1/2 , where k is the dielectric constant of the material. In the 1940s
Stratton's treatise on this for metals was covered in his book. But, I can't remember
the title or publisher. Horace Poteet at Sandia Labs has a copy. I'll rattle his cage
later.

If that is the case, wouldn't the mass of heat be E/c'^2 where c'^2 is a orders of
magnitude less than 9e16?

Perhaps heated carbon weighs a lot more than we think, and acts like a black hole.
:-)

Regards,

Frederick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Cc: <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 12:46 AM
Subject: RE: Weighing Heat


> Hamdi writes:
> >I am not sure about it. It is true that gravity appears interact with
> >everything, but it is not proved experimentally all energy forms induce
> >gravity.
>
> Certainly, the energy associated with mass in motion is
> a form of energy sensitive to other gravitating masses.
> This we see experimentally in the cyclotron. Fred suggests
> incoherent vibration of the mass in the form of heat,
> given the above context this is not such a stretch.
>
> Have you considered chemical reactions, Fred??? I'm
> imagining an experiment where the mass is measured
> before and after a reaction occurs.
>
> K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 15 06:23:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id GAA01799;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 06:21:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 06:21:35 -0800
Message-ID: <003101c3ab7b$63f789c0$7700bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <001f01c3ab71$61e8b280$7700bf3f@computer>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:21:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409c98e9e32ab30860484cb7d6363a762a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"nYBwi.0.wR.kPZj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52505
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Keith.

Here is Stratton's book that touches on the dielectric constants of metals etc.

Julius Adams Stratton; Electromagnetic
Theory, McGraw-Hill,1941.

Regards,

Frederick

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 15 13:08:21 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA28239;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:06:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:06:03 -0800
Message-ID: <006301c3abbb$1c5b85e0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <001f01c3ab71$61e8b280$7700bf3f@computer> <003101c3ab7b$63f789c0$7700bf3f@computer>
Subject: OT: Weighing Heat
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 12:57:39 -0800
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 NAA28185
Resent-Message-ID: <"v9PfJ1.0.7v6.xKfj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52506
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Not to diminish Fred's heavy-duty observation, but don't you just love the phrase, "weighing heat" ...

...plus, for those of us who are of a certain age...er.... where memory of yesteryear is occasionally keener than memory of yesterday, it is a phrase that can bear a double 'Tom Swifty' ....

"wonder how one weighs heat?" ponders a perspiring Tom...


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 15 15:07:46 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA03856;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:04:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:04:56 -0800
From: "explorecraft" <pariah@explorecraft.com>
To: "Vortex-L" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Weighing Heat
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 06:00:53 +0700
Message-ID: <MBBBJJGDFDALGKGNLBHOEEAHCFAA.pariah@explorecraft.com>
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 V6.00.2800.1106
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
Importance: Normal
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - lester.switchfusion.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - eskimo.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - explorecraft.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"t0ysn.0.9y.N4hj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52507
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



One obvious point is that energy is
 only defined in the context of mass.

Thus, any energy has an associated mass...


  http://www.explorecraft.com/
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Nagel [mailto:knagel@gis.net]
> Sent: Saturday, 2003 November 15 13:46
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Cc: fjsparber@earthlink.net
> Subject: RE: Weighing Heat
> 
> 
> Hamdi writes:
> >I am not sure about it. It is true that gravity appears interact with 
> >everything, but it is not proved experimentally all energy forms induce 
> >gravity.
> 
> Certainly, the energy associated with mass in motion is
> a form of energy sensitive to other gravitating masses. 
> This we see experimentally in the cyclotron. Fred suggests
> incoherent vibration of the mass in the form of heat,
> given the above context this is not such a stretch. 
> 
> Have you considered chemical reactions, Fred??? I'm
> imagining an experiment where the mass is measured 
> before and after a reaction occurs. 
> 
> K.
> 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 15 15:38:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA21256;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:36:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:36:08 -0800
Message-ID: <001b01c3abc8$d9439640$e700bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <MBBBJJGDFDALGKGNLBHOEEAHCFAA.pariah@explorecraft.com>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:35:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e79c57757bfd424c51f8b26fe1561816350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"QleTu1.0.zB5.dXhj_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52508
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:
>
> Hamdi writes:
> >I am not sure about it. It is true that gravity appears interact with everything,
but it is not proved experimentally
> > all energy forms induce gravity.
>
> Certainly, the energy associated with mass in motion is
> a form of energy sensitive to other gravitating masses.
> This we see experimentally in the cyclotron. Fred
> suggests incoherent vibration of the mass in the form of > heat, given the above
context this is not such a stretch.

Good point.
>
> Have you considered chemical reactions, Fred??? I'm
> imagining an experiment where the mass is measured
> before and after a reaction occurs.

I hadn't considered that, Keith, but, "Thermite" would be a first choice.

Regards,

Frederick

>
> K.
>


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 17 18:38:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id SAA22873;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:34:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:34:26 -0800
Message-ID: <3FB98531.7020007@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:34:25 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEFKDOAA.knagel@gis.net> <001f01c3ab71$61e8b280$7700bf3f@computer>
In-Reply-To: <001f01c3ab71$61e8b280$7700bf3f@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"tzwAu.0.Ib5.oKOk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52509
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Frederick Sparber wrote:
> Hi Keith.
> 
> One thing that I overlooked, and that is the speed of light c' in a
> material is c/(k)^1/2 , where k is the dielectric constant of the
> material. In the 1940s Stratton's treatise on this for metals was
> covered in his book. But, I can't remember the title or publisher.
> Horace Poteet at Sandia Labs has a copy. I'll rattle his cage later.
> 
> If that is the case, wouldn't the mass of heat be E/c'^2 where c'^2
> is a orders of magnitude less than 9e16?

No.  The 'c' in the SR and GR equations refers to the speed of light in
vacuum, and is constant under all circumstances.  The propagation
velocity of light is separate, and is (as you pointed out) not
universally constant.

Sanity check:  Consider Cherenkov radiation.  It's emitted by things
going faster than the propagation velocity of light.  If 'c' were
reduced by the dielectric constant, then Cherenkov radiation would
indicate a violation of SR.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 17 22:35:13 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA07990;
	Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:33:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:33:25 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b02bbdf6bff79d9@[209.23.136.16]>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:33:10 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Papp Engine
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"fyxiS2.0.Uy1.qqRk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52510
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I paged through the latest issue of IE magazine today and noticed the 
articles by Heinz Klostermann on the Papp Engine. The first article 
talks about some new patents that he received on Papp's technology. 
Then I read the second article which says that Rohner Engineering is 
offering a working version of an electrical generator for sale. I am 
in the process of following this matter up and will keep you people 
posted on the progress of my investigation. I don't have a patent 
number but I suppose that Mr. Klostermann would be the patentee and 
Clean Energy Inc. would be the assignee.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 05:01:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id EAA23288;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:58:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:58:47 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 07:58:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Papp Engine
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor@infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BBDF81A3.9EB6%editor@infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <a05111b02bbdf6bff79d9@[209.23.136.16]>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"1_M1B1.0.oh5.6UXk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52511
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On 11/18/03 1:33 AM, "thomas malloy" <temalloy@metro.lakes.com> wrote:

> I paged through the latest issue of IE magazine today and noticed the
> articles by Heinz Klostermann on the Papp Engine. The first article
> talks about some new patents that he received on Papp's technology.

These are patent applications for patents, not awarded patents. There is no
patent number issued.
 
> Then I read the second article which says that Rohner Engineering is
> offering a working version of an electrical generator for sale.

No. Mr. Rohner is only offering a basic engine, but without of course the
mysterious gas mixing apparatus.  No electrical generator attached or
integrated, as far as I know.


> I am 
> in the process of following this matter up and will keep you people
> posted on the progress of my investigation.

The new issue of IE -- #52 -- will be back from the printer shortly. It has
about 8 more pages of Papp saga historical research. There are some
revealing photos that shed light on the nature of the explosion of 11/18/68


> I don't have a patent
> number but I suppose that Mr. Klostermann would be the patentee and
> Clean Energy Inc. would be the assignee.

Several top cold fusion/LENR people are aboard, if financing can come
together.


Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
New Energy Foundation, Inc.
(A nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation)
P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816
Phone: 603-485-4700   Fax: 603-485-4710
www.infinite-energy.com




 
> 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 08:46:24 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA02259;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:42:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:42:30 -0800
Message-ID: <003701c3adea$913618e0$a900bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:42:15 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d74b925f136acc8247a5af651f5f8956350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"4uh562.0.-Y.rlak_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52512
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
> Frederick Sparber wrote:
> > Hi Keith.
>
> > One thing that I overlooked, and that is the speed of light c' in a
> > material is c/(k)^1/2 , where k is the dielectric constant of the
> > material. In the 1940s Stratton's treatise on this for metals was
> > covered in his book. But, I can't remember the title or publisher.

Julius A. Stratton; Electromagnetic Theory; McGraw Hill, December 1941.

www.Amazon.com  has  4 used copies ranging from $135.00 - $250.00

> > If that is the case, wouldn't the mass of heat be E/c'^2 where c'^2
> > is a orders of magnitude less than 9e16?

> No.  The 'c' in the SR and GR equations refers to the  speed of light in
> vacuum, and is constant under all circumstances.

Not so. (e1/eo)^1/2 ie. the square root of the ratio of the permittivity of a material
(e1) to
the permittivity of space (eo) determines the speed of light in the material.

OTOH, the index of refraction of water is 1.33 , which indicates that c' is ~ 0.66*c
indicating a permittivity of 1.33 = (K*eo/eo)^1/2 or an actual dielectric constant (K)
of 1.769 as
opposed to a "dielectric constant" of ~ 80 based on polarizability of the molecules.

> The  propagation velocity of light is separate, and is (as > you pointed out) not
universally constant.
>
> Sanity check:  Consider Cherenkov radiation.
> It's emitted by things going faster than the propagation velocity of light.
> If 'c' were reduced by the dielectric constant, then

Yes.  a beta particle (electron) moving at 0.66*c in space has a "gamma" or
relativistic mass of 2*Mo and an energy of ~ 0.511 Mev.

OTOH, in water Mrel = Mo/[1- (v^2/c'^2)]^1/2 = ?? you do the math.  :-)
>
> Cherenkov radiation would indicate a violation of SR.
>
Not if you are a fish doing warp 2.

Regards,

Frederick





From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 10:09:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA05477;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:04:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:04:05 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b05bbdffd62a38e@[64.61.217.89]>
In-Reply-To: <BBDF81A3.9EB6%editor@infinite-energy.com>
References: <BBDF81A3.9EB6%editor@infinite-energy.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:55:19 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Papp Engine
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"g6Q9T1.0.TL1.Kybk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52513
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>On 11/18/03 1:33 AM, "thomas malloy" <temalloy@metro.lakes.com> wrote:

And Eugene Mallove replied

>  > I paged through the latest issue of IE magazine today and noticed the
>  > articles by Heinz Klostermann on the Papp Engine. The first article
>>  talks about some new patents that he received on Papp's technology.
>
>These are patent applications for patents, not awarded patents. There is no
>patent number issued.
>

So, Klostermann has filed for patents?

>  > Then I read the second article which says that Rohner Engineering is
>>  offering a working version of an electrical generator for sale.
>
>No. Mr. Rohner is only offering a basic engine, but without of course the
>mysterious gas mixing apparatus.  No electrical generator attached or
>integrated, as far as I know.

Well, Isn't this just a classic FE machine story. It would seem to me 
that if you had the basic apparatus, and all you had to do was add 
various gases until a reaction was observed, that given the amount of 
money that people had invested in this they would have discovered a 
gas mixture that would work. For Rohner to be offering that machine, 
without the gas is disingenerous at  best.

>
>
>>  I am
>>  in the process of following this matter up and will keep you people
>>  posted on the progress of my investigation.
>
>The new issue of IE -- #52 -- will be back from the printer shortly. It has
>about 8 more pages of Papp saga historical research. There are some
>revealing photos that shed light on the nature of the explosion of 11/18/68

I appreciate the effort Eugene, but given the money that has already 
been poured into what looks like a black hole to me, I doubt that I 
will do anything with it. Now all that would change in Klostermann 
were to respond to his email with an invitation to see a working 
engine.



>
>
>>  I don't have a patent
>>  number but I suppose that Mr. Klostermann would be the patentee and
>>  Clean Energy Inc. would be the assignee.
>
>Several top cold fusion/LENR people are aboard, if financing can come
>together.
>

I noted with interest the deoxygenated water that was included in the 
gas mixture, is that the same thing as hydrogen? If that is the case 
then given the presence of Mills catalyst gases in the mixture, 
perhaps Papp built the illusive hydrino based energy machine.

Later: I just read the interview that you did with Mark Hugo and 
Blair Jennes. I looked up Mark's phone number, then I noticed his 
email address, well here wer go again!

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 10:48:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA12460;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:45:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:45:01 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Papp Engine
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:08:06 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEGKDOAA.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: <BBDF81A3.9EB6%editor@infinite-energy.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"VD3Q2.0.X23.iYck_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52514
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Gene.

Can you provide us with the application numbers?

For those playing at home, here's the granted patent for Papp.
US4428193 Inert gas fuel, fuel preparation apparatus
and system for extracting useful work from the fuel 

This patent has few citations, but this one caught my eye.
US5510668 Spark gap with low breakdown voltage jitter 

I believe it was claimed that the Papp engine, after running
for some time, would collect a layer of lithium inside
the cylinder. Am I mistaken here, Gene?

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene F. Mallove [mailto:editor@infinite-energy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 7:58 AM
To: vortex l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Papp Engine


On 11/18/03 1:33 AM, "thomas malloy" <temalloy@metro.lakes.com> wrote:

> I paged through the latest issue of IE magazine today and noticed the
> articles by Heinz Klostermann on the Papp Engine. The first article
> talks about some new patents that he received on Papp's technology.

These are patent applications for patents, not awarded patents. There is no
patent number issued.
 
> Then I read the second article which says that Rohner Engineering is
> offering a working version of an electrical generator for sale.

No. Mr. Rohner is only offering a basic engine, but without of course the
mysterious gas mixing apparatus.  No electrical generator attached or
integrated, as far as I know.


> I am 
> in the process of following this matter up and will keep you people
> posted on the progress of my investigation.

The new issue of IE -- #52 -- will be back from the printer shortly. It has
about 8 more pages of Papp saga historical research. There are some
revealing photos that shed light on the nature of the explosion of 11/18/68


> I don't have a patent
> number but I suppose that Mr. Klostermann would be the patentee and
> Clean Energy Inc. would be the assignee.

Several top cold fusion/LENR people are aboard, if financing can come
together.


Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
New Energy Foundation, Inc.
(A nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation)
P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816
Phone: 603-485-4700   Fax: 603-485-4710
www.infinite-energy.com




 
> 


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 12:27:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA06396;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:23:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:23:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031118151439.01d7c258@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:23:37 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: New paper from Reifenschweiler
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 MAA06347
Resent-Message-ID: <"-LtCR1.0.rZ1.D_dk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52515
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have a new, one-page paper from Otto Reifenschweiler, "Cold Fusion and 
Decrease of Tritium Radioactivity." It begins:

"In recent papers (1, 2, 3, 4) the author has deduced from experiments with 
tritium (5) that during heating of a TiT0.035 -preparation and of a 
TiT0.035-preparation the radioactivity of the tritium decreased strongly. 
This strange effect was distinctly confirmed by the observation that with 
the TiT0.035-preparation the radioactivity decreased 12.5 times stronger 
than the release of tritium (2,3,4). A quite independent proof of the 
strong decrease of » of tritium could be obtained by a thermodynamic 
evaluation of the heating experiment with the TiT0.035-preparation . . ."

Unfortunately, he only communicates by regular mail, and it took about a 
month for this letter to reach me. I had to make some changes to the 
manuscript. I must mail them back to him and wait for approval before I can 
upload it, so it may be a while.

He also sent me a copy of the ICCF five paper with seven comments in the 
margins, such as "this may be a necessary condition for the decrease of 
lambda"  (p. 1, para. 3) and "most important!" (p. 6, "It is recommended to 
apply in all experiments a second tube . . . "). I may add these footnotes 
to the LENR-CANR version of this paper.

He says he is working on another paper: "Further Evidence Of The Decrease 
Of Tritium Radioactivity By A Thermodynamical Evaluation Of A Heating 
Experiment." (I think that should be "Thermodynamic.")

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 13:06:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA07230;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:01:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:01:31 -0800
Message-ID: <3FBA88AD.5040502@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:01:33 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
References: <003701c3adea$913618e0$a900bf3f@computer>
In-Reply-To: <003701c3adea$913618e0$a900bf3f@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ucnFU2.0.om1.gYek_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52516
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Frederick Sparber wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> 
>> Frederick Sparber wrote:
>> 
>>> If that is the case, wouldn't the mass of heat be E/c'^2 where
>>> c'^2 is a orders of magnitude less than 9e16?
> 
>> No.  The 'c' in the SR and GR equations refers to the  speed of
>> light in vacuum, and is constant under all circumstances.
> 
> Not so. (e1/eo)^1/2 ie. the square root of the ratio of the
> permittivity of a material (e1) to the permittivity of space (eo)
> determines the speed of light in the material.

Sorry -- I think I wasn't clear about what I was trying to say.

I meant the 'c' which appears in the formula for mass increase and time
dilation is equal to the speed of light in a vacuum (no material
present).  It's always "C(vacuum)", if you will, rather than what we
might call "C(actual)", regardless of where the equations are being
applied.  So, even though the actual propagation speed of light in a
material -- "C(actual)" -- is smaller than "C(vacuum)", the values for
relativistic mass increase, time dilation, and length contraction
inside that material are still computed using "C(vacuum)".

IOW, the 'c' in SR just happens to equal the propagation velocity of 
light in a vacuum -- it's not actually "wired" to the actual speed of 
light in any way.  If photons turned out to have nonzero rest mass, and 
to travel at slightly less than 'c', it wouldn't affect SR (save when it 
came time to synchronize all those clocks in the gedanken experiments, 
where we've always used light beams to do it).

Or, at any rate, that's how I understand it.

Cheers...

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 14:25:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA16459;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:22:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:22:00 -0800
Message-ID: <20031118222124.96320.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:21:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: Papp Engine
To: knagel@gis.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEGKDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"R5fsk2.0.114.7kfk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52517
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--- Keith Nagel wrote:
 
> For those playing at home, here's the granted patent
for Papp US4428193 Inert gas fuel, fuel preparation
apparatus and system for extracting useful work from
the fuel 
 
> This patent has few citations, but this one caught
my eye US5510668 Spark gap with low breakdown voltage
jitter 

This one caught my eye also as it may precede Papp:
http://www.delphion.com/details?pn10=US03609965

Jones


 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 14:38:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA29373;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:34:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:34:43 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031118152420.01d875b8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:29:22 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: CF researchers working on the Papp effect
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"jZjq82.0.qA7.2wfk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52518
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Eugene F. Mallove writes:

 > > I don't have a patent
 > > number but I suppose that Mr. Klostermann would be the patentee and
 > > Clean Energy Inc. would be the assignee.
 >
 > Several top cold fusion/LENR people are aboard, if financing can come
 > together.

That is interesting. Since I do not know who these people are, they must be 
keeping a fairly low profile. I am not one to pry into people's business, 
but these folk do not gab about the subject at ICCF conferences. That being 
the case, I suppose the gadget does not actually exist, at present.

Or if it does exist, these people have learned nothing from their 
experience with cold fusion. They are either crazy or incurably stupid, at 
least with regard to business, public relations and human nature. As Thomas 
Malloy said: "Isn't this just a classic FE machine story." All they have to 
do is tell the world about the machine and invite few dozen people in to 
see it, and they will soon have millions and millions and MILLIONS of 
dollars. It would not be a matter of "arranging" financing, so much as 
beating investors off with the fag end of a barge poll.

The same goes for Correa, Mills and others, by the way. Several CF 
researchers who claim -- or claimed -- they had devices that could have 
triggered this kind of excitement. Toyota could certainly have shopped 
around the last P&F devices they had. By now we would have CF automobile 
prototypes. Fleischmann believes Toyota deliberately suppressed the 
discovery. I suppose he must be right. I cannot imagine how else to explain 
events. Toyota probably suppressed CF, and the Amoco Production company 
certainly did. That is reprehensible, but understandable. It is clear why 
these institutions do not want CF. What I will never understand is why so 
many inventors and researchers act the same way, suppressing themselves.

Some CF researchers claim there is great opposition to CF, and if they 
reveal their work they will be clobbered. This is bunk. Yes, of course 
there is high-level opposition. Yes, if you challenge the establishment 
directly at the Patent Office or the DoE you will be clobbered. But the 
forces arrayed against cold fusion are so widely separated and so 
ineffectual, they might as well not exist for most intents and purposes. 
They resemble the advanced German armies in Russia in 1942 which sometimes 
"held" a front 100 kilometers wide with a dozen men. You could drive an 
entire army of tanks between the German outposts without anyone noticing. 
People have downloaded 310,000 papers from LENR-CANR.org, and students and 
professors from over 200 different universities access the site every 
month. A person who reveals an effective CF experiment could it replicated 
and funded long before the DoE realizes what was happening.

To give another military analogy, 180,000 U.S. forces in Iraq are presently 
being tied down and effectively defeated by no more than 5,000  Iraq 
forces, who have suffered few casualties in the last few months. This is a 
classic guerrilla strategy, similar to the one the U.S. used against Great 
Britain in the Revolutionary War, the Chinese communists used against the 
Japanese and Nationalist Chinese, and the Algerians used against the 
French. (The Vietnamese should have used it more than they did; they lost 
millions more soldiers than they needed to, in order to defeat the 
U.S.)  Anyone familiar with military history can point to a dozen more 
examples. This is how a small number of people go about defeating a large, 
superior force. It nearly always works, unless the larger forces face 
national annihilation if they lose. On Nov. 13, the Washington Post reported:

"The enemy is waging a campaign against the occupation," said retired Army 
Col. Andrew J. Bacevich, who teaches strategy and security issues at Boston 
University. "In some respects, their campaign manifests greater coherence 
and logic than does our own."

The point is, with a good, time-tested strategy you can defeat superior 
forces and a highly trained, high-tech army, even when they are ruthless, 
the way the French were in Algeria. (The French employed the same tactics 
that the Nazis used against the French resistance 15 years earlier.) The 
same goes for business, and fight for cold fusion. Time after time, in 
thousands of examples, small, wily businesses have defeated larger ones, 
with guerrilla-like, indirect strategies. Attack the weak points. Hit and 
run. With a proper strategy, we could win the CF wars using only what we 
have available now, even though the DoE, Amoco, Toyota, the APS and the 
others arrayed against us. Unfortunately, the strategies that most CF 
researchers and investors choose are analogous to the ones selected by 
World War I generals, and by Saddam Hussein and the Iranians in their war: 
you charge directly at the enemy's strong points. You attack machine guns 
with exposed troops, and you march unarmed 12-year-old boys across mine 
fields in order to detonate the mines. In other words, you do everything 
possible to ensure your own defeat.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 18 15:00:25 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA20687;
	Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:57:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:57:46 -0800
Message-ID: <008301c3ae1e$fda05160$a900bf3f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <003701c3adea$913618e0$a900bf3f@computer> <3FBA88AD.5040502@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Weighing Heat
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:56:57 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9407095ac5562b1387b8d0ed81f142d1e70350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"NB7gg3.0._25.eFgk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52519
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
> Sorry -- I think I wasn't clear about what I was trying to say.
>
> I meant the 'c' which appears in the formula for mass increase and time
> dilation is equal to the speed of light in a vacuum (no material
> present).  It's always "C(vacuum)", if you will, rather than what we
> might call "C(actual)", regardless of where the equations are being
> applied.  So, even though the actual propagation speed of light in a
> material -- "C(actual)" -- is smaller than "C(vacuum)", the values for
> relativistic mass increase, time dilation, and length contraction
> inside that material are still computed using "C(vacuum)".

I see what you're getting at, and it sort of makes sense that a Cherenkov electron
doesn't exhibit a mass increase according to c' = ~ 0.66 * vacuum c in water. I Think.
>
> IOW, the 'c' in SR just happens to equal the propagation velocity of
> light in a vacuum -- it's not actually "wired" to the actual speed of
> light in any way.  If photons turned out to have nonzero rest mass, and
> to travel at slightly less than 'c', it wouldn't affect SR (save when it
> came time to synchronize all those clocks in the gedanken experiments,
> where we've always used light beams to do it).

By the same token do non-zero rest mass neutrinos traveling "very close to vacuum c"
undergo a mass increase??
If they do, a  0.511 MeV neutrino with a rest mass Mo = 0.511 eV would have a
relativistic mass equal to the rest mass of an electron:

Mrel = Mo[(0.511MeV/0.5 eV) + 1]  = 9.1e-31 kg

Mo = 0.511eV* 1.6e-19/c^2 = 8.176e-20/9e16 = 9.1e-37 kg.

They don't seem to produce much Cherenkov radiation in water, do they?

Regards,

Frederick


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 19 07:08:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA15740;
	Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:06:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:06:36 -0800
Message-ID: <001001c3aea6$57ad86a0$5611b83f@computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Optics Stuff
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:06:30 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C3AE74.0A42DFA0"
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: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9401a5332eaf8166d6bce28590bd4a11626350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mrp6o2.0.sr3.xRuk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52520
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_000D_01C3AE74.0A42DFA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

For fun.

 http://www.microscopyu.com/tutorials/java/lightandcolor/refraction/index.html

Snell's Law of Total Internal Reflection:

 sin theta critical = (n2/n1)^1/2 where medium 2 is space (n2 = c/v = 1) and medium 1
is the slightly
greater index of refraction of the "particle/energy-wave".

(critical angle theta = 89.582 degrees?)

1/137.03 or the fine structure constant "alpha" (0.00729729) comes into play here. -)

 http://floti.bell.ac.uk/MathsPhysics/1total.htm

methinks that when a 1.02 MeV photon strikes something and forms an electron-positron
pair, the boundary condition is established by the slightly greater index of
refraction of the particle.

Regards,

 Frederick


------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C3AE74.0A42DFA0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Nikon MicroscopyU Light and Color - Refraction of Light - Interactive Java Tutorial.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Nikon MicroscopyU Light and Color - Refraction of Light - Interactive Java Tutorial.url"

[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.microscopyu.com/tutorials/java/lightandcolor/refraction/index.html

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.microscopyu.com/tutorials/java/lightandcolor/refraction/index.html
Modified=E04BE72A94AEC30142

------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C3AE74.0A42DFA0--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 19 12:36:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA04254;
	Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:33:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:33:11 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031119151835.01dac7c8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:32:55 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: EIA Annual Energy Review 2002
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KQ-bl1.0.721.5Ezk_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52521
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The EIA's Annual Energy Review for 2002 was published recently. See:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/contents.html

This is great stuff for energy statistics gluttons. The quality of the 
statistics seems excellent, as far as I can tell. The numbers agree closely 
with authoritative industry estimates, and they add up. The statistics you 
find in various books and at other web sites are sometimes widely at 
variance from one another.

For an interesting overview in each subject area, click on the "Flow 
Diagrams" at the top of the page; the hyperlinks labeled: "Energy Overview 
| Petroleum | Natural Gas | Coal | Electricity" The Electricity Flow 
Diagram shows that 65% of the energy used to generated electricity is 
wasted. This is why co-generation would be so valuable.

When you click on the subject areas in the lower portion of the page, such 
as "Energy Overview" and "Financial Indicators," I recommend you then 
select the "Chapter" listed at the top of each page, such as: "Energy 
Overview Chapter PDF."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Nov 19 23:45:40 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA18005;
	Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:44:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:44:28 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0dbbe20e72f4d6@[64.61.217.89]>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEGKDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMCEGKDOAA.knagel@gis.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:44:58 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: RE: Papp Engine
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"UlmHo.0.9P4.R37l_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52522
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I had a nice email conversation with Mark Hugo about his research. In 
the IE article he mentions an area of his research that he can't talk 
about. It has to do with shrinking the size of the atom. This is the 
first time I've heard anything about doing that, and I haven't got a 
clue on how to do this. Do any of you people have any ideas? this 
reminds me of Mills' work, but AFAIK, that only applies to hydrogen. 
I did notice the presence of deoxygenated water in the gas mixture. I 
assume that this is hydrogen. I'll see what Mark says.

I assume that the two bulbs are charged with the KV electricity. is 
this how the discharge is produced.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 10:44:47 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA05710;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:38:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:38:48 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031120122542.01daf6b0@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:35:55 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"6Rg_J3.0.8P1.ueGl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52523
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mizuno, who may be the most prolific discoverer since Thomas Edison, 
reports yet another result in an abstract for the upcoming JCF-5 conference 
(December 2003). Attached is the abstract, edited by me.

I have one question about this. What are these units of magnetism "kG"? I 
thought magnetism is measured in Amperes per meter, or webers (flux), or 
tesla (flux density).

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Neutron emission under magnetic field at low temperature


Tadahiko Mizuno, Kenichi Himoro, Tadashi Akimoto,

Division of Quantum energy engineering, Graduate School of Engineering,

Hokkaido University, Kita 13 Nishi 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8628, Japan



Abstract

We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled 
in  liquid nitrogen and compressed under a magnetic field. The neutron 
count, and duration of the release, and the time of the release after 
treatment all fluctuated considerably. Neutron emissions were observed in 
ten out of ten test cases.

The reaction cell was a Pyrex glass tube of 6 mm diameter, 3 mm inner 
diameter and 100 mm in length. A coil wound in a spiral around the reaction 
tube supplied the magnetic field. The magnet coil is 1.5 mm diameter copper 
wire, wound 10,000 turns. The whole system was put in a stainless steel 
vessel. The outer surface of the vessel is insulated by a Styrofoam, and 
another layer of 1.5 mm thick stainless steel plates were placed on top of 
the Styrofoam insulation to prevent electromagnetic noise from reaching the 
neutron measurement system. The vessel was filled with liquid N2 gas to 
cool the coil and the reactor tube.

The magnetic field was 10 kG at the center of the reaction tube. The 
current for the magnetic coil was supplied by a stable direct current power 
supply through a resistive wire, to precisely control the current. The 
magnetic field passes through the reaction tube along the length. The 
height of the coil is 100 mm; that is, the same as tube length. The current 
passing through the coil was increased from 0 to 100 A, meaning the 
intensity of the magnetic field changed from 0 to 10 kG. Neutrons were 
measured with three external He3 detectors placed around the cell, 20 cm 
from the vessel walls.

The experiment was performed 10 times. A typical example is shown below. 
Neutron burst of 5.5 c/s were 1000 times higher than the background counts. 
These bursts  occurred 2 times within a 300 second interval. The total 
neutron emission can be estimated from the counting efficiency, and it was 
10^4 ~ 10^5 c/s.

The reaction we observed came about after cooling deuterium gas to a low 
temperature in a magnetic field. The reaction appears to be highly 
reproducible, reliably generating high neutron emissions. We conclude that 
the models proposed heretofore based upon d-d reactions are inadequate to 
explain our present results, which must involve magnetic field nuclear 
reactions.


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 10:46:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA09045;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:43:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:43:35 -0800
Message-ID: <3FBD0B47.90206@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:43:19 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20031120122542.01daf6b0@pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031120122542.01daf6b0@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"1Ga8I2.0.5D2.MjGl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52524
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> What are these units of magnetism "kG"?


kiloGauss?

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 10:56:59 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA17439;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:53:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:53:56 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:17:04 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEHGDOAA.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: <5.2.0.9.2.20031120122542.01daf6b0@pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"lnl003.0.MG4.4tGl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52525
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Jed.

kG is likely kilogauss, and 10 kG is not all that
big a field, given the claim. I'm surprised he's
not using permanent magnets to do this experiment,
as anything involving strong cooling and 100A currents
in a coil of wire would be messy. 10kG would
be easy to reach with rare earth magnets, and the
experiment would be differential rather than single
( one control sample, one fitted with PM's ). He
could run the experiment all day with this method.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:JedRothwell@mindspring.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 12:36 PM
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno


Mizuno, who may be the most prolific discoverer since Thomas Edison,
reports yet another result in an abstract for the upcoming JCF-5 conference
(December 2003). Attached is the abstract, edited by me.

I have one question about this. What are these units of magnetism "kG"? I
thought magnetism is measured in Amperes per meter, or webers (flux), or
tesla (flux density).

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Neutron emission under magnetic field at low temperature


Tadahiko Mizuno, Kenichi Himoro, Tadashi Akimoto,

Division of Quantum energy engineering, Graduate School of Engineering,

Hokkaido University, Kita 13 Nishi 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8628, Japan



Abstract

We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled
in  liquid nitrogen and compressed under a magnetic field. The neutron
count, and duration of the release, and the time of the release after
treatment all fluctuated considerably. Neutron emissions were observed in
ten out of ten test cases.

The reaction cell was a Pyrex glass tube of 6 mm diameter, 3 mm inner
diameter and 100 mm in length. A coil wound in a spiral around the reaction
tube supplied the magnetic field. The magnet coil is 1.5 mm diameter copper
wire, wound 10,000 turns. The whole system was put in a stainless steel
vessel. The outer surface of the vessel is insulated by a Styrofoam, and
another layer of 1.5 mm thick stainless steel plates were placed on top of
the Styrofoam insulation to prevent electromagnetic noise from reaching the
neutron measurement system. The vessel was filled with liquid N2 gas to
cool the coil and the reactor tube.

The magnetic field was 10 kG at the center of the reaction tube. The
current for the magnetic coil was supplied by a stable direct current power
supply through a resistive wire, to precisely control the current. The
magnetic field passes through the reaction tube along the length. The
height of the coil is 100 mm; that is, the same as tube length. The current
passing through the coil was increased from 0 to 100 A, meaning the
intensity of the magnetic field changed from 0 to 10 kG. Neutrons were
measured with three external He3 detectors placed around the cell, 20 cm
from the vessel walls.

The experiment was performed 10 times. A typical example is shown below.
Neutron burst of 5.5 c/s were 1000 times higher than the background counts.
These bursts  occurred 2 times within a 300 second interval. The total
neutron emission can be estimated from the counting efficiency, and it was
10^4 ~ 10^5 c/s.

The reaction we observed came about after cooling deuterium gas to a low
temperature in a magnetic field. The reaction appears to be highly
reproducible, reliably generating high neutron emissions. We conclude that
the models proposed heretofore based upon d-d reactions are inadequate to
explain our present results, which must involve magnetic field nuclear
reactions.



From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 11:17:37 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA06385;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:14:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:14:05 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbe2c1ffb5a0@[12.21.208.140]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:15:25 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Fifty percent increase in CO2 by 2020?
Resent-Message-ID: <"tYfWh2.0.hZ1.z9Hl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52526
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

An insane world to come?  Vorts need to get busy and deliver some energy
products.


<http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/11/20/climate.gas.reut/index.html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 11:44:57 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA04633;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:37:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:37:59 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031120143402.00bac188@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:37:51 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"1qMnG1.0.D81.MWHl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52527
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel writes:

 > kG is likely kilogauss, and 10 kG is not all that
 > big a field, given the claim. I'm surprised he's
 > not using permanent magnets to do this experiment . . .

If I understand correctly, the burst of neutrons appear after the magnetic 
field is removed. That was my impression . . .  I need to see Figure 1. You 
cannot remove a permanent magnet, and you cannot vary the field strength.

I relayed Nagel's comments to Mizuno and asked for a copy of Fig. 1.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 12:04:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA28841;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:01:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:01:10 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501bbe2c66abf87@[12.21.211.211]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:02:31 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Resent-Message-ID: <"mbGU-2.0.K27.5sHl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52528
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:35 PM 11/20/3, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Mizuno, who may be the most prolific discoverer since Thomas Edison,
>reports yet another result in an abstract for the upcoming JCF-5 conference
>(December 2003). Attached is the abstract, edited by me.
>
>I have one question about this. What are these units of magnetism "kG"? I
>thought magnetism is measured in Amperes per meter, or webers (flux), or
>tesla (flux density).

I'd like to indulge in a number of my typically speculative amateur comments.

The 10 kG is 10 kilogauss which is equal to 1 T, i.e. 1 tesla.  A 1 tesla
field is NOT going to produce significant "compression".

The staiunless steel used for a magnetic shield is not effective because
(most) stainless steels are not magnetic?

Some hopefully constructive comments folllow.

1.  Since the neutrons come in bursts it appears that an environment
condusive to stripping reactions has been produced and the bursts are
triggered by cosmic rays. If so, increasing the D2 pressure should increase
the neutron production rate.  It is also possible that the stainles steel
outer layer produces a shower of particles from the cosmic rays and is
criticalt to the success of the experiment.  It is not new that high energy
particle stimulation of D2 can produce neturons, even stimulation by
electrons (e.g Kamada et.al)

2.  The orientation of the magnetic field with repect to source of cosimc
rays may affect the burst intensity.

3.  The nuclear environment might further be prepared by directing a laser
beam of the appropriate frequency (See relevant articles by Storms and
others on LENR-CANR.org) through the deuterium.  Unfortunately, the beam
must be directed perpendicular to the B field, not axially down the field
lines as would be feasible with the present apparatus.  This perpendicular
aspect could be achieved using a pair of axially aligned coils separated
sufficiantly to accomodate the radially directed laser beam between them
and placing a flat walled sample holder beteen the coils and in their
central gaps.  Alternatively, strong permanent magnets could be used
provided the back side of the magnetiic circuit is closed with high mu
material (iron) and the gap for the sample is fairly small.  BTW, old WW2
surplus C shaped magnetron magnet gaps were about 10 kG.

4.  The experiment might also work using LiD or D2O.

5.  It might be of interest to axially stimulate the deuterium with 6.5355
MHz radio frequency since that is the NMR resonant frequency.

6.  It may be of interest to artificially stimulate the mix using external
or dissolved radioctive sources.

7.  An old vortex post follows that may have some relavent numbers and
concepts, and suggests using the nuclear flux to create fairly benign
isotopes for further energy production at a later time. This had little
chance of being made to work in a practical sense, but the additon of laser
stimulation might change that significantly.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                            A D2O NMR Reactor

                         Horace Heffner - 1/4/98

Rich Murray quotes Robert I. Eachus: "Even though the numbers seem to
indicate otherwise, the proton and neutron in deuterium are very loosly
bound.  In fact, if you flip the  spin of one of the nucleons, the deuteron
falls apart."

If this is true then it should be possible to flip the proton in the
deuterium atoms, in D2O for example,  using nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR), to achieve fission.  Deuterium has a relatively low receptivity to
NMR stimulation though.

Flipping protons in other nuclei using NMR is not much in the way of an
idea, but flipping the proton in deuterium seems very feasible.  All you
need is a two magnet poles, a sample of D2O in between, and a perpendicular
coil with the resonant frequency.

This strikes me as a really convenient way to produce neutrons.

Isotope   Magnetogyric      NMR Frequency
            Ratio        (MHz Relative to H)
      (10^7 rad T^-1 s^-1)

1H         26.7510           100.000000
2H          4.1064            15.351

Using the value 4.1064 10^7 rad T^-1 s^-1 I get 6.5355 MHz/T.  It is fairly
easy to get a uniform 0.1 T magnetic field using permanent magnets, so that
would be a resonant frequency of 410,640 Hz in the 0.1 T field.

If nothing is wrong with the idea, then the neutron production could be
used to create isotopes right in the D2O solution.  For example tritium
could be manufactured in this way.  However, this only produces 18.6 KeV
per atom, so is not good for energy production.  A solution saturated in
7Li (i.e. LiOH) would produce lots of 8Li though, at 16.005 MeV per atom
beta decay, and 0.84 s half life.  Still this is not good for energy
storage, due to the short half life of 8Li.  Could produce 10Be from 9Be,
but 10Be has too long a long half life (1.52 x 10^6 y) and small energy
production at only 0.556 MeV.  12B production is another short half-life
(24 ms) possibility with 11.71 MeV beta production.

Here is a summary of some candidates:

Daughter                          Parent
Isotope   Half Life    Energy   Cross Secion    Decay modes
                       (MeV)      (Barns)

8Li       0.84 s       16.005     45 mb         beta, alpha
10Be      1.52x10^6 y   0.5561    8.1 mb        beta
12B       0.0202 s     13.369     5.3 mb        beta, gamma
20F       11 s          7.029     9.5 mb        beta, gamma
24Na      14.96 h       5.514     0.433         beta, gamma
32P       14.28 d       1.71      0.16          beta
36Cl      3.01x10^5 y   0.7083    43.7          beta, E.C.(1.142 MeV)
41Ca      1.03x10^5y    0.421     0.413         E.C.
46Sc      83.81 d       2.367     27.0?         beta, gamma
52V       3.76 m        3.976     4.91          beta, gamma
56Mn      2.578 h       3.696     13.3          beta, gamma
60Co      5.271 y       2.824     58.8          beta, gamma
etc.

Note that none of these candidates create long term waste byproducts.  Only
10Be, 36Cl, 41Ca and 60Co present storage problems, but even the
intermediate half life of 60Co is very useful.  From a cross section
standpoint, Na, Cl, V, Mn, and Co look fairly good.

A good candidate for an NMR reactor might be MnSiF6 dissolved in D2O. This
would be nuclear waste free except for the structure.  Use of quartz for
structure and containment would help on that.  Main problems are field
magnets and exciter coils.  Keeping a sufficient amount of water shielding
between the coils, magnets, and active resonance location should help keep
activation of the coils and magnets to a minimum.  SiO2 containment could
be used to make a boundary between the radioactive D2O solution and
sheilding H2O.  It would take a fairly large reactor to be waste free for
all practical purposes.  The shielding H2O would also produce D2O fuel.  A
Li jacket could also be used for the purpose of making both fuel and energy
as with the D-T fusion reactor, but this would produce more waste unless
contianment of this jacket were in quartz.  Also, the neutrons from D are
thermal, so the reaction

   n + Li7 --> Li6 + n + n

is not present. A LiOH H2O solution might make for a good containment
sheild.   Regardless of all these kinds of considerations, the NMR reactor
would be much cleaner than DT fusion, due to the ability to keep the
reaction zone away from immediate contact with Al.

The biggest problem in managing the neutrons in the D2O NMR Reactor design
seems to be the D2 itself.  The reaction:

   n + D --> T

eats up the neutrons because D is the most common species.  Fortunately the
thermal neutron cross section for D is only 0.32 mb.  If the water is a
good mix of D2O and T2O, and even includes H2O, then it could end up being
a neutron shell game, to get the neutron eventually to the target nucleus,
that being Li7, Li8, Mn55, etc, the neutron plays a shell game in various
reactions with various terminating ends:

   n + D --> T
   n + T --> 2 D + e-
   n + T --> D + n + n
   n + H --> D
   T --> He3 + e-
   n + He3 --> He4 + e-
   n + Li6 --> T + He4

It is also interesting that the reaction n + Li7 really takes shape as:

N + Li7 --> Li8 --> e- + Be8 --> e- + He4 + He4

In various scenarios the final output is helium.  Also of interest is the
feasibility of running the reactor on only D and Li as input fuel.

The suggested reactor can not multiply neutrons, is not a breader, so,
assuming NMR can eventually release  100 percent of the neutrons at a low
energy cost, and each neutron is worth, say, 10 MeV on average, the main
issue comes down to the economics.  The 1993-94 edition of the CRC Handbook
of Chemistry and Physics gives the price for D2O as varying from $0.06/g to
$1.00/g, depending on quantity and purity.  Since purity is no issue, and
volume would be large, we can use $0.10/g for a first estimate of cost in
volume.  Using 20 as the molecular weight for D2O we have a cost/mol of
$2.00/mol. So, we have an energy output E=(10^6 eV/atom)(6.02x10^23
atoms/mol)(1.6x10^-19J/ev)=9.64x10^10 J/mol.  At $2/mol the cost of the
energy is 4.82x10^10 J/$.  At 3600 J/KWh, we have 1.34x10^7 KWh/$.
Assuming a plant efficienty of 1 percent, we still produce power at
1.34x10^5 KWh/$, which compares very favorably with present rates of appx.
10 KWh/$.

The rest of the economic determination depends on plant cost and that
depends on the remaining question of how much neutron flux can be obtained
from NMR excitement of deuterium.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 12:56:52 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA19945;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:55:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:55:03 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:18:15 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEHHDOAA.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: <v01530501bbe2c66abf87@[12.21.211.211]>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"i0o4a.0.Wt4.ceIl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52529
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Horace.

You write:
>The orientation of the magnetic field with repect to source of cosimc
>rays may affect the burst intensity.

I was wondering about that too. Given the fact that the bursts
are seemingly random, it suggests an external trigger?

>It might be of interest to axially stimulate the deuterium with 6.5355
>MHz radio frequency since that is the NMR resonant frequency.

Yes, and it would jibe with Jed's comment that the effect occurs
when the field is removed, presumably at a rate faster than
T1 ( or T2? I keep getting them mixed up ). 10,000 turns of
wire would make that a tricky task. I didn't gather that
was the case from the abstract, but it's an important point
to clarify. 

You mentioned Robert Eauchus, is he still a list member?
What happened to him?

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 15:09:19 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA26568;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:05:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:05:39 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbe2f1e4f659@[12.21.211.211]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:06:47 -0900
To: <knagel@gis.net>, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Resent-Message-ID: <"Sgcf-2.0.nU6.2ZKl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52530
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:18 PM 11/20/3, Keith Nagel wrote:

>Yes, and it would jibe with Jed's comment that the effect occurs
>when the field is removed, presumably at a rate faster than
>T1 ( or T2? I keep getting them mixed up ).


I don't know of the T1 and T2 to which you refer, or the context in which
they are used.

The magnetogyric ratio for deuterium nucleii is 4.1064 x 10^7 rad T^-1
s^-1.  That means they precess 4.1064 x 10^7 radians per second per tesla.
The higher the magentic field the higher the resonant frequency. If the
nucleii are electrostatically stimulated at the resonant frequency and then
the magnetic field is changed (it doesn't have to disappear), or the
stimulation frequency changes (it doesn't have to disappear either), the
nuclei dump, by radiating, the kinetic energy they have absorbed.  Of
interest is that the energy absorbed by the nucleus, I think, must heat the
magnetic bond.  I suggest that it extends both the mean and maximum
distance the proton and neutron separate in their mutual linear
oscillations.  The probability of stripping (assuming some significant
final stripping agent that adds its energy) is non-proportionately
increased in the Boltzman tail of the (axial) magnetic bond energy
distribution.  Further, the energy radiated by a stimulated deuterium
nucleus is roughly that required to (doubly) stimulate its neighbor, and
thus a chain stripping reaction type phenomenon might exist.  It seems like
it might be possible to construct a pulse maser that works on NMR
principles.  Such a maser might be electrostatically stimulated in two
directions, both othogonal to the B field and each other.  One direction
would be used for pumping and the other (longer) direction for stimulated
emission.  This of course is all unchecked brain storming style
speculation, and a bit off the original topic.


> 10,000 turns of
>wire would make that a tricky task. I didn't gather that
>was the case from the abstract, but it's an important point
>to clarify.
>
>You mentioned Robert Eauchus, is he still a list member?
>What happened to him?
>
>K.


Robert Eachus left the vortex list some years ago.  I haven't heard from
him recently.  Maybe he lurks from time to time?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 15:18:22 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA02746;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:15:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:15:29 -0800
Message-ID: <009801c3afba$fd3fcaa0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Stranger than fiction
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:06:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3AF77.E8E38620"
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_oQl3.0.hg.GiKl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52531
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_0095_01C3AF77.E8E38620
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In an earlier "off-topic" post to vortex, I tried to make a tentative =
case for the proposition that the recent dramatic surge in solar flare =
eruptions could be linked to the brightest and most massive star in the =
milky way, Eta Carinae (EC)...and what makes EC such an interesting =
candidate is that it is reverberating to its own 5.5 year cycle with a =
companion 'object' - which cycle is not quite half of our Sun's 11 year =
sunspot cycle ...but it is very close, and that small offset may require =
occasional corrective reconciliation... but, admittedly EC is far too =
distant to affect our sun gravitationally or with any (non-focused) =
photon emission.

Some recent results from "big-budget science" may help to flesh out =
another possibility, however, as well as have direct relevance to a =
possible mechanism behind some forms of LENR, and even explain why there =
is such variability (and lack of reproducibility) in experimental =
results where CF electrodes seem to be identical.

In trying to comprehend how a star so distant could influence our sun, =
it is clear that no conventional explanation suffices... but that a =
*focused* discharge of high mass or high energy might suffice, =
especially if the focusing were not exactly a random thing... that is to =
say, not random because our solar system is axially aligned, that is: =
nearly perpendicular to the exact axis of rotation of EC and its =
companion (with a further implication that EC may have expelled our =
entire system billions of years in the past! ...but that is going =
waaaaay too far for the present argument).=20

But, even if we limit the discussion to "just" a focused discharge from =
EC, traveling fairly close to light-speed, what kind of focused and =
accelerated mass fits these circumstances (disruptive enough to cause =
sunspots or earthly volcanism) ?

Here is where things can get strange.

Quarks are considered to be the most elementary mass particles - pieces =
of matter that can't be divided into anything smaller. Normal matter in =
the everyday world is made of only two types of quark - called "up" and =
"down," but there is a third variety, called "strange".

The so-called "strange quark matter"  (aka SQM or "strangelets") is very =
dense... heavier even than neutron star material - a sphere the size of =
a bacterium would weigh a ton, but it may possibly coexist (when highly =
diluted) with regular matter and that is the LENR connection... or it =
may accumulate on its own in dense but non-neutron-stars such as the =
star known as RX J1856.5-3754, in the constellation of Corona Australis. =
This star's mass and temperature profile means that it cannot be a =
neutron star - it is too dense! yet not quite dense enough to form a =
black hole. A similar object may be the companion object to EC.

Theorists have long suspected the existence of these very dense objects, =
which are denser than neutron stars but are not massive enough to become =
black holes... and they are pretty sure now that they have identified =
their first few quark stars, which may not be composed of 100% strange =
quarks. Strange quarks can have short lifetimes in some baryonic =
combinations, but surely are stable in others in high percentage... =
which material may itself be accelerated out of the active-star's axial =
polar region (whenever new material is captured, as in the case of =
binaries).

So, the $64 question is: could "strange matter" being accelerated out =
from EC and directly towards Earth be the possible connection to the =
recent anomalous solar activity which has trailed, by several months, =
the peak x-ray output of EC. If anomalous volcanism were to follow, soon =
here on earth, it may also be from this same "strange matter" cause:
http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html

BTW, this cite above is a "must read" for anyone interested in =
understanding the risks or prospects of a cosmic influence on earthly =
catastrophe....as well as offering an explanation as to how some of this =
strange quark material could have become imbedded with normal matter on =
the interior of earth...
=20
Although some theorists have suggested that most strange matter was =
formed in the early Universe, remnants of this matter may still exist in =
binary systems like EC, and even in some asteroids -plus, strange matter =
may still be being born at the extreme-end of cosmic violence, such as =
occurs on EC (its photon output exceeds 5 million suns) ... plus now we =
have some tentative evidence of a putative mechanism where some of this =
strange material gets deposited on earth.=20

Does this have any relevance for understanding cold fusion?

It is far too speculative to say that this strange matter connection is =
even possible, but if advancing technology in the next few years does =
present us with the means of proving that a few strange quarks do turn =
up in asteroids, and that asteroid impact sites are the prime earthly =
source of the precious metals like palladium... then? There are =
anecdotal reports of pure metals from different mines that differ in =
density from the textbook standard...but... <gulp>... is that just =
anecdotal, or is the so-called "secret alloy"  that J&M has supposedly =
been keeping out of the public eye (i.e. an unexpectedly 'heavy' form of =
Pd (from a particular source) which seems to be pure by all normal =
testing except that it is slightly more dense)?

Well, let's leave it at that for now, but if there are any CF labs =
capable of doing extremely precise density tests on their active LENR =
electrodes (SRI or LANL?), and if those tests show even a slightly =
abnormal density shift for "active" cathodes, then it may not be =
unreasonable to assume that somehow, some-way, a few of these strange =
quarks have gotten into the palladium in some kind of stable baryonic =
form... <grin>

Jones

Oh... BTW, if any strange matter were to be actually found, say in PPB =
(parts per billion) in normal matter, then how would that predispose the =
material to OU?

Easy.... <big grin> isn't it obvious that the strange quark is the =
natural wormhole into the Dirac's sea?

Now that is some kind of secret swimming hole...





------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3AF77.E8E38620
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>In an earlier "off-topic" post to vortex, I tried to make a =
tentative case=20
for the proposition that the recent dramatic surge in solar flare =
eruptions=20
could be linked to the brightest and most massive star in the milky way, =
Eta=20
Carinae (EC)...and what makes&nbsp;EC such&nbsp;an interesting candidate =
is that=20
it is reverberating to its own 5.5 year cycle with a companion 'object' =
- which=20
cycle is not quite half of our Sun's 11 year sunspot cycle ...but it is =
very=20
close, and that small offset may require occasional corrective =
reconciliation...=20
but, admittedly EC is far too distant to affect our sun gravitationally =
or with=20
any (non-focused) photon emission.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Some recent results from "big-budget science" may help to flesh out =
another=20
possibility, however, as well as have direct relevance to a possible =
mechanism=20
behind some forms of LENR, and even explain why there is such =
variability (and=20
lack of reproducibility) in experimental results where CF electrodes =
seem to be=20
identical.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In trying to comprehend how a star so distant could influence our =
sun, it=20
is clear that no conventional explanation suffices... but that a =
*focused*=20
discharge of high mass or high energy&nbsp;might suffice, especially if =
the=20
focusing were not exactly a random thing... that is to say, not=20
random&nbsp;because our solar system is axially aligned, that is:=20
nearly&nbsp;perpendicular to the exact axis of rotation of EC and its=20
companion&nbsp;(with a further implication that EC may have expelled our =
entire=20
system&nbsp;billions of years&nbsp;in the past! ...but that is going =
waaaaay too=20
far for the present argument). </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But, even if we limit the discussion to "just" a focused discharge =
from EC,=20
traveling fairly close to light-speed, what kind of focused and =
accelerated mass=20
fits these circumstances (disruptive enough to cause sunspots or earthly =

volcanism) ?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Here is where things can get strange.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Quarks are considered to be the most elementary mass particles - =
pieces of=20
matter that can't be divided into anything smaller. Normal matter in the =

everyday world is made of only two types of quark - called "up" and =
"down," but=20
there is a third variety, called "strange".</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The so-called "strange quark matter"  (aka SQM or "strangelets") is =
very=20
dense... heavier even than neutron star material - a sphere the size of =
a=20
bacterium&nbsp;would weigh a ton, but it may possibly coexist (when =
highly=20
diluted) with regular matter and that is the LENR connection... or it =
may=20
accumulate on its own in dense but non-neutron-stars such as the star =
known=20
as&nbsp;RX J1856.5-3754, in the constellation of Corona =
Australis.&nbsp;This=20
star's mass and&nbsp;temperature profile means that&nbsp;it cannot be a =
neutron=20
star - it is too dense! yet not quite dense enough to form a black hole. =
A=20
similar object&nbsp;may be the companion object to EC.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Theorists have long suspected the existence of these very dense =
objects,=20
which are denser than neutron stars but are not massive enough to become =
black=20
holes... and they are pretty sure now that they have identified their =
first few=20
quark stars, which may not be composed of 100% strange quarks. Strange =
quarks=20
can have short lifetimes in some baryonic combinations, but surely are =
stable in=20
others in high percentage... which material may itself be accelerated =
out of the=20
active-star's axial polar region (whenever new material is captured, as =
in the=20
case of binaries).</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>So, the $64 question is:&nbsp;could "strange matter" being =
accelerated out=20
from EC and directly towards Earth be the possible connection to the =
recent=20
anomalous solar activity which has trailed, by several months, the peak =
x-ray=20
output of EC. If anomalous volcanism were to follow, soon here on earth, =
it may=20
also be from this same "strange matter" cause:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html">http://www.smu.e=
du/newsinfo/releases/01342.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>BTW, this cite above&nbsp;is a "must read" for anyone interested in =

understanding the risks or prospects of a cosmic&nbsp;influence on =
earthly=20
catastrophe....as well as offering an explanation as to how some of this =
strange=20
quark material could have become imbedded with normal matter on the =
interior of=20
earth...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;<BR>Although some theorists have suggested that most strange=20
matter&nbsp;was formed in the early Universe, remnants of this matter =
may still=20
exist in binary systems like EC, and even in some asteroids =
-plus,&nbsp;strange=20
matter may still be being born at the extreme-end of cosmic violence, =
such as=20
occurs on EC (its photon output exceeds 5 million suns) ... plus now we =
have=20
some tentative evidence of a putative mechanism where some of this =
strange=20
material gets deposited on earth. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Does this have any relevance for understanding cold fusion?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It is far too speculative to say that this strange matter =
connection is=20
even possible, but if advancing technology in the next few years does =
present us=20
with the means of proving that a few strange quarks do turn up in =
asteroids, and=20
that asteroid impact sites are the prime earthly source of the precious =
metals=20
like palladium... then? There are anecdotal reports of pure metals from=20
different mines that differ in density from the textbook =
standard...but...=20
&lt;gulp&gt;...&nbsp;is that just anecdotal, or is the so-called "secret =
alloy"=20
&nbsp;that J&amp;M has supposedly been keeping out of the public eye =
(i.e. an=20
unexpectedly 'heavy' form of Pd (from a particular source) which seems =
to be=20
pure by all normal testing except that it is slightly more dense)?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Well, let's leave it at that for now, but if there are any CF labs =
capable=20
of doing extremely precise density tests on their active LENR electrodes =
(SRI or=20
LANL?), and if those tests show even a slightly abnormal density shift =
for=20
"active" cathodes, then it&nbsp;may not be unreasonable to assume that =
somehow,=20
some-way, a few of these strange quarks have gotten into the palladium =
in some=20
kind of stable baryonic form... &lt;grin&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Oh... BTW, if any strange matter were to be actually found, say in =
PPB=20
(parts per billion)&nbsp;in normal matter, then how would that =
predispose the=20
material to OU?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Easy.... &lt;big grin&gt; isn't it obvious that the strange quark =
is the=20
natural wormhole into the Dirac's sea?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Now that is some kind of secret swimming hole...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3AF77.E8E38620--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 16:04:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA09147;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:02:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:02:10 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel@gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel@gis.net>
To: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner@mtaonline.net>
Cc: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:25:14 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEHJDOAA.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: <v01530500bbe2f1e4f659@[12.21.211.211]>
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"TimPF2.0.TE2.0OLl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52532
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace:
>I don't know of the T1 and T2 to which you refer, or the context in which
>they are used.

T1 is the spin-lattice relaxation time, T2 is the spin-spin
relaxation time. The context is that when you align nuclei
with a magnetic field, then drop the field rapidly, you'll
excite free oscillation amongst the aligned nuclei. If the
field decay is too slow, the nuclei will just realign and
no oscillation will take place. 

You'll have a difficult time of it getting the static field
homogeneous enough to just drive away at x.xxxxx MHz.
Pulsed or swept freq. approaches are much more effective.

K.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 16:18:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA19033;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:14:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:14:11 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501bbe2fa5bf391@[12.21.208.87]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:15:28 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: DT jiggling
Resent-Message-ID: <"kevpP.0.Hf4.JZLl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52533
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A hydrogen gas where a large proportions, say 50 percent, of nuclei consist
of one deuterium nucleus and one tritium nucleus, i.e. a 50-50 DT gas,
might be used to generate neutrons.  This is because the neutron is
comparatively weekly bound to the proton in D by the strong force.  A large
proportion of the D nuclear bond consists of the magnetic bond between the
proton and neutron.

In an atom the electron cloud is spherically symmetric and thus exerts no
electrostatic force on the centrally located nucleus.  In fact, if the
cloud were located in a perfect spherical shell, then the nucleus would be
free to wander about inside that shell in a nearly electrostatic force-free
environment.  However, the electron cloud has a small probability density
near the nucleus which increases radially outwardly to a maximum and then
diminishes rapidly as distance goes to infinity.  As the electron moves
away from the electron center of charge a centering force develops on the
nucleus.

Suppose however, that the electron charge distribution were in the form of
a planar ring.   The centering capacity is lost, except in the axis normal
to the plane.  The charge, once even slightly off center, is then attracted
radially outward to the point of maximum charge density in the ring.

Placing a hydrogen atom in a magnetic field causes the electron probability
density cloud to flatten toward a plane normal to the magnetic field.  If
the magnetic field were sufficiently strong, the nuclei would be attracted
outward and periodically in their gyrations within their respective rings
could then tunnel the final distance in order to fuse.

In a sufficiently strong magnetic field the electron density is increased
between the nuclei and the nuclei are further attracted to the plane of
electron maximum charge, as well as to the periphery of the atom.  Both
electron screening and nuclear positioning are enhanced.  In addition, at
extended distances, the strong magnetic field tend to align both the proton
and neutron such that their poles repel each other.  This converts the
magnetic bond into a magnetic repulsion, and thus detracts from strong
force instead of adding to it.   The opportunity for exchange reactions is
thus vastly increased.

If a magnetic field is insufficiently strong for fusion to result with much
probability, it still might be large enough to permit exchange reactions
involving the neutron.  The neutron is neutral and free to wander
comparatively far from the proton, and almost equally free to wander in the
direction of a neighboring nucleus as it is to wander the opposite
direction, regardless of the nature of the space charge through which it
travels.  The neutron thus has a much higher probability of involvement in
an exchange reaction than the proton.

In a sufficiently strong magnetic field, especially with appropriate
stimulation, we then might expect to see an onslaught of exchange reactions
of the type:

   D + D -> p + T
   D + T -> p + T4 -> T3 + n
   T + T -> D + T4 -> T3 + n

In a pure deuterium environment, provided laser light is applied in a
direction perpendicular to the magnetic field and provided its direction of
polarization is orthogonal to the beam and magnetic field, we might expect
to see:

   D + D -> p + T

and when the p eventually exchanges places with a D (more often happens in
electrolytes) then we might see:

   D + T -> p + T4 -> T3 + n

It thus seems important to measure the tritium evolving in laser stimulated
cold fusion experiments conducted in strong magnetic fields.  Tritium
measurement is far easier than helium measurements, for example, and
provide evidence of an exchange reaction.  Exchange reactions tend to occur
in high energy molecular collisions.  It seems reasonable to me that the
probability of such reactions would be greatly enhanced if a strong
magnetic field exists parallel to the target plane.  In the case of the
negative charged wire experiments of Claytor et al the tritium production
might be enhanced by inducing a powerful magnetic field parallel to the
wire.  As a D2+ ion hits the cathode a somewhat planar electron field
molecule might develop enough to effect the neutron exchange.  Also,
neutron exchange reactions with the wire material should increase in
probability.

Another method that might be more effective would be to create a neutral
beam of D2 or DT atoms that hit a target with the appropriate magnetic
field imposed.  Energy can then be extracted from the resulting neutrons or
from radioactive isotopes generated in the target.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 16:36:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA02473;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:33:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:33:52 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbe30ce4a300@[12.21.208.87]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:35:12 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: DT jiggling (some typos corrected)
Resent-Message-ID: <"Eo4D7.0.Lc.lrLl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52534
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A hydrogen gas where a large proportions, say 50 percent, of nuclei consist
of one deuterium nucleus and one tritium nucleus, i.e. a 50-50 DT gas,
might be used to generate neutrons.  This is because the neutron is
comparatively weekly bound to the proton in D by the strong force.  A large
proportion of the D nuclear bond consists of the magnetic bond between the
proton and neutron.

In an atom the electron cloud is spherically symmetric and thus exerts no
electrostatic force on a centrally located nucleus.  In fact, if the cloud
were located in a perfect spherical shell, then the nucleus would be free
to wander about inside that shell in a nearly electrostatic force-free
environment.  However, the electron cloud has a small probability density
near the nucleus which increases radially outwardly to a maximum and then
diminishes rapidly as distance goes to infinity.  As the nucleus moves away
from the electron center of charge a centering force develops on the
nucleus.

Suppose however, that the electron charge distribution were in the form of
a planar ring.   The centering capacity is lost, except in the axis normal
to the plane.  The nucleus charge, once even slightly off center, is then
attracted radially outward to the point of maximum charge density in the
ring.

Placing a hydrogen atom in a magnetic field causes the electron probability
density cloud to flatten toward a plane normal to the magnetic field.  If
the magnetic field were sufficiently strong, the nuclei would be attracted
outward and periodically in their gyrations within their respective rings
could then tunnel the final distance in order to fuse.

In a sufficiently strong magnetic field the electron density is increased
between the nuclei and the nuclei are further attracted to the plane of
electron maximum charge, as well as to the periphery of the atom.  Both
electron screening and nuclear positioning are enhanced.  In addition, at
extended distances, the strong magnetic field tends to align both the
proton and neutron such that their poles repel each other.  This converts
the magnetic bond into a magnetic repulsion, and thus detracts from the
strong force instead of adding to it.   The opportunity for exchange
reactions is thus vastly increased.

If a magnetic field is insufficiently strong for fusion to result with much
probability, it still might be large enough to permit exchange reactions
involving the neutron.  The neutron is neutral and free to wander
comparatively far from the proton, and almost equally free to wander in the
direction of a neighboring nucleus as it is to wander the opposite
direction, regardless of the nature of the space charge through which it
travels.  The neutron thus has a much higher probability of involvement in
an exchange reaction than the proton.

In a sufficiently strong magnetic field, especially with appropriate
stimulation, we then might expect to see an onslaught of exchange reactions
of the type:

   D + D -> p + T
   D + T -> p + T4 -> T3 + n
   T + T -> D + T4 -> T3 + n

In a pure deuterium environment, provided laser light is applied in a
direction perpendicular to the magnetic field and provided its direction of
polarization is orthogonal to the beam and magnetic field, we might expect
to see:

   D + D -> p + T

and when the p eventually exchanges places with a D (more often happens in
electrolytes) then we might see:

   D + T -> p + T4 -> T3 + n

It thus seems important to measure the tritium evolving in laser stimulated
cold fusion experiments conducted in strong magnetic fields.  Tritium
measurement is far easier than helium measurements, for example, and
provide evidence of an exchange reaction.  Exchange reactions tend to occur
in high energy molecular collisions.  It seems reasonable to me that the
probability of such reactions would be greatly enhanced if a strong
magnetic field exists parallel to the target plane.  In the case of the
negative charged wire experiments of Claytor et al the tritium production
might be enhanced by inducing a powerful magnetic field parallel to the
wire.  As a D2+ ion hits the cathode a somewhat planar electron field
molecule might develop enough to effect the neutron exchange.  Also,
neutron exchange reactions with the wire material should increase in
probability.

Another method that might be more effective would be to create a neutral
beam of D2 or DT atoms that hit a target with the appropriate magnetic
field imposed.  Energy can then be extracted from the resulting neutrons or
from radioactive isotopes generated in the target.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 16:46:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA09646;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:43:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:43:41 -0800
X-Sender: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530501bbe30f753d5e@[12.21.211.242]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:45:03 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Resent-Message-ID: <"JR1Gz1.0.XM2.y-Ll_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52535
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On thinking more, it seems to me sensible that x-ray stimulation at the
bond energy of the d-t nucleus would be the easiest way to free neutrons
from deuterium.  Perhaps cosmic ray burts produce x-rays in the stainless
steel that can do the job?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 16:47:34 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA11002;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:45:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:45:34 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Message-ID: <a.38b321ed.2ceeb9ff@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:44:47 EST
Subject: Re: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a.38b321ed.2ceeb9ff_boundary"
X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10712
Resent-Message-ID: <"_Ncnn.0.lh2.j0Ml_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52536
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_a.38b321ed.2ceeb9ff_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/20/03 1:44:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
JedRothwell@mindspring.com writes:


> What are these units of magnetism "kG"? I 
> 

kilo gauss

--part1_a.38b321ed.2ceeb9ff_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 11/20/03 1:44:33 PM Eastern Standar=
d Time, JedRothwell@mindspring.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">What are these units of magneti=
sm "kG"? I <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
kilo gauss</FONT></HTML>

--part1_a.38b321ed.2ceeb9ff_boundary--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Nov 20 22:31:36 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA28561;
	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:29:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:29:44 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500bbe3614a7740@[12.21.209.33]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:31:06 -0900
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Yet another astounding result from Mizuno
Resent-Message-ID: <"vvSC2.0.B-6.O3Rl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52537
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sorry.  Slight typo.  Last message hould have read: "On thinking more, it
seems to me sensible that x-ray stimulation at the bond energy of the p-n
nucleus would be the easiest way to free neutrons from deuterium.  Perhaps
cosmic ray burts produce x-rays in the stainless steel that can do the job?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 21 12:45:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA29870;
	Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:40:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:40:46 -0800
To: ahmancer@aol.com, Asrandprr@aol.com, balchmag@aol.com, rluzenberg@aol.com,
        cbhc@juno.com, crj@hiwaay.net, reality@pocketmail.com,
        goodgrief4@hotmail.com, Jack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com,
        jaymefneely@yahoo.com, jbsris@bellsouth.net, JMay@hoover.k12.al.us,
        jodess@charter.net, JTaylor279@aol.com, laura@suggs.com,
        mbkreider@msn.com, me@juli.org, mwgchf@aol.com, perrypoodle@aol.com,
        pligon3392@aol.com, rebraswell@aol.com, RJohanson@ehjlaw.com,
        rodpeeks@bellsouth.net, sevelius@cableone.net, spruiell@hotmail.com,
        tbaermojo@aol.com, vanorri@bellsouth.net, winteam@sbcglobal.net
Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:36:28 -0600
Subject: Fw: Re: neat observation
Message-ID: <20031121.144119.-2008097.1.wardsworld@juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--__JNP_000_12f0.276c.22c5
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 19-6,7-14,27-32767
From: Ward Johanson <wardsworld@juno.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"cP13K3.0.6I7.BXdl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52538
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This message is in MIME format.  Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

----__JNP_000_12f0.276c.22c5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


----- Forwarded Message -----
From: RSRKYLE@aol.com
To: wardsworld@juno.com
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST
Subject: Re: neat observation
Message-ID: <18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com>

America will be a great nation when it once again has great leaders to
challenge people to purpose and to sacrifice.  911 was a perfect
opportunity for that.  But, George W. Bush failed to use that opportunity
to ignite the imaginations of the American public.  John Kennedy said 
"We will have a man on the moon in this decade." (the sixties).  And
guess what?  We did!  George W. Bush could have said, "We will eliminate
the threat of terrorism from the U.S. within five years."  "We will
become energy independent within ten years."  "We will uncover the roots
of terrorism and wipe them out within 20 years."  There is no limit to
the ingenuity and creativity of Americans who yearn for new challenges
and accomplishments.  It doesn't depend on where manufacturing or
computer programing is done.  THE PROBLEM IN AMERICA IS OUR LEADERSHIP
VACUUM!  G.W.BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN MY LIFETIME! 
----__JNP_000_12f0.276c.22c5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUTF-8 http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2719.2200" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #=
ffffff">
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV style=3D""background: " #cccccc\?>----- Forwarded Message -----</DIV>
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A href=3D"mailto:RSRKYLE@aol.com">RSRKYLE@aol.com</A></=
DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A=20
href=3D"mailto:wardsworld@juno.com">wardsworld@juno.com</A></DIV>
<DIV><B>Date:</B> Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: neat observation</DIV>
<DIV><B>Message-ID:</B> &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com">18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com=
</A>&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>America will be a great nation when it once again has =
great=20
leaders to challenge people to purpose and to sacrifice.&nbsp; 911 was a =
perfect=20
opportunity for that.&nbsp; But, George W. Bush failed to use that =
opportunity=20
to&nbsp;ignite the imaginations of the American public.&nbsp; John Kennedy=
=20
said&nbsp; "We will have a man on the moon in this decade." (the sixties).&=
nbsp;=20
And guess what?&nbsp; We did!&nbsp; George W. Bush could have said, "We =
will=20
eliminate the threat of terrorism from the U.S. within five=20
years."&nbsp;&nbsp;"We will become energy independent within ten years."&=
nbsp;=20
"We will uncover the roots of terrorism&nbsp;and wipe them out within 20=20
years."&nbsp; There is no limit to the ingenuity and creativity of=20
Americans&nbsp;who yearn for new&nbsp;challenges and accomplishments.&nbsp;=
 It=20
doesn't depend on where manufacturing or computer programing is done.&nbsp;=
 THE=20
PROBLEM IN AMERICA IS OUR LEADERSHIP VACUUM!&nbsp; G.W.BUSH IS THE WORST=20
PRESIDENT IN MY LIFETIME! </BODY></HTML>

----__JNP_000_12f0.276c.22c5--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 21 13:10:15 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA19762;
	Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:05:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:05:31 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031121151851.01dac8f8@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:05:30 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Mizuno explains more
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"tEhrX2.0.cq4.Qudl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52539
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Mizuno sent me the rough draft of his JCF5 paper. It partly confirms my 
impression that an electromagnet is used because a change in magnetism 
sometimes triggers the neutron burst. That was what I understood talking to 
him about the experiment on the telephone over the last few months. I 
thought he turned off the power completely, but apparently not. However, a 
change does sometimes seem to trigger a burst:

"After the electric current of the magnet was changed to 35 V at 1200 s, a 
burst of neutrons was observed. Another burst occurred 120 s later."

The sequence of events in this experiment is still unclear to me. I wrote 
to Mizuno asking to clarify this. If I understand correctly, he adds the 
liquid nitrogen to the insulated container before turning on the 
electromagnet. It seems that he sometimes sees a burst even without 
electromagnet! Perhaps I misinterpret, but he wrote:

"However, in other runs, neutron emissions were observed immediately after 
liquid N2 was added."

I will make very sure he means "before the magnetic field was imposed."


The critical issue in experiments of this nature is neutron detection. I 
believe Mizuno is using the same three He3 detectors he used in previous 
experiments, which are described in some recent papers. These devices were 
provided NTT. One of the three is shielded with Cd film. They are 
insensitive, but unlikely to produce false positives. They are calibrated 
with a standard Cf-252 source (2.58 x 10^4 decay/s), that registers five 
counts per second. Thus, efficiency is estimated at 0.0002. The actual 
neutron count in one sample of data is low, 5.5 counts/second, but this is 
1,000 times background.

This paper has several co-authors including Akimoto, who knows a lot about 
particle detection.


If this is replicated, it sure would blow a large hole in conventional 
plasma physics. I have the impression Mizuno et al. think it is easier to 
replicate than cold fusion.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 21 13:23:48 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA01727;
	Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:21:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:21:09 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick@highsurf.com@mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210101bbe41654af71@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <009801c3afba$fd3fcaa0$8837fea9@cpq>
References: <009801c3afba$fd3fcaa0$8837fea9@cpq>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:46:17 -1000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick@highsurf.com>
Subject: Re: Stranger than fiction
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA01627
Resent-Message-ID: <"0Qh8E1.0.tQ.57el_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52540
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>At 3:06 PM -0800 11/20/03, Jones Beene wrote:
>...but that is going waaaaay too far for the present argument

Too bad - just getting interesting. <g>

><snip> our solar system is axially aligned, that is: nearly perpendicular to the exact axis of rotation of EC and its companion</snip>

That fact would be of interest to followers of spin wave phenomena. For such a connection to exist, it has to be an enormously powerful long-range force, and yet one that does not couple easily or obviously to ordinary bulk matter. For a CF effect, some coincidental temporal condition during an experiment (solar flares, or some other ghostly trigger) might throttle that weak coupling, or some component of the materials used (your strange-matter palladium perhaps) might have a not-so-weak coupling already. So for a reactivity increase to be triggered remotely, a powerful mysterious spin field whose intensity changes through time and axial orientation is a possibility, though speculative. OTOH, very high gamma and some cosmic rays are not currently detectable by instruments, but may have effects on matter in unusual conditions like inside the sun or in an active part of a CF cell. Whatever may have toasted the Great Lakes around 12.5K years ago appears to have been a particle storm, one far too big and energetic for the sun to have generated.  I seem to recall that there was some reason that data might have pointed to the area of the sky the particles came in from, but I can't find it now. Anyway, here's a recap of the Great Lakes research with some rebuttals:

http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/cat.html?c=8        (scroll down a bit...)

- RM
Honolulu, HI



**********************************
Rick Monteverde
427 Kaleimamahu St.
Honolulu, HI 96825-2329
(808) 395-5483 voice (home)
(808) 395-1244 voice (office)
(808) 753-7516 cell
(808) 395-1884 fax
rick@highsurf.com
**********************************

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 21 14:18:17 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA14532;
	Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:08:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:08:45 -0800
Message-ID: <007001c3b07a$e527df00$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <009801c3afba$fd3fcaa0$8837fea9@cpq> <v04210101bbe41654af71@[10.220.188.4]>
Subject: Re: Stranger than fiction
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:00:36 -0800
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 OAA14451
Resent-Message-ID: <"R0NNb1.0.lY3.hpel_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52541
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde writes,

> >...but that is going waaaaay too far for the present argument
> 
> Too bad - just getting interesting. <g>


OK... since you insist <g>

One point of clarification about the star Eta Carinae (EC) and its possible relevance to anything that happens in "our neck of the woods." It is true that the star is far too distant to influence our sun in ways that we understand now, and that the suggestion that our solar sytem could have actually been expelled from EC 5 billion years ago may seem totally preposterous because of the distance. 

But there is more to the story.  7,500 light-years is indeed a long way off... at least it is NOW, but to evaluate the cogency of this suggestion, let's put that distance into reversed time perspective. The Milky Way is said to be a large spiral galaxy about 10 billion years old, composed of about a hundred billion stars arrayed in the form of a disk, probably a spiral disk. Despite any evidence for an "expanding universe", it is clear that we are forever gravitaionally bound to most of these hundred billion stars, and have been since our Sun (and later the earth) were formed those 5 billion years ago. 

It is said our solar system is only a second (if not third) generation star system and formed out of the remants of a supernova or other extremely violent event back when the Milky War was much more compact, and whichever "collapsed star" that we came from is probably moving away from us (relative to the rest of the galaxy) at a much faster rate than we are moving away from other stars, even though we are both gravitationally bound to the same galaxy. It is therefore theoretically possible that almost any neutron star or quark star within our portion (1/3 to 1/2) of the galaxy could been the one to have spawned our solar system, due to the vast time span and the fact that our relative separation from that progentitor object is likely to be far different than from everything else.

The Milky Way has a central bulge (some 30,000 light-years across) of closely packed stars lying in the direction of Sagittarius.  At first, our Sun was thought to be near the central bulge, but studies have later shown us to be some 28,000 light-years distant but lying in the galactic plane closer to the edge than to the center. When we look in the plane of the disk we see the combined light of its stars from within a disk that is ~100,000 light-years across, and Eta Carinae (EC) is now 7,500 light years away (close by comparison) in the constellation Carina (The Keel, for those with a prophetic bent) but 4.5 billion years ago we could have easily been within the necessary "range" of EC for it to have been our progenitor celestial body. In fact, as of the present time, the closest possible candidate celestial body (neutron star or greater) to us is over 400 light years away, but 5 billion years ago that object could have been further removed than was EC at that particular time.

A curious fact is that the closest possible candidate celestial body to have been our progenitor is now believed to be a "quark star" not a neutron star....

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020414.html

"Previously, this compact star (RJX J185635-375) held claim to being the closest neutron star -- only 150 light-years away. Now new observations and analysis indicate not only a larger distance, roughly 450 light-years, but a very small radius for RXJ J185635-375, pictured above. One hypothesized solution holds hope a RJX J185635-375 is actually a not a neutron star but a quark star -- something new. Now quark stars are truly strange -- some may have made a transition to type of matter known as strange quarks. Quark stars, were they to exist, can be intermediate between neutron stars and black holes in size and density. Quark stars can also be more compact and cool faster than neutron stars. In fact, some might even be ultracompact -- so dense that light itself can orbit."

Therefore, the bottom line is that only conclusion one can make is that EC is a possibility for progenitor object, but so are several thousand other dense objects within our galaxy.
 
> > our solar system is axially aligned, that is: nearly perpendicular to the exact axis of rotation of EC and its companion....

> That fact would be of interest to followers of spin wave phenomena. For such a connection to exist, it has to be an enormously powerful long-range force, and yet one that does not couple easily or obviously to ordinary bulk matter. For a CF effect, some coincidental temporal condition during an experiment (solar flares, or some other ghostly trigger) might throttle that weak coupling, or some component of the materials used (your strange-matter palladium perhaps) might have a not-so-weak coupling already. So for a reactivity increase to be triggered remotely, a powerful mysterious spin field whose intensity changes through time and axial orientation is a possibility, though speculative. 

Yes, thanks for bringing up spin fields (torsion fields) as the linkage mechanism, but that subject sounds like idea-fodder for another day....

> OTOH, very high gamma and some cosmic rays are not currently detectable by instruments, but may have effects on matter in unusual conditions like inside the sun or in an active part of a CF cell. 

Yes, I remember it being said in the early '90s when a lot of people couln't reproduce P&F that the probelm was that Salt Lake City was so high in elevation that it allowed more cosmic radiation in... but I think that possibility has been discounted now.

>Whatever may have toasted the Great Lakes around 12.5K years ago appears to have been a particle storm, one far too big and energetic for the sun to have generated.  I seem to recall that there was some reason that data might have pointed to the area of the sky the particles came in from, but I can't find it now. Anyway, here's a recap of the Great Lakes research with some rebuttals [snip]

Very interesting... and definitely stranger than fiction.

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 21 15:02:23 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA01398;
	Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:59:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:59:53 -0800
Message-ID: <002401c3b083$434f9840$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
From: "revtec" <revtec@PTD.NET>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <20031121.144119.-2008097.1.wardsworld@juno.com>
Subject: Re: Re: neat observation
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:00:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01C3B059.5A505D60"
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: <"Yc_zM3.0.dL.fZfl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52542
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_0021_01C3B059.5A505D60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We wouldn't have lost the World Trade Center in 2001, or or have to =
prove ourselves in Iraq if we had shown some resolve (leadership) in =
Somalia or picked up Bin Laden when we had him handed to us during the =
Clinton administration.  I will restrain myself from further comment =
since this isn't the place.  I am quite irritated with this political =
outburst from Mr. Ward. We have enough scientific divisiveness to deal =
with without injecting this stuff.

Jeff Fink
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Ward Johanson=20
  To: ahmancer@aol.com ; Asrandprr@aol.com ; balchmag@aol.com ; =
rluzenberg@aol.com ; cbhc@juno.com ; crj@hiwaay.net ; =
reality@pocketmail.com ; goodgrief4@hotmail.com ; =
Jack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com ; jaymefneely@yahoo.com ; =
jbsris@bellsouth.net ; JMay@hoover.k12.al.us ; jodess@charter.net ; =
JTaylor279@aol.com ; laura@suggs.com ; mbkreider@msn.com ; me@juli.org ; =
mwgchf@aol.com ; perrypoodle@aol.com ; pligon3392@aol.com ; =
rebraswell@aol.com ; RJohanson@ehjlaw.com ; rodpeeks@bellsouth.net ; =
sevelius@cableone.net ; spruiell@hotmail.com ; tbaermojo@aol.com ; =
vanorri@bellsouth.net ; winteam@sbcglobal.net=20
  Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20
  Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 3:36 PM
  Subject: Fw: Re: neat observation



  RSRKYLE@aol.com
  To: wardsworld@juno.com
  Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST
  Subject: Re: neat observation
  Message-ID: <18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com>

  America will be a great nation when it once again has great leaders to =
challenge people to purpose and to sacrifice.  911 was a perfect =
opportunity for that.  But, George W. Bush failed to use that =
opportunity to ignite the imaginations of the American public.  John =
Kennedy said  "We will have a man on the moon in this decade." (the =
sixties).  And guess what?  We did!  George W. Bush could have said, "We =
will eliminate the threat of terrorism from the U.S. within five years." =
 "We will become energy independent within ten years."  "We will uncover =
the roots of terrorism and wipe them out within 20 years."  There is no =
limit to the ingenuity and creativity of Americans who yearn for new =
challenges and accomplishments.  It doesn't depend on where =
manufacturing or computer programing is done.  THE PROBLEM IN AMERICA IS =
OUR LEADERSHIP VACUUM!  G.W.BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN MY LIFETIME! 
------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C3B059.5A505D60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUTF-8 http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: =
#ffffff"=20
bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>We wouldn't have lost the World Trade Center in 2001, or or have to =
prove=20
ourselves in Iraq if we had shown some resolve (leadership) in Somalia =
or picked=20
up Bin Laden when we had him handed to us&nbsp;during the Clinton=20
administration.&nbsp; I will restrain myself from further comment since =
this=20
isn't the place.&nbsp; I am quite irritated with this political outburst =
from=20
Mr. Ward.&nbsp;We have enough scientific divisiveness to deal with =
without=20
injecting this stuff.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jeff Fink</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=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=3Dwardsworld@juno.com =
href=3D"mailto:wardsworld@juno.com">Ward=20
  Johanson</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dahmancer@aol.com =

  href=3D"mailto:ahmancer@aol.com">ahmancer@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3DAsrandprr@aol.com =
href=3D"mailto:Asrandprr@aol.com">Asrandprr@aol.com</A>=20
  ; <A title=3Dbalchmag@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:balchmag@aol.com">balchmag@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Drluzenberg@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:rluzenberg@aol.com">rluzenberg@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dcbhc@juno.com href=3D"mailto:cbhc@juno.com">cbhc@juno.com</A> =
; <A=20
  title=3Dcrj@hiwaay.net =
href=3D"mailto:crj@hiwaay.net">crj@hiwaay.net</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dreality@pocketmail.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:reality@pocketmail.com">reality@pocketmail.com</A> ; <A =

  title=3Dgoodgrief4@hotmail.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:goodgrief4@hotmail.com">goodgrief4@hotmail.com</A> ; <A =

  title=3DJack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:Jack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com">Jack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com</=
A> ; <A=20
  title=3Djaymefneely@yahoo.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:jaymefneely@yahoo.com">jaymefneely@yahoo.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Djbsris@bellsouth.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:jbsris@bellsouth.net">jbsris@bellsouth.net</A> ; <A=20
  title=3DJMay@hoover.k12.al.us=20
  href=3D"mailto:JMay@hoover.k12.al.us">JMay@hoover.k12.al.us</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Djodess@charter.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:jodess@charter.net">jodess@charter.net</A> ; <A=20
  title=3DJTaylor279@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:JTaylor279@aol.com">JTaylor279@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dlaura@suggs.com =
href=3D"mailto:laura@suggs.com">laura@suggs.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dmbkreider@msn.com =
href=3D"mailto:mbkreider@msn.com">mbkreider@msn.com</A>=20
  ; <A title=3Dme@juli.org href=3D"mailto:me@juli.org">me@juli.org</A> ; =
<A=20
  title=3Dmwgchf@aol.com =
href=3D"mailto:mwgchf@aol.com">mwgchf@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dperrypoodle@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:perrypoodle@aol.com">perrypoodle@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dpligon3392@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:pligon3392@aol.com">pligon3392@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Drebraswell@aol.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:rebraswell@aol.com">rebraswell@aol.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3DRJohanson@ehjlaw.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:RJohanson@ehjlaw.com">RJohanson@ehjlaw.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Drodpeeks@bellsouth.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:rodpeeks@bellsouth.net">rodpeeks@bellsouth.net</A> ; <A =

  title=3Dsevelius@cableone.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:sevelius@cableone.net">sevelius@cableone.net</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dspruiell@hotmail.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:spruiell@hotmail.com">spruiell@hotmail.com</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dtbaermojo@aol.com =
href=3D"mailto:tbaermojo@aol.com">tbaermojo@aol.com</A>=20
  ; <A title=3Dvanorri@bellsouth.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:vanorri@bellsouth.net">vanorri@bellsouth.net</A> ; <A=20
  title=3Dwinteam@sbcglobal.net=20
  href=3D"mailto:winteam@sbcglobal.net">winteam@sbcglobal.net</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A =
title=3Dvortex-l@eskimo.com=20
  href=3D"mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com">vortex-l@eskimo.com</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 21, 2003 =
3:36=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Fw: Re: neat =
observation</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV #cccccc\? ? background:><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:RSRKYLE@aol.com">RSRKYLE@aol.com</A></A></DIV>
  <DIV><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:wardsworld@juno.com">wardsworld@juno.com</A></DIV>
  <DIV><B>Date:</B> Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST</DIV>
  <DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: neat observation</DIV>
  <DIV><B>Message-ID:</B> &lt;<A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com">18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.c=
om</A>&gt;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>America will be a great nation when it once again has =
great=20
  leaders to challenge people to purpose and to sacrifice.&nbsp; 911 was =
a=20
  perfect opportunity for that.&nbsp; But, George W. Bush failed to use =
that=20
  opportunity to&nbsp;ignite the imaginations of the American =
public.&nbsp; John=20
  Kennedy said&nbsp; "We will have a man on the moon in this decade." =
(the=20
  sixties).&nbsp; And guess what?&nbsp; We did!&nbsp; George W. Bush =
could have=20
  said, "We will eliminate the threat of terrorism from the U.S. within =
five=20
  years."&nbsp;&nbsp;"We will become energy independent within ten =
years."&nbsp;=20
  "We will uncover the roots of terrorism&nbsp;and wipe them out within =
20=20
  years."&nbsp; There is no limit to the ingenuity and creativity of=20
  Americans&nbsp;who yearn for new&nbsp;challenges and =
accomplishments.&nbsp; It=20
  doesn't depend on where manufacturing or computer programing is =
done.&nbsp;=20
  THE PROBLEM IN AMERICA IS OUR LEADERSHIP VACUUM!&nbsp; G.W.BUSH IS THE =
WORST=20
  PRESIDENT IN MY LIFETIME! </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C3B059.5A505D60--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 05:58:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA26584;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:56:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:56:11 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:55:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Mizuno explains more
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor@infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BBE4D51C.A07C%editor@infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20031121151851.01dac8f8@pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"RQgyc1.0.HV6.whsl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52543
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 11/21/03 4:05 PM, "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Mizuno sent me the rough draft of his JCF5 paper. It partly confirms my
> impression that an electromagnet is used because a change in magnetism
> sometimes triggers the neutron burst. That was what I understood talking to
> him about the experiment on the telephone over the last few months. I
> thought he turned off the power completely, but apparently not. However, a
> change does sometimes seem to trigger a burst:
> 
> "After the electric current of the magnet was changed to 35 V at 1200 s, a
> burst of neutrons was observed. Another burst occurred 120 s later."
> 
> The sequence of events in this experiment is still unclear to me. I wrote
> to Mizuno asking to clarify this. If I understand correctly, he adds the
> liquid nitrogen to the insulated container before turning on the
> electromagnet. It seems that he sometimes sees a burst even without
> electromagnet! Perhaps I misinterpret, but he wrote:
> 
> "However, in other runs, neutron emissions were observed immediately after
> liquid N2 was added."
> 
> I will make very sure he means "before the magnetic field was imposed."
> 
> 
> The critical issue in experiments of this nature is neutron detection. I
> believe Mizuno is using the same three He3 detectors he used in previous
> experiments, which are described in some recent papers. These devices were
> provided NTT. One of the three is shielded with Cd film. They are
> insensitive, but unlikely to produce false positives. They are calibrated
> with a standard Cf-252 source (2.58 x 10^4 decay/s), that registers five
> counts per second. Thus, efficiency is estimated at 0.0002. The actual
> neutron count in one sample of data is low, 5.5 counts/second, but this is
> 1,000 times background.
> 
> This paper has several co-authors including Akimoto, who knows a lot about
> particle detection.
> 
> 
> If this is replicated, it sure would blow a large hole in conventional
> plasma physics. I have the impression Mizuno et al. think it is easier to
> replicate than cold fusion.
> 
> - Jed

Has he performed the most obvious, critically needed control(s) -- the use
of an inert gas instead of D2 (e.g. Argon or N2 itself)?  Has he
contemplated also trying to alter the effect, if it  is real, by using H2?

In the early days of cold fusion, neutron bursts were seen in thermal
cycling of titanium chips with LN2  -- Menlove, and Scaramuzzi.  I am not
sure these have survived critical review. I don't recall.

Indeed, if this pure D2 neutron effect is substantiated, it blows not only
many holes in standard physics but also the lattice-based "cold fusion"
theories.


Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, President
New Energy Foundation, Inc.
(A nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation)
P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302-2816
Phone: 603-485-4700   Fax: 603-485-4710
www.infinite-energy.com

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 07:30:02 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA29367;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:28:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:28:36 -0800
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20031122102147.00bad388@pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell@mindspring.com@pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:28:39 -0500
To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Mizuno explains more
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"yMh0g.0.iA7.Z2ul_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52544
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Eugene F. Mallove writes:

 > Has he performed the most obvious, critically needed control(s) -- the use
 > of an inert gas instead of D2 (e.g. Argon or N2 itself)?  Has he
 > contemplated also trying to alter the effect, if it  is real, by using H2?

That's a good question. I do not know whether he has done those tests or 
not. I will ask him. I am working through a rough draft in English and 
notes in Japanese. The only calibration I see is the positive one I 
mentioned, with a Cf-252 neutron source.


 > In the early days of cold fusion, neutron bursts were seen in thermal
 > cycling of titanium chips with LN2  -- Menlove, and Scaramuzzi.  I am not
 > sure these have survived critical review. I don't recall.

As far as I know the authors stand by these results.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 08:46:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA24805;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:45:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:45:34 -0800
Message-ID: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: OT:  12,500 B.P.
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:37:27 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01C3B0D3.DC2E0F60"
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: <"2A3mW1.0.L36.jAvl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52545
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_0017_01C3B0D3.DC2E0F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yesterday, Rick Monteverde mentioned a most interesting website and body =
of research about a little-known natural catastrophe (most likely real) =
that occurred around the Great Lakes region of the USA about 12,500 =
years ago. It is a date, coincidental or not, with a lot of "baggage" in =
the form of mysticism. Here is the science:

http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a=3D36

It turns out that this date has significance in other parts of the world =
as well. First a quote from the above:

"The enormous energy released by the catastrophe at 12,500 yr B.P. could =
have heated the atmosphere to over 1000=B0C over Michigan, and the =
neutron flux at more northern locations would have melted considerable =
glacial ice. Radiation effects on plants and animals exposed to the =
cosmic rays would have been lethal, comparable to being irradiated in a =
5-megawatt reactor more than 100 seconds."

The curious thing is that this date was formerly considered to be before =
the dawn of advanced civilization, but is that true? Now comes the =
mysticism connection:

Boston university. geologist Michael Schock, Ph.D has studied the Sphinx =
extensively from a scientific perspective and believes that the pattern =
of weathering of the Sphinx is consistent with severe erosion from  with =
water in an area with little rain...normally. This could date the Sphinx =
back to 12,500 years B.P., toward the end of the last ice age. But the =
problem is that little survives from that period to prove an earlier =
civilization than the one that produced the pyramids 4,500 years ago.

Then there is the precession connection:
http://www.crystalinks.com/precession.html

Which leads to the open floodgate of mysticism, which I won't even get =
into except to mention a few names who "embraced" the particular date =
(12,500 B.P.): Cayce,  John Anthony West,  Robert Bauval,  Graham =
Hancock, etc.etc.

Coincidence?... or a redactive-recursive case of art imitating life =
imitating art... well, let's just say that Cayce certainly had no way of =
knowing about the scientific part, other than... no, let's don't even go =
there...

Jones

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C3B0D3.DC2E0F60
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, Rick Monteverde mentioned a most interesting website and =
body of=20
research about a little-known natural catastrophe (most likely real) =
that=20
occurred around the Great Lakes region of the USA about 12,500 years =
ago. It is=20
a date, coincidental or not,&nbsp;with a lot of "baggage" in the form of =

mysticism. Here is the science:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a=3D36">http://www.ce=
nterfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a=3D36</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It turns out that this date has significance in other parts of the =
world as=20
well. First a quote from the above:</DIV>
<DIV><BR>"The enormous energy released by the catastrophe at 12,500 yr =
B.P.=20
could have heated the atmosphere to over 1000=B0C over Michigan, and the =
neutron=20
flux at more northern locations would have melted considerable glacial =
ice.=20
Radiation effects on plants and animals exposed to the cosmic rays would =
have=20
been lethal, comparable to being irradiated in a 5-megawatt reactor more =
than=20
100 seconds."</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The curious thing is that this date was formerly considered to be =
before=20
the dawn of advanced civilization, but is that true? Now comes the =
mysticism=20
connection:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Boston university. geologist Michael Schock, Ph.D&nbsp;has studied =
the=20
Sphinx extensively from a scientific perspective and believes that the =
pattern=20
of weathering of the Sphinx is consistent with severe erosion from&nbsp; =
with=20
water in an area with little rain...normally. This could date the Sphinx =
back to=20
12,500 years B.P., toward the end of the last ice age. But the problem =
is that=20
little survives from that period to prove an earlier civilization than =
the one=20
that produced the pyramids 4,500 years ago.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Then there is the precession connection:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.crystalinks.com/precession.html">http://www.crystalink=
s.com/precession.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Which leads to the open floodgate of mysticism, which I won't even =
get into=20
except to mention a few names who "embraced" the particular date (12,500 =
B.P.):=20
Cayce,  John Anthony West,  Robert Bauval,  Graham Hancock, =
etc.etc.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Coincidence?... or&nbsp;a redactive-recursive case of art imitating =
life=20
imitating art... well, let's just say that Cayce certainly had no way of =
knowing=20
about the scientific part, other than... no, let's don't even go =
there...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C3B0D3.DC2E0F60--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 10:25:41 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA07649;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:22:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:22:31 -0800
Message-ID: <005001c3b124$73d84c40$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:14:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004D_01C3B0E1.653F8E20"
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: <"dkdhN3.0.Ht1.cbwl_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52546
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_004D_01C3B0E1.653F8E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The so-called Richat Structure is a geological formation in the Maur =
Adrar Desert in the African country of Mauritania. Although it resembles =
an impact crater, it is almost certainly neither a meteorite nor =
asteroid crater, nor is it an eroded volcanic dome.=20

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021028.html

Many experts have an opinion in it, based on scant & scanter evidence, =
so why not one more, this time from the fringe?

OK ... looks like an SQM (strange quark matter) entry lesion to me....

REF:
http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html

Jones


Might be a promising place to mine for LENR electrodes  ;-)
------=_NextPart_000_004D_01C3B0E1.653F8E20
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 so-called Richat Structure is a geological formation in the =
Maur Adrar=20
Desert in the African country of Mauritania. Although it resembles an =
impact=20
crater, it is almost certainly neither a meteorite nor asteroid crater, =
nor is=20
it&nbsp;an eroded&nbsp;volcanic dome. </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><U><FONT color=3D#0000ff></FONT></U>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021028.html">http://antwrp.gsf=
c.nasa.gov/apod/ap021028.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Many experts have an opinion in it, based on scant &amp; scanter =
evidence,=20
so why not one more, this time from the fringe?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>OK ... looks like an SQM (strange quark matter)&nbsp;entry lesion =
to=20
me....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>REF:</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html">http://www.smu.e=
du/newsinfo/releases/01342.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Might be a promising place to mine for LENR electrodes=20
&nbsp;;-)</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_004D_01C3B0E1.653F8E20--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 14:28:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA18434;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:25:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:25:43 -0800
From: JoeGuokas@aol.com
Message-ID: <6a.387afee5.2cf13c41@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:25:05 EST
Subject: Re: Mizuno explains more
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Resent-Message-ID: <"vlgWt2.0.xV4.c9-l_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52547
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

About a year before ICCF4, Howard Menlove discovered thermal cycling caused 
condensation on the sensor circuitry, creating artifacts mistaken for neutron 
bursts.  Howard Menlove made this public during a plenary session of ICCF4.  

As for the Italian experiments, they used the same type detectors.  If I 
recall correctly, Howard Menlove had gone to Italy to help them set up their 
thermal cycling experiments.  So I think his disillusionment with thermal cycling 
due to neutron burst false positives included the Italian experiments.  

-- Joe Guokas

 Eugene F. Mallove writes:
   
  > In the early days of cold fusion, neutron bursts were seen in thermal
  > cycling of titanium chips with LN2  -- Menlove, and Scaramuzzi.  I am not
  > sure these have survived critical review. I don't recall.
 
Jed Rothwell writes:

>>  As far as I know the authors stand by these results.
 

 
 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 15:25:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA04898;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:22:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:22:27 -0800
Message-ID: <3FBFE368.2F328489@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:38:53 -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: Mizuno explains more
References: <6a.387afee5.2cf13c41@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"x-7ec1.0.KC1.o--l_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52548
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The effect you mention may occur for a brief time, until the experimenter sees what
is happening.  However,  this was not the source of neutrons seen by Menlove or the
Italians.  Neutron detection involves many ways to show that the signals come from a
source, in contrast to being random discharges.  This includes layers of detectors
that show proper coincidence and the expected pulse height of the signals.  In
addition, the detectors are generally too far from the cold source to allow
condensation, especially in the low humidity at Los Alamos.  I think the comments
you attribute to Menlove were a statement of what to avoid rather than an
explanation of the results.

Ed

JoeGuokas@aol.com wrote:

> About a year before ICCF4, Howard Menlove discovered thermal cycling caused
> condensation on the sensor circuitry, creating artifacts mistaken for neutron
> bursts.  Howard Menlove made this public during a plenary session of ICCF4.
>
> As for the Italian experiments, they used the same type detectors.  If I
> recall correctly, Howard Menlove had gone to Italy to help them set up their
> thermal cycling experiments.  So I think his disillusionment with thermal cycling
> due to neutron burst false positives included the Italian experiments.
>
> -- Joe Guokas
>
>  Eugene F. Mallove writes:
>
>   > In the early days of cold fusion, neutron bursts were seen in thermal
>   > cycling of titanium chips with LN2  -- Menlove, and Scaramuzzi.  I am not
>   > sure these have survived critical review. I don't recall.
>
> Jed Rothwell writes:
>
> >>  As far as I know the authors stand by these results.
>
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Nov 22 16:24:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA31503;
	Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:21:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:21:54 -0800
From: JoeGuokas@aol.com
Message-ID: <1c9.12333cbf.2cf15777@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:21:11 EST
Subject: Re: Mizuno explains more
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Resent-Message-ID: <"kYUo81.0.0i7.Ws_l_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52549
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I apologize to all, but particularly to Howard Menlove.  I could have sworn I 
remembered some conversations on this topic from 1993.  That is why I did not 
look it up before replying to Jed.  But my memory is not as good as it once 
was.  I have now searched and found a paper from 1991 in which Howard Menlove 
took precautions against condensation, and still observed neutron bursts - 
shown here:

-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.chem.au.dk/~db/fusion/alpha_Z

Zhu R, Wang X, Lu F, Ding D, He J, Liu H, Jiang J, Chen G, Yuan Y, Yang L,
Chen Z, Menlove HO;    Fusion Technol. 20 (1991) 349.
"Measurement of neutron burst production in thermal cycle of D2 absorbed
titanium chips".
** Experimental, Ti, gas phase, neutrons, res+
A Chino-USA effort to find neutrons in a Ti/D2 gas system with thermal
cycling - the "Italian" mode. The experiment was done 580 m underground to
minimise cosmic influx. Humidity had to be avoided, to avoid fake neutron
bursts from the (3)He detectors (18 of them). The setup was not sensitive to
mechanical knocks. H2 dummy batches were run to eliminate other artifacts.
There were 10 D2 batches and only 3 of these showed no neutron emissions. The
others showed neutron bursts of up to 535 from a burst. The burst intensity
was up to 2 orders of magnitude above the carefully monitored background. The
bursts occur during the first one or two thermal cycles, between -100 degC and
room temperature; thereafter, the Ti seems to be inactive. They could be
reactivated by vacuum degassing and reloading but the activity was lower. The
controls with H2 ruled out interference effects. 021991|111991

-----------------------------------------------------

--- Joe Guokas


<< 
The effect you mention may occur for a brief time, until the experimenter
 sees what is happening.  However,  this was not the source of neutrons 
seen by Menlove or the Italians.  Neutron detection involves many ways 
to show that the signals come from a source, in contrast to being random 
discharges.  This includes layers of detectors  that show proper coincidence
 and the expected pulse height of the signals.  In  addition, the detectors 
are generally too far from the cold source to allow  condensation, especially
 in the low humidity at Los Alamos.  I think the comments  you attribute 
to Menlove were a statement of what to avoid rather than an  explanation 
of the results.
 
 Ed
>> 

 Joe Guokas wrote:
 
 > About a year before ICCF4, Howard Menlove discovered thermal cycling caused
 > condensation on the sensor circuitry, creating artifacts mistaken for 
neutron
 > bursts.  Howard Menlove made this public during a plenary session of ICCF4.
 >
 > As for the Italian experiments, they used the same type detectors.  If I
 > recall correctly, Howard Menlove had gone to Italy to help them set up 
their
 > thermal cycling experiments.  So I think his disillusionment with thermal 
cycling
 > due to neutron burst false positives included the Italian experiments.
 >
 > -- Joe Guokas
 >
 >  Eugene F. Mallove writes:
 >
 >   > In the early days of cold fusion, neutron bursts were seen in thermal
 >   > cycling of titanium chips with LN2  -- Menlove, and Scaramuzzi.  I am 
not
 >   > sure these have survived critical review. I don't recall.
 >
 > Jed Rothwell writes:
 >
 > >>  As far as I know the authors stand by these results.
 >
 >
 >
 >
  >>

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov 23 15:28:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA15394;
	Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:24:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:24:10 -0800
Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3FC1403F.4EB82EE0@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 23:18:23 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11@centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xc"
Resent-Message-ID: <"nm7Xp.0.Sm3.P6Km_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52550
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Jones Beene wrote:

Yesterday, Rick Monteverde mentioned a most interesting
website and body of research about a little-known natural
catastrophe (most likely real) that occurred around the
Great Lakes region of the USA about 12,500 years ago. It
is a date, coincidental or not, with a lot of "baggage"
in the form of mysticism. Here is the science:

http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a3D36

It turns out that this date has significance in other
parts of the world as well. First a quote from the above:

"The enormous energy released by the catastrophe at
12,500 yr B.P. could have heated the atmosphere to over
1000B0C over Michigan ..."

Hi All,

As was mentioned here over a year ago, what evidence
is there from the Greenland ice cores?

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov 23 16:03:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id PAA14440;
	Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:58:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:58:57 -0800
Message-ID: <004801c3b21c$93bd7000$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq> <3FC1403F.4EB82EE0@centurytel.net>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:50:29 -0800
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 PAA14205
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wscpt3.0.XX3.0dKm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52551
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 
> As was mentioned here over a year ago, what evidence
> is there from the Greenland ice cores?


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/10/981002082033.htm

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 05:55:22 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id FAA08315;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:53:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:53:18 -0800
Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3FC20BF9.2B74CA97@centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:47:37 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11@centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq> <3FC1403F.4EB82EE0@centurytel.net> <004801c3b21c$93bd7000$8837fea9@cpq>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xc"
Resent-Message-ID: <"CCq_N2.0.k12.DrWm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52552
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Hi Jones,

Thanks for the reference:

``http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/10/981002082033.htm

Source:		University Of Colorado At Boulder

Date:		1998-10-02

Antarctic Ice Core Hints Abrupt Warming Some 12,500 Years
Ago May Have Been Global

An analysis of an ancient Antarctic ice core indicates
an abrupt climate warming occurred there about 12,500
years ago, an event previously thought to have primarily
influenced climate in the Northern Hemisphere.

James White, a paleo-climatologist at the University
of Colorado at Boulder ...

"The ice cores from opposite ends of the earth can be
accurately cross-dated using the large, rapid climate
changes in the methane concentrations from the atmosphere
that accompanied the warming," White said.

The evidence from the greenhouse gas bubbles indicates
temperatures from the end of the Younger Dryas Period
to the beginning of the Holocene some 12,500 years ago
rose about 20 degrees Fahrenheit in a 50-year period in
Antarctica, much of it in several major leaps lasting less
than a decade ... ''

I certainly agree that there is strong evidence of global
warming starting about 12,500 years ago and which is going 
on today -- we seem to be in a "warm room", most likely
because of increased output from the Sun -- Horace and I
beat that one around  several months ago.

However,

Jones Beene wrote:

``Yesterday, Rick Monteverde mentioned a most interesting
website and body of research about a little-known natural
catastrophe (most likely real) that occurred around the
Great Lakes region of the USA about 12,500 years ago ...''

My question regarding evidence from the Greenland ice
cores refers to debris trapped in the ice that can be
related to such a catastrophe.  For example, ice core
data can be correlated with specific volcanic eruptions.
Is there any such evidence for this proposed catastrophe?

Jack Smith

PS  Although the last interglacial had a duration of
only about 10,000 years, the previous one endured for
about 30,000 years.  So maybe we have 18,000 years of
warming left.  We may need it because if the Arctic
ice cap melts, those cold winds could give us 50 feet
of "lake effect" snow during July here in Cleveland,
Ohio, -- a plausible trigger for the next ice age.


From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 07:43:12 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA12344;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:38:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:38:10 -0800
Message-ID: <20031124153752.70173.qmail@web11706.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:37:52 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Re: neat observation
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <002401c3b083$434f9840$6701a8c0@msns.flt.ptd.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"4j0HI2.0.e03.WNYm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52553
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

we didnt ahve him handed to us, they wanted a prisoner
exchange, releasing some of THEIR terrorists in
exchange.  by law, we cant do that.  now, clinton DID
have a full recon on osama, watching all his links and
trades, and in fact had a plan to assasinate osama the
moment it became possible, with a predator uav on
call.  that day happened to be the day of the
turnover.  so clinton actually had a 3 hour meeting
with bush on the issue, outlined everything for him
personally, and asked him to give the order to strike,
as clinton no longer could.  according to one of
clinton's aides, bush "laughed at him, and told him to
relax"  bush not only didnt give the order to strike,
but later ordered that all recon of bin ladens
operations be disbanded.  now, HOW could 9/11 have
been prevented?  ohh, and why did bush do all this? 
cause it was a bargaining chip with teh taliban. 
after all, bush was trying to get the taliban to agree
to allow an american company to build an oil pipeline
through afghanistan, and he was being nice to osama to
get on their good side.  
--- revtec <revtec@PTD.NET> wrote:
> We wouldn't have lost the World Trade Center in
> 2001, or or have to prove ourselves in Iraq if we
> had shown some resolve (leadership) in Somalia or
> picked up Bin Laden when we had him handed to us
> during the Clinton administration.  I will restrain
> myself from further comment since this isn't the
> place.  I am quite irritated with this political
> outburst from Mr. Ward. We have enough scientific
> divisiveness to deal with without injecting this
> stuff.
> 
> Jeff Fink
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Ward Johanson 
>   To: ahmancer@aol.com ; Asrandprr@aol.com ;
> balchmag@aol.com ; rluzenberg@aol.com ;
> cbhc@juno.com ; crj@hiwaay.net ;
> reality@pocketmail.com ; goodgrief4@hotmail.com ;
> Jack.Harrison@NDCHealth.com ; jaymefneely@yahoo.com
> ; jbsris@bellsouth.net ; JMay@hoover.k12.al.us ;
> jodess@charter.net ; JTaylor279@aol.com ;
> laura@suggs.com ; mbkreider@msn.com ; me@juli.org ;
> mwgchf@aol.com ; perrypoodle@aol.com ;
> pligon3392@aol.com ; rebraswell@aol.com ;
> RJohanson@ehjlaw.com ; rodpeeks@bellsouth.net ;
> sevelius@cableone.net ; spruiell@hotmail.com ;
> tbaermojo@aol.com ; vanorri@bellsouth.net ;
> winteam@sbcglobal.net 
>   Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
>   Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 3:36 PM
>   Subject: Fw: Re: neat observation
> 
> 
> 
>   RSRKYLE@aol.com
>   To: wardsworld@juno.com
>   Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:18:46 EST
>   Subject: Re: neat observation
>   Message-ID: <18a.222c2b9b.2ced3836@aol.com>
> 
>   America will be a great nation when it once again
> has great leaders to challenge people to purpose and
> to sacrifice.  911 was a perfect opportunity for
> that.  But, George W. Bush failed to use that
> opportunity to ignite the imaginations of the
> American public.  John Kennedy said  "We will have a
> man on the moon in this decade." (the sixties).  And
> guess what?  We did!  George W. Bush could have
> said, "We will eliminate the threat of terrorism
> from the U.S. within five years."  "We will become
> energy independent within ten years."  "We will
> uncover the roots of terrorism and wipe them out
> within 20 years."  There is no limit to the
> ingenuity and creativity of Americans who yearn for
> new challenges and accomplishments.  It doesn't
> depend on where manufacturing or computer programing
> is done.  THE PROBLEM IN AMERICA IS OUR LEADERSHIP
> VACUUM!  G.W.BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN MY
> LIFETIME! 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 07:44:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA14381;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:42:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:42:02 -0800
Message-ID: <20031124154147.30789.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:41:47 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <005001c3b124$73d84c40$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"4iJJm3.0.AW3.7RYm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52554
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

dunno, the link states that theres no shock altered
rock.  if the circles were created by seismic shock,
that would be there, no matter the source of said
shock.
--- Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
> The so-called Richat Structure is a geological
> formation in the Maur Adrar Desert in the African
> country of Mauritania. Although it resembles an
> impact crater, it is almost certainly neither a
> meteorite nor asteroid crater, nor is it an eroded
> volcanic dome. 
> 
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021028.html
> 
> Many experts have an opinion in it, based on scant &
> scanter evidence, so why not one more, this time
> from the fringe?
> 
> OK ... looks like an SQM (strange quark matter)
> entry lesion to me....
> 
> REF:
> http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html
> 
> Jones
> 
> 
> Might be a promising place to mine for LENR
> electrodes  ;-)


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 08:00:51 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id HAA23268;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:56:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:56:47 -0800
Message-ID: <000d01c3b2a2$5644c760$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq> <3FC1403F.4EB82EE0@centurytel.net> <004801c3b21c$93bd7000$8837fea9@cpq> <3FC20BF9.2B74CA97@centurytel.net>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:47:57 -0800
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 HAA23150
Resent-Message-ID: <"zBgW7.0.Rh5._eYm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52555
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jack,

> PS  Although the last interglacial had a duration of
> only about 10,000 years, the previous one endured for
> about 30,000 years.  So maybe we have 18,000 years of
> warming left.  We may need it because if the Arctic
> ice cap melts, those cold winds could give us 50 feet
> of "lake effect" snow during July here in Cleveland,
> Ohio, -- a plausible trigger for the next ice age.



Or... the less sanguine alternattve... that being that the ice/warming cycle is triggered by fairly regular cosmic events that occasionally heat up the sun on steady cycles, but that the"norm" for Earth ....would otherwise be advancing ice and much colder temps... this possibility, unlikely as it may seem at first, is part of my problem with all the well-meaning hoopla about the evils of global warming. 

The time horizon for humans (even fairly intelligent ones) is so limited that we may not realize that global warming could be a good thing in the perspective of an Earth that would normally be much colder... had we not, as this mounting evidence indicates, been blasted some 12,500 years ago with a huge dose of mass/energy, the effects of which are still around us, but non-obvious. In fact, there is plenty of present-day contrarian evidence that even now, globally, we are approaching a cooling-off period, not a net-warming.

In this longer-term scenario, North America should be covered by a thick ice sheet extending well down into the mid-west... and as for Cleveland... forget lake-effect snow, you would be under several hundred feet of advancing ice pushing down from a depopulated Canada...

Just the kind of shiver you needed, first thing on a December morning, right? And perhaps a little more incentive for all of us to spread the message about the importance of LENR research....

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 08:33:53 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA16079;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:30:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:30:56 -0800
Message-ID: <002001c3b2a7$1bdc2280$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <20031124154147.30789.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:22:07 -0800
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 IAA15758
Resent-Message-ID: <"gvRVJ1.0.8x3.09Zm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52556
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "alexander hollins" 

> dunno, the link states that theres no shock altered
> rock.  if the circles were created by seismic shock,
> that would be there, no matter the source of said
> shock.


Not really... If the mass/energy source that caused the circular impact pattern in the desert only heated up the sand enough to cause significant melting over a wide area, and thus it naturally induced 'stress-relief' because of the molten state, then there would be no shock-altered structure - only circular bands of glassy silicates caused by differential cooling rates.

The only way this could happen would be a fairly extensive, but fairly low flux ( a few particles per meter^3) of accelerated material arriving in a long stream that blasted through earth, maybe all the way through, and caused massive heating around the path of travel from entry to exit, but left no lingering radioactive transmutation (apparently there is none). Presumably this would be a different type of cosmic event then the one that caused the heating over the Great Lakes 12,500 years ago - and far different from the impact of a normal asteroid. The lesson being that we on Earth are subject to many diverse cosmic risks that are not yet well understood.

When SQM particles meet normal quarks, it is my understanding that they will decay without the expected residual radioactivity of nuclear decay, and some small percentage of SQM may recombine into a new kind of baryonic material that is still present at that site. That was the reason behind the comment (not totally flippant) in the last post that any metal ores from that particular impact area might be a source for LENR electrodes...if enough metal ore could be found in the melted silicates and if that metal then contained some small percentage of residual SQM... but don't try to find any references for this suggestion on the internet, it was mostly a product of a troubled mind and too many profiteroles at a holiday event.

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 09:06:00 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA06732;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:01:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:01:11 -0800
Message-ID: <20031124170100.71115.qmail@web11703.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:01:00 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <002001c3b2a7$1bdc2280$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"kFJQY2.0.-e1.MbZm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52557
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

but that would leave metamorphic silicates.  teh
article states that its sedimentary.  no sign of
melted rocks either.
--- Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "alexander hollins" 
> 
> > dunno, the link states that theres no shock
> altered
> > rock.  if the circles were created by seismic
> shock,
> > that would be there, no matter the source of said
> > shock.
> 
> 
> Not really... If the mass/energy source that caused
> the circular impact pattern in the desert only
> heated up the sand enough to cause significant
> melting over a wide area, and thus it naturally
> induced 'stress-relief' because of the molten state,
> then there would be no shock-altered structure -
> only circular bands of glassy silicates caused by
> differential cooling rates.
> 
> The only way this could happen would be a fairly
> extensive, but fairly low flux ( a few particles per
> meter^3) of accelerated material arriving in a long
> stream that blasted through earth, maybe all the way
> through, and caused massive heating around the path
> of travel from entry to exit, but left no lingering
> radioactive transmutation (apparently there is
> none). Presumably this would be a different type of
> cosmic event then the one that caused the heating
> over the Great Lakes 12,500 years ago - and far
> different from the impact of a normal asteroid. The
> lesson being that we on Earth are subject to many
> diverse cosmic risks that are not yet well
> understood.
> 
> When SQM particles meet normal quarks, it is my
> understanding that they will decay without the
> expected residual radioactivity of nuclear decay,
> and some small percentage of SQM may recombine into
> a new kind of baryonic material that is still
> present at that site. That was the reason behind the
> comment (not totally flippant) in the last post that
> any metal ores from that particular impact area
> might be a source for LENR electrodes...if enough
> metal ore could be found in the melted silicates and
> if that metal then contained some small percentage
> of residual SQM... but don't try to find any
> references for this suggestion on the internet, it
> was mostly a product of a troubled mind and too many
> profiteroles at a holiday event.
> 
> Jones
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 09:30:50 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA26840;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:26:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:26:25 -0800
Message-ID: <005b01c3b2ae$d32e8200$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <20031124170100.71115.qmail@web11703.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:17:19 -0800
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 JAA26681
Resent-Message-ID: <"L0dNX.0.CZ6.0zZm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52558
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "alexander hollins" 

> but that would leave metamorphic silicates.  the article states that its sedimentary.  no sign of melted rocks either.

I think you mean "igneous,"not "metamorphc."

There are a number of other sites on the web giving more detail, such as 
http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/DAAC_DOCS/geomorphology/GEO_2/GEO_PLATE_T-31.HTML

where it is stated that there are significant breccia, which is is abundant in the structure but the breccia does not have the characteristics of that produced by impact ..."Injection breccia and pseudotachylyte-like material, shatter cones, and other shock-metamorphic effects have not been identified."

Now breccia is a cemented rock that is often igneous, especially where some heat, but not a lot of heat combined with pressure is involved in formation.

Admittedly, the evidence for an SQM impact site is not great, but then again NO geologist to my knowledge even considered it as a possibility and the evidence for such other possibilities as the "hydrothermal alteration of rhyolite sills"is not there either, as there is no surface or subsuface water, so quien sabe?

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 10:35:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA09698;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:32:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:32:03 -0800
Message-ID: <20031124182928.66225.qmail@web11708.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:29:28 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <005b01c3b2ae$d32e8200$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"JCdFQ.0.GN2.Ywam_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52559
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

no, igneous is lava formed, metamorphic is any kind
that has been changed, usually by heat and pressure. 
so if something happens to the base sedimetary rock,
no matter the source of the change, its considered
metamorphic.

as to breccia 
http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/vwlessons/lessons/Slideshow/Serocks/Sedrock3.html
Breccia is formed in a very similar fashion to
conglomerate. The difference between the two rocks is
that breccia's rock fragments are very sharp and
angular. These rock fragments have not been
transported by water, wind, or glaciers long enough to
be rounded and smoothed like in the conglomerate. The
cementing agents silica, calcite (CaCO3), and iron
oxides are the same as in conglomerate. 

thus breccia is a sedimentary rock, though the gravel
component can be of any type.  you get impact breccia
after the rock is broken by impact, and then cemented
in place by water and sand flow.  it is not igneas. 
to be igneas, the cementing force would have to be a
terrestrial melted rock, aka lava, but thats a
different rock altogether.  the link you gave also
states 
Dips of strata are relatively gentle; strata are even
flat-lying at the center of the structure. Nowhere are
beds severely disrupted and contorted
and
Quartzite forms the resistant circular ridges, and
less resistant rocks underlie the intervening annular
depressions, some of which contain seasonal lakes. The
center of the structure, the Guelb er Richât (Figure
T-31.3), exposes flat-lying limestone and some
meta-arkose surrounded by a massive ridge of chert and
chert breccia
and
Associated analcime-rich rock has been interpreted by
some to be the result of hydrothermal alteration of
rhyolite sills and dikes

this means, in order, that the minerals were laid
where they are, posibbly due to some unusual water
flow, that the large ridges are quartzite, a
metamorphic that takes a LOOOOONG time to form, and
that the valleys are a different mineral altogether
one that is both younger and more erosible, and that
the center is a combination of limestone (sedimentary)
and chert/chert brecia.  chert is a metamorphic formed
from a slow squeezing of an igneaous rock, which, due
to number three, would have to be old., and off number
three, evidence of there once being water, and it
being there post deposition of the limestone/breccia,
and a lack of volcanic activity. 

in addition, there is a statement that a fault system
that runs through and past it shows layers that
approximate the structure, if it were formed by a dome
forming, ie, the rock being upifted from a central
point, thus forming the bands.  but there is no
evidence of impact or volcanic activity doing this. 
which is where teh myster lies.  something lifted it
slowly, not fast....  ohh, your saying a slow
bombardment...   the only way that would work is if
something created a small amount of heat and large
amount of pressure, in an area no larger than about 1
kilometer, constantly, over a long time, and (heres
teh big kicker) at a constanct depth, not affecting
the central limestone until reaching a certain depth.

that would be....   planned.  if done by some type of
bombardment.  hmm.... other thoughts coming to me, let
me research.

--- Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
> From: "alexander hollins" 
> 
> > but that would leave metamorphic silicates.  the
> article states that its sedimentary.  no sign of
> melted rocks either.
> 
> I think you mean "igneous,"not "metamorphc."
> 
> There are a number of other sites on the web giving
> more detail, such as 
>
http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/DAAC_DOCS/geomorphology/GEO_2/GEO_PLATE_T-31.HTML
> 
> where it is stated that there are significant
> breccia, which is is abundant in the structure but
> the breccia does not have the characteristics of
> that produced by impact ..."Injection breccia and
> pseudotachylyte-like material, shatter cones, and
> other shock-metamorphic effects have not been
> identified."
> 
> Now breccia is a cemented rock that is often
> igneous, especially where some heat, but not a lot
> of heat combined with pressure is involved in
> formation.
> 
> Admittedly, the evidence for an SQM impact site is
> not great, but then again NO geologist to my
> knowledge even considered it as a possibility and
> the evidence for such other possibilities as the
> "hydrothermal alteration of rhyolite sills"is not
> there either, as there is no surface or subsuface
> water, so quien sabe?
> 
> Jones
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 10:45:39 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA17328;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:41:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:41:00 -0800
Message-ID: <20031124184044.22051.qmail@web11706.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 10:40:44 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <005b01c3b2ae$d32e8200$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gucgm.0.gE4.y2bm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52560
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

doing a little research 
http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mmi/english/dmg/mauritanides.html

http://cp.yahoo.net/search/cache?p=Mauritania+acidic&ei=UTF-8&n=20&fl=0&url=zFZI-Hyl4dkJ:www.fu-berlin.de/dahlem/DWR_88%2520Desert/08%2520Hiernaux.pdf

the particular area is an ultrabasic old rock area,
but its surrounded by rather acidic soils on all
sides, a big farming problem.  there is evidence of
post limestone water, especially in teh deep areas. 
if the area was a decent sized lake for a short time,
and there was an aquifer that came that was acid laden
from the trip through the soils nearby, there would be
a decent amount of bubbling and gas formation where
the two water sources met.  that would provide the
doming, and the weathering would occur after the lake
dried.  also, the link you had provided said that
there was a decent amount of radial drainage, which
is, iirc, consitent both with dry lakebeds and with
aquifer tubes.  yes no?

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 11:30:01 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA15911;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:23:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:23:54 -0800
Message-ID: <007b01c3b2bf$3d490880$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <20031124182928.66225.qmail@web11708.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:14:50 -0800
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 LAA15813
Resent-Message-ID: <"JxApe.0.Xu3.9hbm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52561
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


> no, igneous is lava formed, metamorphic is any kind
> that has been changed, usually by heat and pressure. 
> so if something happens to the base sedimentary rock,
> no matter the source of the change, its considered
> metamorphic.

This is simply not true. Any first year geology course will tell you that igneous rock is a rock or mineral that solidified from molten or partly molten material, but lava, by definition is only that magma which cooled *above ground*. Molten sedimentary rock is igneous and *only* igneous - unless it has been pressurized and changed in microstructure, then it becomes metamorphic.

Igneous rock derives from either magma, lava, or from any heated sedimentary origin; It does not have to be lava-formed, only heat formed. Most igneous rock which we see on the surface was cooled under the surface before appearing on the surface (due to erosion or uplifting) and that is one of the two key distinctions: all lava was cooled on the surface, and some lava can be metamorphic.

It is true that all lava is derived from magma, but only a small fraction of igneous rock is/was lava, nor is all magma lava, nor is all lava igneous (some is metamorphic). Furthermore, there are two distinct kinds of breccia, and

igneous breccia is either -
a. A breccia that is composed of fragments of igneous rock.  or

b. *Any breccia produced by igneous processes;* e.g., volcanic breccia,
intrusion breccia, partially molten breccia. 

Metamorphic rocks are rocks that have "morphed" from igneous or sedimentary rocks into another kind of microstructure under tons and tons of pressure over extended periods.

> thus breccia is a sedimentary rock, 

No. Even normal breccia is cemented rock which can be mostly sedimentary or partially sedimentary, but this term must be distinguished from 'igneous breccia' which is... you guessed it... a rock or mineral that solidified from molten or partly molten conglomerate material...

Jones

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 11:33:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA18128;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:26:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:26:35 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b1ebbe805d4db38@[64.61.217.89]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500bbe2c1ffb5a0@[12.21.208.140]>
References: <v01530500bbe2c1ffb5a0@[12.21.208.140]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:27:18 -0600
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Fifty percent increase in CO2 by 2020?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"bydrH3.0.5R4.hjbm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52562
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>An insane world to come?  Vorts need to get busy and deliver some energy
>products.
>
>
><http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/11/20/climate.gas.reut/index.html>
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner

I agree, but how do we do it?

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 13:16:55 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id NAA26184;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:10:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:10:53 -0800
From: Erikbaard@aol.com
Message-ID: <116.2bd7f557.2cf3cdac@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:10:04 EST
Subject: another failing "universal constant" revealed?
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 10708
Resent-Message-ID: <"QIm231.0.-O6.SFdm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52563
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi All - 

Popular science media have discussed how the speed of light might not be 
remained constant from the Big Bang through present  (I'll gently skirt Big Bang 
arguments for now, thank you) but the following ideas about "fine structure 
constant" binding electrons to protons might be interesting for a few folks on 
the list --


AS UNIVERSE COMES UNDONE, ELECTRONS CLING MORE TIGHTLY TO PROTONS

Northeastern scientists question the fundamental constants of nature

BOSTON, Mass. In this topsy-turvy world of changing trends and 
stormy alliances, two Northeastern University scientists propose an answer
to why even the fundamental constants of nature don't seem constant 
anymore. The bond between electrons and protons, called the fine 
structure constant, or alpha, may not be constant and may have been 
200,000 times weaker about ten billion years ago. This is a recent 
astronomy finding that is hotly debated because it departs from the 
standard model of physics and may point to modifications introduced by 
string theory -- the modern "Theory of Everything" which attempts to 
unify all forces in nature.

According to Drs. Luis Anchordoqui and Haim Goldberg of the Department of
Physics at Northeastern University in Boston, Mass., this apparent tiny
change in alpha through the years may mirror the apparent accelerating
expansion rate of the Universe, as if electrons and protons clung ever more
tightly together as the Universe began to fly apart. The scientists 
describe this process in a recent issue of Physical Review D: Vol. 68, 
083513 (2003).

"The apparent change in the fine structure constant remains controversial,
partly because it stands in contrast to standard field theory, the basis of
all the successes in atomic and nuclear physics, in which this constant is
an unvarying input to all calculations," said Anchordoqui. "We find,
however, that the apparent change agrees with a variety of different types
of observations."

Light signals from exceedingly bright and distant galaxies called quasars
seem to indicate that the bond between electrons and protons was weaker in
the early universe. Light left these galaxies about 10 billion years ago and 
thus reflects the state of matter (and the laws of nature) from that epoch.
This apparent change in the fine structure constant has been observed in
several independent measurements.

On Earth, however, studies of a natural nuclear fission reactor which
operated in Gabon two billion years ago reveal no change in the fine
structure constant, down to an accuracy of one part in ten million.  Thus,
if the fine structure constant has changed, it did not do so evenly through
the years. Anchordoqui and Goldberg attempt to reconcile this discrepancy.

They propose that the apparent change in the fine structure constant is
coupled to "quintessence."  This is a theory of dark energy in which a
mysterious universal repulsive force, once weaker long ago, now dominates
over the force of gravity and is causing the universe to fly apart at an
ever-expanding rate. Anchordoqui and Goldberg worked with one particular
model of quintessence proposed by Drs. Andreas Albrecht and Constantinos
Skordis of the University of California, Davis, in 2000.  They found that
their own theory of the fine structure constant, when viewed in the context
of this quintessence model, provides agreement between the quasar data and
the Gabon data.

That is, the fine structure constant was measurably weaker ten billion 
years ago, but as quintessence assumed dominance about eight billion years 
ago, the force between electrons and protons became stronger and "more 
constant."

The strength of the electron-proton bond from any matter created anytime
within the last several billion years is essentially indistinguishable.

The reason for this lies in the peculiar behavior of the Albrecht-Skordis
model, in which the quintessence field has all but ceased its variation
during the present era.  The model is also consistent with landmark data
collected by the NASA Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, which has
determined fundamental properties of the universe, such as its age and
shape, an announcement made in February 2003. Anchordoqui and Goldberg said
analyzing the light from even more distant quasars will reveal a steady
decrease in electron-proton binding strength.

Also, they said their theory could be tested soon with just a ten-fold
improvement in sensitivity in measuring the acceleration of different
objects in free fall.  This is because a variation in the fine structure
constant would imply a variation of this type of acceleration as the
chemical makeup varied, a violation in the equivalence principle introduced
by Albert Einstein in his general theory of relativity. Two proposed
space-based mission will have this sensitivity: the MICROSCOPE mission from
France's Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, expected to fly in 2005; and a
NASA-ESA mission called STEP, Satellite Test of the Equivalence Principle.
"We may be able to test this model of a 'changing' fine structure constant
within a couple of years with instruments on satellites," said Goldberg.
"Or, we could continue observing alpha in lab experiments for another
several billion years to see changes on the order of the quasar values. I'm
counting on the satellites." For more information, refer to Anchordoqui and
Goldberg's journal article, "Time Variations of the Fine Structure Constant
Driven by Quintessence," available at http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0306084.

Northeastern University, located in the heart of Boston, Massachusetts, 
is a world leader in cooperative education and recognized for its expert 
faculty and first-rate academic and research facilities. Through co-op, 
Northeastern undergraduates alternate semesters of full-time study with 
semesters of paid work in fields relevant to their professional interests 
and major, giving them nearly two years of professional experience upon 
graduation. The majority of Northeastern graduates receive a job offer from 
a co-op employer. Cited for excellence two years running by U.S. News & World
Report, Northeastern was named a top college in the northeast by the
Princeton Review 2003/04. In addition, Northeastern's career services was
awarded top honors by Kaplan Newsweek's "Unofficial Insiders Guide to the
320 Most Interesting Colleges and Universities," 2003 edition. For more
information, please visit http://www.northeastern.edu.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 16:19:38 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA02207;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:09:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:09:41 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick@highsurf.com@mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210107bbe8412ce410@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq>
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:12:05 -1000
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick@highsurf.com>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1142403363==_ma============"
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ji6nB3.0.KY.4tfm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52564
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

--============_-1142403363==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

Well, I *hope* it was natural, else we were paid a visit by the 
empire's death star (settings on "planetary stun", apparently).

If it did happen, it might be related to any number of catastrophic 
events around that time - but the carbon dating is off kilter so it's 
hard to make all the connections. It would have been the 
quintessential biblical smiting. Perhaps the cause of those 
mysterious mile-wide pock marks along the east coast that look like, 
you know, stamp your foot in a mud puddle and look at the marks where 
the soft mud blobs impact. Look like old eroded angled meteor impacts 
but they're not. They 'point' to the general area northeast. Suddenly 
the air heats up to 1000 deg or so, the ice pack erupts like it was 
in a microwave oven, the wind messes weather globally, the sea rises 
a few feet and floods costal settlements worldwide, big sudden gravel 
outflow found in the seabed off the St. Lawrence area in the 
Atlantic, etc. Dakota badlands? On and on. Some big mess happened up 
there, and the conventional idea is that things broke up rather 
suddenly when the ice began to recede around that time. I think the 
recent conventional theory is that there was some sort of natural 
ice/mud dam that broke loose with a glacier lake full of water behind 
it. Could have been, but the ionization tracks of a significant 
nuclear event are recorded in the rocks and soil up there, and would 
have to be properly explained too. The tracks start fresh at the 
then-surface (proving a sudden and not cumulative event source), and 
peter out a few feet below, giving a good sample of the flux 
intensity. It was indeed intense.

- Rick

>Yesterday, Rick Monteverde mentioned a most interesting website and 
>body of research about a little-known natural catastrophe (most 
>likely real) that occurred around the Great Lakes region of the USA 
>about 12,500 years ago. It is a date, coincidental or not, with a 
>lot of "baggage" in the form of mysticism. Here is the science:
>
><http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a=36>http://www.centerfi 
>rstamericans.com/mt.html?a=36
>
<big snip>
**********************************
Rick Monteverde
427 Kaleimamahu St.
Honolulu, HI 96825-2329
(808) 395-5483 voice (home)
(808) 395-1244 voice (office)
(808) 753-7516 cell
(808) 395-1884 fax
rick@highsurf.com
**********************************
--============_-1142403363==_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 { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.</title></head><body>
<div>Well, I *hope* it was natural, else we were paid a visit by the
empire's death star (settings on &quot;planetary stun&quot;,
apparently).</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>If it did happen, it might be related to any number of
catastrophic events around that time - but the carbon dating is off
kilter so it's hard to make all the connections. It would have been
the quintessential biblical smiting. Perhaps the cause of those
mysterious mile-wide pock marks along the east coast that look like,
you know, stamp your foot in a mud puddle and look at the marks where
the soft mud blobs impact. Look like old eroded angled meteor impacts
but they're not. They 'point' to the general area northeast. Suddenly
the air heats up to 1000 deg or so, the ice pack erupts like it was
in a microwave oven, the wind messes weather globally, the sea rises
a few feet and floods costal settlements worldwide, big sudden gravel
outflow found in the seabed off the St. Lawrence area in the
Atlantic, etc. Dakota badlands? On and on. Some big mess happened up
there, and the conventional idea is that things broke up rather
suddenly when the ice began to recede around that time. I think the
recent conventional theory is that there was some sort of natural
ice/mud dam that broke loose with a glacier lake full of water behind
it. Could have been, but the ionization tracks of a significant
nuclear event are recorded in the rocks and soil up there, and would
have to be properly explained too. The tracks start fresh at the
then-surface (proving a sudden and not cumulative event source), and
peter out a few feet below, giving a good sample of the flux
intensity. It was indeed intense.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>- Rick</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Yesterday, Rick Monteverde mentioned a
most interesting website and body of research about a little-known
natural catastrophe (most likely real) that occurred around the Great
Lakes region of the USA about 12,500 years ago. It is a date,
coincidental or not,&nbsp;with a lot of &quot;baggage&quot; in the
form of mysticism. Here is the science:</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.html?a=36"
>http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/mt.ht<span
></span>ml?a=36</a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<div>&lt;big snip&gt;</div>

<div>**********************************<br>
Rick Monteverde<br>
427 Kaleimamahu St.<br>
Honolulu, HI 96825-2329<br>
(808) 395-5483 voice (home)<br>
(808) 395-1244 voice (office)<br>
(808) 753-7516 cell<br>
(808) 395-1884 fax<br>
rick@highsurf.com<br>
**********************************</div>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1142403363==_ma============--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Nov 24 20:04:30 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id UAA04372;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:00:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:00:58 -0800
Message-ID: <031201c3b307$7bc11420$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq> <v04210107bbe8412ce410@[10.220.188.4]>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:51:58 -0800
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 UAA04284
Resent-Message-ID: <"TT_o63.0.D41.vFjm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52565
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde writes,

> I think the recent conventional theory is that there was some sort of natural 
> ice/mud dam that broke loose with a glacier lake full of water behind 
> it. Could have been, but the ionization tracks of a significant 
> nuclear event are recorded in the rocks and soil up there, and would 
> have to be properly explained too. The tracks start fresh at the 
> then-surface (proving a sudden and not cumulative event source), and 
> peter out a few feet below, giving a good sample of the flux 
> intensity. It was indeed intense.

... according to one estimate in the article - it was many times more intense than the flux in nuclear reactors if it were instantaneous,... and it probably was instantaneous as it was localized, whereas a longer-term cosmic discharge could not be so localized - so it was very much like a nuclear weapon in its neutron effects.

What could cause this?

If we write-off the mad-alien theory, you know... Klingons pissed-off that the Chippewa screwed them on a fur trade (and, yeah they probably have some WMDs stashed in caves), so they nuke first and ask questions later (eventually to be adopted as the Bush strategy) and realizing that air and ice have a very low cross-sections for thermal neutrons we are left with very few possibilities: antimatter, SQM, or  the highest energy cosmic rays (mostly protons, but including heavier atomic nuclei) with energies above 10^20 eV (16 Joules each), over fifty million times more energetic than the particles produced by the nearby Fermilab accelerator. But could any of these cause such an intense neutron flux at ground level?

Jones 

BTW, as for more proof, one wonders if anything else in that area which is drastically affected by neutrons (boron, cadmium, hafnium?) and presently measurable (besides the Pu/U ratio, which was evaluated and is way-off) is also anomalously unusual? 

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 01:40:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA07137;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:37:45 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:37:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller@midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:39:09 -0600
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <1n86svg97c4nrqo95pqjunaghilkauui5r@4ax.com>
References: <005001c3b124$73d84c40$8837fea9@cpq>
In-Reply-To: <005001c3b124$73d84c40$8837fea9@cpq>
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 mx2.eskimo.com id BAA07037
Resent-Message-ID: <"aMSpb1.0.Ql1.aBom_"@mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52566
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:14:20 -0800, "Jones Beene"
<jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:

>The so-called Richat Structure is a geological formation in the Maur Adrar Desert in the African country of Mauritania. Although it resembles an impact crater, it is almost certainly neither a meteorite nor asteroid crater, nor is it an eroded volcanic dome. 
>
>http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021028.html
>
>Many experts have an opinion in it, based on scant & scanter evidence, so why not one more, this time from the fringe?
>
>OK ... looks like an SQM (strange quark matter) entry lesion to me....
>
>REF:
>http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/01342.html

I haven't read all the references (and don't completely understand
those I read :),   but ... how about a really, really big lightning
strike?  (Really big)

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

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 09:32:11 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id JAA31476;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:28:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:28:38 -0800
Message-ID: <3FC35E90.9080008@rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:52:16 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
References: <001a01c3b116$eaf00060$8837fea9@cpq> <v04210107bbe8412ce410@[10.220.188.4]>
In-Reply-To: <v04210107bbe8412ce410@[10.220.188.4]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"PxCCC.0.kh7.65vm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52567
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde wrote:

> Well, I *hope* it was natural, else we were paid a visit by the 
> empire's death star (settings on "planetary stun", apparently).



Or, as the Vedic texts say, there was a global nuclear war between India 
and Atlantis:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/8/prweb44253.htm

I guess India won.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 10:35:31 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA09394;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:30:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:30:42 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b01bbe94dd4edf2@[64.61.217.89]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:31:26 -0600
To: Vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy@metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Over coming the columb barrier
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Resent-Message-ID: <"jQRPj3.0.bI2.H_vm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52568
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Since reading the Vol 9 Issue 51 of I E mag, I have suddenly taken in 
interest in the Papp Engine. Since I assume that the energy results 
from LENR, this has translated into an interest in that subject. Mark 
Hugo who is researching the matter too has recommended that I read R 
A Oriani's papers on the subject.  His 2003 coauthored with Fisher 
appears to prove that LENR's have been happening. He mentions the 
matter of over coming the columb barrier, which I assume is a 
critical first step in getting the reaction to proceed. He mentions 
various theories which address this matter, however the discussion is 
limited to a few sentences. Do any of you people know of a paper 
which addresses this matter in more detail?

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 11:05:08 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id KAA31248;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:59:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:59:43 -0800
Message-ID: <20031125185927.11159.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:59:27 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <3FC35E90.9080008@rtpatlanta.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"j7Wrz2.0.Ae7.UQwm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52569
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

i've heard it said that the various indian (na indian)
tribes with various from space legends and pictographs
that resemble space ships were actually survivors of
said war that landed in escape craft of some type, and
did not in fact come over on the land bridge.  not
sure if i buy that, just sharing.
--- Terry Blanton <blantont@rtpatlanta.com> wrote:
> Rick Monteverde wrote:
> 
> > Well, I *hope* it was natural, else we were paid a
> visit by the 
> > empire's death star (settings on "planetary stun",
> apparently).
> 
> 
> 
> Or, as the Vedic texts say, there was a global
> nuclear war between India 
> and Atlantis:
> 
> http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/8/prweb44253.htm
> 
> I guess India won.
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 12:37:18 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA01847;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:33:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:33:36 -0800
Message-ID: <3FC3BCAA.40502@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:33:46 -0500
From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
References: <20031125185927.11159.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20031125185927.11159.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Puudq1.0.gS.Voxm_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52570
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



alexander hollins wrote:
> i've heard it said that the various indian (na indian)
> tribes with various from space legends and pictographs
> that resemble space ships were actually survivors of
> said war that landed in escape craft of some type, and
> did not in fact come over on the land bridge.

Perhaps -- but what makes you so sure they aren't descendents of the 
ancient Egyptians who settled Central America?  They crossed the 
Atlantic in boats made of reeds, as demonstrated by Thor Heyerdahl in 
the "Ra".  (OK, so it sank, but it _could_ have made it across.)

Of course, most of them moved on to settle the Pacific islands, but some 
may very well have migrated north.  Of course, their dates would be out 
of sync with the dates of the settlers who came over the land bridge, 
which adds to the murk surrounding the carbon dating.

Dunno how this fits with the BP 12,500 blowup, tho.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Nov 25 12:54:06 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA15120;
	Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:51:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:51:19 -0800
Message-ID: <20031125205111.67696.qmail@web11703.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:51:11 -0800 (PST)
From: alexander hollins <the_leaking_pen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: OT:  12,500 B.P.
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <3FC3BCAA.40502@pobox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"nwTkk.0.Ai3.73ym_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52571
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

well, the dates of crossings of the land bridge
coincide.

and... i thought its been proven that there was no
direct link between the egyptians and the central
americans.  thats why the similarity of style is
generally considered one of archeologies great
mysteries.
--- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <salaw@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> alexander hollins wrote:
> > i've heard it said that the various indian (na
> indian)
> > tribes with various from space legends and
> pictographs
> > that resemble space ships were actually survivors
> of
> > said war that landed in escape craft of some type,
> and
> > did not in fact come over on the land bridge.
> 
> Perhaps -- but what makes you so sure they aren't
> descendents of the 
> ancient Egyptians who settled Central America?  They
> crossed the 
> Atlantic in boats made of reeds, as demonstrated by
> Thor Heyerdahl in 
> the "Ra".  (OK, so it sank, but it _could_ have made
> it across.)
> 
> Of course, most of them moved on to settle the
> Pacific islands, but some 
> may very well have migrated north.  Of course, their
> dates would be out 
> of sync with the dates of the settlers who came over
> the land bridge, 
> which adds to the murk surrounding the carbon
> dating.
> 
> Dunno how this fits with the BP 12,500 blowup, tho.
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Nov 28 14:27:45 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id OAA03254;
	Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:24:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:24:18 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Just another cosmic catastrophe
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 09:23:39 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <ohifsvg98ju3fg1c6m75i7ig64huq94ip9@4ax.com>
References: <005001c3b124$73d84c40$8837fea9@cpq> <1n86svg97c4nrqo95pqjunaghilkauui5r@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <1n86svg97c4nrqo95pqjunaghilkauui5r@4ax.com>
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 OAA03187
Resent-Message-ID: <"6iKiZ1.0.fo.Hiyn_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52572
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Dean Miller's message of Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:39:09 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]

>I haven't read all the references (and don't completely understand
>those I read :),   but ... how about a really, really big lightning
>strike?  (Really big)
[snip]
How about the progressive drying up of a circular salt lake as the climate changed, resulting in the deposition of different salts as their concentration got too high around the edges where the water was shallowest?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

A "must" read - "The New Rulers of the World" - John Pilger

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov 30 16:15:42 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id QAA17991;
	Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:12:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:12:07 -0800
Message-ID: <008b01c3b79e$790cbea0$8837fea9@cpq>
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9@pacbell.net>
To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Scaling the wall of LENR
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:02:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3B75B.692D76C0"
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: <"VZvqc1.0.1P4.NTeo_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52573
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_01C3B75B.692D76C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The history of the industrial revolution and "business" in general, for =
most of the last two hundred years, has been the history of applying the =
maxim of greater "economy of scale," a bigger-is-better, super-size-it =
kind of theory where increasingly larger facilities or machines =
invariably proved to be more cost effective and therefore profitable.

The effectiveness of the general idea that "bigger is better" has =
dominated society, even science, up until a few decades ago, about the =
time of the Vietnam war and the "Age of Aquarius" counter-culture - when =
old dogma began to be questioned (as well as everything else in American =
society) even in business circles. Occasionally, one started to hear =
about companies "divesting" in order to maximize stock-holder value.

But it was not really until the silicon chip and the =
computer/microprocessor revolution, leading to the whole "nano-tech" =
field, that the competitive advantage of small, decentralized and =
independent entities started making a whole lot more sense.  Without a =
doubt, when it comes to circuits and probably even "thinking" machines, =
there are reverse economies of scale (after a certain threshold) - but =
does it follow that in the near future, there may also be discovered a =
few kinds of energy-generation which will be proven to more cost =
effective (or maybe "only-feasible") on a small. scale: Could some form =
of LENR fall into the emerging categorization of "small is splendid"?

It came up in a recent private conversation that some experiments which =
show a glimmer of "free-energy" simply will not scale up, and in fact =
should probably be scaled-down. I wonder if it is possible that a "think =
small" mind-set might be helpful in many kinds of LENR and I'm not just =
talking about the importance of maximizing surface area, because that in =
itself may not be enough. The idea that synergy is only available by =
going bigger (which is often true) may not hold in all circumstances, =
esp. where normal "laws" don't hold (i.e. the second law of =
thermodynamics)

I wonder what exact circumstances (related to LENR) would benefit from =
"reverse economy of scale" besides maybe:
1. maximizing surface area,
2. minimizing retained energy, or stated otherwise
3. maximizing energy release per unit time
4. providing some kind of intelligent interface (ala Maxwell's demon)
5. Maximizing the probability of a QM reaction

...can anyone out there in vortex-land (and not suffering from a post =
turkey-day, tryptophan-induced-overdose) think of other reasons that =
*reduced* size might be beneficial in LENR?

Jones

A google search for "reverse synergy" i.e. where the whole is less than =
the sum of the parts - turns up a number of hits, but so far none seem =
promising....


------=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3B75B.692D76C0
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 history of the industrial revolution and "business" in=20
general,&nbsp;for most of the last two hundred years,&nbsp;has been the =
history=20
of applying the maxim of greater "economy of scale," a bigger-is-better, =

super-size-it kind of&nbsp;theory where increasingly larger facilities =
or=20
machines invariably proved to be more cost effective and therefore=20
profitable.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The effectiveness of the general idea that "bigger is better" has =
dominated=20
society, even science, up until a few decades ago, about the time of the =
Vietnam=20
war and the "Age of Aquarius" counter-culture - when&nbsp;old dogma =
began to be=20
questioned (as well as everything else in American society) even in =
business=20
circles. Occasionally, one started to hear about companies "divesting" =
in order=20
to maximize stock-holder value.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But it was not really until the silicon chip and the=20
computer/microprocessor revolution, leading to the whole "nano-tech"=20
field,&nbsp;that the competitive advantage of small, decentralized and=20
independent entities started making a whole lot more sense. =
&nbsp;Without a=20
doubt, when it comes to circuits and probably even "thinking" machines, =
there=20
are reverse economies of scale (after a certain threshold) - but does it =
follow=20
that in the near future, there may also be discovered a few kinds of=20
energy-generation which will be proven to more cost effective (or maybe=20
"only-feasible") on a small. scale: Could some form of LENR fall into =
the=20
emerging categorization of "small is splendid"?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It came up in a recent private conversation that some experiments =
which=20
show a glimmer of "free-energy" simply will not scale up, and in fact =
should=20
probably be scaled-down. I wonder if it is possible that a "think small" =

mind-set might be helpful in many kinds of LENR and I'm not just talking =
about=20
the importance of maximizing surface area, because that in itself may =
not be=20
enough. The idea that synergy is only available by going bigger (which =
is often=20
true) may not hold in all circumstances, esp.&nbsp;where normal "laws" =
don't=20
hold (i.e. the second law of thermodynamics)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I wonder what exact circumstances (related to LENR) would benefit =
from=20
"reverse economy of scale"&nbsp;besides maybe:</DIV>
<DIV>1. maximizing surface area,</DIV>
<DIV>2. minimizing retained energy, or stated otherwise</DIV>
<DIV>3. maximizing energy release per unit time</DIV>
<DIV>4. providing some kind of intelligent interface (ala Maxwell's =
demon)</DIV>
<DIV>5. Maximizing the probability of a QM reaction</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>...can anyone out there in vortex-land (and not suffering from a =
post=20
turkey-day, tryptophan-induced-overdose) think of other reasons that =
*reduced*=20
size might be beneficial in LENR?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A google search for "reverse synergy" i.e. where&nbsp;the whole is =
less=20
than the sum of the parts - turns up a number of hits, but so far none =
seem=20
promising....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0088_01C3B75B.692D76C0--

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Nov 30 22:36:03 2003
Received: (from smartlst@localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id WAA17357;
	Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:34:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:34:39 -0800
From: Michael Huffman <knuke@sumosound.de>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Scaling the wall of LENR
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 07:42:30 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
References: <008b01c3b79e$790cbea0$8837fea9@cpq>
In-Reply-To: <008b01c3b79e$790cbea0$8837fea9@cpq>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200312010742.31207.knuke@sumosound.de>
X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de auth:b76291440de0a671bf17bfec730be47d
Resent-Message-ID: <"P4fWb1.0.3F4.-3ko_"@mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/52574
X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 01:02 am, Jones Beene wrote:

> I wonder what exact circumstances (related to LENR) would benefit
> from "reverse economy of scale" besides maybe: 1. maximizing
> surface area,
> 2. minimizing retained energy, or stated otherwise
> 3. maximizing energy release per unit time
> 4. providing some kind of intelligent interface (ala Maxwell's
> demon) 5. Maximizing the probability of a QM reaction
>
> ...can anyone out there in vortex-land (and not suffering from a
> post turkey-day, tryptophan-induced-overdose) think of other
> reasons that *reduced* size might be beneficial in LENR?

I agree with what Jones is saying, and think that this line of thought
could prove to be beneficially applied to a number of endeavors.

Some years ago, I was doing some reading on various cluster computing
experiments performed by some of the university labs in the States.
One of the more interesting experiments involved writing an operating 
system that would analyse broken or partially functioning computers,
and make available the functioning parts of the individual computers
to the overall cluster computing effort.

  The operating system was written in such a way that it didn't care 
what kind of processor was on any given board, or what kind of memory 
a machine had.  The operating system could make good use of it, as 
long as it was functioning.

What made me smile was the fact that the students wired together every 
piece of junk computer that they could get their hands on, and the 
operating system made the "junkyard" function like a supercomputer.  
In fact, in some ways, it functioned even better.

What was discovered was that the efficiency of the individual machines 
no longer mattered.  Individual machines could well, indeed, stop 
functioning altogether, and the overall computing effort would 
continue.  This made the overall computing effort independent of any 
given machine, increasing the reliability of the cluster itself.

If this concept were to be applied to the field of energy production, 
it would effectively reprioritize the energy generation part of the 
process by lowering the importance of that group of technologies, and 
elevating the importance of energy harvesting or gathering.  I have 
long held that decentralization of the energy generation process 
leads to a more reliable overall energy production system.

  What is needed is an intelligent operating system that can determine 
where energy is freely available for the taking, and then deploying 
the appropriate methods for the harvesting of that energy for as long 
as that energy source is available.

  If you focused your initial efforts on the task of harvesting heat, 
the type of generation technology would not matter.  It could be 
LENR, or any of the already existing generation schemes, and it would 
include making use of the waste heat generated by any number of 
processes.  After harvesting or gathering this heat, it simply needs 
to transported to the places that need it.

If nanotechnologies were developed to do this harvesting task, you 
could conceivably capture the heat from generation sources that now 
would not seem to be worth the effort.  The Foresight Institute is 
the group to watch in this regard.  http://www.foresight.org

I check their website every so often to see what is new, but I haven't 
done it for a while.  About a year ago, they announced that they 
would be releasing a whitepaper on the future role of cavitation in 
the field of nanotechnology.  Maybe it is about time I gave them 
another look.

Cheers,
Knuke