From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 1 09:26:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i91GQff1012706; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:26:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i91GQRFb012617; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:26:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:26:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000901c4a7d3$5b35b140$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: On the Photo-activity of Chlorine, part 1 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:26:06 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A798.ADF37E20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55972 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A798.ADF37E20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chlorine is the chameleon of the periodic table =96 a noxious poison, = despite it being absolutely necessary for most biological life. It is so = very ironic that it has become the "bad boy" of the environmental = movement lately... that irony arises because the salt content (i.e. the = chlorine content) of bodily fluids, and of every cell in the body, is = very close to being the very same identical ratio to the salt content of = the oceans in which life first evolved.=20 IOW chlorine is as essential to human life as any carbohydrate. And = furthermore, there may be something about that chlorine/H2O ratio in sea = water which makes it an evolutionary "norm" after several hundred = million years of survival pressure in higher life =96 i.e. life having = already left the confines of the oceans, so why maintain the ratio when = salt can be hard to find in certain locales? If chlorine... that is, = chlorine in the form of salt, NaCl, and in a fairly exact ratio with = H2O, were not highly advantageous, then some form of advanced life would = have veered away from it, one would think. I like to harangue the environmental movement from time to time, despite = being a dyed-in-the-wool environmentalist myself, basically because most = of Nader=92s Raiders and the Sierra Club are little more than = pudden-headed tree-huggers =96 single-minded zealots who shun science as = must as they cherish a warped understanding of "nature." The only common = ground being a shared and rather intense shame for our national Oil = addiction, and more intense hatred for the greedy "pushers"... the = insidious nazi-esque high level control exerted by the (shadow) = petro-government.=20 At any rate, the future use of chlorine for free-energy is a prospect = which could materialize in the next few years, despite protestations = from the far-left. The far right is more problematic. And I refuse to = call environmentalists "green" for this posting... esp. in light of the = color of many chlorine compounds. But if comes down to belligerency with = both MIB and MIG, is there any hope? The most amazing property of chlorine may go beyond its enormous = chemical(only) reactivity and its electron affinity, which is highest = among all elements =96 higher even than fluorine. This property may be = important in the context of a hypothetical heavy electron, which we have = been calling electronium, and designating as (*e-). Don=92t bother to = google it and find anything relevant, as the concept was invented here = recently and the name co-opted. To continue the color scheme, this idea = of a previously unknown heavy electron is greener-than-green. To continue the list of superlatives for chlorine, the atom participates = in a certain photo-chemical reaction so violently that it has been said = to produce a supra-chemical or atomic reaction, i..e "atomic" in the = form of free neutrons splitting from deuterium when combined with = photocatalyzed chlorine. I would stress the "photo" of photochemical. = Think of it as a synergy where two elements, which would normally react = to produce a few eV of mass/energy... will instead produce a few hundred = eV per resultant molecule, and with a few excursions (on the tail) into = the keV range, by the simple expedient of pumping up the chlorine with = UV light. Impossible...? Not if chlorine contains in its k-shell a = particular kind of electron =96 (*e-). As far back as 1727 a fellow named Schulze discovered the photoactivity = of silver halides (compounds of chlorine, iodine, etc.) leading to a = whole new industry - photography. The photo-reactivity of halides, = particularly chlorine, is about as well known in some circles as = Hamburgers. But one of those circles, not circle-K necessarily, was = nipped-in-the-bud... shall we say. Back early in 1942, if not before, Dr. George Kistiakowsky, then Head of = the Explosives Division of the Manhattan Project and inventor of all of = the A-bomb "triggers" for the next dozen years, proposes a = photocatalyzed DCl reaction as the best atom bomb trigger. An A-bomb = trigger must release lots of neutrons at the exact same time that the = fissile core is being uniformly compressed by an external explosion. = Chlorine is perfect for the explosion, of course, but how does it = produce neutrons and what happens after it has been irradiated by being = near the core for extended periods...? Huh? You say. Why didn=92t this show up in Rhodes=92 book? Well, the DCl = research was classified from that point on, becoming blacker-than-black = - and remains so today. This could be out of concern for another = incident which occurred within the same year and which our government = has failed to "come clean" on, because after 60 years it involves = billions of dollars of potential liability today. Not to mention severe = racial overtones. R. Rhodes missed-out on that scoop too. We are pretty sure (from reading between the lines of the archives) that = a DCl trigger resulted from Kistiakowsky=92s R&D work in the early 1940s = and was actually manufactured, and we suspect that the first A-bomb = explosion... no... not the one at Trinity in New Mexico, but the one a = year earlier at Port Chicago in California, may have been caused by a = DCl trigger which went off prematurely. From that point on, nothing else = remains to be found in the LANL archives... except perhaps the acrid = odor of a malingering and sodden high-level cover-up. Or was that odor = from a defective chlorine pump at the motel swimming pool? Consequently, we are left to speculate as to why the head of a = prestigious 600 man R&D department would recommend a chemical reaction = to release neutrons, if the reaction did not do so; why the research was = then classified Top Secret if it did not work; why the research remains = classified 60 years later, if it did not work; whether or not the = mechanism was too unpredictable for actual usage in a bomb; and whether = or not this mechanism caused a major accident in which hundreds of = innocent lives were lost (and then the underlying blame maliciously = shifted =96 i.e. "mutiny" !!)... ...and, most importantly for the new millennium, whether or not the = Cl-photo-effect could be implemented to produce energy in a range far = above chemical but not quite nuclear. One wonders if the proliferation = issues themselves were just too overwhelming, or whether the liability = issue was the main concern? Does the phrase "deuterium splitting" mean = anything? If not, and if you buy into the official accounting of the = Port Chicago incident, then this posting will not mean much. Fast forward to 1984, and Patent # 4,426,354 granted to Robert Scragg = for a Power Generator System using HCl Reaction. This system uses a = nuclear reactor, not to generate heat but to generate radiation, which = chlorine absorbs in order to react far more violently with H2 or even = with H2O than normal. As it absorbs such energy, the Cl reactivity with = hydrogen increases exponentially, becoming the most powerful chemical = reaction known by far. This patent didn=92t go far in the good old USA, = for reasons which seem obvious. Reactors are dangerous enough without = adding chlorine...but that is not the best use for it. Was it "borrowed" = here or elsewhere? One wonders why the soviet space program is said to = still be considering the use of chlorine....=20 Without trying to sound too much like James Burke (or James Bond) ... = stayed tuned for next week=92s episode... Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A798.ADF37E20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chlorine is the chameleon of the periodic table =96 a noxious poison, = despite=20 it being absolutely necessary for most biological life. It is so very = ironic=20 that it has become the "bad boy" of the environmental movement lately... = that=20 irony arises because the salt content (i.e. the chlorine content) of = bodily=20 fluids, and of every cell in the body, is very close to being the very = same=20 identical ratio to the salt content of the oceans in which life first = evolved.=20

IOW chlorine is as essential to human life as any carbohydrate. And=20 furthermore, there may be something about that chlorine/H2O ratio in sea = water=20 which makes it an evolutionary "norm" after several hundred million = years of=20 survival pressure in higher life =96 i.e. life having already left the = confines of=20 the oceans, so why maintain the ratio when salt can be hard to find in = certain=20 locales? If chlorine... that is, chlorine in the form of salt, NaCl, = and in=20 a fairly exact ratio with H2O, were not highly advantageous, then some = form of=20 advanced life would have veered away from it, one would think.

I like to harangue the environmental movement from time to time, = despite=20 being a dyed-in-the-wool environmentalist myself, basically because most = of=20 Nader=92s Raiders and the Sierra Club are little more than pudden-headed = tree-huggers =96 single-minded zealots who shun science as must as they = cherish a=20 warped understanding of "nature." The only common ground being a shared = and=20 rather intense shame for our national Oil addiction, and more intense = hatred for=20 the greedy "pushers"... the insidious nazi-esque high level control = exerted by=20 the (shadow) petro-government.

At any rate, the future use of chlorine for free-energy is a prospect = which=20 could materialize in the next few years, despite protestations from the=20 far-left. The far right is more problematic. And I refuse to call=20 environmentalists "green" for this posting... esp. in light of the color = of many=20 chlorine compounds. But if comes down to belligerency with both MIB and = MIG, is=20 there any hope?

The most amazing property of chlorine may go beyond its enormous=20 chemical(only) reactivity and its electron affinity, which is highest = among all=20 elements =96 higher even than fluorine. This property may be important = in the=20 context of a hypothetical heavy electron, which we have been calling=20 electronium, and designating as (*e-). Don=92t bother to google it and = find=20 anything relevant, as the concept was invented here recently and the = name=20 co-opted. To continue the color scheme, this idea of a previously = unknown heavy=20 electron is greener-than-green.

To continue the list of superlatives for chlorine, the atom = participates in a=20 certain photo-chemical reaction so violently that it has been said to = produce a=20 supra-chemical or atomic reaction, i..e "atomic" in the form of free = neutrons=20 splitting from deuterium when combined with photocatalyzed chlorine. I = would=20 stress the "photo" of photochemical. Think of it as a synergy where two=20 elements, which would normally react to produce a few eV of = mass/energy... will=20 instead produce a few hundred eV per resultant molecule, and with a few=20 excursions (on the tail) into the keV range, by the simple expedient of = pumping=20 up the chlorine with UV light. Impossible...? Not if chlorine contains = in its=20 k-shell a particular kind of electron =96 (*e-).

As far back as 1727 a fellow named Schulze discovered the = photoactivity of=20 silver halides (compounds of chlorine, iodine, etc.) leading to a whole = new=20 industry - photography. The photo-reactivity of halides, particularly = chlorine,=20 is about as well known in some circles as Hamburgers. But one of those = circles,=20 not circle-K necessarily, was nipped-in-the-bud... shall we say.

Back early in 1942, if not before, Dr. George Kistiakowsky, then Head = of the=20 Explosives Division of the Manhattan Project and inventor of all of the = A-bomb=20 "triggers" for the next dozen years, proposes a photocatalyzed DCl = reaction as=20 the best atom bomb trigger. An A-bomb trigger must release lots of = neutrons at=20 the exact same time that the fissile core is being uniformly compressed = by an=20 external explosion. Chlorine is perfect for the explosion, of course, = but how=20 does it produce neutrons and what happens after it has been irradiated = by being=20 near the core for extended periods...?

Huh? You say. Why didn=92t this show up in Rhodes=92 book? Well, the = DCl research=20 was classified from that point on, becoming blacker-than-black - and = remains so=20 today. This could be out of concern for another incident which occurred = within=20 the same year and which our government has failed to "come clean" on, = because=20 after 60 years it involves billions of dollars of potential liability = today. Not=20 to mention severe racial overtones. R. Rhodes missed-out on that scoop = too.

We are pretty sure (from reading between the lines of the archives) = that a=20 DCl trigger resulted from Kistiakowsky=92s R&D work in the early = 1940s and was=20 actually manufactured, and we suspect that the first A-bomb explosion... = no...=20 not the one at Trinity in New Mexico, but the one a year earlier at Port = Chicago=20 in California, may have been caused by a DCl trigger which went off = prematurely.=20 >From that point on, nothing else remains to be found in the LANL = archives...=20 except perhaps the acrid odor of a malingering and sodden high-level = cover-up.=20 Or was that odor from a defective chlorine pump at the motel swimming = pool?

Consequently, we are left to speculate as to why the head of a = prestigious=20 600 man R&D department would recommend a chemical reaction to = release=20 neutrons, if the reaction did not do so; why the research was then = classified=20 Top Secret if it did not work; why the research remains classified 60 = years=20 later, if it did not work; whether or not the mechanism was too = unpredictable=20 for actual usage in a bomb; and whether or not this mechanism caused a = major=20 accident in which hundreds of innocent lives were lost (and then the = underlying=20 blame maliciously shifted =96 i.e. "mutiny" !!)...

...and, most importantly for the new millennium, whether or not the=20 Cl-photo-effect could be implemented to produce energy in a range far = above=20 chemical but not quite nuclear. One wonders if the proliferation issues=20 themselves were just too overwhelming, or whether the liability issue = was the=20 main concern? Does the phrase "deuterium splitting" mean anything? If = not, and=20 if you buy into the official accounting of the Port Chicago incident, = then this=20 posting will not mean much.

Fast forward to 1984, and Patent # 4,426,354 granted to Robert Scragg = for a=20 Power Generator System using HCl Reaction. This system uses a nuclear = reactor,=20 not to generate heat but to generate radiation, which chlorine absorbs = in order=20 to react far more violently with H2 or even with H2O than normal. As it = absorbs=20 such energy, the Cl reactivity with hydrogen increases exponentially, = becoming=20 the most powerful chemical reaction known by far. This patent didn=92t = go far in=20 the good old USA, for reasons which seem obvious. Reactors are dangerous = enough=20 without adding chlorine...but that is not the best use for it. Was it = "borrowed"=20 here or elsewhere? One wonders why the soviet space program is said to = still be=20 considering the use of chlorine....

Without trying to sound too much like James Burke (or James Bond) ... = stayed=20 tuned for next week=92s episode...

Jones

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A798.ADF37E20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 1 12:53:15 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i91JrBXu028968; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:53:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i91JqqOJ028844; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:52:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:52:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004106275224200@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "Akira Kawasaki" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 01, 2004 Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 00:52:24 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d85bdce0642b6a100b2937b5e1a37f346d3ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.54.136 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55973 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > [Original Message] > From: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 10/1/2004 12:32:17 PM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 01, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 01 Oct 04 Washington, DC 1. KYOTO PROTOCOL: RUSSIA PUTS THE CLIMATE TREATY OVER THE TOP. Russia's cabinet endorsed the treaty and sent it to Parliament, where approval is expected. With 120 countries already on board, this meets the requirement that the treaty be ratified by nations responsible for at least 55 percent of 1990-level emissions. Roald Sagdeev, former science advisor to Gorbachev, was ecstatic on his return from Moscow yesterday. Now a physics professor at the University of Maryland, he told WN last night that the effect the treaty will have on emissions is far less important than the recognition by signatories that climate change is an important world problem, and they are committed to dealing with it. Having flatly rejected the treaty, the United States is now isolated. 2. NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION: CANDIDATES DIFFER SHARPLY IN DEBATE. The moderator, Jim Lehrer, asked Kerry what he thought is the most serious threat to national security. "Nuclear proliferation, nuclear proliferation," Kerry responded emphatically. "To make it clear to the world that we're serious about containing nuclear proliferation," he vowed to shut down the current program to develop a nuclear bunker- buster. Bush responded that "we've increased funding for dealing with nuclear proliferation about 35 percent since I've been President." Apparently, if the United States develops a new nuclear weapon it's not proliferation. 3. ACUPUNCTURE: YOU DON'T HAVE TO KNOW WHERE THE RABBIT CAME FROM On TV's "Sex and the City" Charlotte, who was unable to conceive, turned to acupuncture. I read that in the Wall Street Journal, but it didn't say whether it helped. So I turned to the experts on the WN staff. Charlotte, they assured me, ended up adopting. I'm not surprised. Of course, even if she had become pregnant it wouldn't mean that acupuncture helped. You need a randomized, placebo- controlled, double-blind study with good statistics to find out what works and what doesn't. And double-blind is hard to do with needles. But it wouldn't matter, I still wouldn't believe it. The trouble is it's silly. Acupuncture, complete with "meridians" that connect acupuncture points, and moxibustion http://www.aps.org/WN/WN98/wn111398.cfm , which applies heat to the acupuncture points, predate vivisection by thousands of years. Well by 2004 they've looked: no features of our anatomy correspond to any of this stuff. They discovered acupuncture before it was known that blood circulates, or that germs cause disease. But is there anything acupuncture doesn't treat? The Wednesday New York Times reported that "acupuncture is moving toward the mainstream." Mainstream what? When a stage magician pulls a rabbit out of a hat, I may not know where the rabbit came from, but I know it's not magic. It's not science either. THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/ To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 1 15:23:05 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i91MMwXu001224; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:22:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i91MMuPg001210; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:22:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:22:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041001181601.025a9818@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 18:20:55 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Need proofreaders and critics for new book Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55974 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: For the past couple of months I have been writing a book titled, "Cold Fusion and the Future." It is based upon some of the articles I wrote in I.E., comments I have made here, and blue sky speculation by people here and elsewhere. Soo Seddon has been assisting me as editor. It is short -- 140 pages -- and frivolous. The book still needs a great deal of work and polishing, but I think at this stage it would benefit from other people's inputs and insights, and technical corrections. If anyone is interested in seeing the rough draft, please contact me. I will e-mail it, in Acrobat format. If many people want to see it, I may upload it to a directory with a simple password such as "sesame." I would upload it to LENR-CANR.org, but I do not want dozens of people to download my mistakes, or poorly written, rough draft English. Also I do not yet have permission to use all of the figures I have inserted, I am waiting for technical corrections from a professor, and I do not want the Google robot to index it. When I finish, probably after ICCF-11, I will upload the entire thing in Acrobat format. Speaking of new books, I look forward to seeing what Steve Krivit wrote. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 2 04:28:45 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i92BSeuI025874; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 04:28:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i92BScXs025867; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 04:28:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 04:28:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041002112830.82108.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 04:28:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Nick Reiter Subject: neutron pickin time To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041001181601.025a9818@mail.lenr-canr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55975 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gentlemen, I'd like to toss out a couple of generic CF questions to any experimentalists out there. My little cathode glow discharge / sheath plasma reactor is set up and empirically optimized for cathode material (nickel foil "sword") and electrolyte (K2CO3). Been calling it the Wisp-1. I made up a crude neutron detector using a nalgene bottle of aqueous manganese chloride positioned in front of my Geiger counter head. Last week, I ran a couple of light water runs, and saw no appreciable effects either with TCs in the bath or anything other than a couple of slight rise periods on the GM counter. On one run, I did add like .5% by volume D2O, since I had a few ml I made from burning some D2 I had. I now have a greater quantity of heavy water (99.9%), and could conceivably make a run using that. Questions that arise are thus: 1. In CF technology to date, are any positive results found using blends of heavy and light water? I'd like to be frugal with my D2O. The FUSOR crowd seems to be tickled with bleeding in small percents of D2 into the Ar or He used for the plasma. Or have aqueous CF recipes always required the straight stuff for results? 2. Any last thoughts on a better homebrew neutron detection scheme? Someone hinted to me recently that old style D cell batteries with manganese sulphate in them made a good neutron detector for use with a GM counter. All notions appreciated! Best, NR __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 2 08:41:12 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i92Ff3uI020775; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:41:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i92Ff181020754; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:41:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:41:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004901c4a896$2f8ac1c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Supra-chemical reactions Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:40:46 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4A85B.82BF9360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55976 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4A85B.82BF9360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On the Photo-activity of Chlorine, part II.=20 The Supra-chemical reaction, and its tragic history. Reactions involving bound electrons are by definition chemical. This is = not to say that they "must" be of low energy. Combustion, which is a = chemical reaction, is typically low energy - i.e. the mass-energy is in = the range of a few eV because only the valence shell electrons are being = affected.=20 Some of the newer high explosives manage to get more bang by using inner = shell electrons, with a potential to achieve a small multiple of the = normal chemical reaction. A high explosive called Astrolyte, the name = reflecting one of its components being rocket fuel (hydrazine)can = reputedly get a significant added boost by the addition of aluminum = dust. Because of the much higher density of aluminum, this addition = would be of absolutely no value (in "bang-for-the-pound") unless the = inner orbitals of the atom were being affected, somehow.=20 A lot of secrecy surrounds high explosives, for obvious reasons. Some of = the secrecy surrounding the highest energy chemical reactions seems to = be more paranoid than that which is surrounding nuclear weapons, which = is a curious twist. Even more curious is to follow some of the forums = which focus on these things - whew... scary. The so-called explosive = experts sound more like teenage jocks with the "mine is bigger than = yours" blustering, but fortunately many show little real acumen in the = related physics issues. Nevertheless I wouldn't want to get on their = bad-side. Testosterone is more explosive and more deadly than any silly = bomb ingredient. The so-called "Auger cascade" of high energy electrons results when a = gamma ray knocks out a k-shell electron. Surprisingly, it is not = necessary to use gammas to get to the k-shell, as coherent non-ionizing = light can also do it under some circumstances, even though the = wavelength is supposedly 10,000 times too long.=20 When the innermost, or k-shell, of an atom is altered, the energy = potential for explosiveness can be much greater - in the 10 keV to over = 100 keV range - which is nearly 100,000 times greater than what one = gets from combustion per atom, or 25,000 times the best explosive - but = still not OU for a variety of reasons, some semantic. Plus the time = scale is greatly extended so explosiveness is minimized. Auger cascades = require intense external input, and your average unabomber can't afford = to throw away a good gamma source with every pop. =20 The most controversial and (once thought to be) bogus class of high = explosives is the so-called ballotechnic variety, which are claimed to = depend on massive interaction of inner electrons. The available = technical material about these explosives is likely to be nonsense or at = least anecdotal and highly suspect, and certainly many scams have been = perpetrated, esp. of the spy-vs-spy variety. Many on this forum know of = Cohen's claims and the official rebuttals. But the officials seldom claim that this class of materials is = non-existent - just the one notorious scam item, and it is usually = claimed that these explosives depend upon materials which have been = exposed for extended periods to gamma irradiation within a nuclear = reactor in order to work, so will never be easy to come by or safe to = handle. What does this imply? You probably knew I would be getting back to electronium (*e-) didn't = you?=20 Yes, I think that if there is any chance of these ballotechnics being = actual materials, as opposed to science fiction, then the existence of = the putative triad heavy electron (*e-) provides the best (really the = only) explanation of the underlying methodology. The explosive materials = (heavy metals) themselves would be, in effect (*e-) concentrators and = the effect of irradiation would be to raise the (*e-) to a metastable = state, where thereafter a lower energy photon would be able to force = very energetic decays. There are some reasons why the most often = mentioned elements in these devises would be (*e-) concentrators, = especially in the case of mercury, but my purpose here is to focus on = the premiere (*e-) concentrator - which is chlorine. Normally as mentioned, thousands or even millions of eV separate atomic = energy levels from chemical. But for heavy atoms, the innermost = (K-shell) electrons can have binding energies of one tenth a normal = nuclear transition energy, which is about one MeV. IOW, the typical = K-shell would be 100,000 eV and the nuclear gamma closer to one MeV. When a group of physicists in Japan observed what they called excitation = by electronic transition (NEET), I believe that they were mistaken as to = the identity of the source. That group used a synchrotron source to = knock K-shell electrons out of gold atoms. Usually an outer electron = will fill the K-shell vacancy, giving up energy in the form of x rays = around 50-100 keV and throwing Auger electrons from the atom during the = process.=20 The researchers, however, observed that the energy occasionally "excited = the nucleus" instead of creating Auger electrons and x rays. They used = this term because of the higher energy seen. What I believe they = observed was not an excited nucleus at all but an electronium decay. = When electronium decays you will get=20 (*e-) --> Ps + e- --> e- + 1MeV gamma the MeV gammas and pair production which result will of course be = mistaken for nuclear reactions by those who don't buy into this new = concept, which is the entire physics establishment at the moment (but = they have been wrong many times before).=20 At any rate, it is feasible to this observer, using the hypothetical = (*e-) concept, to imagine why, some 60 years ago, the first nuclear = trigger, the DCl (deuterium chloride) trigger, was able to 1) convert chemical energy into a D stripping reaction 2) misfire unpredictably 3) still be kept under wraps, because we have alternative triggers = which are more reliable anyway, and the only use for the cheaper DCl would be by rogue nations ...with the unavoidable side effect of 4) all the research about why DCl was able to produce neutrons from just = a chemical reaction was squashed 60 years ago with the secrecy order, = and we have consequently missed the easiest of all, and most robust of = all LENR reactions - and what could have been the foundation for = expanding the technology into an acceptable source of energy for our = future use, now that oil is no longer plentiful. Oh. One might ask why the particular chlorine used by Dr. Kistiakowsky, = Head of the Explosives Division of the Manhattan Project and inventor = the A-bomb trigger, was so active in releasing neutrons that he = immediately saw its potential 60 years ago, but probably didn't have a = clue at that time why it worked. To understand this, one must take a look at uranium enrichment process = in use then at Oak Ridge, where Dr. K did a stint, and particularly the = prevalent use of U-tetrachloride as the starting salt of many early = manufacturing processes. When the chlorine from this process is later = reused, which it would have been in those days, it has been in intimate = contact with decay radiation of just about the correct energy level for = extended periods - and certainly the (*e-) in the k-shells of the = chlorine will thereafter have been not only enriched because of its = higher electron affinity than U, but also pumped up into metastable = states.=20 When this chlorine is combined with any deuterated explosive, it is my = contention that free neutrons will result from what appears to be a = chemical reaction. IOW chlorine is not only the best element for = capturing (*e-) but it is also a good medium for allowing metastable = pumping of the (*e-) so that it will release MeV gammas on decay. These = gammas will easily knock off neutrons from deuterium - the result being = the "almost" perfect trigger, on paper... unless you happened to be one = of the hundreds of Afro-American stevedores blown into oblivion one hot = July day in 1944 at Port Chicago, near the San Francisco Bay. I believe that this curious (outrageous to some) speculation may go way = beyond a special trigger which tragically miss-fired, and caused = valuable technology to be later enshrouded into the innermost sanctum of = top secrecy . If you want to pursue some anecdotal curiosities, check = the observer reports of the early A-bomb tests and particularly the = predominant *color* or the initial mushroom cloud - which color is not = seen in tests from the mid-50s onward. =20 Why was that greenish yellow color only there at the first?=20 Well, to take (*e-) speculation to the maximum extent, I would suggest = that a doubly enriched chlorine atom has more energy per pound than = U-235!=20 And basically, we are talking chemical energy, by definition... Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4A85B.82BF9360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On the Photo-activity of Chlorine, part II.

The Supra-chemical reaction, and its = tragic=20 history.

Reactions involving bound electrons are by definition = chemical. This is not to say that they "must" be of low energy. = Combustion,=20 which is a chemical reaction, is typically low energy - i.e. the = mass-energy is=20 in the range of a few eV because only the valence shell electrons are = being=20 affected.
 
Some of the newer high explosives manage to get more bang by using = inner=20 shell electrons, with a potential to achieve a small multiple of the = normal=20 chemical reaction. A high explosive called Astrolyte, the name = reflecting=20 one of its components being rocket fuel (hydrazine)can reputedly get a=20 significant added boost by the addition of aluminum dust. Because of the = much=20 higher density of aluminum, this addition would be of absolutely no = value (in=20 "bang-for-the-pound") unless the inner orbitals of the atom were being = affected,=20 somehow.
 
A lot of secrecy surrounds high explosives, for obvious reasons. = Some of=20 the secrecy surrounding the highest energy chemical reactions seems to = be more=20 paranoid than that which is surrounding nuclear weapons, which is a = curious=20 twist. Even more curious is to follow some of the forums which focus on = these=20 things - whew... scary. The so-called explosive experts sound more like = teenage=20 jocks with the "mine is bigger than yours" blustering, but fortunately = many show=20 little real acumen in the related physics issues. Nevertheless I = wouldn't want=20 to get on their bad-side. Testosterone is more explosive and more deadly = than=20 any silly bomb ingredient.
 
The so-called "Auger cascade" of high energy electrons results when = a gamma=20 ray knocks out a k-shell electron. Surprisingly, it is not necessary to = use=20 gammas to get to the k-shell,  as coherent non-ionizing light can = also do=20 it under some circumstances, even though the wavelength is supposedly = 10,000=20 times too long.
 
When the innermost, or k-shell, of an atom is altered, the energy = potential=20 for explosiveness can be much greater - in the 10 keV to over 100 keV = range -=20 which is  nearly 100,000 times greater than what one gets from = combustion=20 per atom, or 25,000 times the best explosive - but still not OU for a = variety of=20 reasons, some semantic. Plus the time scale is greatly extended so = explosiveness=20 is minimized. Auger cascades require intense external input, and = your=20 average unabomber can't afford to throw away a good gamma source with = every=20 pop.  
 
The most controversial and (once thought to be) bogus class of high = explosives is the so-called ballotechnic variety, which are claimed to = depend on=20 massive interaction of inner electrons. The available technical material = about=20 these explosives is likely to be nonsense or at least anecdotal and=20 highly suspect, and certainly many scams have been perpetrated, = esp. of the=20 spy-vs-spy variety. Many on this forum know of Cohen's claims and the = official=20 rebuttals.
 
But the officials seldom claim that this class of materials is = non-existent=20 - just the one notorious scam item, and it is usually claimed that these = explosives depend upon materials which have been exposed for extended = periods to=20 gamma irradiation within a nuclear reactor in order to work, so will = never be=20 easy to come by or safe to handle.
 
What does this imply?
 
You probably knew I would be getting back to electronium (*e-) = didn't you?=20
 
Yes, I think that if there is any chance of these ballotechnics = being=20 actual materials, as opposed to science fiction, then the existence of = the=20 putative triad heavy electron (*e-) provides the best (really the only)=20 explanation of the underlying methodology. The explosive materials = (heavy=20 metals) themselves would be, in effect (*e-) concentrators and the = effect=20 of irradiation would be to raise the  (*e-) to a metastable state, = where=20 thereafter a lower energy photon would be able to force very energetic = decays.=20 There are some reasons why the most often mentioned elements in these = devises=20 would be (*e-) concentrators, especially in the case of mercury, but my = purpose=20 here is to focus on the premiere  (*e-) concentrator - which = is=20 chlorine.
 
Normally as mentioned, thousands or even millions of eV separate = atomic=20 energy levels from chemical. But for heavy atoms, the innermost = (K-shell)=20 electrons can have binding energies of one tenth a normal nuclear = transition=20 energy, which is about one MeV. IOW, the typical K-shell would be = 100,000 eV and=20 the nuclear gamma closer to one MeV.
 
When a group of physicists in Japan observed what they called=20 excitation by electronic transition (NEET), I believe that they were = mistaken as=20 to the identity of the source. That group used a synchrotron source to = knock=20 K-shell electrons out of gold atoms. Usually an outer electron will fill = the=20 K-shell vacancy, giving up energy in the form of x rays around 50-100 = keV and=20 throwing Auger electrons from the atom during the process.
 
The researchers, however, observed that the energy occasionally = "excited=20 the nucleus" instead of creating Auger electrons and x rays. They used = this term=20 because of the higher energy seen. What I believe they observed was not = an=20 excited nucleus at all but an electronium decay. When electronium decays = you=20 will get
 (*e-) --> Ps + e- --> e- + 1MeV gamma
the MeV gammas and pair production which result will of course be = mistaken=20 for nuclear reactions by those who don't buy into this new concept, = which is the=20 entire physics establishment at the moment (but they have been wrong = many times=20 before).
 
At any rate, it is feasible to this observer, using = the hypothetical=20 (*e-) concept, to imagine why, some 60 years ago, the first nuclear = trigger, the DCl (deuterium chloride) trigger, was able to
1) convert chemical energy into a D stripping reaction
2) misfire unpredictably
3) still be kept under wraps, because we have alternative triggers=20         which are more reliable anyway, = and the=20 only use for the cheaper
    DCl would be by rogue nations
 
...with the unavoidable side effect of
 
4) all the research about why DCl was able to produce neutrons from = just a=20 chemical reaction was squashed 60 years ago with the secrecy order, and = we have=20 consequently missed the easiest of all, and most robust of = all LENR=20 reactions - and what could have been the foundation for expanding the = technology=20 into an acceptable source of energy for our future use, now that oil is = no=20 longer plentiful.
 
Oh. One might ask why the particular chlorine used by Dr. = Kistiakowsky,=20 Head of the Explosives Division of the Manhattan Project and inventor = the A-bomb=20 trigger, was so active in releasing neutrons that he immediately saw its = potential 60 years ago, but probably didn't have a clue at that time why = it=20 worked.
 
To understand this, one must take a look at uranium enrichment = process in=20 use then at Oak Ridge, where Dr. K did a stint, and particularly the = prevalent=20 use of U-tetrachloride as the starting salt of many early manufacturing=20 processes. When the chlorine from this process is later reused, = which it=20 would have been in those days, it has been in intimate contact with = decay=20 radiation of just about the correct energy level for extended periods - = and=20 certainly the (*e-) in the k-shells of the chlorine will thereafter = have=20 been not only enriched because of its higher electron affinity than U, = but also=20 pumped up into metastable states.
 
When this chlorine is combined with any deuterated explosive, it is = my=20 contention that free neutrons will result from what appears to be a = chemical=20 reaction. IOW chlorine is not only the best element for=20 capturing (*e-) but it is also a good medium for allowing = metastable=20 pumping of the (*e-) so that it will release MeV gammas on decay. = These=20 gammas will easily knock off neutrons from deuterium - the result = being the=20 "almost" perfect trigger, on paper... unless you happened to be one of = the=20 hundreds of Afro-American stevedores blown into oblivion one hot July = day in=20 1944 at Port Chicago, near the San Francisco Bay.
 
I believe that this curious (outrageous to some) speculation may go = way=20 beyond a special trigger which tragically miss-fired, and caused = valuable=20 technology to be later enshrouded into the innermost sanctum of top=20 secrecy . If you want to pursue some anecdotal curiosities, check = the=20 observer reports of the early A-bomb tests and particularly the = predominant=20 *color* or the initial mushroom cloud - which color is not seen in tests = from=20 the mid-50s onward. 
 
Why was that greenish yellow color only there at the first?
 
Well, to take  (*e-) speculation to the maximum extent, I = would=20 suggest that a doubly enriched chlorine atom has more energy per pound = than=20 U-235!
 
And basically, we are talking chemical energy, by = definition...
 
Jones
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4A85B.82BF9360-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 2 20:26:29 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i933QOnC007990; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:26:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i933QCA4007935; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:26:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:26:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 19:31:10 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: neutron pickin time Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55977 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:28 AM 10/2/4, Nick Reiter wrote: >2. Any last thoughts on a better homebrew neutron >detection scheme? Someone hinted to me recently that >old style D cell batteries with manganese sulphate in >them made a good neutron detector for use with a GM >counter. As you probably know, tubes having boron compounds on their inner walls and/or BF3 gas are typically used for neutron detection. They work due to the reaction: 5B10 + 0n1 --> 3Li7 + 2He4 Thus there is one alpha generated per reaction. The cross section of Boron is large, but unfortunately is inversely proportional to neutron velocity. BF3 tubes are thus only good for low energy neutrons. They can be used for high energy neutron counters by placing high density hydrogen materials (e.g. plastic) in front of the tube to slow down the neutrons (moderate them) via collision with the protons, which are effective at moderating because they have roughly the same mass. If you are looking for high energy neutrons then you might get some results by placing a plastic moderator, say about 1/4" thick, in front of the tube and counting recoil protons, but this would not be any good for low flux counting. If you have a thin window on your geiger tube you could try a thin boron coating on the outside of the window with the hope that a useful number of alphas can penetrate. I've heard but can't confirm that placing a silver dollar between the neutron source and the geiger counter window works for some neutron fluxes and energies. Best thing to do is probably to try to locate a BF3 counter or just buy a tube (readily available as parts) and build your own. Calibration is another problem though, I would think. An impromptu idea is to try placing a thin boron compound coating up close to some film. Possibly the boron compound could be sandwiched between two thin layers of plastic. The whole assembly can then be wrapped in foil to prevent exposure to light. If the film exposes during an experiment, then voila! Idividual events might be counted in the film by microscope, though this sounds like a difficult and amateurish procedure. You could use the film transport mechanism of a cheap or disposable camera to expose small sections of a roll at a time. This would require using a lead shield with a hole in it located at the camera's focal plane, i.e. exposure area. The nice thing about this film set-up is most places don't charge for developing "unexposed" film. It is also nice that film gives an integration over time, vs just an immediate counting rate most cheap geiger counters provide. Again, the problem is calibration, or just basic testing, unless you happen to have a Farnsworth fusor handy, or some other neutron source. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 2 20:41:50 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i933flri003801; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:41:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i933fQdp003644; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:41:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:41:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 19:46:27 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: neutron pickin time Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55978 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I neglected to mention that if the film method is used a section of film without the boron coating should be exposed as well, just as a control to provide at least some information as to the source of the radiation. In addition, I suppose it is pretty obvious that a sufficient metal barrier should be supplied to wipe out most alphas, betas and x-rays. It also just occurred to me that obtaining BF3 tubes may not be so easy as it once was. At 4:28 AM 10/2/4, Nick Reiter wrote: >2. Any last thoughts on a better homebrew neutron >detection scheme? Someone hinted to me recently that >old style D cell batteries with manganese sulphate in >them made a good neutron detector for use with a GM >counter. As you probably know, tubes having boron compounds on their inner walls and/or BF3 gas are typically used for neutron detection. They work due to the reaction: 5B10 + 0n1 --> 3Li7 + 2He4 Thus there is one alpha generated per reaction. The cross section of Boron is large, but unfortunately is inversely proportional to neutron velocity. BF3 tubes are thus only good for low energy neutrons. They can be used for high energy neutron counters by placing high density hydrogen materials (e.g. plastic) in front of the tube to slow down the neutrons (moderate them) via collision with the protons, which are effective at moderating because they have roughly the same mass. If you are looking for high energy neutrons then you might get some results by placing a plastic moderator, say about 1/4" thick, in front of the tube and counting recoil protons, but this would not be any good for low flux counting. If you have a thin window on your geiger tube you could try a thin boron coating on the outside of the window with the hope that a useful number of alphas can penetrate. I've heard but can't confirm that placing a silver dollar between the neutron source and the geiger counter window works for some neutron fluxes and energies. Best thing to do is probably to try to locate a BF3 counter or just buy a tube (readily available as parts) and build your own. Calibration is another problem though, I would think. An impromptu idea is to try placing a thin boron compound coating up close to some film. Possibly the boron compound could be sandwiched between two thin layers of plastic. The whole assembly can then be wrapped in foil to prevent exposure to light. If the film exposes during an experiment, then voila! Idividual events might be counted in the film by microscope, though this sounds like a difficult and amateurish procedure. You could use the film transport mechanism of a cheap or disposable camera to expose small sections of a roll at a time. This would require using a lead shield with a hole in it located at the camera's focal plane, i.e. exposure area. The nice thing about this film set-up is most places don't charge for developing "unexposed" film. It is also nice that film gives an integration over time, vs just an immediate counting rate most cheap geiger counters provide. Again, the problem is calibration, or just basic testing, unless you happen to have a Farnsworth fusor handy, or some other neutron source. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 3 07:31:48 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i93EVcYQ005717; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:31:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i93EVWxL005689; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:31:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:31:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Standing Bear To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Need proofreaders and critics for new book Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:48:59 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041001181601.025a9818@mail.lenr-canr.org> In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041001181601.025a9818@mail.lenr-canr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410031048.59152.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55979 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Friday 01 October 2004 18:20, Jed Rothwell wrote: > For the past couple of months I have been writing a book titled, "Cold > Fusion and the Future." It is based upon some of the articles I wrote in > I.E., comments I have made here, and blue sky speculation by people here > and elsewhere. Soo Seddon has been assisting me as editor. > > It is short -- 140 pages -- and frivolous. > > The book still needs a great deal of work and polishing, but I think at > this stage it would benefit from other people's inputs and insights, and > technical corrections. If anyone is interested in seeing the rough draft, > please contact me. I will e-mail it, in Acrobat format. If many people want > to see it, I may upload it to a directory with a simple password such as > "sesame." > > I would upload it to LENR-CANR.org, but I do not want dozens of people to > download my mistakes, or poorly written, rough draft English. Also I do not > yet have permission to use all of the figures I have inserted, I am waiting > for technical corrections from a professor, and I do not want the Google > robot to index it. > > When I finish, probably after ICCF-11, I will upload the entire thing in > Acrobat format. > > Speaking of new books, I look forward to seeing what Steve Krivit wrote. > > - Jed Jed, You have read many of my posts here under my nom de plume. I would be happy to help you in any way. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 3 09:53:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i93GrBYQ013403; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:53:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i93Gr9ku013382; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:53:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:53:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041003165300.50401.qmail@web60309.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:53:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: neutron pickin time To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55980 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks Horace, And thanks too to the couple of vortexians who gave some suggestions off list. Got a neat little protocol for some final electrolyte selection, and then the matter of boron for neutron detection. Boric acid is easy enough to pick up, but I also have some serious quantities of boron nitride ceramic powder, as well as plates or coatings of same. Now I am not sure, though that the window on my old GM counter is thin enough to admit the alpha particles. I thought the emission from manganese was a couple of gamma peaks. The silver dollar trick makes sense. I saw an article that may have been linked here a while back about how Oak Ridge used to have a souvenir silver dime gimmick whereupon the bombardment from Ra or Pu would kick up some short life emission from one particular silver isotope. The tourist could then take the dime with him or her, - by the time it rolled away from the Geiger counter it was already cooled off! Will keep all advised... Best, NR --- Horace Heffner wrote: > At 4:28 AM 10/2/4, Nick Reiter wrote: > > >2. Any last thoughts on a better homebrew neutron > >detection scheme? Someone hinted to me recently > that > >old style D cell batteries with manganese sulphate > in > >them made a good neutron detector for use with a GM > >counter. > > As you probably know, tubes having boron compounds > on their inner walls > and/or BF3 gas are typically used for neutron > detection. They work due to > the reaction: > > 5B10 + 0n1 --> 3Li7 + 2He4 > > Thus there is one alpha generated per reaction. The > cross section of Boron > is large, but unfortunately is inversely > proportional to neutron velocity. > BF3 tubes are thus only good for low energy > neutrons. They can be used for > high energy neutron counters by placing high density > hydrogen materials > (e.g. plastic) in front of the tube to slow down the > neutrons (moderate > them) via collision with the protons, which are > effective at moderating > because they have roughly the same mass. If you are > looking for high > energy neutrons then you might get some results by > placing a plastic > moderator, say about 1/4" thick, in front of the > tube and counting recoil > protons, but this would not be any good for low flux > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 3 17:54:20 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i940sDOX008260; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 17:54:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i940sCn6008244; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 17:54:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 17:54:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 16:59:12 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: neutron pickin time Resent-Message-ID: <80ew1C.A.wAC.08JYBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55981 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:53 AM 10/3/4, Nick Reiter wrote: >Thanks Horace, > >And thanks too to the couple of vortexians who gave >some suggestions off list. Off-list responses to an on-list request are not very considerate to those who are interested in such very on-topic subjects, nor to those who bother to directly contribute to the list. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 3 23:55:19 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i946tCOX014512; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 23:55:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i946tBYT014487; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 23:55:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 23:55:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 02:55:03 EDT Subject: Railgun Overunity & The Key To Free Energy To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups.com, a-albionic@yahoogroups.com, ThomasClark123@aol.com, Baronvolsung@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d9.160396d1.2e924dc7_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55982 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_d9.160396d1.2e924dc7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "15.5 The Railgun By Konstantin Meyl, Scalar Waves Pg. 315 to Pg. 329,2003, Indel The engineers and physicists involved in the SDI-project were quite astonished, as they had a close look at the bent rails of their gun. During the test operation the equipment was really flying around their heads. They were very sure to only have fed in 16.7 MJ of energy, from the rotation of a homopolar generator, because more was not available for the experiment by any means. ...There is talk about a released energy having around 399 GJ what corresponds to an overunity effect of 24000. ... In the pictures a bright lightning can be seen at the moment of launching (fig 15.5 A). Here presumably is being materialized, in which the part of anti-matter annihilates with the particles of matter under emission of light. There thus takes place the same process as in the case of lightning or the shinning of the sun. In addition is being reported that heat energy is withdrawn from the environment, a circumstance, which is typical for all functioning converters for space energy. ... Like for lightning also the railgun is stimulated with a very high excitation voltage and with extreme speeds of change of the tension voltage (high du/dt) (fig. 15.5C). From the setup it concerns a bridge of Ampere, which in various respects appears to be superior to the rocket engines, after the costly transport of the propellant into space isn't necessary since the capacitor batteries can be recharged by solar power. ... 15.6 Unipolar induction The projectile, for from the function let us rather speak of the short-circuit bar or the slider, at first is entirely conventionally accelerated and experiences, mathematically expressed, as dv/dt. The magnetic field B stretching perpendicular to the movement is constant, so that according to the Faraday relation E=v X B from the velocity v an electric field strength E results and from the acceleration dv/dt a field change dE/dt. These open field lines along the length of the slider, in particular the oscillating part, appears to interact with oscillating particles and to collect these particles. It concerns presumably neutrinos, which primarily materialize in charge carriers. These contribute to the current flux in the slider and to the acceleration, whereupon still more neutrinos are collected. A hardly controllable avalanche effect is formed. Only if the change in tension voltage has worn off and the capacitor is completely discharged, also the resonant interaction will again collapse. The inventors who want to construct a civil version of the railgun, is given a warning on the way which should be taken seriously. At first it doesn't take particularly much imagination to imagine a rotating arrangement of the gun, a construction with one axis, with which a generator driven, which produces power. A small part is supplied the system again as supply for itself. The rest would be available free to the consumers as nonpolluting regenerative energy. That really sounds good, if there wouldn't be this one obstacle. 15.7 Tendency to instability In a continuously working machine the discharging of the capacitor cannot remain as single event as in the case of the gun. The discharging and the recharging has to take place cyclic depending on the revolutions per minute. To obtain a rotating movement even to a certain extent ignition has to follow ignition. But if the ignition takes place, although the avalanche effect of the last one still hasn't worn off, then inevitable a catastrophe will occur, then the work of wonder is taken apart under the eyes of its creator. Numerous inventors already have had to collect such painful experiences. It is assumed that not even Nikola Tesla had escaped, as he had to put away again his stately luxury car with electric motor and energy converter in a barn near Buffalo already after one week of test operation in the year 1931. Of course also for this problem solutions in accordance with engineering are offered. Meaningful would be a restriction of the revolutions per minute and a power regulation. Only most inventors don't think that far. On the one hand, because they handicraft without a useful physical model and on the other hand they think they already have reached the goal, if they observe something like free energy for the first time. Just as fast as the joy then the disillusionment comes, because a converter which doesn't work, is not able to convince anyone. .... As the example of the railgun space energy technologies and inventors can study the relations and the way of functioning very concretely and even calculate these relatively simple. It is a big relief, that all three vectors stand perpendicular to each other: The E field, the B-field and the velocity v. Ideal conditions both with regard to a maximizing of the wanted accelerating force and for the resonant interaction, increase at the same time the collecting of space quanta, which probably may be set equal to the neutrinos. This is made possible by the Faraday's law of unipolar induction. In that way at the right and left end of the slider a positive a negative pole each are formed. The further the two poles are away of each other, the more the field lines are opened and the more neutrinos can go into resonance. In this place still considerable improvements and optimizations are possible. In addition to the two discussed the phenomena of the electrostriction is added as a third phenomena, which authoritatively contributes to the conversion of neutrinos into electrons. It is a field dependent change of length, which in the case of lightning takes care of the thunder and in both cases, therefore also here, is active as a charge carrier producer. 15.11 The key to free energy As a contribution to the discussion the individual principles of functioning of space energy again are collected and the attempt is undertoo to value them. In the case of an oscillating dipole configuration, for instance the railgun, open field lines are present only along the mutual line of connection. (fig 15.8 A). With that not particularly many space quant can be reached. It hense has to be operated with gigantic excitation powers in the range of many thousands of Ampere, so that further field lines fling open and interact. The wanted over-unity effect can only be reached at an enormous expense of technical apparatus. An unipolar arrangement here is considered more advantageous, where hold the more unipolar, the fewer excitation power is required. But in that way it can take longer until the collecting of neutrinos like an avalanche again has worn off. In the case of the an ideal spherical arrangement (fig 15.8 B), as the ball-lightening takes, the process can even last for minutes. This explains why unipolar systems can be kept under control only very hard. If the neutrino avalanche is rolling then it purely theoretically can only be stopped with a still larger excitation power, for instance by phase shifting, what can hardly be realized in practice. ..... A synchronous operation between the neutrino oscillation and the converter can, apart from the technologically hardly realizable high frequency, by no means really be recommended. As a rule one single steep flank of the change of the excitation voltage is sufficient to start the avalanche. By means of the repetition frequency or by means of the duty cycle of the excitation voltage then resonance's to the neutrino field can be made or avoided. On the other hand cant be done without the avalanche effect. The utilizable power of the neutrino converter otherwise would be much too small. This case should be pursued further in the design of a longitudinal wave gauge. All converter systems at first work based on a well-known and tried and tested physical principle of functioning. In the case of the railgun it is the bridge of Ampere. The thus used force effect on a conductor through which flows current is advantageous due to the obtainable order of magnitude and as a basic concept extremely recommendable. But also coulomb forces or other physical principles can be used. Despite that a further relation still must be added, which produces the interaction with the neutrinos. Closely associated with the unipolar arrangement it is the unipolar induction which in virtually all space energy concepts is put to use. It already could be shown that the railgun uses the effect as well as John Searl in the case of his flying disc. The Faraday law of induction turns out to be the key to free energy. " --part1_d9.160396d1.2e924dc7_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "15.5 The Rai= lgun By Konstantin Meyl, Scalar Waves Pg. 315 to Pg. 329,2003, Indel

The engineers and physicists involved in the SDI-project were quite asto= nished, as they had a close look at the bent rails of their gun. During the=20= test operation the equipment was really flying around their heads.

They were very sure to only have fed in 16.7 MJ of energy, from the rota= tion of a homopolar generator, because more was not available for the experi= ment by any means. ...There is talk about a released energy having around 39= 9 GJ what corresponds to an overunity effect of 24000. ... In the pictures a= bright lightning can be seen at the moment of launching (fig 15.5 A).  = ;Here presumably is being materialized, in which the part of anti-matter ann= ihilates with the particles of matter under emission of light.  There t= hus takes place the same process as in the case of lightning or the shinning= of the sun.=20

In addition is being reported that heat energy is withdrawn from the env= ironment, a circumstance, which is typical for all functioning converters fo= r space energy. ...

Like for lightning also the railgun is stimulated with a very high excit= ation voltage and with extreme speeds of change of the tension voltage (high= du/dt) (fig. 15.5C). From the setup it concerns a bridge of Ampere, which i= n various respects appears to be superior to the rocket engines, after the c= ostly transport of the propellant into space isn't necessary since the capac= itor batteries can be recharged by solar power.=20
...

15.6 Unipolar induction

The projectile, for from the function let us rather speak of the short-c= ircuit bar or the slider, at first is entirely conventionally accelerated an= d experiences, mathematically expressed, as dv/dt.  The magnetic field=20= B stretching perpendicular to the movement is constant, so that according to= the Faraday relation E=3Dv X B from the velocity v an electric field streng= th E results and from the acceleration dv/dt a field change dE/dt.=20
These open field lines along the length of the slider, in particular the= oscillating part, appears to interact with oscillating particles and to col= lect these particles.  It concerns presumably neutrinos, which primaril= y materialize in charge carriers. These contribute to the current flux in th= e slider and to the acceleration, whereupon still more neutrinos are collect= ed.=20
A hardly controllable avalanche effect is formed. Only if the change in=20= tension voltage has worn off and the capacitor is completely discharged, als= o the resonant interaction will again collapse.

The inventors who want to construct a civil version of the railgun, is g= iven a warning on the way which should be taken seriously.  At first it= doesn't take particularly much imagination to imagine a rotating arrangemen= t of the gun, a construction with one axis, with which a generator driven, w= hich produces power.  A small part is supplied the system again as supp= ly for itself.  The rest would be available free to the consumers as no= npolluting regenerative energy.=20
That really sounds good, if there wouldn't be this one obstacle.=20

15.7 Tendency to instability

In a continuously working machine the discharging of the capacitor canno= t remain as single event as in the case of the gun. The discharging and the=20= recharging has to take place cyclic depending on the revolutions per minute.= To obtain a rotating movement even to a certain extent ignition has to foll= ow ignition. But if the ignition takes place, although the avalanche effect=20= of the last one still hasn't worn off, then inevitable a catastrophe will oc= cur, then the work of wonder is taken apart under the eyes of its creator.=20

Numerous inventors already have had to collect such painful experiences.= It is assumed that not even Nikola Tesla  had escaped, as he had to pu= t away again his stately luxury car with electric motor and energy converter= in a barn near Buffalo already after one week of test operation in the year= 1931.=20

Of course also for this problem solutions in accordance with engineering= are offered. Meaningful would be a restriction of the revolutions per minut= e and a power regulation. Only most inventors don't think that far. On the o= ne hand, because they handicraft without a useful physical model and on the=20= other hand they think they already have reached the goal, if they observe so= mething like free energy for the first time. Just as fast as the joy then th= e disillusionment comes, because a converter which doesn't work, is not able= to convince anyone.=20

.... As the example of the railgun space energy technologies and invento= rs can study the relations and the way of functioning very concretely and ev= en calculate these relatively simple.  It is a big relief, that all thr= ee vectors stand perpendicular to each other: The E field, the B-field and t= he velocity v.  Ideal conditions both with regard to a maximizing of th= e wanted accelerating force and for the resonant interaction, increase at th= e same time the collecting of space quanta, which probably may be set equal=20= to the neutrinos.  This is made possible by the Faraday's law of unipol= ar induction.  In that way at the right and left end of the slider a po= sitive a negative pole each are formed.  The further the two poles are=20= away of each other, the more the field lines are opened and the more neutrin= os can go into resonance.  In this place still considerable improvement= s and optimizations are possible.=20

In addition to the two discussed the phenomena of the electrostriction i= s added as a third phenomena, which authoritatively contributes to the conve= rsion of neutrinos into electrons.  It is a field dependent change of l= ength, which in the case of lightning takes care of the thunder and in both=20= cases, therefore also here, is active as a charge carrier producer.=20

15.11 The key to free energy

As a contribution to the discussion the individual principles of functio= ning of space energy again are collected and the attempt is undertoo to valu= e them.=20

In the case of an oscillating dipole configuration, for instance the rai= lgun, open field lines are present only along the mutual line of connection.= (fig 15.8 A).  With that not particularly many space quant can be reac= hed.  It hense has to be operated with gigantic excitation powers in th= e range of many thousands of Ampere, so that further field lines fling open=20= and interact.  The wanted over-unity effect can only be reached at an e= normous expense of technical apparatus.=20

An unipolar arrangement here is considered more advantageous, where hold= the more unipolar, the fewer excitation power is required. But in that way=20= it can take longer until the collecting of neutrinos like an avalanche again= has worn off.  In the case of the an ideal spherical arrangement (fig=20= 15.8 B), as the ball-lightening takes, the process can even last for minutes= . This explains why unipolar systems can be kept under control only very har= d.  If the neutrino avalanche is rolling then it purely theoretically c= an only be stopped with a still larger excitation power, for instance by pha= se shifting, what can hardly be realized in practice. ..... A synchronous op= eration between the neutrino oscillation and the converter can, apart from t= he technologically hardly realizable high frequency, by no means really be r= ecommended.  As a rule one single steep flank of the change of the exci= tation voltage is sufficient to start the avalanche.  By means of the r= epetition frequency or by means of the duty cycle of the excitation voltage=20= then resonance's to the neutrino field can be made or avoided.   O= n the other hand cant be done without the avalanche effect. The utilizable p= ower of the neutrino converter otherwise would be much too small.  This= case should be pursued further in the design of a longitudinal wave gauge.=20

All converter systems at first work based on a well-known and tried and=20= tested physical principle of functioning.  In  the case of the rai= lgun it is the bridge of Ampere.   The thus used force effect on a= conductor through which flows current is advantageous due to the obtainable=  order of magnitude and as a basic concept extremely recommendable. &n= bsp;But also coulomb forces or other physical principles can be used.=20

Despite that a further relation still must be added, which produces the=20= interaction with the neutrinos. Closely associated with the unipolar arrange= ment it is the unipolar induction which in virtually all space energy concep= ts is put to use.  It already could be shown that the railgun uses the=20= effect as well as John Searl in the case of his flying disc.  The Farad= ay law of induction turns out to be the key to free energy. "

--part1_d9.160396d1.2e924dc7_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 5 11:16:19 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i95IGFCb016505; Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:16:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i95IFnHN016375; Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:15:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:15:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041005140259.025a9948@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 14:15:39 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55983 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I believe I have mentioned this story here a few times. Briefly: before the Iraq war the main evidence for nuclear bomb research in Iraq was that the Iraqis had purchased thousands of aluminum tubes, which one analyst thought were intended for use in centrifuges. Experts at Los Alamos took one look at the photographs of the tubes and dismissed that theory, but administration officials have been repeating it ever since. on October 3 and October 5 the New York Times finally published the full details of this fiasco. The scientific misjudgments in cold fusion pale in comparison. See: October 3, "How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence" article. October 5, "The Nuclear Bomb That Wasn't" editorial. QUOTES: "The only physical evidence the administration offered for an Iraqi nuclear program were the 60,000 aluminum tubes that Baghdad set out to buy in early 2001; some of them were seized in Jordan. Even though Iraq had a history of using the same tubes to make small rockets, the president and his closest advisers told the American people that the overwhelming consensus of government experts was that these new tubes were to be used to make nuclear bomb fuel. Now we know there was no such consensus. Mr. Bush's closest advisers say they didn't know that until after they had made the case for war. But in fact, they had plenty of evidence that the claim was baseless; it was a long-discounted theory that had to be resurrected from the intelligence community's wastebasket when the administration needed justification for invading Iraq. The tubes-for-bombs theory was the creation of a low-level C.I.A. analyst who got his facts, even the size of the tubes, wrong. It was refuted within 24 hours by the Energy Department, which issued three papers debunking the idea over a four-month period in 2001, and by the International Atomic Energy Agency. A week before Mr. Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, in which he warned of an Iraqi nuclear menace, international experts in Vienna had dismissed the C.I.A.'s theory about the tubes. The day before, the International Atomic Energy Agency said there was no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program and rejected the tubes' tale entirely. . . ." - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 05:37:18 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i96CbA7G022963; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 05:37:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i96CaYBm022792; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 05:36:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 05:36:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 04:37:14 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55984 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >QUOTES: > >"The only physical evidence the administration offered for an Iraqi nuclear >program were the 60,000 aluminum tubes that Baghdad set out to buy in early >2001[snip] . . ." > >- Jed It may be that the greatest failure of the Bush administration was the failure to offer sufficient rewards for information leading to the location of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The nuclear weapons program may indeed have been shut down, but there seems to be a glaring lack of information as to the location of chemical weapons, or, given that they were all destroyed, the location of their remnants and the records of destruction. There were caravans of trucks fleeing to Syria and Iran at the time of the invasion, so it may never be known what was taken to these countries. What is well known, however, is that in Desert Storm Sadam preferred giving his air force to Iran rather than having it destroyed on the ground. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 07:36:04 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i96EZrnG012006; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:35:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i96EZb1m011946; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:35:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:35:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:35:23 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55985 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: horace, the fleeing trucks have been shown to be as real as the hordes of iraqis massing on saudia arabias border back when we convinced the saudis to let us put us troops on their soil. (for those not in the know, those were doctored sattelite photos. ie, not real) the 60 k page document that iraq turned over, that after one day the bush admin said, nope, not good enough, has been stated by the un weapons inspector team to have EVERYTHING. saddam in fact met all our demands. but warmongering proffiteers live everywhere. On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 04:37:14 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >QUOTES: > > > >"The only physical evidence the administration offered for an Iraqi nuclear > >program were the 60,000 aluminum tubes that Baghdad set out to buy in early > >2001[snip] . . ." > > > >- Jed > > It may be that the greatest failure of the Bush administration was the > failure to offer sufficient rewards for information leading to the location > of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The nuclear weapons program may > indeed have been shut down, but there seems to be a glaring lack of > information as to the location of chemical weapons, or, given that they > were all destroyed, the location of their remnants and the records of > destruction. There were caravans of trucks fleeing to Syria and Iran at > the time of the invasion, so it may never be known what was taken to these > countries. What is well known, however, is that in Desert Storm Sadam > preferred giving his air force to Iran rather than having it destroyed on > the ground. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > -- Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten. -G.K. Chesterton From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 13:41:49 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i96Kfj7G026425; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 13:41:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i96KfTos026338; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 13:41:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 13:41:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003b01c4abe4$cdb1eee0$a1796d45@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Shoulders: LARGE-SCALE PROPULSION USING EVOs Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 13:41:05 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55986 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ken Shoulder's highly speculative new ideas (even more so than normal) will definitely attract the anti-gravity (clock) watchers on vortex and, excuse the specialized pun, the best thing about Ken's ideas is ... no charge... ;-) The pdf on "Large-Scale Propulsion Using EVOs" can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/ Side note: Here's a semi-obvious thing which you may never have thought of in this way: "Controllable propulsion is the functional equivalent of antigravity in that it allows for the nullification of gravitational effects near planetary objects and in space. At the level of basic technology discussed here, there is a strong affinity between the engineering aspects of propulsion, antigravity and electrical energy production." Now that does not necessarily mean that everthing which is overunity (energy-wise) will also have antigravity side effects ... but there is an interconnection by way of "time." To blend in a little "Saviour" into the mix... why would we ever assume that the time parameter must remain constant? Of course, many of us knew that this is probably how ET's bicycle was able to achieve antigravity.... he merely altered the time parameter.... "time flies" as they say... seriously, though, almost any human can achieve anti-gravity for a short period. Even without reading Buchanan's "Ubiquity" you are no doubt fairly familiar with the ongoing struggle against one "power law" which we have to contend with on a regular basis - gravity. The only thing two things keeping humans from achieving sustained antigravity are consequently either controllable propulsion or controllable time. Control of either will suffice. An important feature of gravity revealed by all this is the possible variability in time parameter. A heavy object falling freely near the surface of the earth undergoes constant acceleration at almost ten m/sec/sec (32 ft/sec/sec)... or else it just feels time differently. At the end of the first second, it would have fallen ~5 m (16 ft) and would have a speed of close to10 m/sec (32 ft/sec). At the end of the second second (my spell checker can't figure that one out), the object would have fallen ~20 m (64 ft) and after the third 256. So if you work back the other way, you can see that any human can overcome gravity for quite a few milliseconds, and if ... one could only control time a little better... If I were going to borrow something from ET in order to "go places" in this world, if would be his "watch" instead of the bicycle... ...and BTW "watch" Ken Shoulders. He may be plugging into something which will electrify us all. I'm dying to know if his EVO experiment has been performed on a precision scale yet. In fact. I was a little disappointed that these results were not what this new document was about when I first read the title. Anyway, I will predict that we will hear something on that front soon, whether it be more levity or real anti-gravity... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 17:45:23 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i970jK5O022912; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:45:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i970jFiO022869; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:45:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:45:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041007004513.99693.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:45:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55987 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thoughts (or brain droppings, as George Carlin would say): 1. We will never know for sure what photos and or evidence was doctored and by who. This tends to happen with things like this, the goings on with politics and the war. 2. Since when does the United Nations dictate our policy? I am not a citizen of the UN, or of some supposed unified world. I am a strong nationalist, and shall remain as such. 3. The war has gone on too long. How I personally feel it should have been handled I will not comment on here, as it would likely cause a flame war, with said flames directed at me. However, it should have been handled differently, more swiftly, and more effectively. 4. If the US were to back down, and 'play nice doggie' so to speak, that would not send a very good message to potential enemies. 5. In reply to statements like: "The US is a bunch of big bullies, and they are picking on poor deprived people of the world that could cause no harm to such a powerful nation. Why are they flexing their muscles this way?" Can cause no harm? Tell this to those who died in the towers; who speaks for the dead? What do we say to the dead? 6. My personal idea of foreign policy: "Leave us alone, we'll leave you alone, assuming you don't go around butchering your own people. Be our friend, we'll be your friend and will help you. Harm us, and we will destroy you." Now, is it a nation's right to be able to butcher their own people? I certainly don't think so, and if the 'biggest dog on the block' doesn't seem to think so either, so much the better. 7. Universal Service Act, eh? It appears dead, yet it is interesting to consider. I've heard from the media that Bush was the one who wanted the draft back, yet this nice piece of legislative detritus has been formulated by politicians of the more liberal persuasion. 2 years of national service...hmmm...well, let's see: I've been paying taxes so some people who wish to do nothing can declare themselves unfit to work, get free heat and power (and much more) while I do honest, hard work, try to make ends meet, and generally be a good person, and hope I do not freeze this winter, because I damn sure wouldn't qualify for any help from Uncle Sam. I'd say I have payed my 2-year 'debt to society' and then some. 8. Addition to above: Is there even a chance that this Universal Service Act is a really nice/strange internet hoax? The thing is unbelievable to read... 9. I'm not a Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, Communist Party USA, etc. When you see that nice little space on your paper called "None of the above" or "Other", think of me. So....what's new on the scientific front? --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 18:00:04 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i970xvHj029792; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:59:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i970xihi029733; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:59:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:59:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Time as a constant ??? Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:58:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C4ABDE.E93CECB0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55988 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C4ABDE.E93CECB0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000D_01C4ABDE.E93E7350" ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C4ABDE.E93E7350 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankCould we consider time as the only constant, provided that single = constant changes with everything physical? Absurd comment ? Perhaps.. but.. maybe science gives us a glimpse but = not the vocabulary. Perhaps we do not know how to assign a measurement to time? A clock may = be a flawed method. For those scripture buffs, an interesting story = regarding the sun's shadow on the staircase moving back may not be so = absurd should another method of measurement be discovered. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C4ABDE.E93E7350 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Could we consider time as the only constant, = provided=20 that single constant changes with everything physical?
Absurd comment ? Perhaps.. but.. maybe = science=20 gives us  a glimpse but not the vocabulary.
Perhaps we do not know how to assign a = measurement to=20 time? A clock may be a flawed method. For those scripture buffs, an = interesting=20 story regarding the sun's shadow on the staircase moving back may not be = so=20 absurd should another method of measurement be discovered.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C4ABDE.E93E7350-- ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C4ABDE.E93CECB0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000b01c4ac08$d200a530$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C4ABDE.E93CECB0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 18:58:22 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i971w9Hj010546; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:58:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i971w6pj010520; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:58:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:58:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <01f301c4ac11$041011c0$a1796d45@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:57:21 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: <1thwcB.A.LkC.sKKZBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55989 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Richard, "Could we consider time as the only constant, provided that single constant changes with everything physical?" Normally, yes. I was going out on a limb here in support of the observation that *time* may - in its ultimate aspect, be more like a *volume* rather than linear as in a straight line affair; so that "how" we perceive time is somewhat relative to who/where we are located and other sensory inputs... and the underlying lack of precision applies to many scientific measurements as well, which usually assumes both time linearity and perfect 3-D space. "For those scripture buffs, an interesting story regarding the sun's shadow on the staircase moving back may not be so absurd should another method of measurement be discovered." I like that analogy... OTOH I would caution against letting "creationists" get any bit of control over scientific rationality... which they are prone to do in certain areas of the country.... IOW one can still manage to be a "creationist" in the sense of an "ultimate plan"... that is, a divinity operating on a different time scale and in a modality of "morphic fields"... yet still understand how the process could took a verrrry long time. Nothing could be more idiotic, IMHO than to try to interpret any ancient scripture in a literal sense. A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American public TV called "Connections" which is enlightening to merge with some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of Bill Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" master-mind, specialized in linking seemingly-random events in history; which events all came together at the proper time for the advancement of science, technology and our modern lifestyle. Some of the later episodes became a little strained, but the overwhelming impression one was left with is that none of the things we enjoy today would have been possible out of interlocking context... out of a wide spectrum of disparate contributions, and out of what can only be described as a loosely implemented "grand scheme." It is not unrealistic to assign the idea of "divinity" to such a slow process, but of course ... this is not what some other folks (in pulpits) want you to believe. "Seemingly random" is the operative mechanism. The result was not planned in excruciating detail for maximum speed - nor well-directed in one sense, but the results can be interpreted that way, especially in a 'compressed-time' understanding. One could cynically surmise that it goes back to the old "half-full/half-empty" interpretation of reality. Science has a word for that mechanism of not-so-random randomness - it is the *stochastic process*. This is the way the real "supreme being" operates - not in broad brushstrokes, but in curious little steps-and-missteps over the millennia, a process which is easy for the skeptic to call "random" and indicative of no God, but then again the skeptic, in so doing, is only expressing his own profound ignorance of the true underlying situation, and especially ignorance of time. Evolution itself is the best evidence of a stochastic process, but absolutely NOT random mechanism, esp in light of a "day being as a thousand" (or many million) years... There are underlying 'forms' and memes in nature which all exert a miniscule influence which are only felt over extended time spans. The secular scientist is free to call this "partly random" but the spiritual observer can call it subtlety directed, the "Tao" or the "water-course way," the path of least resistance - in effect, the divine way... ...and best (or worst) of all, neither side will be demonstrably incorrect. Even if one side of the argument may be called demon-strably anti-spiritual... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 6 19:23:28 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i972NK5O016744; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:23:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i972NCNV016701; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:23:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:23:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4164A888.3050205@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 22:23:04 -0400 From: Terry Blanton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> <01f301c4ac11$041011c0$a1796d45@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <01f301c4ac11$041011c0$a1796d45@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <9qv52C.A.4EE.QiKZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55990 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >...and best (or worst) of all, neither side will be >demonstrably incorrect. > This coin could have many sides. Maybe "intelligent design" does not require a "supreme" being . . . just a highly advanced one. After all, we seem to be a late-blooming species. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 05:38:33 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97CcKUF017340; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:38:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97CcI25017333; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:38:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:38:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c4ac6a$827a4ae0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Joy of discussion Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 07:37:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4AC40.80647C50"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55991 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4AC40.80647C50 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4AC40.80647C50" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4AC40.80647C50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankBefore he passed, my geologist friend and I enjoyed comparing = views. Mine was the earth expanded versus his.. the continental drift. = His view being that the evidence shows plate tectonics are dynamic. My = view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the = east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point = of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could = grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional = water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close = approach by Mars allowing the water to be " stripped".=20 My thinking for earth expansion being to reconcile the " ancient's" year = of 360 vs 365 1/4 days. His being to reconcile the existence of ocean = canyons such as the Hudson.=20 Our thoughts on the time theme never reached a point of reconciliation. Jones mentioned that " volume" could be descriptive. Perhaps an " = elusive illusion of volume" may fill in one of the blank spaces of the " = coloring" book of life we were given without being supplied with the = "paint by number" manual.. or ..were we given a manual?? The joy of discussion is enhanced in the Vortex group by self discipline = whereas most groups degenerate into arguments. I commend each of you. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4AC40.80647C50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Before he passed, my geologist friend = and I=20 enjoyed comparing views. Mine was the earth expanded versus his.. the=20 continental drift. His view being that the evidence shows plate = tectonics are=20 dynamic. My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" = since the=20 east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point = of=20 maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant = me=20 slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional = water=20 required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by = Mars=20 allowing the water to be  " stripped".
 
My thinking for earth expansion being = to=20 reconcile the " ancient's" year of 360 vs 365 1/4 days. His = being  to=20 reconcile the existence of ocean canyons such as the Hudson. =
 
Our thoughts on the time theme never = reached a=20 point of reconciliation.
 
 Jones mentioned  that " = volume" could=20 be descriptive. Perhaps an " elusive illusion of volume" may fill in one = of the=20 blank spaces of the " coloring" book of life we were given without being = supplied with the "paint by number" manual.. or ..were we given a=20 manual??
 
The joy of discussion is enhanced in = the Vortex=20 group by self discipline whereas most groups degenerate into arguments. = I=20 commend each of you.
 
Richard
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4AC40.80647C50-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4AC40.80647C50 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c4ac6a$692b4210$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4AC40.80647C50-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 05:53:09 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97Cr389010484; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:53:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97Cr1dt010467; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:53:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:53:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041047115212290@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Carbonation of H2O/D2O Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 06:52:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ef0ca2002d8771d89634c34812c42bc7350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.180 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55992 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A battery of experiments involving microwaving water, ranging from distilled,(and melted hailstones from a recent deluge) and various concentrations of salts, indicate either the presence/transfer of the electronium particle, or complex (loss tangent) interaction behavior of the 2.45 GHz microwaves with the water. Carbonation by adding CO2 under pressure exceeding 4 atmospheres would eliminate anions such as Cl - etc., and M+ cations while increasing the H+ or D+: ion concentration D2O + CO2 (pressure) -----> D2CO3aq -----> 2 D+ + CO2- - This gives one a shot at seeing if a (Hydrino-Deuterino-like) particle is created, and if this would be a practical means for concentration of atmospheric Electronium. >From this one might find that Electroniumized Deuterons have a lower neutron stripping energy requirement, and a higher (hot or cold) fusion cross section. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

A battery of experiments involving microwaving water, ranging from
distilled,(and melted hailstones from a recent deluge) and various concentrations of
salts, indicate either the presence/transfer of the electronium particle, or complex  (loss tangent)
interaction behavior of the 2.45 GHz microwaves with the water.
Carbonation by adding CO2 under pressure exceeding 4 atmospheres would
eliminate anions such as Cl -  etc., and M+ cations while increasing the H+ or D+: ion
concentration
 
D2O + CO2  (pressure) ----->   D2CO3aq  ----->     2 D+  +  CO2- -
 
This gives one a shot at seeing if a (Hydrino-Deuterino-like) particle is
created, and if this would be a practical means for concentration of atmospheric Electronium.
 
From this one might find that Electroniumized Deuterons have a lower neutron stripping
energy requirement, and a higher (hot or cold) fusion cross section.
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 07:13:05 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97ECx89027299; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 07:12:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97ECv4I027274; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 07:12:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 07:12:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004104713127230@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Joy of discussion Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:12:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ae1de313aea665f5f532965405071ab3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.207 Resent-Message-ID: <0v6cv.A.GqG.o7UZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55993 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Richard Macaulay wrote: "My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to be " stripped"." Going by the scriptures, Richard: "When Methuselah had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his death occurred in the year of the Deluge." I interpret this as a change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselah was about 3.3 times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, and was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energy is thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder. Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased. :-) http://www.earth-history.com/Generation.htm Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Richard Macaulay wrote:
 
"My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to be  " stripped"."
 
Going by the scriptures, Richard:
 
"When Methuselah had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his death occurred in the year of the Deluge."
 
I interpret this as a change in lightspeed:
 
E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselah
was about 3.3  times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, and
was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energy
is thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia
of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t.
 
This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder.
 
Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased.  :-)
 
 
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 08:16:43 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97FGa89009871; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:16:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97FGX4t009845; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:16:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:16:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <001201c4ac80$99645fa0$7c56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> <01f301c4ac11$041011c0$a1796d45@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:15:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55994 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones wrote: > > A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, > nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American public TV > called "Connections" which is enlightening to merge with > some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of Bill > Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" master-mind, > specialized in linking seemingly-random events in history; > which events all came together at the proper time for the > advancement of science, technology and our modern lifestyle. > Some of the later episodes became a little strained, but the > overwhelming impression one was left with is that none of > the things we enjoy today would have been possible out of > interlocking context... out of a wide spectrum of disparate > contributions, and out of what can only be described as a > loosely implemented "grand scheme." It is not unrealistic to > assign the idea of "divinity" to such a slow process, but of > course ... this is not what some other folks (in pulpits) > want you to believe. Burke's brilliant initial series sticks with me as a masterpiece of exposition of a very important topic, which Jones has touched on. In retrospect on my own life, I am compelled to recognize a series of events which have guided it. "Objectively" the choices may seem random, but "subjectively" at each critical branching point there was a sense of the 'right path' being 'presented' to me, sometimes with a distinct sense of emphasis: Do This! Apropos of all this is Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science", which is a graphical demonstration of the power of cellular automata; Wolfram states that one motive in writing Mathematica was to explore cellular automata in depth. Involving parallel, recursive, non-linear interactons based on simple rules, no algorithm can "analyze" it (or verbal description embrace it). One can only plug in the starting point and watch what happens, which one can do with Mathematica, a powerful computer, and lots of patience. Wolfram demonstrates that for some seeds, nothing much happens; static order is quickly produced. For others, superficially similar, chaos erupts, in which every mathematical test of randomity is passed. Wolfram goes on to demonstrate this property for all manner of rules, and that the mathematical entities so created can perform logical and arithmetical operatons. One of the theoological arguments against scientific recductionism is the extreme complexity of the manifested world. Wolfram answers this with the genrative power of cellular automata, implying that that the root of Existence there may indeed be a simple set of rules in operation. The chances of finding this set by reductionist science are nil. Existence is deterministic chaos on a grand order. Studies of deterministic chaos have shown the existence of "strange attractors" and other islands of order amid apparent disorder. A number of books have been written on this theme. Penrose, in "Shadows of the Mind" pointed out certain mathematical problems which cannot be solved by algoritms [and therefore programmed computers] but can be solved by human minds; therefore there is a qualitative difference. I suggest that a funamental property of neural networks is "pattern recognition". That term is hardly adequate to the task, for what I am pointing to is that our senses of sight and hearing, as well as others, depend on very complex nonlinear parallel processing systems which have partially be definied by neurological and psychological studies. Only a neural-network mind can recognize patterns in the magical world outside our skins, see constellations in the stars, voices in the surf, and conspiracies under every rock. We compulsively seek patterns, connect dots, etc. In contemplation of the manifestaions of the cosmic cellular automatoa, one can map then onto traditional descriptions of God; engimatic, intimate, transcendant, endlessly creative, pervasive, implacable, unfathomable, etc. Quoting the Tao: "The Way that can be named is not the eternal Way; Naming is the mother of ten thousand things." Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 08:37:25 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97Fb7UF031405; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:37:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97Fb3IG031322; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:37:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:37:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:36:49 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? In-Reply-To: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55995 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: im missing the last part of the statement. provided that constant changes... wouldnt that make it a variable. and time IS a variable, dependant upon velocity. On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:58:55 -0500, RC Macaulay wrote: > > Could we consider time as the only constant, provided that single constant > changes with everything physical? > Absurd comment ? Perhaps.. but.. maybe science gives us a glimpse but not > the vocabulary. > Perhaps we do not know how to assign a measurement to time? A clock may be a > flawed method. For those scripture buffs, an interesting story regarding the > sun's shadow on the staircase moving back may not be so absurd should > another method of measurement be discovered. > > Richard -- Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten. -G.K. Chesterton From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 08:53:11 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97Fr589019696; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:53:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97Fr44U019678; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:53:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:53:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:52:23 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis In-Reply-To: <20041007004513.99693.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20041007004513.99693.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55996 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: 1. well, since theres been testifiying in front of congress and leaks and unaltered originals sent to media, yeah, actually, we do know for sure. 2. the us is a signatory to the un. the us has agreed to the uns controll in issues that are not about defense. in fact, the whole reason we went into iraq was becuase of them supposedly not doing WHAT THE UN ORDERED. so, we went to war, ignoring un dictates, becuase of un dictates. sure, that makes sense. 3. not touching.. 4. it would send a greatmessage to potential allies though. 5. so, your the kind of person, if someone cuts you off in traffic, you go and cut someone else off, and blame it on teh guy that cut you off? Saddam and iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. NOTHING to do with Al Quaeda. Osama bin laden HATES Saddam, becuase he ran iraq as a non secular state. Al Quaeda had been known to bomb targets in Iraq because of that. not that they were able to get in often, as iraqs borders were quite tight. not that they are anymore. and youre right. who speaks for the dead. who complains that the troops and equipment that were sent to afghanistan, where those who attacked us actually ARE, were pulled out and sent to iraq. ohh, wait. i do. thats right. 6. iraq didnt "butcher" its own people. its human rights records against protests suck, but the "mass graves" are those kurds who we told to revolt, and that wed help them, and then we abandoned them. it was a civil war, and any country has the right to defend its integrity in a civil war. using the gas we sold him to do it with was probably the least deadly way, number of casualties wise, to do it with. as for the lists of those always dying, that was becuase of un sanctions that prevented a lot of medicine and other equipment from getting in, becuase it MIGHT be used in weapons production. its like all the laws that prevent people from buying more than one box of sudafed, becuase you MIGHT make meth with it. 7. actually, the whole point of the universal service act was that if there was a draft activation (which is still possible) then there would already be a change made to the draft (this change) that would allow that activation to be done non militarily if the person chose. those talking about it as the bill to bring back the draft simply dont know what they are talking about. the usa does not actually activate the draft, it simply changes the existing draft laws on the books, by removing the age sex limits, and giving non military means of service if you DO get drafted. 8. nope, its real. but misstated and fearmongered on line 9. im a liberal. except where im conservative. socialist leanings. lets all sing now! kumbaya my non denominational lord and/or insert faith or lack thereof here, kumabaya! now then. the x prize has been won, and st helens has a stomach ache. other than that, dunno. On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:45:13 -0700 (PDT), Kyle Mcallister wrote: > Thoughts (or brain droppings, as George Carlin would > say): > > 1. We will never know for sure what photos and or > evidence was doctored and by who. This tends to happen > with things like this, the goings on with politics and > the war. > > 2. Since when does the United Nations dictate our > policy? I am not a citizen of the UN, or of some > supposed unified world. I am a strong nationalist, and > shall remain as such. > > 3. The war has gone on too long. How I personally feel > it should have been handled I will not comment on > here, as it would likely cause a flame war, with said > flames directed at me. However, it should have been > handled differently, more swiftly, and more > effectively. > > 4. If the US were to back down, and 'play nice doggie' > so to speak, that would not send a very good message > to potential enemies. > > 5. In reply to statements like: "The US is a bunch of > big bullies, and they are picking on poor deprived > people of the world that could cause no harm to such a > powerful nation. Why are they flexing their muscles > this way?" Can cause no harm? Tell this to those who > died in the towers; who speaks for the dead? What do > we say to the dead? > > 6. My personal idea of foreign policy: "Leave us > alone, we'll leave you alone, assuming you don't go > around butchering your own people. Be our friend, > we'll be your friend and will help you. Harm us, and > we will destroy you." Now, is it a nation's right to > be able to butcher their own people? I certainly don't > think so, and if the 'biggest dog on the block' > doesn't seem to think so either, so much the better. > > 7. Universal Service Act, eh? It appears dead, yet it > is interesting to consider. I've heard from the media > that Bush was the one who wanted the draft back, yet > this nice piece of legislative detritus has been > formulated by politicians of the more liberal > persuasion. 2 years of national service...hmmm...well, > let's see: I've been paying taxes so some people who > wish to do nothing can declare themselves unfit to > work, get free heat and power (and much more) while I > do honest, hard work, try to make ends meet, and > generally be a good person, and hope I do not freeze > this winter, because I damn sure wouldn't qualify for > any help from Uncle Sam. I'd say I have payed my > 2-year 'debt to society' and then some. > > 8. Addition to above: Is there even a chance that this > Universal Service Act is a really nice/strange > internet hoax? The thing is unbelievable to read... > > 9. I'm not a Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, > Communist Party USA, etc. When you see that nice > little space on your paper called "None of the above" > or "Other", think of me. > > So....what's new on the scientific front? > > --Kyle > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > -- Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten. -G.K. Chesterton From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 09:18:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97GI8UF011098; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 09:18:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97GI61D011088; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 09:18:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 09:18:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041007161757.14427.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 09:17:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <001201c4ac80$99645fa0$7c56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55997 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gentlemen, Back in 2000, I attended a little informal meeting at University of Arizona in Tucson at the Astronomy Department on alternative models of gravity. One of the people I met at that time was the department contrarian astronomer, Dr. Bill Tifft. Tifft's speciality was the observation of quantized red shift anomalies in spiral galaxies. His tentative hypothesis suggested that at intergalactic sizes, general relativity may break down, and that space and time assume properties similar to everyday life in the quantum realm. Now this was meaty stuff, and Tifft was as you might imagine a fan and intellectual sparring partner of Halton Arp. However what I found even more fascinating was Tifft's theory of 3D time. Fascinating even given that I understood only .0001% of what he was suggesting! Best I could translate into Nickspeak, the time domain has a three dimensional existence, but because we are in the space domain, we can perceive it only (at best) as an abstract 4th dimension. However in Tifft's cosmology, there could be matter, planets, people, existing in the time domain, and for them, space would be an annoying poetic relativistic abstraction. The interface is at photons - or something like that. A web search for Tifft's work shows up very little, though a couple of years ago he had started a website for the discussion of 3D time models. No idea what happened to it, or him. Maybe some vortexian with greater seeking skills than I can follow up. I have e-mailed Tifft on a couple of occasions over the past 4 years, to no avail. Despite my lack of understanding, it seemed elegant and had a truthful character to it as theories go. Still an empiricist, but when I do walk the other side of the street, I am a sucker for theories that are elegantly symmetrical. Old fashioned that way. NR --- Mike Carrell wrote: > Jones wrote: > > > > > A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, > > nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American > public TV > > called "Connections" which is enlightening to > merge with > > some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of > Bill > > Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" > master-mind, _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 10:46:35 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97HkW89028020; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:46:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97HkUQ7028000; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:46:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:46:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41657315.181F5969@ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 09:38:42 -0600 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K. Systems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: Joy of discussion] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------DE2B4A1EC9FECA34CA4D51CE" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55998 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------DE2B4A1EC9FECA34CA4D51CE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------DE2B4A1EC9FECA34CA4D51CE Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by tanager.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1cfztk3gt3NZFmQ0 for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 07:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ix.netcom.com (pcp07641507pcs.sntafe01.nm.comcast.net[68.35.23.61]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004100714422101200jibple> (Authid: estorms04); Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:42:21 +0000 Message-ID: <416547F6.D1A522D6@ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:21:05 -0600 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K. Systems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fjsparber@earthlink.net Subject: Re: Joy of discussion References: <410-22004104713127230@earthlink.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------5979389FED94C2C4102778C8" X-ELNK-AV: 0 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 --------------5979389FED94C2C4102778C8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a few question as a simple observer of things I know little about. If the speed of light changed, would not the speed of the electron around the nucleus also change? Would not the rate of reactions within nature and within the body not change in proportion? In other words, would Methuselah have aged just as fast? In fact, how would anyone know that the speed of light had changed if all things that move change in proportion, as they must? Suppose, as many people are proposing, that another faster mechanism exists for communication. Would not the use of this method invalidate the conclusions about time that the speed of light implies? Just a few questions to keep you thinking. Ed Frederick Sparber wrote: > Richard Macaulay wrote: "My view.. that the continents could not have > drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". > The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the > other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could > have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans > would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to > be " stripped"." Going by the scriptures, Richard: "When Methuselah > had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he > became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable > term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his > death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his > death occurred in the year of the Deluge." I interpret this as a > change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the > lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselahwas about 3.3 > times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of > what it is now, andwas zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the > present value. Conservation of mass and energyis thus satisfied: > Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where > I is the moment of inertiaof a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w > =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) > when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder. Note the > decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased. > :-) http://www.earth-history.com/Generation.htm Frederick --------------5979389FED94C2C4102778C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a few question as a simple observer of things I know little about.  If the speed of light changed, would not the speed of the electron around the nucleus also change?  Would not the rate of reactions within nature and within the body not change in proportion?  In other words, would Methuselah have aged just as fast?  In fact, how would anyone know that the speed of light had changed if all things that move change in proportion, as they must?   Suppose, as many people are proposing, that another faster mechanism exists for communication.  Would not the use of this method invalidate the conclusions about time that the speed of light implies?  Just a few questions to keep you thinking.

Ed

Frederick Sparber wrote:

 Richard Macaulay wrote: "My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to be  " stripped"." Going by the scriptures, Richard: "When Methuselah had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his death occurred in the year of the Deluge." I interpret this as a change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselahwas about 3.3  times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, andwas zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energyis thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertiaof a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder. Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased.  :-) http://www.earth-history.com/Generation.htm  Frederick
--------------5979389FED94C2C4102778C8-- --------------DE2B4A1EC9FECA34CA4D51CE-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 10:49:06 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97Hmx89028777; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:48:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97HmwLb028751; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:48:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:48:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41658184.60004@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 13:48:52 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: [OT] Syrian/Israeli Peace? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <64Vcg.A.EBH.KGYZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/55999 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: "Syrian President Bashar Assad is offering to make peace with Israel and says he is ready to cooperate with the United States in stabilizing Iraq, a former senior State Department official said Wednesday." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485831.html Is Assad smoking from the same hookah as Kadafi? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 11:45:35 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97IjUUF007794; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:45:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97Ij0NF007630; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:45:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:45:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: "Vortex" Subject: Stepper Motor thoughts and questions. Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:14:08 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <9hX_z.A.K3B.r6YZBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56000 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All. I'm hoping some of you folks can give me some advice. I've been working with stepper motors from old hard drives; an excellent source for such things. They each come with a controller card, and vary in speed from 5000-15000 rpm depending on the make and model. The problem I run into is that it's often the case that in order to save power and extend drive life, the motor tends to turn off ( or pulse on and off ) after a few seconds of operation. Is there an easy generic way to modify the controller card to override this? ( like for example putting a voltage on one of the pins from the ribbon cable connector ). I'm sure that specific mods could be done to achieve this, but it would be far too much work to track down the drive chip specs for each brand and figure this out. A generic cheat would make my recovery rate for old drives increase tremendously. I used to just strip the magnets from old drives, and regret throwing aways the rest now that I know how useful the rest can be. So I mention it to you all as well; old drives are filled with stepper motor/ NIB magnet goodness. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 11:57:41 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97IvI89025623; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:57:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97IvHnQ025612; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:57:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:57:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00d701c4ac9f$6dc1ee20$6501a8c0@Erin> From: "Kitzmiller" To: References: <000e01c4ac6a$827a4ae0$0100007f@xptower> Subject: Re: Joy of discussion Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:57:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 Disposition-Notification-To: "Kitzmiller" X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Resent-Message-ID: <4K1pCC.A.IQG.NGZZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56001 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay > > Before he passed, my geologist friend and I enjoyed comparing views. > Mine was the earth expanded versus his.. the continental drift. His view > being that the evidence shows plate tectonics are dynamic. My view.. > that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and > west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of > maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant > me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water > required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach > by Mars allowing the water to be "stripped". > > My thinking for earth expansion being to reconcile the "ancient's" year > of 360 vs 365 1/4 days. His being to reconcile the existence of ocean > canyons such as the Hudson. > Richard - How far have you gotten in developing your idea of the planet 'expanding' to create its separated continents? And could it not be a "combination" of both expansion and tectonics? What do you see as the force behind such a planetary expansion? What was the original diameter? I'd be very interested in any idea you may have on this subject. Thanks. Wyley From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 12:10:09 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97J9x89030571; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:10:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97J9wEe030561; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:09:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:09:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007150704.00ba74b8@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 15:09:52 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Artificial muscles Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <8Ej8DD.A.ZdH.GSZZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56002 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See: Electroactive Polymers As Artificial Muscles - Capabilities, Potentials And Challenges http://ndeaa.jpl.nasa.gov/ndeaa-pub/EAP/EAP-robotics-2000.pdf Figure 11 is neat! - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 12:35:48 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97JZg89005323; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:35:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97JZfnm005307; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:35:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:35:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041047183449340@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: [Fwd: Joy of discussion] Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 13:34:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94004adf6786d0beb54edc06af728d82cab350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.120.4 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56003 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII So far all I can come up with for an answer Ed, is "42". :-) Frederick .................................................................................................................................................................. On 10/7/04 12:46:36 PM Ed Storms wrote to Frederick and forwarded to Vortex-l: "I have a few question as a simple observer of things I know little about. If the speed of light changed, would not the speed of the electron around the nucleus also change? Would not the rate of reactions within nature and within the body not change in proportion? In other words, would Methuselah have aged just as fast? In fact, how would anyone know that the speed of light had changed if all things that move change in proportion, as they must? Suppose, as many people are proposing, that another faster mechanism exists for communication. Would not the use of this method invalidate the conclusions about time that the speed of light implies? Just a few questions to keep you thinking. " Ed Frederick Sparber wrote: Richard Macaulay wrote: "My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to be " stripped"." Going by the scriptures, Richard: "When Methuselah had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his death occurred in the year of the Deluge." I interpret this as a change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselahwas about 3.3 times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, and was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energyis thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder. Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased. :-) http://www.earth-history.com/Generation.htm Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

So far all I can come up with for an answer Ed, is "42".    :-)
 
Frederick
..................................................................................................................................................................
On 10/7/04 12:46:36 PM
 
Ed Storms wrote to Frederick and forwarded to Vortex-l:

"I have a few question as a simple observer of things I know little about.  If the speed of light changed, would not the speed of the electron around the nucleus also change?  Would not the rate of reactions within nature and within the body not change in proportion?  In other words, would Methuselah have aged just as fast?  In fact, how would anyone know that the speed of light had changed if all things that move change in proportion, as they must?   Suppose, as many people are proposing, that another faster mechanism exists for communication.  Would not the use of this method invalidate the conclusions about time that the speed of light implies?  Just a few questions to keep you thinking. "

Ed

Frederick Sparber wrote:

 Richard Macaulay wrote: "My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .. but the additional water required to fill the oceans would need to come from a close approach by Mars allowing the water to be  " stripped"." 
 
Going by the scriptures, Richard: 
 
"When Methuselah had reached the great age of one hundred and eighty-seven years he became the father of Lamech. Following this he lived the remarkable term of seven hundred and eighty-two years, which makes his age at his death nine hundred and sixty-nine years. It follows thus that his death occurred in the year of the Deluge." 
 
I interpret this as a change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselahwas about 3.3  times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, and was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value.
 
Conservation of mass and energyis thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went  yonder. Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased.  :-) 
 
 
Frederick
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 14:30:21 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97LUEUF019173; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:30:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97LUCEd019159; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:30:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:30:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007172830.00ba73b8@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 17:29:40 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Infamous Popular Mechanics article now on line Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56004 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/ Sort of infamous. With some people. Actually, I am glad they published it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 15:15:07 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97MErUF031073; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:14:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97MEqSY031060; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:14:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:14:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181358.025ab918@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 18:14:55 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Academic web sites held for ransom (but who cares?) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56005 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It appears that someone is going around buying up old, defunct academic conference web sites and holding them for ransom, by advertising pornographic products on them. See, for example: ICCF10 conference http://www.iccf10.org/ Robotics 2000 and Space 2000 conference. Albuquerque, NM, USA, February 28 - March 2, 2000 http://www.spaceandrobotics.org/ This scheme will not work because no one cares about an academic conference after it is over. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 15:21:21 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97MLEUF032613; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:21:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97MLDY2032597; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:21:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:21:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181556.025c7048@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 18:21:13 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Need CAD/CAM VTOL drawing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <2JqyjC.A.R9H.YFcZBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56006 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If anyone out there enjoys using these CAD/CAM drawing programs, please contact me by private e-mail. I would like to commission a drawing of a futuristic six-engined, wingless VTOL airplane, if you can imagine such a thing. A rough sketch would be fine. It does not have to be detailed and it certainly does not have to be airworthy, even in theory, not that I could judge. I did a Google image search but I did not find anything appealing. I know nothing about CAD/CAM programs. I do not even know what "CAM" stands for. It is the part on the shaft that opens the valve. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 15:53:52 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97Mrl89021433; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:53:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97MridW021403; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:53:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:53:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041007225339.33282.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:53:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56007 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > 1. well, since theres been testifiying in front of > congress and leaks > and unaltered originals sent to media, yeah, > actually, we do know for > sure. I'm just saying there is a lot more to this whole situation than meets the eye, on both sides. > 2. the us is a signatory to the un. the us has > agreed to the uns > controll in issues that are not about defense. in > fact, the whole > reason we went into iraq was becuase of them > supposedly not doing WHAT > THE UN ORDERED. so, we went to war, ignoring un > dictates, becuase of > un dictates. sure, that makes sense. Let me get this straight: you are saying that the UN has control over all US issues except those of defense? I hope I read that wrong. Personally, I am all for the US 'disobeying' the UN, if this is the case. The US belongs to us, the citizens of the US. Not to the rest of the world. As far as what the UN ordered, I do not really care, I do not take orders from the UN. > 3. not touching.. ;) > 4. it would send a greatmessage to potential allies > though. Such as? Let's all be pushovers together? > 5. so, your the kind of person, if someone cuts you > off in traffic, > you go and cut someone else off, and blame it on teh > guy that cut you > off? Where in the hell did you get THAT from what I wrote? No I don't do things like that, why would I? It would be pointless and stupid. Traffic actions have nothing to do with baseless attacks against a civilian populus whatsoever. > Saddam and iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. > NOTHING to do with > Al Quaeda. Maybe so, maybe not. I would be hard pressed to trust anything said or 'discovered' from over there. Regardless, the man was absolutely terrible, and it is a good thing he has been taken out of power. > Osama bin laden HATES Saddam, becuase he > ran iraq as a non > secular state. Al Quaeda had been known to bomb > targets in Iraq > because of that. The statement "my enemies' enemy is my friend" is not true most of the time, particularly when dealing with nations like Iraq and present company. > who complains that > the troops and > equipment that were sent to afghanistan, where those > who attacked us > actually ARE, were pulled out and sent to iraq. > ohh, wait. i do. > thats right. You do? How about close friends who I have not seen for over a year, who have been nearly killed (maybe some have been), whose families have worried daily about them, and who upon return now face being sent back? These guys, the ones who are now able to communicate with me again, have told me stories from 'over there', and many of these stories are rather grim. We all tend to agree, it should have been handled more swiftly. It is also interesting that, from what they have told me, the average Iraqi they have talked to seems quite glad to be rid of Saddam. Oh, but I forgot...these guys aren't the media, so they aren't to be trusted. They are just the ones who have been mortared, bombed and shot at for a year. > > 6. iraq didnt "butcher" its own people. its human > rights records > against protests suck, but the "mass graves" are > those kurds who we > told to revolt, and that wed help them, and then we > abandoned them. Well, the US was wrong for not helping like we promised to. I am not saying the US is always right. Alot of the time it is wrong, and has done some incredibly stupid and irrational things. > it was a civil war, and any country has the right to > defend its > integrity in a civil war. By killing its own people in droves? Saddam is a mass murderer, to deny this and to deny that it is good that he is no longer in power is insanity. As to UN sanctions preventing aid, and stupid laws in the US (there are many), I agree, these things are ridiculous, and should be stopped. In any case, it would not be so bad to have allowed help to those in need...if the ruling body of the people being given aid suddenly seized the imports and began to use them for weapons production of some kind, then you get rid of said ruling body. Interesting points. Unfortunately, this thing has the potential to be taken off the proverbial deep end, if implemented. > 8. nope, its real. but misstated and fearmongered > on line Someone should notify Symantec...its the newest online fear-virus, courtesy of the US congress. ;) > lets all sing now! kumbaya my non denominational > lord and/or insert > faith or lack thereof here, kumabaya! Interesting way to put things....this particular way of speaking has become popular nowadays, it seems, particularly with the younger generations, including my own (which I will politely decline affiliation with). Personally, I am strong enough to not be offended when someone prays to Buddha in my presence, or says "May Allah bless you", or whatever the case may be. Our modern society is too obsessed with making sure that they don't offend someone with what they say. Are we now a society of babies with our poor little feelings to get hurt by what the bad man said? "He said 'Christ' in public, he's trying to force me to be a christian, waaaaah." "I don't like it that you have xxxxxxxx clothing brand on, I demand that all the children be force to wear one uniform and look/think/act/react alike." It's all great stuff. And probably bad for progress and free thinking. Then again, you might have been just kidding with the modification to Kumbaya. Be rather unmelodic to sing it that way... ;) > now then. the x prize has been won, and st helens > has a stomach ache. > other than that, dunno. "Mount St. Helens erupted again! Blew the top clean off, eebedeyedbede that's all, folks!" --Johnny Carson, portraying Walter Cronkite speaking in the voice of Porky Pig. --Kyle _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 16:34:21 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i97NYFLE031776; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 16:34:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i97NYD5H031760; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 16:34:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 16:34:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041007163450.05606c70@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 16:35:21 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: Academic web sites held for ransom (but who cares?) In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181358.025ab918@mail.lenr-canr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56008 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I pity the poor slob who has nothing better to do with his/her life. At 06:14 PM 10/7/2004 -0400, you wrote: >It appears that someone is going around buying up old, defunct academic >conference web sites and holding them for ransom, by advertising >pornographic products on them. See, for example: > >ICCF10 conference > >http://www.iccf10.org/ > >Robotics 2000 and Space 2000 conference. Albuquerque, NM, USA, February 28 >- March 2, 2000 > >http://www.spaceandrobotics.org/ > >This scheme will not work because no one cares about an academic >conference after it is over. > >- Jed > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 17:12:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i980CILE006935; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:12:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i980CGlt006916; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:12:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:12:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <651048fc-8f7d-4fb8-9800-850f3f0b80a0> Message-ID: <009401c4accb$69e43ac0$cf56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181556.025c7048@mail.lenr-canr.org> Subject: Re: Need CAD/CAM VTOL drawing Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 19:51:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56009 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: > If anyone out there enjoys using these CAD/CAM drawing programs, please > contact me by private e-mail. I would like to commission a drawing of a > futuristic six-engined, wingless VTOL airplane, if you can imagine such a > thing. A rough sketch would be fine. It does not have to be detailed and it > certainly does not have to be airworthy, even in theory, not that I could > judge. I did a Google image search but I did not find anything appealing. > > I know nothing about CAD/CAM programs. I do not even know what "CAM" stands > for. It is the part on the shaft that opens the valve. It's Computer Aided Design & Computer Aided Manufactruing. The objective is to remove the vast amounts of paperwork in the design and manufacturing of any complex machine: airplane, automobile, dishwasher, etc. Current technology can do the whole job in software, with 3-D checking for inteference of parts, automatic production of solid models of arbitrary shape (such as a chain of solid, independent links), and finally operation of complex machining tools. Groups in various parts of the world can work on the same machine. I think that a major aircraft manufacturer did a whole design in CAD/CAM. But why a six-engine VTOL when a four engine car-like VTOL craft already exists? It has four ducted fans driven by Wankel engines at the corners and redundant computers to achieve flight stability. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 7 20:13:51 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i983DjLE006072; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 20:13:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i983Ddu4006034; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 20:13:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 20:13:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 20:13:32 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis In-Reply-To: <20041007225339.33282.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20041007225339.33282.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56010 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: no, what im saying is that in terms of troop deployment overseas in anything but defensive posture, we are under un control. we should NOT attack people unilaterally that have not attacked us. iraq did not attack us. period. and since weve killed more people in iraq so far than saddam has in the past decade, yeah, id argue over whether or not its better to have him gone. he was a dictator. he was not that bad a one, and there are many worse. but they tend to have favored trading nation status., you know. china. as a start. the traffic analogy was a way of saying, you cannot use 9/11 as justification for iraq. ive lost a friend. i have a co worker who lost her son. to a stupid war in iraq that should NEVER HAVE OCCURED. i have 2 friends there now, and 3 more soon to be there. saddam disarmed. he complied with regulations. the rule of law was being followed in iraq. as for cold blooded mass murderer, and so was abraham lincoln by your logic. after all, a hell of a lot more americans died in teh civil war than have died in iraq under saddam. and they wouldnt have died had lincoln just let them seceed. and yes, the kumbaya was sarcastic. teh precense of mind to not be offended? where do you get off? why would you be offended? others are free to worship as they please. thats whats so great about this country. On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:53:39 -0700 (PDT), Kyle Mcallister wrote: > > 1. well, since theres been testifiying in front of > > congress and leaks > > and unaltered originals sent to media, yeah, > > actually, we do know for > > sure. > > I'm just saying there is a lot more to this whole > situation than meets the eye, on both sides. > > > 2. the us is a signatory to the un. the us has > > agreed to the uns > > controll in issues that are not about defense. in > > fact, the whole > > reason we went into iraq was becuase of them > > supposedly not doing WHAT > > THE UN ORDERED. so, we went to war, ignoring un > > dictates, becuase of > > un dictates. sure, that makes sense. > > Let me get this straight: you are saying that the UN > has control over all US issues except those of > defense? I hope I read that wrong. Personally, I am > all for the US 'disobeying' the UN, if this is the > case. The US belongs to us, the citizens of the US. > Not to the rest of the world. As far as what the UN > ordered, I do not really care, I do not take orders > from the UN. > > > 3. not touching.. > > ;) > > > 4. it would send a greatmessage to potential allies > > though. > > Such as? Let's all be pushovers together? > > > 5. so, your the kind of person, if someone cuts you > > off in traffic, > > you go and cut someone else off, and blame it on teh > > guy that cut you > > off? > > Where in the hell did you get THAT from what I wrote? > No I don't do things like that, why would I? It would > be pointless and stupid. Traffic actions have nothing > to do with baseless attacks against a civilian populus > whatsoever. > > > Saddam and iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. > > NOTHING to do with > > Al Quaeda. > > Maybe so, maybe not. I would be hard pressed to trust > anything said or 'discovered' from over there. > Regardless, the man was absolutely terrible, and it is > a good thing he has been taken out of power. > > > Osama bin laden HATES Saddam, becuase he > > ran iraq as a non > > secular state. Al Quaeda had been known to bomb > > targets in Iraq > > because of that. > > The statement "my enemies' enemy is my friend" is not > true most of the time, particularly when dealing with > nations like Iraq and present company. > > > who complains that > > the troops and > > equipment that were sent to afghanistan, where those > > who attacked us > > actually ARE, were pulled out and sent to iraq. > > ohh, wait. i do. > > thats right. > > You do? How about close friends who I have not seen > for over a year, who have been nearly killed (maybe > some have been), whose families have worried daily > about them, and who upon return now face being sent > back? These guys, the ones who are now able to > communicate with me again, have told me stories from > 'over there', and many of these stories are rather > grim. We all tend to agree, it should have been > handled more swiftly. It is also interesting that, > from what they have told me, the average Iraqi they > have talked to seems quite glad to be rid of Saddam. > Oh, but I forgot...these guys aren't the media, so > they aren't to be trusted. They are just the ones who > have been mortared, bombed and shot at for a year. > > > > > 6. iraq didnt "butcher" its own people. its human > > rights records > > against protests suck, but the "mass graves" are > > those kurds who we > > told to revolt, and that wed help them, and then we > > abandoned them. > > Well, the US was wrong for not helping like we > promised to. I am not saying the US is always right. > Alot of the time it is wrong, and has done some > incredibly stupid and irrational things. > > > it was a civil war, and any country has the right to > > defend its > > integrity in a civil war. > > By killing its own people in droves? Saddam is a mass > murderer, to deny this and to deny that it is good > that he is no longer in power is insanity. > > As to UN sanctions preventing aid, and stupid laws in > the US (there are many), I agree, these things are > ridiculous, and should be stopped. In any case, it > would not be so bad to have allowed help to those in > need...if the ruling body of the people being given > aid suddenly seized the imports and began to use them > for weapons production of some kind, then you get rid > of said ruling body. > > > > Interesting points. Unfortunately, this thing has the > potential to be taken off the proverbial deep end, if > implemented. > > > 8. nope, its real. but misstated and fearmongered > > on line > > Someone should notify Symantec...its the newest online > fear-virus, courtesy of the US congress. ;) > > > lets all sing now! kumbaya my non denominational > > lord and/or insert > > faith or lack thereof here, kumabaya! > > Interesting way to put things....this particular way > of speaking has become popular nowadays, it seems, > particularly with the younger generations, including > my own (which I will politely decline affiliation > with). Personally, I am strong enough to not be > offended when someone prays to Buddha in my presence, > or says "May Allah bless you", or whatever the case > may be. Our modern society is too obsessed with making > sure that they don't offend someone with what they > say. Are we now a society of babies with our poor > little feelings to get hurt by what the bad man said? > "He said 'Christ' in public, he's trying to force me > to be a christian, waaaaah." "I don't like it that you > have xxxxxxxx clothing brand on, I demand that all the > children be force to wear one uniform and > look/think/act/react alike." It's all great stuff. And > probably bad for progress and free thinking. > > Then again, you might have been just kidding with the > modification to Kumbaya. Be rather unmelodic to sing > it that way... ;) > > > now then. the x prize has been won, and st helens > > has a stomach ache. > > other than that, dunno. > > "Mount St. Helens erupted again! Blew the top clean > off, eebedeyedbede that's all, folks!" --Johnny > Carson, portraying Walter Cronkite speaking in the > voice of Porky Pig. > > --Kyle > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > > -- Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten. -G.K. Chesterton From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 03:54:30 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98AsODS029265; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 03:54:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98AsIgB029247; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 03:54:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 03:54:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004105895327950@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Joy of discussion Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 04:53:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b62de51ffc044fb20edab346903cc586350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.56 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56011 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII In response to Richard Macaulay's earlier contention that the earth was expanding: "My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .." I had written: "I interpret this as a change in lightspeed: E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselah was about 3.3 times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it is now, and was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energy is thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I is the moment of inertia of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t. This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+ when he went yonder. Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased." This leaves the astonishing conclusion that Methuselah weighed about 10 kilograms and stood about as tall as a small child!! http://www.webhealthcentre.com/general/yc_hwchart.asp No wonder Noah's Ark could hold two of every animal species of the Earth at that time. With ~ 7.2 hour days (compared to our 24) Noah and "the boys" had their work cut out for them. :-) http://www.genesisfiles.com/NoahsArk.htm Aren't we getting taller and heavier, these days ?? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

In response to Richard Macaulay's earlier contention that the earth was expanding:
 

"My view.. that the continents could not have drifted " apart" since the east and west side
of land masses " fit". The discussion reached a point of maturity with each "cutting the other
some slack" whereas he could grant me slack that the earth could have expanded .."
 
 I had written:
 
"I interpret this as a change in lightspeed:
 
E = mc^2 or m = E/c^2 suggesting that the lightspeed in the solar system at the time of Methuselah
was about 3.3  times it's present value , hence the mass of the earth was 1/10th of what it
is now, and was zipping around the sun ten times as fast as the present value. Conservation of mass and energy
is thus satisfied: Orbital Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv^2, Rotational energy = 1/2 Iw^2 where I
is the moment of inertia of a rotating sphere 2/5 MR^2, w =2(pi)/t.
 
This would make old man Methuselah about 19 (of our years) when he fathered Lamech and 96+
when he went yonder.

 Note the decreasing ages of his progeny as the speed of light decreased."
 
This leaves the astonishing conclusion that Methuselah weighed about 10 kilograms and stood
about as tall as a small child!! 
 
 
No wonder Noah's Ark could hold two of every animal species of the Earth at that time. 
 
With ~ 7.2 hour days (compared to our 24) Noah and "the boys" had their work cut out for them. :-)
 
 
 Aren't we getting taller and heavier, these days ??
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 05:57:14 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98Cv8XQ019926; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 05:57:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98Cv5Th019901; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 05:57:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 05:57:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001601c4ad36$4d76d850$0f027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 07:57:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4AD0C.641BC1D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56012 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4AD0C.641BC1D0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4AD0C.641D4870" ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4AD0C.641D4870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankAnswer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs were made = into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone accepted the fact back = then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon and read the = plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took umpeen = million years for the river to carve a canyon 20 miles wide and a mile = deep. From there I traveled to White Sands to read another plaque = stating ...the sands were millions of years old and traveled x inches = per year and the sands had drifted 40 miles after the gypsum had = leached from the adjacent mountain. Hmmm... I was viewing a giant hourglass,,, inches per year times miles = roughly equaled 6000 to 12000 years,, not millions of years. Meanwhile , = back at the ranch, my experience with liquids contol systems and = cavitation gave me pause when attempting to reconcile a cavitation cut = 20 miles wide and a mile deep in just under.. say 120 millions years. A = few years ago the Hoover Dam bypass valves were opened against warnings = by people that know better. The damage done in a few hours by cavitation = demonstrated how to cut concrete pipe without using a saw or spend 30 = million years to wear it down. A rather long way around to answering your inquiry about earth = expansion. Imagine the depth and volume of water required to produce = cavitation sufficent to cut the Grand Canyon and toss in the Hudson = River Canyon etc in a years time. I am not an earth scientist but I = think its time to stop the dinasaur stuff about crude oil and let = science be pursued.=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4AD0C.641D4870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Answer for Wyley..I came from the old = days when=20 dinasaurs were made into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone = accepted=20 the fact back then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon = and read=20 the plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took umpeen = million=20 years for the river to carve a canyon 20 miles wide and a mile deep. = >From there=20 I traveled to White Sands to read another plaque stating ...the sands = were=20 millions of years old and traveled x inches per year and the sands = had=20 drifted  40 miles after the gypsum had leached from the adjacent=20 mountain.
 
Hmmm... I was viewing a giant = hourglass,,, inches=20 per year times miles roughly equaled 6000 to 12000 years,, not millions = of=20 years. Meanwhile , back at the ranch, my experience with liquids contol = systems=20 and cavitation gave me pause when attempting to reconcile a cavitation = cut 20=20 miles wide and a mile deep in just under.. say 120 millions years. A few = years=20 ago the Hoover Dam bypass valves were opened against warnings by people = that=20 know better. The damage done in a few hours by cavitation = demonstrated=20 how to cut concrete pipe without using a saw or spend 30 million years = to wear=20 it down.
 
A rather long way around to answering = your=20 inquiry about earth expansion.  Imagine the depth and volume of = water=20 required to produce cavitation sufficent to cut the Grand Canyon and = toss in the=20 Hudson River Canyon etc in a years time. I am not an earth scientist but = I think=20 its time to stop the  dinasaur stuff about crude oil and let = science be=20 pursued.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4AD0C.641D4870-- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4AD0C.641BC1D0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001101c4ad36$4ce28790$0f027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4AD0C.641BC1D0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 08:59:16 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98Fx8DS016903; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:59:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98Fx63F016891; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:59:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:59:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 11:59:09 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: 100 New British Nukes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56013 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. This article: http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by cracking water. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 09:39:26 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98GdIDS028367; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:39:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98GdH7J028347; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:39:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:39:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008122455.0339cc70@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 12:39:19 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56014 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton writes: > I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would > have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. I do not know about the U.K., but the U.S. would require about twice as much land as we possess to grow enough biomass to replace all fossil fuel. See Pimentel, p. 21. > This article: > > http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html > > claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by > cracking water. That article points to this paper: http://www.oswald.co.uk/ocl/windaccountancy04.pdf The paper appears to be off by a factor of three, at least. The first assumption is: "The UK annual consumption of transport energy: = 54 (MTOE) Million Tons Oil Equivalent. Note: this has been steadily increasing." from there the authors calculate how much wind or nuclear power it would take to produce 54 MTOE. they forgot that hydrogen transport is roughly three times more efficient than conventional oil, so they need only 18 MTOE. That is about 33 nuclear reactors, which is a modest number. Or you could have 20 nuclear reactors and 10,000 wind turbines, which would be even more reasonable and cost-effective. The authors have also spread the 100,000 wind turbines equidistant along the cost of England, which is preposterous. Some offshore locations are much better than others. Offshore wind turbines should optimally be located far from land, where they cannot be seen. Also, I think they forgot that wind turbines produce 33% of nameplate power on land, and 40% offshore. This paper will be published in Accountancy. My guess is that it was written by accountants, not engineers. Here is a piquant quote about what happens when accountants speculate about energy (or about any technology), from Kenneth S. Deffeyes. He pointed out that nearly all U.S. oil reserves were discovered in the 1930s. Since 1960 essentially no oil has been discovered in the U.S. he writes: "A pop quiz for economists who insist that higher oil prices bring on discoveries: what did we call the 1930s? (The great Depression) What was the price of oil? ($1 a barrel; without production rationing the free-market price would have been 10 cents a barrel)." - "Hubbert's Peak," p. 138 - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 09:48:19 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98GmBDS031467; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:48:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98GmAHK031458; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:48:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:48:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008124157.0339ca00@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 12:48:12 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56015 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Also, I forgot to mention, the author's plan to use nuclear power generators to make electricity, to perform electrolysis, to produce hydrogen, is preposterous. Methods using nuclear heat directly to split hydrogen (pyrolysis) would be far more efficient. In other words, you only need 15 or 20 nuclear power plants, not 33. They may also be more efficient methods to convert mechanical wind power into hydrogen. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 09:58:01 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98GvhDS001912; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:57:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98GvfaM001889; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:57:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:57:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: From: "Johnson, Steven" To: "'vortex-l@eskimo.com'" Cc: "Johnson, Steven" Subject: RE: 100 New British Nukes Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:57:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-PMX-Version: 4.6.0.99824, Antispam-Core: 4.6.1.104326, Antispam-Data: 2004.7.8.106429 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56016 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From: Jed Rothwell >Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 11:48 AM >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes > > >Also, I forgot to mention, the author's plan to use nuclear >power generators to make electricity, to perform electrolysis, >to produce hydrogen, is preposterous. Methods using nuclear >heat directly to split hydrogen (pyrolysis) would be far more >efficient. In other words, you only need 15 or 20 nuclear power >plants, not 33. > ... FWIW, over in the YAHOO Hydrino discussion group it is my understanding that the infamous arch skeptic, Dr. Zimmerman, would agree with you, that using direct heat (as compared to electrolysis) is the preferable way of cracking vast amounts of the energy carrier, hydrogen, from oxygen. Ya gotta just love that guy! ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 10:28:08 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98HS3XQ012852; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:28:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98HRkEL012749; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:27:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:27:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4166CE15.7090406@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:27:49 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: 100 New British Nukes References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008122455.0339cc70@mail.lenr-canr.org> In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008122455.0339cc70@mail.lenr-canr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56017 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > they forgot that hydrogen transport is roughly three times more > efficient than conventional oil, so they need only 18 MTOE Is this based on mass alone? Does it include extra transport loses (eg hydrogen loses in metal pipelines)? Terry (watching my 50th birthday mylar balloon slowly sink to the floor) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 11:20:22 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98IKGXQ027766; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:20:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98IKEw2027746; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:20:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:20:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002a01c4ad63$5ee8d020$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:19:35 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: <7k-qE.A.axG.eptZBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56018 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry, > This article: > > http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html > > claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by > cracking water. I think one of the reasons you threw this pile of disinfo out to foul the air was to show the incompetence of "Energy Consultants" in the UK... am I right? Check out the brain-dead assumptions this joker is using. Wow. This article is so very misleading that one suspect the petro-shadow government of the UK had a hand in it (I suspect that their petro-shadow government exerts only slightly less influence than our own, unfortunately). The conclusion: "One is to construct 100,000 new wind turbines. The other is to build 100 new nuclear power stations." is frightening to some alternative energy proponents, but... This is based on many false premises which multiply inefficiencies, such as: 1) Hydrogen must come from of electrolysis using electricity from the grid. Overall efficiency thereby is approximately 25-30% (efficiency of electric power generation x efficiency of electrolysis) but, If this guy had looked at the current state of thermochemical hydrogen production from this Sandia document. www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/32405d.pdf "Thermochemical water-splitting" · A thermochemical water-splitting cycle is a set of chemical reactions that sum to the decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen · Energy is input via endothermic high temperature chemical reactions, rejected via exothermic low temperature chemical reactions · Splits water at moderate temperatures (~700-900°C vs ~5,000°C for thermolysis) · Plant efficiencies of ~50% I have heard of net plant efficiencies of 60% but let's use the conservative number. The second and even more egregious assumption is to use "present" oil equivalence in BTU and assume that we will need to match this in H2. But it is clear from hundreds of R&D documents that using H2 in fuel cells will require only 25-30% of the BTU of oil, once the process is optimized. So the bottom line is that for the power required to move the same number of automobiles the same number of miles in Britain, we would NOT need 100 new reactors but probably 7. That is doable, the other is ridiculous. Huge difference, based on assumptions. Notice that the moron who wrote the document "Andrew Oswald" is an "Energy Consultant".. Now, who do you suppose pays for his consultancy? Is it more likely to be Greenpeace or BP ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 11:24:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98IO4XQ029205; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:24:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98IO3Jg029176; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:24:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:24:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041008182352.77178.qmail@web61103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:23:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: I'm back To: Vortex MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-127649969-1097259832=:76361" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56019 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-127649969-1097259832=:76361 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii OK, some of you guys may remember me from 5-6 years ago. I've been lurking the past couple months just reading the posts online, but decided it was time to stick my oar in. Jed, I'm currently an architectural CAD drafter at a building company and would be happy to help you out. Curious to say the least. Merlyn Magical Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today! --0-127649969-1097259832=:76361 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
OK, some of you guys may remember me from 5-6 years ago.  I've been lurking the past couple months just reading the posts online, but decided it was time to stick my oar in.
 
Jed, I'm currently an architectural CAD drafter at a building company and would be happy to help you out.  Curious to say the least.
 
Merlyn
Magical Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today! --0-127649969-1097259832=:76361-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 11:40:04 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98IdvDS030523; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:39:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98Idti8030499; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:39:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:39:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008143233.0339cc10@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 14:39:53 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56020 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > they forgot that hydrogen transport is roughly three times more > > efficient than conventional oil, so they need only 18 MTOE > > > Is this based on mass alone? Does it include extra transport loses (eg > hydrogen loses in metal pipelines)? Hydrogen pipeline losses are modest; only 3% according to the NREL "Hydrogen Program Plan." Honestly, I just glanced at the Hydrogen Program Plan and did some very quick back-of-the-envelope estimates. I came up with 15 or 20 nuke plants. Jones Beene estimated 7, which is probably closer to the mark. I forgot that a nuclear plant produces three times more raw heat energy than electricity, so with 50 percent efficient pyrolysis you end up far ahead of where you would be with electrolysis from electricity. I was estimating half of 1,000 MWe; it should be half of 3,000 MW heat. It is not surprising that Zimmerman also recommends thermal cracking instead of electrolysis. The advantages of this method are common knowledge, and they are described in any book about the potential hydrogen economy. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 11:42:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98IgKXQ001711; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:42:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98IgIik001697; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:42:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:42:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041069184142910@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "Akira Kawasaki" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:41:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d87c701dbca8cae4f0eeb1904ca694850d387f7b89c61deb1d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.54.80 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56021 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > [Original Message] > From: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 10/8/2004 8:58:33 AM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 8 Oct 04 Montreal, CA 1. OUTER LIMITS: PERIMETER INSTITUTE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS. The Institute's stunning new headquarters in Waterloo, Canada opened Saturday. "Brain power rather than military might is fast becoming the way countries exercise their sovereignty," Prime Minister Paul Martin observed. The driving force behind creation of the Institute was entrepreneur Mike Lazarides, who donated $100 million, and led the drive to get additional backing from federal and provincial governments. For three years, the Institute was in temporary quarters with a small research staff, but it is now expected to become the largest concentration of theoretical physicists in the world. This is the future. The great basic research labs of industry are gone; research funding for university and government labs is narrowly targeted. An advisory committee, composed of top theoretical physicists from around the world, described the Perimeter Institute as "a bold experiment with the potential to become the most important new institute in theoretical physics since the founding of the Institute for Advanced Study 70 years ago." One member of that committee, Frank Wilczek, would be awarded a Nobel Prize three days later. 2. THE NOBEL: PHYSICS PRIZE GOES TO AMERICAN QUARK THEORISTS. David Gross, David Politzer and Frank Wilczek shared the prize "For their analyses of nonabelian gauge theories at short distances, and the implications of these insights for the understanding of the strong interaction between quarks." Their 1973 explanation of the strong force that binds quarks into protons made it possible to show how mass arises in protons and neutrons. They were awarded the American Physical Society's J.J. Sakurai Prize for Theoretical Particle Physics in 1986. 3. THE WRONG STUFF: SPACE STATION IS FILLING UP WITH GARBAGE. No wonder there has been talk of abandoning the ISS; have you ever been through a garbage strike? When Congress was being urged to put up the money, the image of the station was of a spacious laboratory, with its crew engaged in sophisticated scientific experiments. Who imagined a crew of only two would spend their time picking their way through piles of empty food containers, dirty underwear and canisters of human excrement to reach a malfunctioning oxygen generator that must be coaxed to work? The shuttle/garbage truck return is still questionable. 4. THE RIGHT STUFF: THE SPIRIT ROVER FACES A NEW CHALLENGE. Even as our two senior-citizen geologists on Mars, now 83 in rover-years, have discovered new evidence of ancient water, NASA says Spirit's wheels "did not operate as commanded" on Oct. 1. I sometimes have the same problem. Spirit is disabled until NASA finds a remedy. I find daily jogging helps. THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 11:47:32 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98IlQXQ002809; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:47:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98IlPPe002784; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:47:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:47:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <63f7607a-4e1b-4eb8-9839-49384e56f40a> Message-ID: <010801c4ad66$5a65ffc0$cf56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Hydrogen energy x 100 Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:40:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56022 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With all this talk about ethanol and hydrogen, let me take note of the water bath calorimetry experiments of Mills which showed a heat release from hydrogen 100 times greater than by combustion of the same amount of hydrogen. Reports on the experiments can be found at www.blacklightpower.com. The paper by Phillips et al. is now published in the Journal of Applied Physics, v 94 No. 6, 15 September 2004. Notable among the 'fuels' is plain water, which supplies both the hydrogen and doubly ionized oxygen as a catalyst for the 'resonant transfer' BLP reactions. Excess power with water fuel is ~21 watts. Take careful note of the gas flow rates of a few sccm (standard cubic centimenters per minute) over ~ 1 hour with sustained power putput of ~ 21 watts. The water bath calorimetry was done first at BLP, later witnessed by a technical assessment team from Rowan University, and later performed by Phillips, on the staff of the University of New Mexico National Laboratory, and Chen with the guidance of Mills. Those comfortable with calorimetry should study the experiment, which is very clean, straightforward, well calibrated, with a very strong heat signal. Demonstration of a process that can extract from elemental hydrogen ~100 times the energy of combustion could change the hydrogen game powerfully for the better. Implementation of devices using water as the primary fuel would make the hydrogen game irrelevant. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 12:10:57 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98JAoXQ008447; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:10:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98JAnUh008424; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:10:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:10:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4166E63D.7040300@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:10:53 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: 100 New British Nukes References: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> <002a01c4ad63$5ee8d020$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <002a01c4ad63$5ee8d020$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56023 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >I think one of the reasons you threw this pile of disinfo >out to foul the air was to show the incompetence of "Energy >Consultants" in the UK... am I right? > I wouldn't tend to single out the UK. :-) Ackshully, I stumbled across it while looking at organic methods of hydrogen production. It was a "James Burke moment" http://www.documentary-video.com/subject.cfm?sid=22 since I was originally seeking how to test for lactose intolerance. I was quite surprised to find that the test measures hydrogen content of the breath. This led me to a recent article: http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,65161,00.html which seems to be an excellent idea. These algae and bacteria not only produce H2 but also lock up carbon from CO2. Doncha love getting lost in the internet? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 12:15:11 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98JF5XQ010366; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:15:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98JF331010340; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:15:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:15:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006f01c4ad6b$17a10130$6501a8c0@Erin> From: "Kitzmiller" To: References: <001601c4ad36$4d76d850$0f027841@xptower> Subject: Re: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:14:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 Disposition-Notification-To: "Kitzmiller" X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56024 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Blank----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 6:57 AM Subject: Episode 2: Joy of discussion > > Answer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs... > Sorry for the apparent misunderstanding. I thought you might have an interesting viewpoint on the argument over tectonic vs. planetary expansion. In your earlier posting, you had mentioned this controversy. > > ...my geologist friend and I enjoyed comparing views. > Mine was the earth expanded versus his.. the continental drift. > > > I am not an earth scientist but I think its time to... > I am not an "earth scientist" either - just an interested amateur seeking a clearer understanding of this planet and how it came to be formed into its present condition. Thanks anyway - Wyley From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 12:29:52 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98JT6DS010974; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:29:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98JSxxO010907; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:28:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:28:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: From: "Johnson, Steven" To: "'vortex-l@eskimo.com'" Cc: "Johnson, Steven" Subject: X Prize sponsors plan other prizes Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:28:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-PMX-Version: 4.6.0.99824, Antispam-Core: 4.6.1.104326, Antispam-Data: 2004.10.8.1 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56025 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: CNN.COM has come out with an article about the sponsors of the X prize. They are planning new prizes to help spur additional innovation in space exploration in the private sector. Good idea. It's worked in the past. http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/10/08/ansari.xprize.ap/index.html We need sponsors to come up to the plate and advertise equivalent prizes for those who can successfully develop and demonstrate ways to utilize new forms alternative energy - with the caveat that when mass produced they will be affordable to the masses. Of course the public may not perceive such prizes as being anywhere near as sexy as watching Evil Kanevil wannabes riding candles into orbit, but in the long run... Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 13:14:07 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98KDeXQ024302; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:13:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98KDb68024281; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:13:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:13:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4166F4EE.4040206@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 16:13:34 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004 References: <410-220041069184142910@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <410-220041069184142910@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56026 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 8 Oct 04 Montreal, CA > >I find daily jogging > helps. > TIMBER! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 13:37:24 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98KbEXQ030266; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:37:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98KbDRg030250; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:37:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:37:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4166FA7F.4080202@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 16:37:19 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: X Prize sponsors plan other prizes References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56027 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Johnson, Steven wrote: >CNN.COM has come out with an article about the sponsors of the X prize. > Did you catch the news on Bigelow's $50M prize for a vehicle to service his "hotel"? http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0409/27bigelow/ UFO enthusiasts might remember Robert for his NIDS: http://www.nidsci.org/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 14:54:02 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98LrqDS016363; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:53:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98Lrofj016336; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:53:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:53:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008175156.0339cce0@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:53:54 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Jacques Benveniste dies Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56028 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am sorry to see this news: http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-19.html Here is something amazing though; Nature actually deigns to mention CF is semi-partly-conceivably positive manner. The rest of the article is bunk, including Nature's version of its own role in this travesty. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 14:58:28 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98LwNXQ017829; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:58:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98LwLBw017813; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:58:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:58:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041008145924.045fad30@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 14:59:34 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: Jacques Benveniste dies In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008175156.0339cce0@mail.lenr-canr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56029 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hell is thawing At 05:53 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, you wrote: >I am sorry to see this news: > >http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-19.html > >Here is something amazing though; Nature actually deigns to mention CF is >semi-partly-conceivably positive manner. The rest of the article is bunk, >including Nature's version of its own role in this travesty. > >- Jed > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 15:31:38 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98MVTXQ024883; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:31:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98MVSkZ024867; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:31:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:31:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:36:40 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: [OT] Long term Scott Ritter-John Kerry link Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56030 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A Google query of "Scott Ritter" "John Kerry" produces quite a surprising (to me anyway) history of Ritter's criticism of John Kerry (in addition to Ritter's more well known criticism of the Bush administration) over issues of weapons of mass destruction, and long before Kerry was a presidential candidate. Despite discrediting due to Ritter's alleged problems with young girls, Ritter seems to have been very well informed regarding the status of Iraq's WMD programs, long before the invasion of Iraq. Ritter was also well attuned to, and even shouting about, Kerry's waffeling on WMD etc. years before that became a campaign issue. Was Ritter prophetic, or did he just have good sources? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 15:54:48 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i98MsbDS030018; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:54:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i98MsZBJ029998; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:54:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:54:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007c01c4ad89$a274b9a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> <010801c4ad66$5a65ffc0$cf56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: Re: Hydrogen energy x 100 Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:53:19 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56031 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Interesting point from M.C. : > With all this talk about ethanol and hydrogen, let me take note of the water > bath calorimetry experiments of Mills which showed a heat release from > hydrogen 100 times greater than by combustion of the same amount of > hydrogen. The only obvious drawback to the Mills process, assuming his published results hold up under closer scrutiny is *energy density* which is a term that we are not used to hearing much about. As best I can tell, this lower energy density is due to the requirement of needing a rather thin plasma, which is irradiated with the RF but mildly so, and requiring a great deal of spatial volume relative to the energy produced. One thought occurs here in the context of a nuclear reactor. Reactors are just the opposite - having extremely high energy density. Can some of the best features of each technology be combined? Lets consider the Mills microwave Everson [sp] tube which uses hydrogen and helium, irradiated at the common oven frequency of 2.45 Ghz. It just so happens that those two gases, mostly He with about 10% H2 are both easily accommodated and usable within a reactor for several purposes - either neutron moderation or heat removal and especially conversion of heat into electricity, or for all of these. But the best thing is... once a hydrino reaches a certain level of shrinkage according to Mills, it will become more and more neutron-like so that near the final 137th stage, we have in effect a virtual neutron. This feature could allow hydrinos to become the "makeup" virtual-neutrons in a subcritical reactor scheme. This proto-hypothesis (fresh off the mental press, consequently the details may change drastically, even within the hour) is based upon combining the Mills hydrino reaction within a subcritical fission reactor using only natural unenriched uranium. We would need to have a high volume, unpressurized reactor with many tubes, each tube composed of unenriched uranium probably in the form of a dielectric carbide, so that microwaves can be propagated down each tube. BTW the price of Uranium recently hit rock bottom with new supplies from Asia. Its cheaper than many common metals like nickel and some stainless steels now so the cost of refueling is almost nothing compared to the energy released. Since the reactor is only nominally subcritical, with a high multiplication ratio, it would still need plenty of control equipment, but probably not all the costly containment of the normal situation. Side note: Granite has a fairly high U content and granite buildings, like the Capitol in D.C. have so much granite that the U content is almost enough to be usable in the type of reactor this idea refers to. Also... I would argue that the contents of that building are often more toxic than those of the reactor which is being described here. Every tube in this reactor will have its own microtron for RF, but that parasitic drain is small, and as it is the common variety used in ovens, they are almost disposable items. The He+H2 mix will be irradiated within a starting tube and recirculated through every tube, never leaving the reactor. External to each fuel tube will be collection grids to collect thermionic electrons, which represents the power output (by direct conversion, of course - no steam cycle). After enough hydrinos are created in situ, the neutron flux will rise enough to heat the tubes to thermionic temps. Reactivity is controlled by how much hydrogen is admitted using computer control. The neutron flux could be a factor of 10-50 less than in a conventional reactor, but with a much larger volume space and no conductive heat removal, the tubes will reach several thousand degrees for efficient thermionic conversion. Needless to say, there are a few other details which need to be worked out... Stay tuned. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 8 20:09:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9939J60010674; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:09:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9939Hor010656; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:09:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:09:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001701c4adad$594ca840$a9017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Tectonic versus planetary expansion Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:09:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4AD83.6FBF3720" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56032 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4AD83.6FBF3720 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4AD83.6FBF3720" ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4AD83.6FBF3720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWylie asks if I have an interesting viewpoint on the subject. No, = just the ongoing dialogue mentioned with a since passed geologist = friend. Your interest leads me to believe that you have some views. Please feel = free to express them here. Perhaps the first recorded discussion on the matter is in Job chapter = 38. Talk about questions.=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4AD83.6FBF3720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Wylie asks if I have an interesting viewpoint on the = subject.  No, just the ongoing dialogue mentioned with a since = passed=20 geologist friend.
 
Your interest leads me to believe that you have some = views.=20 Please feel free to express them here.
 
 Perhaps the first recorded discussion on the = matter is=20 in Job chapter 38. Talk about questions.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4AD83.6FBF3720-- ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4AD83.6FBF3720 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001201c4adad$588d9e00$a9017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4AD83.6FBF3720-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 02:49:03 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i999mx60016030; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 02:48:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i999mvQx016010; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 02:48:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 02:48:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 01:54:07 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56033 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:39 PM 10/8/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Honestly, I just glanced at the Hydrogen Program Plan and did some very >quick back-of-the-envelope estimates. I came up with 15 or 20 nuke plants. >Jones Beene estimated 7, which is probably closer to the mark. I forgot >that a nuclear plant produces three times more raw heat energy than >electricity, so with 50 percent efficient pyrolysis you end up far ahead of >where you would be with electrolysis from electricity. I was estimating >half of 1,000 MWe; it should be half of 3,000 MW heat. > >It is not surprising that Zimmerman also recommends thermal cracking >instead of electrolysis. The advantages of this method are common >knowledge, and they are described in any book about the potential hydrogen >economy. Many processes use heat for some steps in order to obtain products more efficiently electrolysed in later steps. Electrolysis of any such product (e.g. HBr at 0.8 volts) then benefits from high temperature and pressure, and thus further utilization of thermal energy in the process. Hydrogen generation may be a means of gaining full nuclear plant utilization when nuclear capacity exceeds basline power requirements. This is achieved by running the nuclear plant at full capacity and generating hydrogen with excess energy (energy above consumer demand) and waste heat. I found it surprising that the DOE Annual Energy Review: shows a steady INCREASE in nuclear power generation in the US. Somehow I was under the (wrong) impression nuclear power generation was on the wane, due to plant closures and no new plant construction. Could it be the present DOE plans for a hydrogen economy is really a plan for a nuclear economy? Uranium ore must presently be at a nearly an all time low cost due to low demand and increased finds. It is also true that there are various processes for producing hydrogen from coal, and there are plentiful reserves of coal in the US, especially in Alaska. Coal mining may be far more harmful than building a lot of nuclear plants though. Construction of a centrally located farm of nuclear plants (e.g. in Texas) and using existing gas pipeline corridors for hydrogen transport may be a sensible strategy considering both economic and security requirements. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 08:37:33 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99FbPqe024304; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:37:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99FbNPB024291; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:37:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:37:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041009113257.03376eb0@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:37:27 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56034 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > I found it surprising that the DOE Annual Energy Review: > > > > shows a steady INCREASE in nuclear power generation in the US. Somehow I > was under the (wrong) impression nuclear power generation was on the wane, > due to plant closures and no new plant construction. You are correct that plants have closed and no new ones have been constructed. I think the total is down 5 or 10 from the peak. However, the remaining plants are now being run at full power more often, and downtime for maintenance and repair has been reduced. The refuelling operation is carried out more quickly and smoothly. Industry sources say this is because workers are more experienced and better methods have been developed. I hope they are right, and they are not cutting corners. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 10:36:05 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99HZwqe013922; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:35:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99HZth3013891; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:35:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:35:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: John Fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tectonic versus planetary expansion Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:35:41 -0500 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: References: <001701c4adad$594ca840$a9017841@xptower> In-Reply-To: <001701c4adad$594ca840$a9017841@xptower> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id i99HZrqe013875 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56035 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:09:09 -0500, you wrote: BlankWylie asks if I have an interesting viewpoint on the subject. No, just the ongoing dialogue mentioned with a since passed geologist friend. > Your interest leads me to believe that you have some views. Please feel free to express them here. > Perhaps the first recorded discussion on the matter is in Job chapter 38. Talk about questions. > >Richard -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 11:30:39 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99IUVqe026467; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:30:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99IUTlD026435; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:30:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:30:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: John Fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tectonic versus planetary expansion Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:30:14 -0500 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: References: <001701c4adad$594ca840$a9017841@xptower> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id i99IUQqe026415 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56036 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:35:41 -0500, you wrote: Oops... Hit the wrong button; sorry! -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 12:37:22 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99JbG60020375; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:37:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99JbEu6020357; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:37:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:37:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <010c01c4ae37$4e7f0cc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: The GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR with hydrino augmentation Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:36:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0109_01C4ADFC.A18924E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56037 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C4ADFC.A18924E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wasn't it Mark Twain who, in a long letter to someone, apologized for = its length by stating that he didn't have enough time to write a shorter = note? Well, consider this to be a similar apology in the era of email = where with the availability of "cut and past," it seems that short but = meaningful messages take way too much time. Yesterday, the idea of using the Mill's microwave technique as an = integral part of a subcritical reactor was broached. I have played = around with some of the nucleonic calculations, based on Mills reports, = particularly the Rowan study. Unfortunately even Mills has never stated = the critical detail which would allow an accurate model. Although Mills = has stated that at some point in hydrino shrinkage (n/25 or thereabouts) = the process becomes unstable and auto-catalytic - after which a virtual = neutron results; we do not know how long that process takes in an actual = environment of continuous irradiation, nor the probability of any = hydrino reaching the state (n/25) and subsequent immediate = virtual-neutron. For the purposes of this design, I assumed that 10% of = all hydrinos will eventually become virtual neutrons in an average time = of 100,000 seconds of irradiation and that additional gamma irradiation = in a reactor would only help, not squelch the process. This is probably = extremely optimistic, because if true, it would allow less than 3 tons = of uranium carbide to reach "virtual" criticality due to ongoing hydrino = "virtual-neutron" supplementation (after a day-long startup process). = And far less if D2 is substituted for H2. If this was true, BLP should drop everything else they are doing, find = new investors, and switch over to the hydrino boosted subcritical = reactor.=20 5000 to 6000 pounds of uranium in an safe unpressurized 100 megawatt = reactor in a size factor which would fit into - say a railroad car and = have a base cost factor of less than the average house here in Mill = Valley and be safer than a tankload of propane... well that's a hard = combination to beat. Anyway, this would be an exciting prospect... the = only problem being that, personally I do not believe that Mills is = correct in this CAF hypothesis. Why the long write-up then?=20 Well, the potential advantages of this are so outstanding that even if = there is only a chance in a million of Mills' being correct, it is = almost criminal for a committed environmentalist and free-energy = advocate not to mention it... To backtrack, Mills introduced a concept called CAF - columbic = annihilation fusion, but has offered precious little in the form of = actual proof to back it up. I find myself in the squirming position of = accepting the reality of a "shrunken" hydrogen atom, at least through = stage one (and even then it could be shrunken due to other reasons); but = most importantly do not see the hydrino as necessarily an entity which = can keep shrinking to become a virtual neutron. However, R. Mills is a = far smarter guy than me or anyone I know, and has raised and sunk more = than $50 million into his pursuit; therefore - for purposes of this = piece, I will assume that he knows precisely what he has been talking = about and publishing. Consider a thin plasma and a temporary nanosecond in time when the = electron from a free hydrogen atom (not a molecule) gets trapped near a = helium ion. Then thermal and electrostatic agitation causes the heavier = catalyst (helium) to try to pry off the electron; but it will instead = radiate photon energy if it cannot quite succeed, then causing the = electron orbit to fall into a quantum sub-orbit (or as Mills' calls it: = a redundant ground state). In effect, the electron's angular momentum = has given up the energy which was radiated by the He ion and we are left = with shrunken hydrogen. Carry this out for 137 steps and we have a = virtual neutron. Carry it out with Deuterium and we have two neutrons. Mills says no orbits are stable after a few hundred eV are radiated, and = the orbit of the hydrino then becomes so eccentric and that it = immediately collapses into this virtual neutron. Is there any reason why = this entity would not serve as the make-up neutron in a subcritical = reactor scheme? In fact, it slightly more negative near-field (my guess) = should if anything increase its cross-section for inducing fission. THE GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR WITH HYDRINO BOOST All things considered, energy from uranium fission involves some = exasperating tradeoffs, but nevertheless can be easily rationalized as = the =93lesser of all evils,=94 at least for providing favorably-priced = reliable energy for a future world where oil prices have sky-rocketed = out of control. Plus, if done right, it can be cleaner and safer than = combustion. But before rushing into a frenzy of 'throwing good money = after bad,' it would be advisable to determine if the base technology = for fission can be improved very significantly (which would also give = LENR and ZPE projects, not to mention normal hydrino projects, more time = to mature before major expenditures need to be made at the national = level for old-style fission). And... to also see if we can't do it right = this time. IMHO its time for Manhattan project, part deux... One potential compound device which seems to go most of the way towards = a MUCH better integrated system may well be based on the Mills' hydrino. = This technology may provide a natural synergy for use in a fission = reactor to provide some "makeup neutrons" for subcritical fueling, if = Mills is correct, of course. That factor of correctness could be = determined rather quickly, with modest funding, and with or without = cooperation from BLP. This proposed advanced reactor design is=20 1) unpressurized,=20 2) natural U fueled,=20 3) nominally subcritical, 4) direct heat-->electricity conversion=20 5) driven to criticality by hydrino shrinkage and the creation of = virtual neutrons 6) moderated by graphite with perhaps some strategically situated D2O, 7) Perhaps employing continuous, on-site, just-in-time reprocessing = (engineered for robotic operation with no added proliferation risk).=20 The overriding advantages, however, are extremely impressive: the safety = of natural fuel and subcriticality, the safety and low cost of an = unpressuized reactor, far less heat rejection, and getting completely = free of the steam cycle. The steam cycle is the one debilitating = anachronism of all present day reactor designs which is totally = unacceptable for the future - at least as long as there is any = alternative. Using steam together with a dangerous fuel like enriched = uranium has completely morphed what could have been a safe and = inexpensive heating device into an extremely expensive time-bomb which = must be micro-managed, and is always subject to a terrorist threat. An = unpressurized subcritical reactor should end all that. Thermionics - the =93Edison effect=94 - relates to the emission of = electrons by heat. Essentially, electrons entropically =93boil off=94 = any hot material in order to lower its temperature - and they can be = collected and used as direct current when the emitter is hot enough. In = theory, thermionic conversion (TIC) would be the most efficient form of = direct conversion for use with fission fuel except for one major = problem. Extremely high fuel temperature and the kinetic "jitter" of = such can inhibit fission by thermal neutrons, and this is probably why = TIC hasn=92t been seriously considered before now. TIC is currently = used in "decay-type" plutonium reactors for the space program - which is = unfortunately an implementation for which thermionics is poorly suited. = That misuse has tarnished the concept in the minds of many engineers. The enormous gamma radiation which is unavoidable in fission reactors - = and either wasted or a big problem for other forms of conversion, could = actually be put to great use in order to accentuate the normal = thermionic driving mechanism of heat alone. Additional microwave = irradiation on the surface opposite to the emitting surface should also = greatly help. These are two enormous synergies which have yet to be = tried. If TIC can be implemented at more moderate temperatures =96 and = that may now be potentially feasible with this novel design, then = excellent net efficiency is all but guaranteed. Unlike steam conversion = of fossil fuels, the fission energy spectrum is all at the 'high end' = and does NOT necessarily require convective heat rejection as does = combustion; therefore, to the degree that TIC could be implemented at = all, it would result in perhaps double the efficiency of steam. The = requirement for extensive heat-rejection is also the one of the many = intractable and costly problems for steam conversion. Simplistically = stated, when you do not actively reject heat via conduction, the worst = thing that can happen becomes the best thing that can happen - the fuel = gets hotter and forces more electrons to boil off. This can be enhanced = by either a "push" or by a "pull" or both; but any enhanced TIC concept = will necessarily involve novel additional features.=20 The history of the radio vacuum tube may be helpful in understanding = this. The simplest example of thermionics is provided by the diode = vacuum tube, the device that started the modern era of wireless = communication. In this tube, electrons are 'boiled-off' a heated cathode = to be collected on an anode plate, an inefficient process because the = cathode must be parasitically heated. Not a problem in a fission reactor = - where the fuel itself becomes an intrinsically heated cathode and = electron emitter with a double (or triple) push beyond heat.=20 Imagine that your fuel is natural uranium in the form of 36 long hollow = cylinders or pipes =96 lets say ~3 cm in internal diameter, 2 meters = long, wall thickness of 2 cm, each weighing about 80 kg. Each fuel tube = will be surrounded by other closely space cylinders of zirconium metal, = electrically insulated from each other with ceramic end caps. All the = cylinders external to the fuel pipe will be closely space and called = grids. There will be two or three grids per each fuel pipe, all = concentric axially, each serving a purpose to convert heat into emf in = well-know triode or tetrode fashion. The total unit is the functional = equivalent of a long radio vacuum tube, having a "filament" which is the = hollow fuel tube which is irradiated down its central axis by = microwaves. This is where hydrinos are bred. The central diameter is = chosen to be a quarter wavelength of the microwave, in this case 2.45 = Ghz with a wavelength of a little over 12 cm. gives a diameter of about = 3 cm. Let=92s call them FEP assemblies, or fuel-emitter-pipes, and they will = be designed to be robotically removed and replaced in a short time = period, like vacuum tubes in an old radio - so that fuel reprocessing = becomes an ongoing automatic operation. This arrangement then allows a = concentric multipactor grid to feed a collector anode =96 a larger = surrounding cylinder. In this fashion, we should (optimistically) be = able to achieve high current (100,000 amps/pipe) at moderately high = voltage (300 volts) from a fuel element that is kept around 2000 Kelvin. = For use in a fission reactor where the fuel must be kept below the = optimum temperature for efficient TIC electron emission, the available = ways to overcome this limitation go back 60 years to radio. In a triode = tube, a charged open grid can serve to accelerate (pull) electrons away = from a cathode at far lower temperature than when they are being forced = (pushed) by heat alone; or electrons can be pushed from the opposite = side of the emitter by a higher potential or emf capacitance which the = microwave irradiation will provide (in addition to supplying the emf for = hydrino formation). In order to get maximum efficiency, we need to find = a ways to actually multiply electrons from the emitter. Tetrode and = pentrode tubes expand the role of the grid, but don't multiply, yet = there is a gridless device invented by Philo Farnsworth called a = "mulitpactor" which can serve the role of a solid lossless grid, = multiplier and re-emitter, especially in a high gamma environment. Even = in the 1940s, the multipactor achieved efficiency in the high 90% range = when normal power tubes were half of that efficiency, at best. But the = use of the multipactor was limited in radio because of 'noise', and = eventually it was pushed aside by the transistor, so that even today few = EE types are familiar with its features and advantages. This high efficiency of the multipactor is critical when applied to TIC = fission because at a large amount of electron flux must be recycled. For = instance, in order to achieve 3 megawatts of net electrical output per = fuel-pipe, we might need to achieve over 5 megawatts gross output and = continuously recycle over 2 in the form of HV to be used to "force" = higher thermionic emission from a surface that is less than optimum = temperature. If we can recover that recycled input at 90% efficiency, = then the net parasitic loss is only going to be in the range of ~5%. = The parasitic loss of microwave irradiation will be even less. Furthermore, potential synergy can be imagined by using deuterium, = rather than hydrogen. Since we will be actually only consuming a few = pounds a day of either isotope, it makes sense to use D2 rather than H2, = assuming that both isotopes undergo hydrino shrinkage to the same = degree.=20 Two interesting ways to boost subcritical fission with "manufactured" = neutrons, in addition to the hydrino: 1) Use heavy water under ultrasonic irradiation as an active moderator = inside a central cylinder which is surrounded by the FEP assemblies, = and/or 2) Use deuterium gas at very low pressure in the inter-electrode spaces = in order to provide increased electrical conductivity and to generate = some make-up neutrons by photofission and neutron stripping reactions.=20 The electric field created between the central fuel pipe/ TIC electrode = and the multipactor grid can be in the several kilovolt range - and with = a fairly large inter-electrode spacing, a deuterium plasma discharge can = also be maintained. That means that there is a potential for added = neutron generation due to stripping and photofission. The added = operating cost of D2 replacement, if D2 should be substituted for H2 = either in the hydrino region, the inter-electrode region, or both will = be reasonable since less than a hundred kg per year will be used.=20 For use within the reactor itself, any of electrode surfaces would need = to be fashioned out of zirconium metal or graphite (alloys and cermets). = The most external grid could be water cooled, but the fuel pipe and = multipactor grid itself should be uncooled except for the heat transfer = provided by emitted electrons. No convective heat removal is needed. No = expensive cooling towers needed.=20 A further advantage which can be incorporated is a reflective moderator = - a thick graphite blanket which can surround the multi-tube array = providing neutron reflection and moderation. This is a huge advantage = for a smaller size (100 megawatt) reactor which is unavailable to all = pressurized reactors. That is, a graphite blanket of ~1 meter thickness = has been proven to both moderate and reflect neutrons - giving over 90% = thermal neutron reflection, but because of the high space requirement = and the reactivity of graphite with steam, this kind of blanket type = reflector is forbidden in all current reactor designs. Burnup can be = high with on site reprocessing. All the fuel the reactor will ever need = can be in-place at startup. Total uranium usage per kilowatt/hr produced = over the reactor life can be 100 times less than if using enriched fuel. = Fission ash can be removed, concentrated and stored on-site in a small = area. The list of advantages goes on and on. Again, many of these design choices can work together synergistically. = And it would be an incredible option, albeit somewhat complex, to = consider for validation IF the theory of Randall Mills is correct = regarding CAF and the virtual neutron (and particularly if the technique = applies to D2 as well as H2). But, alas, despite spending a fair amount = of time dreaming this scheme up and reducing it to writing... to be = honest, I am far from convinced on that "correctness" of the = virtual-neutron part... More on this "pipe-dream" later... Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C4ADFC.A18924E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Wasn't it Mark Twain who, in a long letter to someone, = apologized for=20 its length by stating that he didn't have enough time to write a shorter = note?=20 Well, consider this to be a similar apology in the era of email where = with the=20 availability of "cut and past," it seems that short but meaningful = messages=20 take way too much time.
 
Yesterday, the idea of using the Mill's microwave technique as an = integral=20 part of a subcritical reactor was broached. I have played around with = some of=20 the nucleonic calculations, based on Mills reports, particularly the = Rowan=20 study. Unfortunately even Mills has never stated the critical detail = which would=20 allow an accurate model. Although Mills has stated that at some point in = hydrino=20 shrinkage (n/25 or thereabouts) the process becomes unstable and = auto-catalytic=20 - after which a virtual neutron results; we do not know how long that = process=20 takes in an actual environment of continuous irradiation, nor the = probability of=20 any hydrino reaching the state (n/25) and subsequent immediate=20 virtual-neutron. For the purposes of this design, I assumed that = 10% of all=20 hydrinos will eventually become virtual neutrons in an average time of = 100,000=20 seconds of irradiation and that additional gamma irradiation in a = reactor would=20 only help, not squelch the process. This is probably extremely = optimistic,=20 because if true, it would allow less than 3 tons of uranium carbide to = reach=20 "virtual" criticality due to ongoing hydrino "virtual-neutron" = supplementation=20 (after a day-long startup process). And far less if D2 is = substituted for=20 H2.
 
If this was true, BLP should drop everything else they are doing, = find new=20 investors, and switch over to the hydrino boosted subcritical reactor. =
 
5000 to 6000 pounds of uranium in an safe unpressurized 100 = megawatt=20 reactor in a size factor which would fit into - say a railroad car and = have a=20 base cost factor of less than the average house here in Mill Valley and = be safer=20 than a tankload of propane... well that's a hard combination to=20 beat. Anyway, this would be an exciting prospect...  the only = problem=20 being that, personally I do not believe that Mills is correct in this = CAF=20 hypothesis. Why the long write-up then?
 
Well, the potential advantages of this are so outstanding that = even if=20 there is only a chance in a million of Mills' being correct, it is = almost=20 criminal for a committed environmentalist and free-energy advocate not = to=20 mention it...
 
To backtrack, Mills introduced a concept called CAF - columbic = annihilation=20 fusion, but has offered precious little in the form of actual proof to = back it=20 up. I find myself in the squirming position of accepting the reality of = a=20 "shrunken" hydrogen atom, at least through stage one (and even then it = could be=20 shrunken due to other reasons); but most importantly do not see the = hydrino as=20 necessarily an entity which can keep shrinking to become a virtual = neutron.=20 However, R. Mills is a far smarter guy than me or anyone I know, and has = raised=20 and sunk more than $50 million into his pursuit; therefore - for = purposes=20 of this piece, I will assume that he knows precisely what he has = been=20 talking about and publishing.
 
Consider a thin plasma and a temporary nanosecond in time when the = electron=20 from a free hydrogen atom (not a molecule) gets trapped near a helium = ion. Then=20 thermal and electrostatic agitation causes the heavier catalyst (helium) = to try=20 to pry off the electron; but it will instead radiate photon energy if it = cannot=20 quite succeed, then causing the electron orbit to fall into a quantum = sub-orbit=20 (or as Mills' calls it: a redundant ground state). In effect, the = electron's=20 angular momentum has given up the energy which was radiated by the He = ion and we=20 are left with shrunken hydrogen. Carry this out for 137 steps and we = have a=20 virtual neutron. Carry it out with Deuterium and we=20 have two neutrons.
 
Mills says no orbits are stable after a few hundred eV are = radiated, and=20 the orbit of the hydrino then becomes so eccentric and that it = immediately=20 collapses into this virtual neutron. Is there any reason why this = entity=20 would not serve as the make-up neutron in a subcritical reactor scheme? = In fact,=20 it slightly more negative near-field (my guess) should if anything = increase its=20 cross-section for inducing fission.
 
THE GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR WITH HYDRINO BOOST

All things considered, energy from uranium fission involves = some=20 exasperating tradeoffs, but nevertheless can be easily rationalized = as the=20 =93lesser of all evils,=94 at least for providing favorably-priced = reliable energy=20 for a future world where oil prices have sky-rocketed out of control. = Plus, if=20 done right, it can be cleaner and safer than combustion. But before = rushing into=20 a frenzy of 'throwing good money after bad,' it would be advisable to = determine=20 if the base technology for fission can be improved very significantly = (which=20 would also give LENR and ZPE projects, not to mention normal = hydrino=20 projects, more time to mature before major expenditures need to be = made at=20 the national level for old-style fission). And... to also see if we = can't do it=20 right this time. IMHO its time for Manhattan project, part deux...
 
One potential compound device which seems to go most of = the way=20 towards a MUCH better integrated system may well be based on the Mills' = hydrino.=20 This technology may provide a natural synergy for use in a fission = reactor to=20 provide some "makeup neutrons" for subcritical fueling, if Mills is = correct, of=20 course. That factor of correctness could be determined rather quickly, = with=20 modest funding, and with or without cooperation from BLP.

This = proposed=20 advanced reactor design is
1) unpressurized,
2) natural U = fueled,
3)=20 nominally subcritical,
4) direct heat-->electricity conversion =
5)=20 driven to criticality by hydrino shrinkage and the creation of virtual=20 neutrons
6) moderated by graphite with perhaps some strategically = situated=20 D2O,
7) Perhaps employing continuous, on-site, just-in-time = reprocessing=20 (engineered for robotic operation with no added proliferation = risk).=20

The overriding advantages, however, are extremely = impressive: the=20 safety of natural fuel and subcriticality, the safety and low cost of an = unpressuized reactor, far less heat rejection, and getting completely = free of=20 the steam cycle. The steam cycle is the one debilitating anachronism of = all=20 present day reactor designs which is totally unacceptable for the future = - at=20 least as long as there is any alternative. Using steam together with a = dangerous=20 fuel like enriched uranium has completely morphed what could have been a = safe=20 and inexpensive heating device into an extremely expensive time-bomb = which must=20 be micro-managed, and is always subject to a terrorist threat. An = unpressurized=20 subcritical reactor should end all that.

Thermionics - the =93Edison effect=94 - relates to the emission = of=20 electrons by heat. Essentially, electrons entropically =93boil off=94 = any hot=20 material in order to lower its temperature - and they can be collected = and used=20 as direct current when the emitter is hot enough. In theory, thermionic=20 conversion (TIC) would be the most efficient form of direct conversion = for use=20 with fission fuel except for one major problem. Extremely high fuel = temperature=20 and the kinetic "jitter" of such can inhibit fission by thermal = neutrons, and=20 this is probably why TIC hasn=92t been seriously considered before now. = TIC =20 is currently used in "decay-type" plutonium reactors for the space = program=20 - which is unfortunately an implementation for which thermionics is = poorly=20 suited. That misuse has tarnished the concept in the minds of many=20 engineers.

The enormous gamma radiation which is unavoidable in = fission=20 reactors - and either wasted or a big problem for other forms of = conversion,=20 could actually be put to great use in order to accentuate the normal = thermionic=20 driving mechanism of heat alone. Additional microwave irradiation on the = surface=20 opposite to the emitting surface should also greatly help. These = are two=20 enormous synergies which have yet to be tried. If TIC can be implemented = at more=20 moderate temperatures =96 and that may now be potentially = feasible with=20 this novel design, then excellent net efficiency is all but guaranteed. = Unlike=20 steam conversion of fossil fuels, the fission energy spectrum is all at = the=20 'high end' and does NOT necessarily require convective heat rejection as = does=20 combustion; therefore, to the degree that TIC could be implemented at = all, it=20 would result in perhaps double the efficiency of steam. The requirement = for=20 extensive heat-rejection is also the one of the many intractable and = costly=20 problems for steam conversion. Simplistically stated, when you do not = actively=20 reject heat via conduction, the worst thing that can happen becomes the = best=20 thing that can happen - the fuel gets hotter and forces more electrons = to boil=20 off.  This can be enhanced by either a "push" or by = a "pull" or=20 both; but any enhanced TIC concept will necessarily involve novel = additional=20 features.
 
The history of the radio vacuum tube may be helpful in = understanding this.=20 The simplest example of thermionics is provided by the diode vacuum = tube, the=20 device that started the modern era of wireless communication. In = this=20 tube, electrons are 'boiled-off' a heated cathode to be collected = on an=20 anode plate, an inefficient process because the cathode must be = parasitically=20 heated. Not a problem in a fission reactor - where the fuel itself = becomes=20 an intrinsically heated cathode and electron emitter with a double (or = triple)=20 push beyond heat.
 
Imagine that your fuel is natural uranium in the form of 36 = long=20 hollow cylinders or pipes =96 lets say ~3 cm in internal diameter, = 2 meters=20 long, wall thickness of 2 cm, each weighing about 80 kg. Each = fuel=20 tube will be surrounded by other closely space cylinders of zirconium = metal,=20 electrically insulated from each other with ceramic end caps. All the = cylinders=20 external to the fuel pipe will be closely space and called grids. There = will be=20 two or three grids per each fuel pipe, all concentric axially,=20 each serving a purpose to convert heat into emf in well-know triode = or=20 tetrode fashion. The total unit is the functional equivalent of a long = radio=20 vacuum tube, having a "filament" which is the hollow fuel = tube which is=20 irradiated down its central axis by microwaves. This is where hydrinos = are bred.=20 The central diameter is chosen to be a quarter wavelength of the = microwave, in=20 this case 2.45 Ghz with a wavelength of a little over 12 cm. gives a = diameter of=20 about 3 cm.
 
Let=92s call them FEP assemblies, or fuel-emitter-pipes, and = they will=20 be designed to be robotically removed and replaced in a short time = period, like=20 vacuum tubes in an old radio - so that fuel reprocessing becomes an = ongoing=20 automatic operation. This arrangement then allows a concentric = multipactor grid=20 to feed a collector anode =96 a larger surrounding cylinder. In this = fashion, we=20 should (optimistically) be able to achieve high current (100,000 = amps/pipe) at=20 moderately high voltage (300 volts) from a fuel element that is = kept around=20 2000 Kelvin.
For use in a fission reactor where the fuel must be kept below = the=20 optimum temperature for efficient TIC electron emission, the available = ways to=20 overcome this limitation go back 60 years to radio. In a triode tube, a = charged=20 open grid can serve to accelerate (pull) electrons away from a cathode = at far=20 lower temperature than when they are being forced (pushed) by heat = alone; or=20 electrons can be pushed from the opposite side of the emitter by a = higher=20 potential or emf capacitance which the microwave irradiation will = provide (in=20 addition to supplying the emf for hydrino formation). In order to get = maximum=20 efficiency, we need to find a ways to actually multiply electrons from = the=20 emitter. Tetrode and pentrode tubes expand the role of the grid, but = don't=20 multiply, yet there is a gridless device invented by Philo Farnsworth = called a=20 "mulitpactor" which can serve the role of a solid lossless grid, = multiplier and=20 re-emitter, especially in a high gamma environment. Even in = the 1940s,=20 the multipactor achieved efficiency in the high 90% range when normal = power=20 tubes were half of that efficiency, at best. But the use of the = multipactor was=20 limited in radio because of 'noise', and eventually it = was pushed=20 aside by the transistor, so that even today few EE types are = familiar with=20 its features and advantages.
 
This high efficiency of the multipactor is critical when applied to = TIC=20 fission because at a large amount of electron flux must be recycled. For = instance, in order to achieve 3 megawatts of net electrical output = per=20 fuel-pipe, we might need to achieve over 5 megawatts = gross output=20 and continuously recycle over 2 in the form of HV to be used to = "force"=20 higher thermionic emission from a surface that is less than optimum = temperature. If we can recover that recycled input at 90% efficiency, = then the=20 net parasitic loss is only going to be in the range of ~5%.  The = parasitic=20 loss of microwave irradiation will be even less.
 
Furthermore,  potential synergy can be imagined by using=20 deuterium, rather than hydrogen. Since we will be actually only = consuming a few=20 pounds a day of either isotope, it makes sense to use D2 rather than H2, = assuming that both isotopes undergo hydrino shrinkage to the same = degree.
 
Two interesting ways to boost subcritical fission with = "manufactured"=20 neutrons, in addition to the hydrino:
1) Use heavy water under ultrasonic irradiation as an active = moderator=20 inside a central cylinder which is surrounded by the FEP assemblies,=20 and/or
2) Use deuterium gas at very low pressure in the inter-electrode = spaces in=20 order to provide increased electrical conductivity and to generate some = make-up=20 neutrons by photofission and neutron stripping reactions.
 
The electric field created between the central fuel pipe/=20 TIC electrode and the multipactor grid can be in the several = kilovolt range=20 - and with a fairly large inter-electrode spacing, a deuterium plasma = discharge=20 can also be maintained. That means that  there is a potential for = added=20 neutron generation due to stripping and photofission. The added = operating cost=20 of D2 replacement, if D2 should be substituted for H2 either in the = hydrino=20 region, the inter-electrode region, or both will be reasonable since = less than a=20 hundred kg per year will be used.
 
For use within the reactor itself, any of electrode surfaces would = need to=20 be fashioned out of zirconium metal or graphite (alloys and cermets). = The most=20 external grid could be water cooled, but the fuel pipe and = multipactor grid=20 itself should be uncooled except for the heat transfer = provided by=20 emitted electrons. No convective heat removal is needed. No expensive = cooling=20 towers needed.
 
A further advantage which can be incorporated is a reflective = moderator -=20 a thick graphite blanket which can surround the multi-tube = array=20 providing neutron reflection and moderation. This is a huge advantage = for a=20 smaller size (100 megawatt) reactor which is unavailable to all = pressurized=20 reactors. That is, a graphite blanket of ~1 meter thickness has been = proven to=20 both moderate and reflect neutrons - giving over 90% thermal neutron = reflection,=20 but because of the high space requirement and the reactivity of graphite = with=20 steam, this kind of blanket type reflector is forbidden in all current = reactor=20 designs.  Burnup can be high with on site reprocessing. All = the fuel=20 the reactor will ever need can be in-place at startup. Total uranium = usage per=20 kilowatt/hr produced over the reactor life can be 100 times less than if = using=20 enriched fuel. Fission ash can be removed, concentrated and = stored=20 on-site in a small area. The list of advantages goes on and on.
 
Again, many of these design choices can work together = synergistically. And=20 it would be an incredible option, albeit somewhat complex,  to = consider for=20 validation IF the theory of Randall Mills is correct regarding CAF = and the=20 virtual neutron (and particularly if the technique applies to D2 as well = as H2).=20 But, alas, despite spending a fair amount of time dreaming this scheme = up and=20 reducing it to writing... to be honest, I am far from convinced on that=20 "correctness" of the virtual-neutron part...

More on this "pipe-dream" later...

Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C4ADFC.A18924E0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 14:46:04 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99Lju60009624; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:45:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99LjscB009601; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:45:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:45:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041009214553.47388.qmail@web12404.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:45:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Iraqi aluminum tube story finis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56038 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vortexians, I am quite sorry I ever got into this thing, and if I have wasted bandwidth, I do apologize. This will likely be my last message on this subject. > period. The addition of the word 'period' makes it that much clearer then? No, Iraq did not attack us. We attacked them. I am not denying this. I am merely questioning whether it was right or wrong. > and since weve killed more people in iraq so far > than saddam has in > the past decade, yeah, id argue over whether or not > its better to have > him gone. he was a dictator. he was not that bad a > one, and there > are many worse. I might be able to agree with this above paragraph if I had consumed a rather large quantity of Jack Daniels, but I fear I would succumb to alcohol poisoning first, if you catch my drift. Not that bad? Pardon my asterisks, but give me a f***ing break. And the dead as well. > saddam disarmed. he complied with regulations. the > rule of law was > being followed in iraq. Are you willing to bet your life on that? I am not. > as for cold blooded mass murderer, > and so was abraham lincoln by your logic. after > all, a hell of a lot > more americans died in teh civil war than have died > in iraq under > saddam. and they wouldnt have died had lincoln just > let them seceed. My logic is obviously misunderstood in any case. My feelings on the civil war are not going to be addressed here. If they were, someone would invariably wonder where I am from, and that will get stirred into the mix. It goes without saying that more Americans died in the civil war than in Iraq under Saddam....I was not referring to American deaths under Saddam, I was referring to Iraqi deaths under Saddam. Apples and oranges, so the saying goes. In the event that Saddam had finally managed to build or aquire nuclear weapons, who can say what the American deaths might have been? > teh precense of mind to not be offended? where do > you get off? why > would you be offended? others are free to worship > as they please. > thats whats so great about this country. Uh..."get off"? I was not particularly offended...I was remarking that too many people get offended by hearing someone say something about his or her god that is not politically correct, or using the term "black" as opposed to "african-american"...the US is too hung up on speaking 'politely' and 'correctly'. Yet I am called a racist if I do not like some kid driving past my home at 3am blasting ghetto music loaded with cursing. I truly begin to wonder what IS so great about this country nowadays. Maybe that seems a little contradictory to what I've written above and in previous posts...I suppose it is in a way, but when dealing with humanity there is always contradiction. Take this as you will, I never meant to offend you or anyone else, I was merely speaking my mind. Maybe others here feel as I do, maybe not. I am personally tired of the topic, and I am sorry I got into it. Have a nice day, --Kyle P.S., the "have a nice day" was not sarcastic. _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 15:57:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99Mv960021344; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 15:57:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i99Mv75x021337; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 15:57:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 15:57:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 15:57:07 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: L. Kowalski intends CF experiment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56039 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From PHYS-L forum, http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/PHYS-L/index.html http://lists.nau.edu/archives/phys-l.html ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 08:59:08 -0400 From: Ludwik Kowalski Reply-To: Forum for Physics Educators To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU Subject: Conservation of energy. The experiment described several weeks ago was not good to measure L (latent heat of evaporation of water) but it can be used to demonstrate that energy is conserved. An extra step must be added to determine the value of L. It is a good experiment because the equipment needed (thermometer, stopwatch, voltmeter, ammeter, an immersion heater and a power supply) is usually available. A simple variac can be used instead of a dc power supply. PREPARATIONS AND A PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENT 1) Place a certain amount of water into a jar or beaker. 2) Insert the immersion heater and the thermometer into water. 3) Connect the heater to the power supply (through the ammeter to measure I). 4) Connect the voltmeter to measure the V at the heater's terminals. 5) Turn the current on to make sure that water can be brought to the boiling point, for example, in 10 minutes. 6) Replace hot water by the room temperature water and measure the heat capacity H of your setup. To accomplish this turn the current on for a time interval t1. During that time the water temperature should increase by dT equal to about 10 C. Calculate H = V*I*t1/dT; it might turn out to be 2000 J/deg. Verify that H is slightly larger that c1*m1, where m1 is the mass of water and c1 is its specific heat. MAIN EXPERIMENT 7) Bring water to the boiling point. Then turn the current off and start measuring temperature every two minutes for about 30 minutes. Plot the cooling curve (temperature versus time). This curve can be used to determine cooling rates, R, of the setup at desired temperatures, such as 80 C. A typical value of R is 3 degrees per minute. 8) Adjust the power supply to reach a desired temperature, say 80 C, and to keep it constant. 9) Measure V and I; these values should also become constant. 10) Turn the current off after time t2 (measured with a stopwatch). ANALYSIS OF DATA 11) How much energy was supplied during the time t2? E1=V*I*t2 12) How much energy was lost during the same time interval? That value, E2, can be determined from the cooling curve. Suppose the experiment is performed at 80 C and that the value of R, at that temperature, is 3 deg/min. Also suppose that H=2000 J/deg and that t2=5 minutes. In that case E2=R*t2*H=3*5*2000=30000 Joules 13) Are E1 and E2 equal? They should be equal at the level of your accuracy and precision. The most likely source of error has to do with R (unless your thermometer has divisions for fractions of degrees). OBSERVATIONS Note that R refers to heat losses due to all mechanisms, including evaporation. Therefore, the above data are not sufficient for finding L. To calculate L we plan to add another step. We will replace water with sand whose mass m2 is equal to c1*m1/c2 (where c1 and c2 are known specific heats of two substances and m1 is the mass of replaced water Bring the sand to the constant temperature of 80 C, turn the heater off and collect the cooling curve data. The rate of cooling with sand, R2, should by much smaller than the rate of cooling with water, R1, because there is no evaporation. We will assume that the rate of cooling by conduction, convection and radiation, at any given temperature, does not change when m1 of water is replaced by m2 of sand. Under that assumption the amount of energy lost by conduction, convection and radiation is E3=R2*t2*H. (Note that H does not change when c1*m1=c2*m2). We expect E3 to be a fraction of E2, for example 15%.. Suppose E3 turns out to be 4500 J. In that case we will be able to say that thermal energy lost through evaporation, in 20 minutes, was 30000-4500=25500 J. The value of L would then be calculated as 25500/M, where M is the mass of water evaporated in 20 minutes. The jar would be standing on a scale to measure M. Our scale is is very reliable but that does not mean that measuring of M is easy. The difficulty has to do with the vapor condensing on the walls of the beaker, on the thermometer, etc. Condensed droplets of water return back to the container and what one is measuring turns out to be a fraction on M. This difficulty is more pronounced when L is measured at 100 C. What can one do to reduce this source of error? Constant wiping of walls with tissue is not very practical, especially at 100 C. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 18:28:47 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9A1Sh60010429; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:28:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9A1SckL010391; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:28:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:28:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <007701c4ae68$6fb76be0$c47bccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <4166B94D.3090308@rtpatlanta.com> <010801c4ad66$5a65ffc0$cf56ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <007c01c4ad89$a274b9a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: Hydrogen energy x 100 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:28:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56040 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones wrote: Interesting point from M.C. : > > > With all this talk about ethanol and hydrogen, let me take > note of the water > > bath calorimetry experiments of Mills which showed a heat > release from > > hydrogen 100 times greater than by combustion of the same > amount of > > hydrogen. > > > The only obvious drawback to the Mills process, assuming his > published results hold up under closer scrutiny is *energy > density* which is a term that we are not used to hearing > much about. As best I can tell, this lower energy density is > due to the requirement of needing a rather thin plasma, > which is irradiated with the RF but mildly so, and requiring > a great deal of spatial volume relative to the energy > produced. In the first paper on the H-He+ experiment, Mills noted that the energy density was comparalbe to an IC engine. Most of the work reported has been of research character, not to see how high the energy density could be pushed. Jones is right, the fundamental energy density of the reactiosn are less than nuclear reactions seen in LENR. In lab LENR experiments there is much evidence that the reactions occur at isolated sites and only a small portion of a target mass may react. When the reaction is actually understood, then it may be possible to fully engage a target mass in the LENR reactions and marvelous devices built. We are an unknown distance in time and man-years from that point. At this point Mills is further down that road than LENR is, in terms of organization, focus, and funding. Where both technologies will take us is not determined yet. > > One thought occurs here in the context of a nuclear reactor. > Reactors are just the opposite - having extremely high > energy density. > > Can some of the best features of each technology be > combined? > > Lets consider the Mills microwave Everson [sp] tube which > uses hydrogen and helium, irradiated at the common oven > frequency of 2.45 Ghz. It just so happens that those two > gases, mostly He with about 10% H2 are both easily > accommodated and usable within a reactor for several > purposes - either neutron moderation or heat removal and > especially conversion of heat into electricity, or for all > of these. But the best thing is... once a hydrino reaches a > certain level of shrinkage according to Mills, it will > become more and more neutron-like so that near the final > 137th stage, we have in effect a virtual neutron. This > feature could allow hydrinos to become the "makeup" > virtual-neutrons in a subcritical reactor scheme. What Jones has not mentioned above is that at each stage of hydrino-hydrino reactions leading to that theoretical point, more and more energy is released -- hundreds of eV per atom. Also, the descent of one hydrino on that scale is balanced by the ascent of another toward "ground" state. These reactions are very complex; while their spectral signatures are seen, details are very sketchy in publications and may be studied for years. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 9 22:55:33 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9A5tUqe003441; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:55:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9A5t2hE003364; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:55:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:55:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:00:16 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: L. Kowalski intends CF experiment Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56041 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:57 PM 10/9/4, William Beaty wrote: [snip] >The difficulty has to >do with the vapor condensing on the walls of the beaker, on the >thermometer, etc. Condensed droplets of water return back to the >container and what one is measuring turns out to be a fraction on M. >This difficulty is more pronounced when L is measured at 100 C. > >What can one do to reduce this source of error? Constant wiping of >walls with tissue is not very practical, especially at 100 C. I've had similar problems doing boil-off calorimetry. My approach was to insulate the beaker. I did this by cutting up 3" thick polyurethane blueboard insulation so as to make a box with a hole in the top (lid) suitable for thermometer, stirrer and wires. (Stirring, using a very low power low voltage DC motor, helps much in obtaining repeatable values and achieving energy balances.) I made the box in two halves that fit together very nicely, a top half (lid) and bottom half. The bottom half I made short enough that the beaker could be placed inside it using tongs. This facilitated *starting* with boiling electrolyte (or about 99 C anyway), and thus eliminating the need to account for energy balance of start-up. The lid actually covered roughly the top half of the beaker, i.e. covered the top down to about halfway to the bottom. It was easy to simply screw the box parts together using 3 1/2 inch deck screws, counter-sunk about an inch or so. It is easy to custom fit the box and lid to most any shape by simply carving the polyurethane or sawing it using a (manual) keyhole saw. Using such a box unfortunately makes for a fairly long cool-down time, but after a lot of runs it becomes apparent the cooling curve data is not very important and doesn't typically vary much when the same box and beaker size is used, and the beaker is filled to a given level and boiled off to a given level that is more than half full. These are boil-off calorimetry concerns, but maybe not of interest to the writer of the above question. Insulating the beaker significantly eliminates condensation because the heat of vaporization can not be significantly removed from the steam. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 07:35:59 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9AEZr60026481; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:35:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9AEZpfA026451; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:35:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:35:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004100101335180@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Kervran's Chickens Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 08:35:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fe1ccfca2fadc0504a7cfe60e8e2b703350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.4 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56042 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII There are several stable isotopes in which a low orbit (*e-) can give a chemical behavior emulating a radio-isotope: 7Nitrogen-14 + (*e-) ----> 6 Carbon-14 5715 year half-life 18Argon-36 + (*e-) -----> 17 Chlorine-36 310,000 year half-life 20Calcium-40 +(*e-) ----> 19Potassium-40 1.26 billion year half-life IOW, the "biological transmutations" depend on the orbit level of the (*e-) and need not involve the energies associated with isotope decay. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

There are several  stable isotopes in which a low orbit (*e-) can give
a chemical behavior emulating a radio-isotope:
 
7Nitrogen-14 + (*e-) ----> 6 Carbon-14   5715 year half-life
 
18Argon-36 + (*e-) -----> 17 Chlorine-36  310,000 year half-life
 
20Calcium-40 +(*e-) ----> 19Potassium-40   1.26 billion year half-life
 
IOW, the "biological transmutations" depend on the orbit level of the (*e-) and
need not involve the energies associated with isotope decay.
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 10:21:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9AHL860025105; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 10:21:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9AHL6JL025091; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 10:21:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 10:21:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008e01c4aeed$71c47880$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Nuclear TIC Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 10:20:14 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008B_01C4AEB2.BBBDB400" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56043 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_008B_01C4AEB2.BBBDB400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thermionic conversion (TIC) of heat directly into electricity, = efficiently and without any intermediary steps, is a bit more = complicated than one might realize without going back forty years to the = days of vacuum tubes, and trying to integrate some of that once = well-know, but now nearly forgotten (in the semiconductor age) = technology.=20 Since two vortexians have noted, in private email, that my concept of = nuclear TIC appears to go way beyond normal parameters (to put it = gently), I would like to clarify. This concept is actually based more on = Farnsworth and his multipactor tetrode than on any modern day = equivalent. Lets call the underlying modality of nuclear TIC as = envisioned in the Gaia reactor, "Farnsworth electrodynamics plus = top-down IR coherency." One objection to the Gaia conversion scheme presented yesterday could be = phrased, "A temperature of 2000 K equates to a thermal energy of the electrons of only about 1/4 eV, so where do you get the 300 volts output from. If you use an external field to accelerate the electrons to = produce a higher voltage, then all the work is being done by the = external field, not by the thermal energy of the electrons." I should have made this very basic underlying concept clearer, but that = posting was already getting too long. In this hypothetical design, most = of the actual "work" of raising the voltage of thermionic electrons - = about 90% of the work actually, is being done by IR photons in a near = coherency spectrum as emitted from the uranium fuel pipe.=20 One needs to appreciate the importance of the very first step - the = ballistic step, which is where the external field (an accelerating grid) = is needed. From then on, as soon as a flux of ballistic electrons has = been freed from the emitter interface, the dense "cloud" of emitted = electrons is like a series circuit with a photon "boost" possible at = every wavelength multiple, but this requires near coherency and benefits = form gamma radiation to break up any surface charge barriers before they = can accumulate.=20 Actually the 2000 K suggested for the emitter is a compromise = temperature, and will not "push" many electrons off ballistically, = anyway. That temperature is too low to work for TIC in a normal diode = situation but anything higher affect the neutron cross-section of the = U-fuel pipe. Unless one can force a dense cloud of electrons off an = emitter and create a corresponding crossed magnetic field due to the = high amperage, efficient TIC is impossible. And that very first step, = the ballistic step is what the applied voltage facilitates. To end up = with a busbar output of 300 v. off of a multipactor, that accelerating = grid would need to be around 2000 volts of positive potential wrt the = fuel pipe (at ground), depending on geometry. This gets more into the old radio tube theory than modern thermionics. = For instance, I have never even heard the triode (tetrode) scheme = mentioned in regard to TIC for energy production. Perhaps that is = because it will NOT work with combustion heat sources at all, for a number of reasons (the main = one being zero possibility of creating a near-coherent IR spectrum).=20 Which brings up the importance of the emitter surface. It must have work = function properties which mesh with other parameters. But the first = thing - the most critical thing by far which one needs for efficient TIC = is a starting flux of ballistic electrons to "open the gate" or to = "prime the pump". Once a virtual series circuit connection has been = established, everything else follows. But a fractional eV isn't going to = give you enough ballistic electrons to start the process. Actually the = mass/energy of the coherent IR photon in question is more like 1/2-1 eV, = and a wavelength of about a micron, but they are not fully absorbed by = the bulk of electrons before they reach the multipactor, so the ending = electron may have only 1/4 eV of added kinetic mass/energy. I hope that = is not too confusing. Once the "pump" (e- flux) has been primed, however, and a virtual series = circuit established by a flux of ballistic electrons being drawn off = (initially by using a parasitic grid), most of the incremental boosting = (voltage gain) can then driven by near-coherent photon emission from the = heated fuel pipe, and not requiring further emf from the accelerating = grid (one would try to keep grid losses in the range of 10%, therefore = 90% of the voltage gain applied to ballistic electrons is by photon = absorption and 10% by the grid. Consequently, it can be envisaged that = most of the voltage gain and most of the "work" is supplied by a = continuous barrage of IR photons being absorbed by the dense cloud of = electrons.=20 If your external accelerating grid is capable of enough emf for starting = a flux across a fairly spacious gap, in order to merely get that 10% = percent of electrons moving off the first angstrom of the emitter/gap = interface, then a much larger percentage come along for free. In the = "wake," so to speak. That is why it is called "priming the pump," a = phrase that Philo himself used. The next step is a multipactor = arrangement which is actually two solid tubes surrounding the fuel pipe, = electrically insulated from each other and from the inner accelerating = grid (which is an open grid, with perhaps 5% surface coverage). This is Philo Farnsworth's milieu! Too bad the internet was not around = then, or else we have greater benefit of his insight. His sketches are = worth way more than a thousand words. This IR absorption process would not work at low amperage. One needs the = self-generated magnetic crossed-field for efficient IR photon = absorption. The advantage here is that since, with nuclear heating, = nearly all of the IR photons are starting out in a much higher spectrum = (actually starting from two 50 MeV fission fragments), then one can = approach and design a nearly *coherent* IR emission spectrum at the low = end with the proper surface coating (probably zirconia). Massive = amperage must be accommodated for the self-field. There are perhaps five = or six interlocking parameters that must be engineered to mesh = seamlessly. This is not possible with combustion, where the IR spectrum is spread = out from the very outset in such a wide (and low) range that no = coherency is possible. The situation is FAR different with nuclear = heating in regard to engineering IR coherency. BTW, some of the gamma = photons will be resonant for accelerating electrons as well, and for = breaking up any tendency for a strong shielding electron near-field to = develop - so that the reactors strong gamma radiation enters into the = picture in a synergetic way. This advanced TIC process can be verbalized to be closely analogous to = the situation in a linear electron accelerator. In fact, the following = description may be a most intuitive analogy for those who are not yet = convinced .... In a old style klystron linear electron accelerator, one uses microwaves = (which are of mass/energy orders of magnitude less that IR photons, but = coherent), to boost a string of electrons in voltage in a step-wise = virtual series circuit. Roughly the same thing will happen in an = advanced TIC except that the gradient is much higher and the geometry is = much changed. Basically it is the SAME modality! IR photons are, = unfortunately, commonly mistaken as being of low energy vis-a-vis = microwaves, but this is far from true. What gives microwaves a "sense" = of much higher energy is merely the easy path to coherency. Once that is = achieved with IR we have a situation of the same kind of sensory = paradigm shift. The resulting gradient for IR absorption is computable: the coherent = boost (let's say 1/2 eV) times the number of boosting "stages", which I = will guess with a wavelength of about 2 nm will give potential gradient = of 250 MeV per meter. To get a 300 volt bump added onto every initial = electron, therefore, one would need very little accelerating gap, in = theory. But of course the process is far from theoretically optimum = because the self-generated magnetic field is not precisely orthogonal = crossed for one thing. And efficient photon absorption demands this. = However, a 1-2 cm gap should suffice to give acceptable absorption. BTW in my previous posting, I was suggesting more than a 10% net grid = losses. This is because of the assumed high requirement for "recycled" = emf and the higher resistance at higher temps -should the design = continue with no conductive heat removal. On further thought, however, = some level of forced heat removal is probably needed at the tube ends = and the final multipactor collector. More later, Jones ------=_NextPart_000_008B_01C4AEB2.BBBDB400 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thermionic conversion (TIC) of heat directly into = electricity,=20 efficiently and without any intermediary steps, is a bit more = complicated than=20 one might realize without going back forty years to the days of = vacuum=20 tubes, and trying to integrate some of that once well-know, but now = nearly=20 forgotten (in the semiconductor age) technology.
 
Since two vortexians have noted, in private email, that my concept = of=20 nuclear TIC appears to go way beyond normal parameters (to put it = gently), I=20 would like to clarify. This concept is actually based more on Farnsworth = and his=20 multipactor tetrode than on any modern day equivalent. Lets call the = underlying=20 modality of nuclear TIC as envisioned in the Gaia reactor, "Farnsworth=20 electrodynamics plus top-down IR coherency."
 
One objection to the Gaia conversion scheme presented yesterday = could be=20 phrased, "A temperature of 2000 K equates to a thermal energy of=20 the
electrons of only about 1/4 eV, so where do you get the 300 volts = output
from. If you use an external field to accelerate the electrons = to=20 produce a higher voltage, then all the work is being done by the = external field,=20 not by the thermal energy of the electrons."

I should have made = this very=20 basic underlying concept clearer, but that posting was already getting = too long.=20 In this hypothetical design, most of the actual "work" of raising the=20 voltage of thermionic electrons - about 90% of the work = actually, is=20 being done by IR photons in a near coherency spectrum as = emitted from the=20 uranium fuel pipe.
 
One needs to appreciate the importance of the very first step = - the=20 ballistic step, which is where the external field (an accelerating grid) = is=20 needed. From then on, as soon as a flux of ballistic electrons has = been=20 freed from the emitter interface, the dense "cloud" of emitted = electrons is=20 like a series circuit with a photon "boost" possible at every wavelength = multiple, but this requires near coherency and benefits form gamma = radiation to=20 break up any surface charge barriers before they can=20 accumulate. 
 
Actually the 2000 K suggested for the emitter is a compromise = temperature,=20 and will not "push" many electrons off ballistically, anyway. That = temperature=20 is too low to work for TIC in a normal diode situation but anything = higher=20 affect the neutron cross-section of the U-fuel pipe. Unless one can = force a=20 dense cloud of electrons off an emitter and create a corresponding = crossed=20 magnetic field due to the high amperage, efficient TIC is impossible. = And that=20 very first step, the ballistic step is what the applied voltage = facilitates. To=20 end up with a busbar output of 300 v. off of a multipactor, that=20 accelerating grid would need to be around 2000 volts of positive = potential wrt=20 the fuel pipe (at ground), depending on geometry.

This gets = more=20 into the old radio tube theory than modern thermionics. For instance, I = have=20 never even heard the triode (tetrode) scheme mentioned in regard to TIC = for=20 energy production. Perhaps that is because it will NOT work
with = combustion=20 heat sources at all, for a number of reasons (the main one being zero=20 possibility of creating a near-coherent IR spectrum).

Which brings up the importance of the emitter surface. It must = have=20 work function properties which mesh with other parameters. But the first = thing -=20 the most critical thing by far which one needs for efficient TIC is a = starting=20 flux of ballistic electrons to "open the gate" or to "prime the pump". = Once a=20 virtual series circuit connection has been established, everything else = follows.=20 But a fractional eV isn't going to give you enough ballistic = electrons to=20 start the process. Actually the mass/energy of the coherent IR photon in = question is more like 1/2-1 eV, and a wavelength of about a micron, = but=20 they are not fully absorbed by the bulk of electrons before they reach = the=20 multipactor, so the ending electron may have only 1/4 eV of added = kinetic=20 mass/energy. I hope that is not too confusing.

Once = the "pump" (e-=20 flux) has been primed, however, and a virtual series circuit=20 established by a flux of ballistic electrons being drawn off = (initially by=20 using a parasitic grid), most of the incremental boosting (voltage=20 gain) can then driven by near-coherent photon emission from = the heated=20 fuel pipe, and not requiring further emf from the accelerating grid (one = would=20 try to keep grid losses in the range of 10%, therefore 90% of the = voltage gain=20 applied to ballistic electrons is by photon absorption and 10% by = the grid.=20 Consequently, it can be envisaged that most of the voltage gain and most = of the=20 "work" is supplied by a continuous barrage of IR photons being absorbed = by the=20 dense cloud of electrons.
 
If your external accelerating grid is capable of enough emf for = starting a=20 flux across a fairly spacious gap, in order to merely get that 10% = percent=20 of electrons moving off the first angstrom of the emitter/gap interface, = then a=20 much larger percentage come along for free. In the "wake," so to speak. = That is=20 why it is called "priming the pump," a phrase that Philo himself used. = The next=20 step is a multipactor arrangement which is actually two solid tubes = surrounding=20 the fuel pipe, electrically insulated from each other and from the = inner=20 accelerating grid (which is an open grid, with perhaps 5% surface=20 coverage).

This is Philo Farnsworth's milieu! Too bad the = internet was=20 not around then, or else we have greater benefit of his insight. His = sketches=20 are worth way more than a thousand words.

This IR absorption = process=20 would not work at low amperage. One needs the self-generated magnetic=20 crossed-field for efficient IR photon absorption. The advantage here is = that=20 since, with nuclear heating, nearly all of the IR photons are starting = out in a=20 much higher spectrum (actually starting from two 50 MeV fission = fragments), then=20 one can approach and design a nearly *coherent* IR emission spectrum at = the low=20 end with the proper surface coating (probably zirconia). Massive = amperage must=20 be accommodated for the self-field. There are perhaps five or six = interlocking=20 parameters that must be engineered to mesh seamlessly.
 
This is not possible with combustion, where the IR spectrum = is  spread=20 out from the very outset in such a wide (and low) range that no = coherency is=20 possible. The situation is FAR different with nuclear heating in regard = to=20 engineering IR coherency. BTW, some of the gamma photons will be = resonant for=20 accelerating electrons as well, and for breaking up any tendency for a = strong=20 shielding electron near-field to develop - so that the reactors strong = gamma=20 radiation enters into the picture in a synergetic way.

This = advanced=20 TIC process can be verbalized to be closely analogous to the situation = in a=20 linear electron accelerator. In fact, the = following description may=20 be a most intuitive analogy for those who are not yet=20 convinced ....

In a old style klystron linear electron = accelerator,=20 one uses microwaves (which are of mass/energy orders of magnitude less = that IR=20 photons, but coherent), to boost a string of electrons in voltage in a = step-wise=20 virtual series circuit. Roughly the same thing will happen in an = advanced TIC=20 except that the gradient is much higher and the geometry is much = changed.=20 Basically it is the SAME modality! IR photons are, unfortunately, = commonly=20 mistaken as being of low energy vis-a-vis microwaves, but this is far = from true.=20 What gives microwaves a "sense" of much higher energy is merely the easy = path to=20 coherency. Once that is achieved with IR we have a situation of the same = kind of=20 sensory paradigm shift.

The resulting gradient for IR = absorption is=20 computable: the coherent boost (let's say 1/2 eV) times the number of = boosting=20 "stages", which I will guess with a wavelength of about 2 nm will give = potential=20 gradient of 250 MeV per meter. To get a 300 volt bump added onto every = initial=20 electron, therefore, one would need very little accelerating gap, in=20 theory.  But of course the process is far from theoretically = optimum=20 because the self-generated magnetic field is not precisely orthogonal = crossed=20 for one thing. And efficient photon absorption demands this. = However,  a=20 1-2 cm gap should suffice to give acceptable absorption.

BTW in = my=20 previous posting, I was suggesting more than a 10% net grid losses. This = is=20 because of the assumed high requirement for "recycled" emf and the = higher=20 resistance at higher temps -should the design continue with no = conductive heat removal. On further thought, however, some level of = forced heat=20 removal is probably needed at the tube ends and the final multipactor=20 collector.
 
More later,

Jones



------=_NextPart_000_008B_01C4AEB2.BBBDB400-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 15:41:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9AMfeqe026037; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:41:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9AMfcva026029; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:41:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:41:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Standing Bear To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, Nick Reiter Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:42:50 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <20041007161757.14427.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041007161757.14427.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410101842.50896.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56044 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thursday 07 October 2004 12:17, Nick Reiter wrote: > Gentlemen, > > Back in 2000, I attended a little informal meeting at > University of Arizona in Tucson at the Astronomy > Department on alternative models of gravity. One of > the people I met at that time was the department > contrarian astronomer, Dr. Bill Tifft. Tifft's > speciality was the observation of quantized red shift > anomalies in spiral galaxies. His tentative > hypothesis suggested that at intergalactic sizes, > general relativity may break down, and that space and > time assume properties similar to everyday life in the > quantum realm. > > Now this was meaty stuff, and Tifft was as you might > imagine a fan and intellectual sparring partner of > Halton Arp. However what I found even more > fascinating was Tifft's theory of 3D time. > Fascinating even given that I understood only .0001% > of what he was suggesting! Best I could translate > into Nickspeak, the time domain has a three > dimensional existence, but because we are in the space > domain, we can perceive it only (at best) as an > abstract 4th dimension. However in Tifft's cosmology, > there could be matter, planets, people, existing in > the time domain, and for them, space would be an > annoying poetic relativistic abstraction. The > interface is at photons - or something like that. > > A web search for Tifft's work shows up very little, > though a couple of years ago he had started a website > for the discussion of 3D time models. No idea what > happened to it, or him. Maybe some vortexian with > greater seeking skills than I can follow up. I have > e-mailed Tifft on a couple of occasions over the past > 4 years, to no avail. > > Despite my lack of understanding, it seemed elegant > and had a truthful character to it as theories go. > Still an empiricist, but when I do walk the other side > of the street, I am a sucker for theories that are > elegantly symmetrical. Old fashioned that way. > > NR > > --- Mike Carrell wrote: > > Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, > > > nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American > > > > public TV > > > > > called "Connections" which is enlightening to > > > > merge with > > > > > some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of > > > > Bill > > > > > Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" > > > > master-mind, > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com My thoughts on this are along similar lines in that a question arises: Why can't time have dimensions as well as space? If spacetime is presumed to be 11 dimensional according to some quantum mechanicists, why would not some of these be dimensions of time as well as space or some other realm of dimension heretofor totally outside of our experience. The space outside of space, an interuniversal space if one will. In this vein, Einstein causality could be circumvented by time travelers, as one actually COULD sterilize one's cat's grandfather and still retain his own cat. The affected timeline would be different from ones own. Bear in mind that events in the skew line timelines could be also infinitely different as well as infinitely numerous. Similarly, if space can inflate on a cosmic scale as in present theories deemed politically correct, why can't space also be malleable locally under similar forces generated locally; and if space can expand, then so also can it contract under similar forces. Maybe even a rebound effect where contracted space in front of a force generator will rebound to original size behind it? And maybe some of this rebound would be like a secondary recovery scheme in a carnot cycle such that actual energy consumed in the process would be more efficiently used. I am afraid that I cannot offer any calculations on this or practical methods of achieving these, but it seems that many things are possible. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 15:54:01 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9AMrv60026960; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:53:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9AMrojW026940; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:53:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:53:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Standing Bear To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Academic web sites held for ransom (but who cares?) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:55:00 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181358.025ab918@mail.lenr-canr.org> In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041007181358.025ab918@mail.lenr-canr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410101855.00397.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56045 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thursday 07 October 2004 18:14, Jed Rothwell wrote: > It appears that someone is going around buying up old, defunct academic > conference web sites and holding them for ransom, by advertising > pornographic products on them. See, for example: > > ICCF10 conference > > http://www.iccf10.org/ > > Robotics 2000 and Space 2000 conference. Albuquerque, NM, USA, February 28 > - March 2, 2000 > > http://www.spaceandrobotics.org/ > > This scheme will not work because no one cares about an academic conference > after it is over. > > - Jed took a look at the two in your letter Jed. One of them, the space and robots one, is just plain sillyness, a rip off on the word 'porn'. It contains no more porn than the easter bunny, but the idea of speculating in old unwanted sites is still noted. The iccf10 site is of a more sinister nature however, but the intent on that site seems to be drug pushing instead of porn. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 16:56:12 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ANu860010558; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:56:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ANu7Td010544; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:56:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:56:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041011005552.006a0614@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:55:52 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56046 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:42 pm 10-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >On Thursday 07 October 2004 12:17, Nick Reiter wrote: >> Gentlemen, >> >> Back in 2000, I attended a little informal meeting at >> University of Arizona in Tucson at the Astronomy >> Department on alternative models of gravity. One of >> the people I met at that time was the department >> contrarian astronomer, Dr. Bill Tifft. Tifft's >> speciality was the observation of quantized red shift >> anomalies in spiral galaxies. His tentative >> hypothesis suggested that at intergalactic sizes, >> general relativity may break down, and that space and >> time assume properties similar to everyday life in the >> quantum realm. >> >> Now this was meaty stuff, and Tifft was as you might >> imagine a fan and intellectual sparring partner of >> Halton Arp. However what I found even more >> fascinating was Tifft's theory of 3D time. >> Fascinating even given that I understood only .0001% >> of what he was suggesting! Best I could translate >> into Nickspeak, the time domain has a three >> dimensional existence, but because we are in the space >> domain, we can perceive it only (at best) as an >> abstract 4th dimension. However in Tifft's cosmology, >> there could be matter, planets, people, existing in >> the time domain, and for them, space would be an >> annoying poetic relativistic abstraction. The >> interface is at photons - or something like that. >> >> A web search for Tifft's work shows up very little, >> though a couple of years ago he had started a website >> for the discussion of 3D time models. No idea what >> happened to it, or him. Maybe some vortexian with >> greater seeking skills than I can follow up. I have >> e-mailed Tifft on a couple of occasions over the past >> 4 years, to no avail. >> >> Despite my lack of understanding, it seemed elegant >> and had a truthful character to it as theories go. >> Still an empiricist, but when I do walk the other side >> of the street, I am a sucker for theories that are >> elegantly symmetrical. Old fashioned that way. >> >> NR >> >> --- Mike Carrell wrote: >> > Jones wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, >> > > nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American >> > >> > public TV >> > >> > > called "Connections" which is enlightening to >> > >> > merge with >> > >> > > some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of >> > >> > Bill >> > >> > > Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" >> > >> > master-mind, >> >> _______________________________ >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! >> http://vote.yahoo.com >My thoughts on this are along similar lines in that a question >arises: Why can't time have dimensions as well as space? Of course it can - if, that is, we are prepared to drag ourselves up out of the grooves that an uncritical education has ground into our brains. See;- Journal of Theoretics Vol.5-3 Guest Commentary The Nature of Time To quote the last para: ======================================================== "If we return to more primitive methods of measuring time and length we will appreciate that the notion that time and space are simple entities or simple concepts is illusory. They are as complex as the world they describe. Likewise the notion that time and space are one and three-dimensional respectively is also illusory. The dimensionality of any concept or physical entity is merely a reflection of the hierarchical level from which we are viewing it. Space has as many or as few dimensions as we wish to give it, and so has time." ======================================================== Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 17:14:44 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9B0EY60014430; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:14:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9B0EX2d014409; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:14:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:14:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: missy9871@spamarrest.com Message-Id: X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:14:22 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: "JNPCo." Subject: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 10/7/04-10/9/04 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1114668831==_ma============" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56047 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1114668831==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 10/7/04 Energizer Battery Corp. sent me an email stating: "WE DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT YOU USE OUR 6-VOLT ENERGIZER BATTERIES IN SERIES (600 VOLTS) TO RUN A 7,500-LB MOTOR ATTACHED TO A 10kW GENERATOR." Fact: Two of those batteries in series connected to one (1) car light will be DEAD IN 3 MINUTES! (The battery voltage drops from 12.7 volts to less than 8 volts) Fact: A 500-volt battery pack of Energizer 6-volt lantern batteries (connected in series) have - as of this day - been running my 7,500-lb Energy Machine and - despite chain and gear losses - been continuously running a 10kW generator for SEVEN HOURS! Fact: These batteries should have been DEAD IN LESS THAN ONE (1) MINUTE! [The amp capacity of batteries in series is equal to the amp capacity of one (1) battery.] Fact: A Fluke #79 hand-held meter placed across one 6-volt battery of the pack reads "OL - 5" volts REPEATEDLY. "OL" = OVERLOAD Fact: "OL" on the Fluke meter means MORE THAN ONE THOUSANDS VOLTS! Fact: THE BATTERIES ARE BEING RECHARGED WHILE THE ENERGY MACHINE OPERATES! Fact: The Energy Machine & 10kW generator will be operated each day for 2 hours and the results will be posted at this website. The videotape/DVD now available (see below) also confirms the above results. (signed) Joseph Westley Newman __________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 10/8/04 The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1200-lb rotor, with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator has now been continuously running for TEN HOURS! As previously stated: The manufacturer of the 6-volt dry cell lantern batteries used in conjunction with this system stated beforehand that under such conditions the batteries WOULD NOT WORK. Not only that the RPM of the 7500-lb Energy Machine from start time after 7 hours of running -- then INCREASED IN SPEED & TORQUE by 31% in 2 hours of additional running. Fact: It takes 60 lbs to rotate the 7500-lb Energy Machine's 1200 rotary shaft by hand at even 1 rpm. Fact: At higher rpms, it takes HUNDREDS OF LBS to rotate that rotary. Fact: According to the manufacturer, these batteries used in this system should have been DEAD LONG AGO --- prior to the first hour of running, MORE THAN NINE (9) HOURS AGO! Fact: The reason the batteries are not dead is because of the BACK-CHARGE of my 7500-lb Energy Machine which utilizes 6-volt dry cell batteries that ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE RECHARGEABLE. The latest videotape/DVD of the Energy Machine's performance confirms the above results. (signed) Joseph Westley Newman __________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 10/9/04 The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1650-lb rotor (including attached 450-lb flywheel) and with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator has now been continuously running for TWELVE HOURS! As previously stated: The manufacturer of the 6-volt dry cell lantern batteries used in conjunction with this system stated beforehand that under such conditions the batteries WOULD NOT WORK. To appreciate the torque or load on the 7500-lb Energy Machine Motor: There is a 6 to 1 gear & chain ratio from my Motor to the PTO generator and then a 6 to 1 gear ratio of the PTO gear box to the generator. That equals a ratio of: THIRTY-SIX TO ONE TURN OF THE MOTOR! I know from years of experience that one could conservatively predict that the Motor could have been pumping water at 100 gallons per minute or 6,000 gallons of water per hour. Or, in twelve hours, that would represent: SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND GALLONS OF WATER FOR DYING CHILDREN IN AFRICA & ELSEWHERE WHO LACK SUFFICIENT ACCESS TO FRESH WATER. PEOPLE OF THE WORLD: Where is your conscience? This Motor is RUNNING OFF ITS OWN POWER! The volt meter placed across a one, 6-volt dry cell battery shows the voltage changing continuously from 4.5 volts to 20 volts to MINUS voltage and over ONE THOUSAND VOLTS! If you love Humanity, call the President of my production company: Mr. Joseph Nolfe at 205-835-9022 to participate in the expansion and development of this technology. (signed) Joseph Westley Newman __________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 10/10/04 The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1650-lb rotor (with attached 450-lb flywheel) and with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator has now entered its FOURTEENTH HOUR of operation! As previously described by the principal chemist for Ray-O-Vac Battery Corporation, Mr. Pat Spellman: All batteries returned to Ray-O-Vac from my lab were consistently found to be OVERCHARGED - NOT DISCHARGED! When the latest batteries used for 14 hours were cut open in their 14th hour of running: "SURPRISE" - the same overcharging-effect discovered by Pat Spellman of Ray-O-Vac was also true for the 6 volt dry cell Energizer batteries, each of which actually consists of FOUR D-CELL BATTERIES IN SERIES. Therein, the 7,500-lb Energy Machine & above-described load ran off the current of ONE D-CELL FLASHLIGHT BATTERY INTO THE 14TH HOUR OF OPERATION! The facts filmed in the recently-produced video prove and echo the comments made by Ray-O-Vac chemist Pat Spellman when he stated on television: "THERE IS APPARENTLY MORE ENERGY BEING PRODUCED THAN THE BATTERIES ARE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING." The latest videotape/DVD of the 7,500-lb Energy Machine is now available. The recorded performance confirms the above results as the system powers an impressive bank of lights, TV, and appliance fan loads placed on the 10kW PTO conventional generator - as well as other impressive facts. Once again, if you care about the future of Humanity, contact the President of my production company: Mr. Joseph Nolfe at 205-835-9022 to participate in the expansion and development of this technology. Oil is now at $53.00/barrel. The Energy Machine is now a non-polluting, energy-abundant alternative! (signed) Joseph Westley Newman __________________________________________________ We have now produced a video of the above demonstration (c. 1.5 hours long in VHS, CD, or DVD format) which proves that this technology is now ready to power the world's energy needs. The video may be ordered for only $20 (including shipping/handling) from: JOSEPH NEWMAN PUBLISHING COMPANY Order/Processing Dept., Attn: Mr. Darryl Bonz 3725 South Division Street Grand Rapids, Michigan 49548 __________________________________________________ "The future of the human race may be dramatically uplifted by the large-scale, commercial development of this invention." --- Dr. Roger Hastings, Principal Physicist, UNISYS CORPORATION "If the manner in which Joseph Newman conducted his experiments and the results were made known to the industrial or engineering community then, in my opinion, several companies and/or individuals possess the expertise and capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the apparent capability of his new concepts." --- Dr. Robert E. Smith, Chief, Orbital and Space Environment Branch, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA "You have opened an area in Astrophysics which may revolutionize the magnetic energy problems which is now the most paramount problem in future energy and space travel. I do believe with proper research funds, the results would not only be a great financial boom to your financiers, but would lead to developments that will be practical and beneficial to all mankind and develop a new step in science." --- Dr. E. L. Moragne, MORAGNE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CO. [Dr. Moragne was an electromagnetic pioneer in the development of the first atomic bomb.] http://www.josephnewman.com --============_-1114668831==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 10/7/04-10/9/04
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
10/7/04

Energizer Battery Corp. sent me an email stating:
 "WE DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT YOU USE OUR 6-VOLT ENERGIZER BATTERIES IN SERIES (600 VOLTS)
TO RUN A 7,500-LB MOTOR ATTACHED TO A 10kW GENERATOR."

Fact:
Two of those batteries in series connected to one (1) car light will be DEAD IN 3 MINUTES!
(The battery voltage drops from 12.7 volts to less than 8 volts)

Fact:
A 500-volt battery pack of Energizer 6-volt lantern batteries (connected in series)
have - as of this day - been running my 7,500-lb Energy Machine
and - despite chain and gear losses - been
continuously running a 10kW generator for SEVEN HOURS!

Fact:
These batteries should have been DEAD IN LESS THAN ONE (1) MINUTE!
[The amp capacity of batteries in series is equal to the amp capacity of one (1) battery.]

Fact:
A Fluke #79 hand-held meter placed across
one 6-volt battery of the pack reads "OL - 5" volts REPEATEDLY.

"OL" = OVERLOAD

Fact:
"OL" on the Fluke meter means MORE THAN ONE THOUSANDS VOLTS!

Fact:
THE BATTERIES ARE BEING RECHARGED WHILE THE ENERGY MACHINE OPERATES!

Fact:
The Energy Machine & 10kW generator will be operated each day for 2 hours
and the results will be posted at this website.

The videotape/DVD now available (see below) also confirms the above results.

(signed)
Joseph Westley Newman


__________________________________________________


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
10/8/04

The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1200-lb rotor, with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator
has now been continuously running for
TEN HOURS!

As previously stated:
The manufacturer of the 6-volt dry cell lantern batteries used in conjunction with this system
stated beforehand that under such conditions the batteries
WOULD NOT WORK. 

Not only that the RPM of the 7500-lb Energy Machine from start time after 7 hours of running --
then INCREASED IN SPEED & TORQUE by 31% in 2 hours of additional running.

Fact:
It takes 60 lbs to rotate the 7500-lb Energy Machine's 1200 rotary shaft by hand at even 1 rpm.

Fact:
At higher rpms, it takes HUNDREDS OF LBS to rotate that rotary.

Fact:
According to the manufacturer, these batteries used in this system
should have been DEAD LONG AGO --- prior to the first hour of running,
MORE THAN NINE (9) HOURS AGO!

Fact:
The reason the batteries are not dead is because of the BACK-CHARGE
of my 7500-lb Energy Machine which utilizes 6-volt dry cell batteries that
ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE RECHARGEABLE.
 
The latest videotape/DVD of the Energy Machine's performance confirms the above results.

(signed)
Joseph Westley Newman


__________________________________________________


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
10/9/04

The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1650-lb rotor (including attached 450-lb flywheel) and
with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator
has now been continuously running for
TWELVE HOURS!

As previously stated:
The manufacturer of the 6-volt dry cell lantern batteries used in conjunction with this system
stated beforehand that under such conditions the batteries
WOULD NOT WORK. 

To appreciate the torque or load on the 7500-lb Energy Machine Motor:
There is a 6 to 1 gear & chain ratio from my Motor to the PTO generator and
then a 6 to 1 gear ratio of the PTO gear box to the generator. That equals a ratio of:
THIRTY-SIX TO ONE TURN OF THE MOTOR!

I know from years of experience that one could conservatively predict that the
Motor could have been pumping water at 100 gallons per minute or 6,000 gallons of water per hour.
Or, in twelve hours, that would represent:
SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND GALLONS OF WATER
FOR DYING CHILDREN IN AFRICA & ELSEWHERE WHO
LACK SUFFICIENT ACCESS TO FRESH WATER.

PEOPLE OF THE WORLD:
Where is your conscience?

This Motor is
RUNNING OFF ITS OWN POWER!

The volt meter placed across a one, 6-volt dry cell battery shows the voltage
changing continuously from 4.5 volts to 20 volts to MINUS voltage and over
ONE THOUSAND VOLTS!

If you love Humanity, call the President of my production company:
Mr. Joseph Nolfe at 205-835-9022
to participate in the expansion and development of this technology.

(signed)
Joseph Westley Newman


__________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
10/10/04

The 7500-lb Energy Machine, 1650-lb rotor (with attached 450-lb flywheel) and
with associated gear/pulley losses powering a 10kW generator has now entered its
FOURTEENTH HOUR
of operation!

As previously described by the principal chemist for Ray-O-Vac Battery Corporation, Mr. Pat Spellman:
All batteries returned to Ray-O-Vac from my lab were consistently found to be
OVERCHARGED - NOT DISCHARGED! 

When the latest batteries used for 14 hours were cut open in their 14th hour of running:
"SURPRISE" - the same overcharging-effect discovered by Pat Spellman of Ray-O-Vac was also true
for the 6 volt dry cell Energizer batteries, each of which actually consists of
FOUR D-CELL BATTERIES IN SERIES.


Therein, the 7,500-lb Energy Machine & above-described load ran off the current of
ONE D-CELL FLASHLIGHT BATTERY
INTO THE 14TH HOUR OF OPERATION!

The facts filmed in the recently-produced video prove and echo the comments made by
Ray-O-Vac chemist Pat Spellman when he stated on television:
"THERE IS APPARENTLY MORE ENERGY BEING PRODUCED
THAN THE BATTERIES ARE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING."

The latest videotape/DVD of the 7,500-lb Energy Machine is now available.
The recorded performance confirms the above results as the system
powers an impressive bank of lights, TV, and appliance fan loads placed on
the 10kW PTO conventional generator - as well as other impressive facts.

Once again, if you care about the future of Humanity,
contact the President of my production company:
Mr. Joseph Nolfe at 205-835-9022
to participate in the expansion and development of this technology.

Oil is now at $53.00/barrel.

The Energy Machine is now a non-polluting, energy-abundant alternative!

(signed)
Joseph Westley Newman

__________________________________________________


We have now produced a video of the above demonstration (c. 1.5 hours long in VHS, CD, or DVD format)
which proves that this technology is now ready to power the world's energy needs. 
The video may be ordered for only $20 (including shipping/handling) from:

JOSEPH NEWMAN PUBLISHING COMPANY
 Order/Processing Dept., Attn: Mr. Darryl Bonz
 3725 South Division Street
 Grand Rapids, Michigan 49548

__________________________________________________


"The future of the human race may be dramatically uplifted by the large-scale, commercial development of this invention."
--- Dr. Roger Hastings, Principal Physicist, UNISYS CORPORATION

 
"If the manner in which Joseph Newman conducted his experiments and the results were made known
to the industrial or engineering community then, in my opinion, several companies and/or individuals
possess the expertise and capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the apparent capability of his new concepts."
--- Dr. Robert E. Smith, Chief, Orbital and Space Environment Branch, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA

 
"You have opened an area in Astrophysics which may revolutionize the magnetic energy problems
which is now the most paramount problem in future energy and space travel.
I do believe with proper research funds, the results would not only be a great financial boom to your financiers,
but would lead to developments that will be practical and beneficial to all mankind and develop a new step in science."
--- Dr. E. L. Moragne, MORAGNE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CO.
[Dr. Moragne was an electromagnetic pioneer in the development of the first atomic bomb.]


http://www.josephnewman.com






 











 











 
--============_-1114668831==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 10 18:56:29 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9B1uEqe006027; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:56:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9B1uDf0006018; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:56:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:56:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <022d01c4af35$77de95a0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: RE: Time as a constant Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:55:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0229_01C4AF0B.76958CF0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56048 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C4AF0B.76958CF0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_022A_01C4AF0B.76958CF0" ------=_NextPart_001_022A_01C4AF0B.76958CF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankAh! Time. =20 Can dimensions be assigned to such an elusive illusion ? Consider a = house of mirrors with a porous screen hung center across the room. This = screen being like the old fashion movie house screen that you can see = through from the back side and actually watch the movie from the reverse = side of the porous screen=20 Next , project an image upon the screen using a rear screen projector. Now consider the image that bleeds through the porous screen and is = projected upon the mirrored wall behind the screen. This image will, in = turn, reflect through the porous screen to project upon the opposite = mirrored wall. Question? Will the image cascade into infinity. Would it be possible to = measure the speed of reflection as a measure of " real time" ? Paul , writing on the subject , used the analogy of a smokey window he = peered through. A true house of mirrors. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_022A_01C4AF0B.76958CF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Ah! Time.
 
Can dimensions be assigned to such an = elusive=20 illusion ?   Consider a house of mirrors with a porous screen = hung=20 center across the room. This screen being like the old fashion = movie=20 house  screen that you can see through from the back side = and actually=20 watch the movie from the reverse side of the porous screen
Next , project an image upon the = screen using a=20 rear screen projector.
Now consider the image that = bleeds through=20 the porous screen and is projected upon the mirrored = wall=20 behind the screen. This image will, in turn, reflect through the porous = screen=20 to project upon the opposite mirrored wall.
Question? Will the image cascade into = infinity.=20 Would it be possible to measure the speed of reflection as a measure of = " real=20 time" ?
Paul , writing on the subject , used = the analogy=20 of a smokey window he peered through.
 
A true house of mirrors.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_022A_01C4AF0B.76958CF0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C4AF0B.76958CF0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <022801c4af35$5f5f5ff0$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0229_01C4AF0B.76958CF0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 03:33:18 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BAXB60030827; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 03:33:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BAWscn030758; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 03:32:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 03:32:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 02:38:09 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: <4VyUiD.A.hgH.VFmaBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56049 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method 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. Further, the method requires the use of Bell's inequality as he applied it to observations in 3 axes of spin, but modified here in application to examine polarization in three independent photon channels instead. The method consists of the following: A. Three communication bundles are utilized by a sender (Alice) which she can use to can reliably send to a receiver (Bob) one photon through each bundle in each time slice. Alice thus sends a triad of photons in each time slice. If more than one photon is sent in a given bundle in a given time slice we can assume here that the additional photons are simply ignored. Each communication bundle consist of a local and communication channel which utilize the following steps: 1. An entangled photon generator creates two channels of unpolarized yet 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, once eventually determined, is always mutually 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 by Alice at about the time of but either slightly before or slightly after receipt of the paired communication channel photons by Bob at the destination. The local channel is assumed to be located entirely at the transmitting site, in close proximity to Alice. 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. Alice then must be located so as to be able to chose to receive local channel photons either before or after Bob receives the corresponding communication channel photons. 3. Photons in the local channel, after sufficient delay, are routed by Alice through one of two paths, the long path or the short path. This switching can be achieved using a fast electromechanical mirror or other means. In the short path the photons are routed through a horizontal filter H1 and then a vertical filter V1 at a time *before* the corresponding entangled photon is received by Bob. In the long path the photons are routed through a horizontal filter H2 and then a vertical filter V2 at a time *after* the corresponding entangled photon is received by Bob. 4. Photons in the communication channel are passed through a vertical polarized filter V3 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. B. The use of three communication bundles by Alice to send a triad of photons in each time slice is analogous to Alain Apsect's famous experiment using the three axes of spin. Each time slice plus a horizontal or vertical polarization detection is equivalent to a spin orientation detection in one of three axes of spin. There are various ways to achieve this analogous three channel triad approach so as to invoke Bell's inequality. The important concept is that three independent photons are sent (roughly) simultaneously, as a triad, through the three bundles available to Alice in each time slice. 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. Half the photons are absorbed by H1 and thus measured as horizontal, and the remaining half are absorbed by V1 and thus measured as vertical. In a given bundle, Bob should detect 50/50 polarization on his end when Alice is directing the local photons through the short path. In the long 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, but the direction is actually set by Bob measuring on his end. In effect Bob is the sender when Alice directs her triads down the long path. Still, half the photons are absorbed by H2 and thus measured as horizontal, and the remaining half are absorbed by V2 and thus measured as vertical. In a given bundle, Bob should still detect 50/50 polarization on his end when Alice is directing the local photons through the long path. It would seem there is no means of communicating a message from Alice to Bob. However, using Bell's inequality, it is the main point here that it appears there is. Assume Alice always switches all the three bundles to either a long or short path simultaneously. If Alice switches to the long path, then Bob must receive exactly a 50/50 vertical and horizontal mix, no matter what bundle he samples. Similarly, suppose Bob chooses at random a bundle to measure the polarization of a photon from a time slice, and then chooses at random again, in the next time slice, any of the three bundles to measure the photon polarization. Bell shows that if there are no hidden variables, Bob will have a 50/50 chance of a polarization match, and thus there is no apparent way for a message to be sent. Bob experiences no hidden variables. However, suppose Alice has sent her three bundles, her triad of photons, down the short path. Alice then sets the polarization orientation of every pair, not Bob. Bob merely detects the results of Alice's operations. Alice has in effect, by beating Bob to the act of measurement, built in hidden variables. She has programmed the triad. Bob must then detect a match more than 50 percent of the time. In fact he should detect a match about 2/3 of the time. To detect a bit of information, Bob need only sample long enough, enough time slices, to determine whether he is sampling from a 1:1 distribution or a 1:2 distribution. Since the time slices can be orders of magnitude shorter in comparison to the transit time from Alice to Bob at the speed of light, faster than light speed (FTL) communication is possible with a high data reliability. Alice and Bob might agree to send 100 time slices per data bit, for example, and further use well known error correction schemes in order to achieve very reliable communications. An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending a data bit (actually only a change of state) via a one-way FTL communication bundle set and returning it via a second one-way return FTL communication bundle set, 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. If the proposed communication method works, special and general relativity presently may stand on shaky philosophical grounds. It is of special interest to relativists the conditions required to achieve the communication, namely that Alice must be able to receive local channel photons both before and after Bob receives the corresponding conjugates. Alice must be able to control the local channel delay, and this is not necessarily possible in a useful way if Alice and Bob are in relative motion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 07:18:24 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BEIDqe012584; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BEIBJV012540; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410111131718980@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: The CryoCar Revisited Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:17:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94056edabf36072402f22aa49a39d7db81c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.174 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56050 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII The use of liquid air as a "motor fuel" gets more attractive when one considers that a Carnot efficiency of 65% - 75% between minus 50 (410 R) and 120 deg F (580 R) and a mechanical efficiency of 50% (~ 15 watts/Lb) is competitive with state-of-the-art lead-acid storage batteries rated at 15 watts/pound. Liquid air properties: Boiling point 142 deg R Heat of vaporization 88 BTU/Lb Hybridization with LN2 superconductors and flywheel technology is also a possibility, Cheap summer air-conditioning as part of the power cycle is thrown in as a bonus. Compact "home air liquefaction" units could be used at costs comparable to battery recharge. I can't see how "transportation hydrogen" can beat it. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

The use of liquid air as a "motor fuel" gets more attractive when one
considers that a Carnot efficiency of 65% - 75% between minus 50 (410 R) and 120 deg F
(580 R) and a mechanical efficiency of 50%  (~ 15 watts/Lb) is competitive with
state-of-the-art lead-acid storage batteries rated at 15 watts/pound.
 
Liquid air properties:
 
Boiling point    142 deg R 
 
Heat of vaporization  88 BTU/Lb  
 
Hybridization with LN2 superconductors and flywheel technology is also a possibility,
 
Cheap summer air-conditioning as part of the power cycle is thrown in as a bonus.
 
Compact "home air liquefaction" units could be used at costs comparable to
battery recharge.
 
I can't see how "transportation hydrogen" can beat it.
 
Frederick
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 08:47:37 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BFlW60014365; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:47:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BFlUb2014349; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:47:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:47:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:52:51 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56051 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ooops! The post made sense to me at 2:30 in the morning, before going to bed. Now that I have awoken, I see it is nonsense! Not an uncommon experience for me these days. Sorry! The flaw is that, for Bell's inequality to be applied, Both Alice's and Bob's individual results from observation of one photon selected at random from each corresponding triad must be compared. This comparison takes place at less than light speed. When this is done, however, the suggested method does seem to provide a means to do an Aspect style experiment using polarization instead of spin. The odd thing is the importance of timing to the result, timing which relativity says can not always be provided because Alice and Bob's time is relative to the observer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 11:31:56 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BIVcqe028702; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:31:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BIVXdq028657; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:31:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:31:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:00:47 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56052 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace. Sorry I haven't picked up on this; the last time I tried to wrap my head around Bell's theorem I got a bit lost in the nomenclature. Maybe we can hash it out here in terms less obscure. My understanding of all of these FTL schemes using quantum teleportation is that some real physical event is happening to the remote paired particle when the local particle is detected. Yet, you are starting with the condition that the particles be paired. This was Bertelmanns critique; consider for example a pair of socks. We mix up the right and left socks, and mail them off to our two receivers. Bob opens his box, and sees he has a left sock. Instantly, Marys sock "becomes" a right sock, by virtue of the fact that according to QM we can't treat the sock as right or left until we measure it and thus it exists as a mixture of the two states. This I see as an artifact of our method of analysis; the using of statistics to study a discrete real event. I am lead to understand that Bells inequalities prove that no hidden variables exist, but I'm wondering if there is any physical basis for this? The sorts of experiments you are suggesting are really to the point, if there is something physical happening when we collapse the wave function then some sort of FTL scheme ought to be realizable. I'm skeptical of this only because I know from my meagre study of statistics that the first thing that gets thrown away in a statistical analysis is causality, a requirement for any communication scheme. Do you still think one of your ideas presented earlier on the list to be workable? K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 11:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Ooops! The post made sense to me at 2:30 in the morning, before going to bed. Now that I have awoken, I see it is nonsense! Not an uncommon experience for me these days. Sorry! The flaw is that, for Bell's inequality to be applied, Both Alice's and Bob's individual results from observation of one photon selected at random from each corresponding triad must be compared. This comparison takes place at less than light speed. When this is done, however, the suggested method does seem to provide a means to do an Aspect style experiment using polarization instead of spin. The odd thing is the importance of timing to the result, timing which relativity says can not always be provided because Alice and Bob's time is relative to the observer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 11:38:41 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BIcSqe031743; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:38:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BIcORd031704; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:38:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:38:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: "Vortex" Subject: Horace hired on as energy consultant to the Kerry Campaign. Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:07:38 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56053 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi All. Despite Horaces right wing leanings, he has a secret lefty side and has been consulting with the John Kerry Campaign over their energy policy. Consider point one. http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/pr_2004_1011b.pdf (1) Create an Energy Security Trust Fund. John Kerry and John Edwards will move us to a new energy future by creating an "Energy Security Conservation Trust Fund" that will leverage funds to develop new clean fuels and foster innovation. The Fund will provide incentives to automakers to develop and consumers to purchase more fuel-efficient cars. It will also enable us to increase our use of renewable fuels (including ethanol and biodiesel) and to develop clean and efficient hydrogen fuel. By 2020, we 20% of our fuel sources will be domestically-produced alternative fuels. The fund will be capitalized with over $20 billion from existing federal oil and gas royalty revenues. It looks like he didn't quite get his way with how the money is to be used, but he got the trust fund idea taken up. Congrats Horace! K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 14:30:50 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BLUl60008814; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:30:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BLUZEp008735; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:30:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:30:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:35:41 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: AN ENERGY LEGACY PLAN Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56054 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: AN ENERGY LEGACY PLAN January, 2003 Horace Heffner THE PROBLEM This plan is an attempt to change the legacy we have left for future generations. This plan is about energy, about finding a practical and comparatively painless means to meet growing energy needs with renewable resources. It is an attempt to make at least some aspect of this generation's energy legacy positive. In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction vs energy subsidies, energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration, production, and use. The debate and problems have been so broad as to demand continuous media, political and academic attention. These and the many associated issues are too broad and controversial for discussion here. It is, however, a simple mathematical fact that to sustain 5 percent or more annual growth in oil consumption that, even if a 10,000 year supply, at our present rate of consumption, is found, we will consume it in the lifetimes of the next few generations due to the rate of consumption growth. It follows rigorously that we can not satisfy our exponential economic and energy consumption growth with a supply side nonrenewable energy attack. This was aptly shown by Professor Evar D. Nering in a June 4, 2001 New York Times Op-Ed article. (See ) It is also reasonable that a means to obtain large affordable amounts of renewable energy should be helpful to society in all energy related problem areas. However, a means to achieve renewable energy development at a sufficient rate has been somewhat elusive. It is the intent here to help solve that problem, and to eventually fund energy conservation measures that ultimately will be necessary to sustain our civilization. This is the intended legacy, a permanently self-funded trust for renewable energy development and conservation. A SIMPLE PLAN A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues addressed, is very simple indeed. The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems. 1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability to administer this plan. It should be a stand-alone agency, but, if that is not politically feasible, it should be at minimum independent of NSF, NASA, DOE, NREL and the national laboratories, as these agencies could be potential bidders and significant benefactors of the plan. Eventually support this Renewable Energy Agency using only a perpetual Renewable Energy Permanent Fund plus agency revenues. A small seed funding need be provided until sufficient energy taxes can be raised to obtain the desired operations budget. It is the goal of the agency to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create renewable energy production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient revenue stream to fund energy conservation measures. The agency should be operated with as much independence from direct management involvement of the administrative and legislative branches of government as possible. When financially independent, and maybe sooner, the agency should become a private non-profit corporation, a trust, with special legislated benefits and duties. One goal of the proposed agency or trust is to achieve financial independence within 20 years. Perhaps making the agency a private trust can be done immediately, but there may be advantages to the USA in having the entity be a government agency, due to the likely involvement of international relations and international deals. Foreign bidding and investment could simply be excluded, though this is less than optimum from a world view, and may even violate existing treaties. Still, in that the plan is based on profit, competition, and privatization, it logically could be implemented by a private trust. Such a trust might be useful in preventing the temptation of future legislators to raid the fund balance. Some creative legislating would clearly benefit this plan. 2) Tax non-renewable energy like oil, gas and coal, enough to generate at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a dollar per person per month. Rebate commercial transportation energy use in order to avoid a significant burden in that sector of the economy. The total net income from this tax is called here the annual tax income. 3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using about 0.5 percent, 1/10 of the 5 percent, to support research in non-conventional, controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE) research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc. The non-conventional research program is intended to be modeled after NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program. However, it is reasonable to commit up to half of the 0.5 percent to infrastructure development for amateurs, small collaborations, and small businesses working in related areas. Such infrastructure might include lending libraries, instruction, consultation, laboratory or shop facilities located about the country, and/or for am energy device test or concept verification center. Any research funds not dispersed by the end of a physical year are deposited into the permanent fund. Proposal cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with special projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining non awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research funding. On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5 percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget. 4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product. Proposal cycles for this could be similar to research awards, but probably less often due to the expected lower number of grants due to the fact bidders in this category would likely have had successful research awards. 5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 75 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that will produce energy that can be sold at a profit. Awards to be based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers when there is cause. A critical requirement is sufficient profitability to meet the goals of the plan, including sustained self-sufficiency. In years of operation subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to 40 percent of annual revenues (operating income) from their project for operation and maintenance, including land, insurance, property taxes, etc., and may apply any balance remaining from that 40 percent to expansion of their proposed facilities on a cost plus basis. There might be considerably different proposals made and accepted, but this is the basis of the numbers used in this plan. It may be questionable as to the feasibility of the suggested numbers. However, a hopeful project energy source is wind energy, the cost of which has dropped 90 percent in the last 20 years. Wind projects currently are designed to last 10 to 30 years. The suggested numbers appear to be feasible even presently for wind projects of 50 MW or better. In any case, annual adjustments to plan percentages are part of the plan itself, and may require tailoring depending on the energy source. The balance of energy sales income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales income, is treated as annual income to the agency. At the end of the year any non-awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund described below. The requests for proposals should be in large, medium and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each category, with roughly equal funding to each category. In the event of no or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent fund. 6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses. This fund is managed separately from all others. 7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund. The "total prior year's income" used throughout the plan is the prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions. If the emergency fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund. Oversight of the fund management should be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of trusts. The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund management should be awarded to a single bidder. The permanent fund goal is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions. This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by suggested financial leverage mechanisms which are part of this plan. Any contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, tax deductible, but preferably encouraged by further incentives. Investment leverage should be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds. One income producing element should be green loans for financing of energy efficient housing construction or business building construction, or for home or business energy efficiency improvements. Achieving the combined housing and business finance goals might be achieved via a single subordinate housing entity similar to existing home finance entities, with such an entity having bond holders and equity holders, in addition to the permanent fund equity itself, each earning their corresponding returns on investments. If a Cap and Trade System for greenhouse gas credit trading is implemented in the US, then income from greenhouse gas credits earned from plan projects should be treated as fund income. 8) Annually adjust the plan percentages and other agency operating parameters as required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation, regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the agency. 9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if it is desirable to the agency and the facility in question is is abandoned, place project facilities into the private domain. This is called here "project disposal". Project disposal is by sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage of 10 to 20 percent specified in the proposal. If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction, but with the proposer retaining his incentive percentage as a bidding advantage. Net proceeds are deposited into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund. Abandoned property may be operated by the agency or the agency may choose to put the operation out to bid using the bid parameters of its choosing. If a project can not achieve the proposed revenue for the 10 year operating period, including disposal income, then the operating period may be extended at the choice of the agency, until the proposed total return can be achieved. It is a goal of the plan that the agency can become self funding within 20 years. It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for energy systems design and construction can garner serious attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors in this limited arena. At some distant point the fund may have an extreme excess of earnings after inflation proofing, and at that point it is reasonable to consider applying some or all of those excess funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs. A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored. Here excise taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated. The fund runs on its own revenue after that. Average payback time for the projects to achieve this is about 13 years. This is very reasonable if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year period, or the cost of renewable energy production continues to drop as it has for wind power. At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights revenue, and possible creation of lynch pin technologies. Also excluded is any project revenue growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers, which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects. Below, project disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is initiated. However, in practice the period might be varied significantly, possibly at the request of proposers, or at the agency's discretion. The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered from the property disposal. That 50 percent recovery amount is placed into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance. Total Fund Maint. & Taxes Sales Int. Income Bal. Disposal Year (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) End Yr. (M$) 1 3,000 0 0 3,000 3,000 0 2 3,000 0 150 3,150 4,500 150 3 3,000 55 225 3,280 6,048 158 4 3,000 114 302 3,416 7,660 164 5 3,000 174 383 3,557 9,338 171 6 3,000 237 467 3,704 10,908 178 7 3,000 311 545 3,856 12,357 185 8 3,000 397 618 4,014 13,671 193 9 3,000 494 684 4,178 14,839 201 10 3,000 606 742 4,348 15,844 209 11 3,000 731 792 4,523 16,671 217 12 3,000 871 834 4,705 17,906 226 13 3,000 973 895 4,868 19,169 235 14 3,000 1,077 958 5,036 20,480 243 15 3,000 1,185 1,024 5,209 21,840 252 16 3,000 1,296 1,092 5,388 23,340 260 17 3,000 1,403 1,167 5,570 24,987 269 18 3,000 1,504 1,249 5,753 26,788 278 19 3,000 1,599 1,339 5,938 28,752 288 20 3,000 1,687 1,438 6,124 30,890 297 21 0 1,767 1,545 3,312 30,211 306 22 0 1,839 1,511 3,349 32,276 166 23 0 1,797 1,614 3,410 34,437 167 24 0 1,750 1,722 3,472 36,664 171 25 0 1,699 1,833 3,533 38,961 174 26 0 1,645 1,948 3,593 41,328 177 27 0 1,587 2,066 3,654 43,769 180 28 0 1,525 2,188 3,713 46,283 183 29 0 1,459 2,314 3,773 48,871 186 30 0 1,388 2,444 3,832 51,534 189 31 0 1,313 2,577 3,890 54,272 192 32 0 1,234 2,714 3,947 55,960 194 33 0 1,254 2,798 4,052 57,715 197 34 0 1,274 2,886 4,160 59,508 203 35 0 1,297 2,975 4,272 61,337 208 36 0 1,320 3,067 4,387 63,205 214 37 0 1,346 3,160 4,506 65,110 219 38 0 1,374 3,255 4,629 67,053 225 39 0 1,403 3,353 4,756 69,035 231 40 0 1,435 3,452 4,886 71,056 238 Resrch Total and Project Not Project Project Pilot Awards Awarded Amount Dispos. (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) (M$) Year 0 0 3,000 0 0 1 300 1,200 1,050 1,200 0 2 315 1,260 1,103 2,460 0 3 328 1,312 1,148 3,772 0 4 342 1,366 1,196 5,139 0 5 356 1,601 1,067 6,739 0 6 370 1,852 926 8,591 0 7 386 2,121 771 10,712 0 8 401 2,409 602 13,121 0 9 418 2,716 418 15,837 0 10 435 3,043 217 18,880 0 11 452 3,392 0 21,072 600 12 470 3,529 0 23,341 630 13 487 3,651 0 25,680 656 14 504 3,777 0 28,090 683 15 521 3,907 0 30,396 800 16 539 4,041 0 32,586 926 17 557 4,177 0 34,642 1,061 18 575 4,315 0 36,548 1,204 19 594 4,454 0 38,286 1,358 20 612 4,593 0 39,836 1,522 21 331 2,484 0 38,928 1,696 22 335 2,512 0 37,911 1,764 23 341 2,558 0 36,818 1,825 24 347 2,604 0 35,645 1,888 25 353 2,649 0 34,387 1,953 26 359 2,695 0 33,041 2,021 27 365 2,740 0 31,603 2,089 28 371 2,785 0 30,074 2,157 29 377 2,830 0 28,449 2,227 30 383 2,874 0 26,730 2,297 31 389 2,917 0 27,163 1,242 32 395 2,960 0 27,612 1,256 33 405 3,039 0 28,093 1,279 34 416 3,120 0 28,609 1,302 35 427 3,204 0 29,164 1,325 36 439 3,290 0 29,759 1,347 37 451 3,380 0 30,399 1,370 38 463 3,472 0 31,086 1,393 39 476 3,567 0 31,823 1,415 40 Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon: Total Fund Balance 71,056 Total Research and Pilots 16,386 Total Current Projects 31,823 Total Sold Project Value 41,286 ========== Total benefit 160,551 Total tax cost 60,000 Cost/Benefit 0.37371 Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the energy generation is initially subsidized. Additional utility type regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general may be required to avoid abuses. It is intended, however, that the financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free. If agency profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged. If foreign bidders or projects are to be allowed, this perhaps should be via a separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benefits to the taxpayer will not be forthcoming. However, the plan might easily be adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached. The disruption to research and pilot funding at year 20 can be smoothed over using a separate long term fund for that purpose. This plan is not intended to interfere with other energy related policies and legislation, like the Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), state renewable energy funds, buy down programs, tax incentives, a Cap and Trade System for greenhouse gas credit trading, etc., but rather it is intended that all these things mutually dovetail and benefit each other. However, technological developments from programs like the Big Three U.S. automakers' FreedomCAR Program to develop hydrogen-based cars, or major fuel cell programs, could have a dramatic and positive effect on the success of any renewable energy program, though possibly not sooner than 10 years. The principle missing technology is hydrogen storage, which now has a potential to be provided using carbon nano-tube storage media. Though the planning horizon for hydrogen is long, it still may be useful to give special weight to projects which produce hydrogen, and to support hydrogen storage, generation, transportation, and fuel cell research. Similar consideration may be warranted for methods of methane production from atmospheric carbon using renewable sources. If wind energy costs continue to decline as in the past 20 years, hydrogen or methane producing wind farms should be cost beneficial within 10 years. This makes feasible many additional locations for major wind energy generation, like Alaska. With sufficient research and appropriate legislation, Alaska alone has the potential to provide the US energy growth needs for generations, though it may take a commitment similar to that of going to the moon to realize it. The principle objection to this legacy plan seems to be ideological, the notion that government can not do anything competently. The principle role of the agency as defined by this plan is generating requests for proposals and performing contract and fund management. This is a role at which government agencies have significant proven abilities. We went to the moon using many components supplied by the lowest qualified bidders. Those who say this kind of thing can not be done will ultimately have to confront the fact it can. This plan has a somewhat surprising resiliency to change. The final numbers change comparatively little with various significantly changing scenarios. However, it does benefit significantly if the price of energy soars. The corresponding negative damage due to a downturn in price is somewhat reduced due to the fact the RFP evaluation is based on profitability, and therefore money that might have gone into projects, during low energy cost times, goes directly into the permanent fund, thus positively affecting later years. US oil consumption in 2000 was about 7.2 billion barrels. If the entire 3 billion dollar a year tax were simply levied against oil, without any rebates to industry, the price of oil would increase less than 42 cents a barrel. We are, in December of 2002, paying a 5 to 10 dollar a barrel premium for some minor disruptions to supply. This could become much worse if an oil embargo should occur due to political conditions. Further, if the plan quantified 3 for 1 payback is achieved, even without the much additional but unquantified payback due to economic multipliers and intangibles, the tax should not be a burden on the taxpayer, but rather a carrier of the taxpayer's burden. The plan as proposed is very modest, and in fact far too timid for our significant needs. The numbers provided are considered a minimal implementation of the concept. Presently, instead of charging the environmental cost of non-renewable energy sources, we are subsidizing them at amounts that have exceeded 30 billion dollars a year. This plan might be funded in full, without excise taxes, by simply channeling 10 percent of existing energy subsidies to the proposed agency. Alternatively, funding could have occurred in full with a one time payment from the trillion dollar surplus which has now unfortunately disappeared. BENEFITS OF THE PLAN The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole and are not readily quantified in the plan. The permanent nature of the plan and its fund is designed to achieve independence from political cycles. This aspect of the plan is critical to its success and is a distinguishing benefit of the plan. The long term stability offered by this plan is intended to reduce the destabilizing effects of the continually changing national financial, regulatory, and market conditions which have so plagued the renewable energy industry. The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the nation gets all the tax money back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy cost, and eventually in the form of funding for energy production and conservation efforts produced without taxation. In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing, and increases general tax revenue. Ultimately, energy prices will be driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological breakthroughs achieved through the plan that will permanently free us from energy worries. This plan may not do as much as hoped to solve world energy problems unless a similar program is adopted on a large scale by other significant economies. However, if the USA becomes largely renewable energy driven, and the rest of the world does not, our energy exports should have a dramatically increased value, and this is good for the balance of trade. In addition to all the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon. If foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the project energy production is still achieved. Over 150 billion dollars in energy production facilities is produced in 40 years, at the nominal tax rate suggested, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very large, with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion dollars. The suggested taxation rate can not achieve all the benefits for which there is a defined need nation wide, but could be significantly scaled up if or when desired, with a corresponding increase in expected benefits, both quantified and unquantified. This plan thus provides the potential to leave a meaningful or even crucial legacy to future generations. This plan is public domain, without copyright. Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is encouraged by the author. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 15:27:23 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BMPu60021252; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:27:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BMPtEg021236; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:25:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:25:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:29:53 -0800 To: , "Vortex" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Horace hired on as energy consultant to the Kerry Campaign. Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56055 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:07 PM 10/11/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi All. > >Despite Horaces right wing leanings, he has a secret >lefty side and has been consulting with the John Kerry >Campaign over their energy policy. This is of course a big surprise to me! 8^) I forgot much of the legacy plan I proposed, and upon skimming over it just now I am somewhat surprised at all the time I took to write it and how much detail I bothered to put in it. The main goal of the Energy Legacy Plan I posted a couple years ago was actually to de-politicise energy development as much as possible. Kerry's trust fund idea does indeed seem on the surface to do that to some extent, but any trust plan would have a much better chance of (the required) long term survival with bi-partisan support. Also, I wouldn't call Kerry's plan a "plan" at his point, but rather a somewhat nebulous goal. I reposted the legacy plan, so it is now hopefully available to all in a fairly readable format at: >Consider point one. > >http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/pr_2004_1011b.pdf > >(1) Create an Energy Security Trust Fund. John Kerry and John Edwards >will move us to a new energy future by creating an "Energy Security >Conservation Trust Fund" that will leverage funds to develop new clean >fuels and foster innovation. The Fund will provide incentives to automakers >to develop and consumers to purchase more fuel-efficient cars. It will >also enable us to increase our use of renewable fuels (including ethanol >and biodiesel) and to develop clean and efficient hydrogen fuel. By 2020, >we 20% This is of course a really wimpy goal compared to what's possible. Spending money on incentives for consumers to buy cars, if that's what this includes, sounds like a boondoggle. If it means increased taxes on fuel provides consumer conservation incentives, then that makes some sense at least. I thought my plan for taxing 3 billion a year for 20 years was pretty wimpy too, compared to what is really needed. With oil at 40 dollars a barrel now, though, the plan would look a lot better now than what I forcast. >of our fuel sources will be domestically-produced alternative fuels. >The fund will be capitalized with over $20 billion from existing federal oil >and gas royalty revenues. > >It looks like he didn't quite get his way with how the money >is to be used, but he got the trust fund idea taken up. Congrats Horace! > >K. Thanks, but I doubt congrats are deserved. It is so darn unfortunate that we have already squandered over 20 years since oil was at $60 a barrel (in today's dollars), and that the american public is now driving SUVs and vans like there is no tomorrow. Most people are probably unaware that $40 a barrel is (was) actually cheap, deceptively cheap, compared to what may be coming if well planned concerted long term action is not taken. We don't need a few measly incentives, we need a wake-up call. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 16:28:01 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BNRkqe006422; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:27:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BNRfMq006387; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:27:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:27:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <416B16C3.1050409@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:26:59 -0400 From: Terry Blanton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> In-Reply-To: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020709060501060302050100" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56056 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020709060501060302050100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit RC Macaulay wrote: > Could we consider time as the only constant, provided that single > constant changes with everything physical? http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-17.html How to build the Universe Philip Ball Including cause-and-effect in equations produces 4-dimensional space-time. Is causality an inherent and necessary characteristic of the Universe, or just an illusion produced by the way our brains interpret the world? It's real, say physicists, who believe they have worked out how the Universe is constructed from the tiniest building-blocks of space-time. The finding could also help the development of a theory of quantum gravity, which would marry the two currently estranged physical theories of the Universe: quantum theory and relativity. Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - about 10-35 metres (about 1020 times smaller than the radius of a proton). It predicts that on this scale the apparently smooth fabric of space and time must degenerate into a kind of 'foam' in which connections between different points are constantly appearing and vanishing. Physicists have long been trying to figure out how the fuzzy nature of space-time at this tiny scale can give rise to the large four-dimensional Universe we see around us, as described by Einstein's theory of relativity. Scientists studying the problem assume that each tiny piece of the foam is a kind of four-dimensional triangle, with three dimensions of space and one corresponding to time. The smooth fabric of space-time can be built up by gluing these triangular tiles together, just as a smoothly curved surface can be made from flat, two-dimensional tiles. Because the quantum foam fluctuates through all kinds of configurations, constructing the physical Universe means adding up all the possible tiling patterns. You might think that this would inevitably generate a four-dimensional Universe - but it doesn't. Earlier researchers found that they got a space-time with either an infinite number of dimensions or just two. Neither of these looks at all like our Universe. Construction work Renate Loll of Utrecht University in the Netherlands and her co-workers have now found a way to assemble the pieces so that they inevitably produce a four-dimensional Universe. Instead of assuming that all tilings are allowed, they impose two constraints. First, the theory of relativity must apply within each individual tile (so that nothing can travel through it faster than light) and second, the assembly must preserve causality. This means that a piece of space-time cannot be constructed in such a way that an 'event' - some change in the Universe - precedes its cause. When they enforced these criteria on their calculations, the researchers ended up with universes with three spatial dimensions and one time dimension - just like our own1. It was "like magic", says Loll. Even more startling, they found that typical universes generated this way started off small and got bigger - they expanded, just like the real Universe has done since the big bang. This was completely unexpected - there was nothing in the tiling rules that seemed to demand it. "We're completely stunned," says Loll. She admits that there's no a priori reason to demand that quantum space-time has to observe causality: the researchers put it into their equations by hand. But that, it seems, is the only way to end up with a realistic Universe. --------------020709060501060302050100 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit RC Macaulay wrote:
Blank
Could we consider time as the only constant, provided that single constant changes with everything physical?

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-17.html

How to build the Universe
Philip Ball
Including cause-and-effect in equations produces 4-dimensional space-time.
 
Is causality an inherent and necessary characteristic of the Universe, or just an illusion produced by the way our brains interpret the world?
 
It's real, say physicists, who believe they have worked out how the Universe is constructed from the tiniest building-blocks of space-time. The finding could also help the development of a theory of quantum gravity, which would marry the two currently estranged physical theories of the Universe: quantum theory and relativity.
 
Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - about 10-35 metres (about 1020 times smaller than the radius of a proton). It predicts that on this scale the apparently smooth fabric of space and time must degenerate into a kind of 'foam' in which connections between different points are constantly appearing and vanishing.
 
Physicists have long been trying to figure out how the fuzzy nature of space-time at this tiny scale can give rise to the large four-dimensional Universe we see around us, as described by Einstein's theory of relativity.
 
Scientists studying the problem assume that each tiny piece of the foam is a kind of four-dimensional triangle, with three dimensions of space and one corresponding to time. The smooth fabric of space-time can be built up by gluing these triangular tiles together, just as a smoothly curved surface can be made from flat, two-dimensional tiles.
 
Because the quantum foam fluctuates through all kinds of configurations, constructing the physical Universe means adding up all the possible tiling patterns. You might think that this would inevitably generate a four-dimensional Universe - but it doesn't. Earlier researchers found that they got a space-time with either an infinite number of dimensions or just two. Neither of these looks at all like our Universe.
 
Construction work
 
Renate Loll of Utrecht University in the Netherlands and her co-workers have now found a way to assemble the pieces so that they inevitably produce a four-dimensional Universe. Instead of assuming that all tilings are allowed, they impose two constraints.
 
First, the theory of relativity must apply within each individual tile (so that nothing can travel through it faster than light) and second, the assembly must preserve causality. This means that a piece of space-time cannot be constructed in such a way that an 'event' - some change in the Universe - precedes its cause.
 
When they enforced these criteria on their calculations, the researchers ended up with universes with three spatial dimensions and one time dimension - just like our own1. It was "like magic", says Loll.
 
Even more startling, they found that typical universes generated this way started off small and got bigger - they expanded, just like the real Universe has done since the big bang. This was completely unexpected - there was nothing in the tiling rules that seemed to demand it. "We're completely stunned," says Loll.
 
She admits that there's no a priori reason to demand that quantum space-time has to observe causality: the researchers put it into their equations by hand. But that, it seems, is the only way to end up with a realistic Universe.

--------------020709060501060302050100-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 16:36:36 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BNaU60003352; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:36:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BNaRZd003310; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:36:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:36:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <416B18F9.1050007@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:36:25 -0400 From: Terry Blanton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Time as a constant ??? References: <001001c4ac08$e9c25740$0100007f@xptower> <416B16C3.1050409@rtpatlanta.com> In-Reply-To: <416B16C3.1050409@rtpatlanta.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090007080303060203040808" Resent-Message-ID: <9gLcLB.A.lz.7jxaBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56057 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090007080303060203040808 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terry Blanton wrote: > Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - > about 10-35 metres (about 1020 times smaller than the radius of a > proton). Should read: "Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - about 10^-35 metres (about 10^20 times smaller than the radius of a proton)" --------------090007080303060203040808 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Terry Blanton wrote:
Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - about 10-35 metres (about 1020 times smaller than the radius of a proton).

Should read:

"Quantum theory describes the Universe at the tiniest possible scale - about 10^-35 metres (about 10^20 times smaller than the radius of a proton)"
--------------090007080303060203040808-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 16:59:32 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BNxPqe013672; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:59:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9BNxMN7013651; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:59:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:59:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: <77.35913c3a.2e9c784f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:59:11 EDT Subject: Re: Tectonic versus planetary expansion To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_77.35913c3a.2e9c784f_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: <5KBCUD.A.LVD.a5xaBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56058 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_77.35913c3a.2e9c784f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit According to Konstantine Meyl, in his book Scalar Waves, the Earth's ground grows and lives and is formed by neutrino energy and cold fusion. Earth was quite a bit smaller during the days of Pangea 200 million years ago. 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 Making a difference one person at a time Get informed. Inform others. --part1_77.35913c3a.2e9c784f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable According to=20= Konstantine Meyl, in his book Scalar Waves, the Earth's ground grows and liv= es and is formed by neutrino energy and cold fusion.   Earth was q= uite a bit smaller during the days of Pangea 200 million years ago.=20

Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.co= m\baron, Email: www.rhf= web.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb= .com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.= rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at w= ww.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at = www.rhfweb.com

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. Inform others.


--part1_77.35913c3a.2e9c784f_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 11 18:41:06 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9C1evmH005300; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9C1eshW005270; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001401c4affc$7f645e00$10027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Hefner's energy plan Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 20:40:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C4AFD2.960E0270" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56059 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C4AFD2.960E0270 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0011_01C4AFD2.960E0270" ------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C4AFD2.960E0270 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankThe plan reads and flows well. I always enjoy a well thought out = plan composed by someone that can put thoughts to words. Suggestions for meditation. I live in Texas, I am 77 and have many friends in the oil business. The = " business" has a get rich mentality that permeates every aspect of the = petroleum industry. A proper word has been coined... ENRON. The question = becomes.. how do you enact the plan using " energy people" ? Where = do you find the people to make the plan work without recruiting " energy = people" ? Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C4AFD2.960E0270 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
The plan reads and flows well. I = always enjoy a=20 well thought out plan composed by someone that can put thoughts to=20 words.
 
Suggestions for = meditation.
 
I live in Texas, I am 77 and have = many friends in=20 the oil business. The " business" has a get rich mentality that = permeates every=20 aspect of the petroleum industry. A proper word has been coined... = ENRON. The=20 question becomes.. how do you enact the plan = using     =20 " energy people" ? Where = do you find=20 the people to make the plan work without recruiting " energy people"=20 ?
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C4AFD2.960E0270-- ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C4AFD2.960E0270 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000f01c4affc$7ed7d570$10027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C4AFD2.960E0270-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 12 00:19:24 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9C7Hxs8018133; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:19:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9C7Hbta018018; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:17:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:17:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:21:35 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hefner's energy plan Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56060 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:40 PM 10/11/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >BlankThe plan reads and flows well. I always enjoy a well thought out plan >composed by someone that can put thoughts to words. Thanks. I should mention that the plan was developed only as a starting point, to demonstrate some things that might be possible if a long range plan can be developed and implemented outside the stormy vagaries of political influence. > >Suggestions for meditation. > >I live in Texas, I am 77 and have many friends in the oil business. The " >business" has a get rich mentality that permeates every aspect of the >petroleum industry. A proper word has been coined... ENRON. The question >becomes.. how do you enact the plan using " energy people" ? Where do >you find the people to make the plan work without recruiting " energy >people" ? > >Richard I have had a little exposure to "energy people" having been one myself for a while. 8^) I've worked as an operations research analyst for a major gas company research organization, and also worked for Sohio-BP here in Alaska during the pipeline construction days. Never worked with roughnecks or wildcatters, but the groups I've worked with worked hard, played hard, and drank plenty too much, and were a talented bunch. It was fun but I'm glad I was young enough to survive it. 8^) I would expect that with billions of dollars out for the grabbing there would be a lot of good engineers and entrepreneurs out to get it, whatever it takes, be it windmills, geothermal, or whatever. That goes for oil patch folks and others. The greed motive helps I think and in fact is an essential ingredient in the idea... assuming the proposals that result (or at least selected) are legitimate and realistic. The problem then for the foundation itself would be hiring dedicated and talented people that could sit by evaluating proposals and performance while other folks made all the big money and had all the fun. The good news I think is that it should take comparatively few people to do the foundation work. The proposed foundation would hopefully be pretty small and have a low overhead, especially in initial years. My experience with folks is that if top management is clear in its goals and constraints, and exemplary in its behavior, good people get made and attracted. If management is rotten, good folks flee, and the whole barrel gets rotten. The problem then seems to me to mainly boil down to finding a few good executives. Such executives will be where you find them, be it oil patch or not. Hopefully, beyond that, regular audits and reasonable controls would prevent another ENRON. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 12 08:29:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9CFSJHS032755; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:29:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9CFSEL9032712; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:28:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:28:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c4b06f$e3f37c20$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Hefner's energy plan Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 10:26:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B045.E40B6300" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56061 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B045.E40B6300 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B045.E40CE9A0" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B045.E40CE9A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankThankfully, this nation still has people that deal with " what = might be possible". I was amused by watching the morning business report = on TV, an interview with the CEO of Devon Petroleum. His comment was = ..we purchased oil properties several years ago when the prices were = depressed .. we sold them recently at top prices. These people are not = in the oil business.. they are commodity brokers as Shell Oil = demonstrated recently by writing down their reserve estimates. Mix this concept with the mode of Washington politics where the game is = not as important to win as it is to make sure the other guy loses. Talk = about impossible tasks, trying to implement Hefner's plan reminds me of = the old western movie where the bad guy threatens to " whip the socks = off the good guy", the good guy told him .. you've got your work cut out = for you cause I ain't wearing any. =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B045.E40CE9A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Thankfully, this nation still has people that deal = with " what=20 might be possible". I was amused by watching the morning business report = on=20 TV,  an interview with the CEO of Devon Petroleum. His comment was = ..we=20 purchased oil properties several years ago when the prices were = depressed .. we=20 sold them recently at top prices. These people are not in the oil = business..=20 they are commodity brokers as Shell Oil demonstrated recently by writing = down=20 their reserve estimates.
 
Mix this concept with the mode of Washington = politics=20 where the game is not as important to win as it is to make = sure the=20 other guy loses. Talk about impossible tasks, trying to = implement=20 Hefner's plan reminds me of the = old western movie where=20 the bad guy threatens to " whip the socks off the good guy", the = good guy=20 told him .. you've got your work cut out for you cause I ain't wearing=20 any.
 
  
 
 
 
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B045.E40CE9A0-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B045.E40B6300 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c4b06f$cccf1b80$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B045.E40B6300-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 12 11:14:44 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9CIDEHS008495; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:14:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9CID9Sf008447; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:13:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:13:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: Horace hired on as energy consultant to the Kerry Campaign. Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:40:58 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56062 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hey Horace. >The main goal of the Energy Legacy Plan I posted a couple years ago was >actually to de-politicise energy development as much as possible. Kerry's >trust fund idea does indeed seem on the surface to do that to some extent, >but any trust plan would have a much better chance of (the required) long >term survival with bi-partisan support. There are some good moderate Republicans left in the party, they haven't all been driven out by Karl Rove, Tom Delay, and Grover Norquist. It remains to be seen if the adults can retake control of their party. General Jesus and his band of merry oil pirates seems to have gotten their fangs in pretty deep. I used to blame these people when I was younger, now I tend to feel that the willful ignorance of the voters is the real problem. There will always be wolves and sheep, but when the sheep start spreading barbeque sauce on their haunches and dancing before the wolves who's really responsible for the slaughter? >This is of course a really wimpy goal compared to what's possible. >Spending money on incentives for consumers to buy cars, if that's what this >includes, sounds like a boondoggle. If it means increased taxes on fuel >provides consumer conservation incentives, then that makes some sense at >least. I thought my plan for taxing 3 billion a year for 20 years was >pretty wimpy too, compared to what is really needed. With oil at 40 >dollars a barrel now, though, the plan would look a lot better now than >what I forcast. You need to keep a closer tab on things. Oil's at 53 today and shows no sign of decline. It'll be interesting to see what happens after the election. >We don't need a few measly incentives, we need a wake-up call. Agreed. Here's a start, my slightly tongue in cheek Wall St. version of your plan. We start a private trust fund, as you describe. The war chest is going to be much smaller, but we'll not have to deal with the destructive influence of the electorate on how the monies get spent. How do we fund this? By taking long positions on the oil market. Had we invested at the beginning of this year with oil at 32$ we'd have almost doubled our money today. Now you might say, won't we be working towards our own demise by investing in this fashion? Not at all. We'll know when the bottoms going to drop out, and not only will our private company stand to soar as that happens, but we'll be in a perfect position to short all those investments when it happens... How about it Vortex? K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 12 12:16:46 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9CJFHs8021602; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:16:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9CJEwiE021522; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:14:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:14:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004001c4b08a$595a92e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: HeNe IR coherency and Nuclear TIC Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:36:09 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56063 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Helium and Neon are two Noble gases which have very low thermal neutron capture cross-sections. Plus the two gases can be engineered to emit coherent light at several step-wise wavelengths, including the important IR wavelength of 1.15 microns. This combination of wavelengths could be important in a thermionic conversions scheme because a properly constructed fuel pipe of uranium within a reactor can be engineered to emit a very large proportion of its thermal energy output as photons in many of these same wavelength spectra, depending on surface coatings. If that we not enough of a synergy, both of these gases have been implicated in the hydrino phenomena of Randall Mills. If Mills is correct on this, then these two gases potentially have the amazing prospect of being amenable to serving a double purpose in a super-efficient, super-safe, subcritical reactor. Those dual purposes are: 1) augmenting TIC by coherent emission of light 2) "manufacturing" makeup neutrons from hydrogen or deuterium, so that an low very inventory of *natural* uranium can be used in a subcritical design. The most typical operating wavelength of a HeNe laser is the 632.8 nm wavelength of visible light. After this, fast radiative decay occurs from the 2p to the 1s energy levels, and other important wavelengths of coherent emission are possible. The 3s?3p and 2s?2p transitions give infrared operation at 3.39 µm and 1.15 µm wavelengths, and a variety of 2s?1s transitions are possible in the green (543.5 nm, the so-called GreeNe laser), the yellow (594 nm) plus the orange (612 nm). All of these coherent wavelengths can be coupled to high amperage TIC electron emission, using the self-generated crossed magnetic field. Very high voltage gradients are possible, in theory. The wide spectrum multi-coherency process is not perfectly efficient, but should be at least double the efficiency of Carnot conversion methods. Regards, Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 12 14:58:00 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9CLuUHS029549; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:57:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9CLuNLh029505; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:56:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:56:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:00:20 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Horace hired on as energy consultant to the Kerry Campaign. Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56064 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:40 PM 10/12/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >You need to keep a closer tab on things. Oil's at 53 today and shows >no sign of decline. It'll be interesting to see what happens after the >election. How right you are that oil's at 53. I was keenly aware of that yesterday too. What a strange typo. I think I meant to type $50 a barrel, but reviewing the plan somehow put me back into the frame of mind I had when oil was moving toward 40. As for the idea of a privately funded trust, I would be surprised if there were enough money available to make the start-up work. I also think there will be a need for congressional legislative support through the years, if not for direct funding then for regulatory relief in some areas. The kind of work to be done requires at least 10-20 year planning, commitment and funding, not just a year or even 4 years at a time. Funding a year a time is like trying to play chess one move at a time. The results are not optimal. I think congress should adopt a rule that sets aside an afternoon a year for all the members to attend a changing of the guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns in Arlington National Cemetary, and to walk to other signifcant locations there. They should be keenly aware that they have an obligation more than just to lobbiests, parties, and campaign contributors. They should preserve a keen perspective on how they got where they are, by the sacrifice of generations before, where they are going, and where they are taking generations to come. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 13 08:09:46 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9DF9Vdv031130; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:09:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9DF9E2g031031; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:09:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:09:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003a01c4b136$819b3780$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: "la loi d'ZPE" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:08:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B0FB.D41F08A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56065 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B0FB.D41F08A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Do Not Adjust Your Set. For a good chuckle and/or a lesson in how NOT to = present one's cutting edge... >From Central Services and the continuing online comedy of who's stinkin' = up tha' ZPE palace grounds... aka, Sarfatti and Puthoff duke it out = behind the ivory tower... or was that....who's behind the giant rat of = Sumatra? ... "behind" you say? If it's be-hind, then it has to be = Leftenant B. Hind, no? http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=3DDownloads&d_op=3Dgetit&lid=3D4= 8 [I'm not sure if one is required to sign-up for this forum or not] I can't help but find a great deal of amusement in too brilliant guys, = with way too much education and way too little common sense, = cat-fighting over how many angels can fit on a pin-head without pricking = their iridescent behinds... geeze, where is St Thomas Aquinas when we = need him? The French have a most apt phrase, the "la loi d`emmerdement maximum" = which is more intricate than a Gallic version of 'Murphy's Law' ... a = common mis-translation. To adequately appreciate the nuances of this = phrase, one must understand what the French mean by their semi-vulgarity = - "merde." There is an English equivalent, of course, but it is a bit = more odorous, vulgar, and less psychological. Then one must appreciate = that the suffix "-ment" which in French is roughly the same as in = English, which is too say "a long-standing and well-established pile of = the former"... Do you see where this is going with respect to hypothetical arguments = over unproven hypotheticals that benefit no one (except perhaps Randi) = and can only lead to "la loi d' ridicule maximum"... and why the = superficial translation of either their math or my French leaves = everything to be desired ? BTW... that superficial translation of the = "la loi d`emmerdement maximum" being something like "the Law of Maximum = Annoyance" Signed Porgy Tirebiter I guess one person *can* make a difference, but most of the time, they = probably shouldn't" ...and should this be fire-signed "Coming = mother..." Anyway, please leave me to my own samsaric delusions. I am, = after all, old, out-of-shape and my Buddha potential is an approaching = an inverse square.... ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B0FB.D41F08A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Do Not Adjust Your Set. For a good chuckle and/or a lesson in how = NOT to=20 present one's cutting edge...
 
From Central Services and the continuing online comedy of who's = stinkin' up=20 tha' ZPE palace grounds... aka, Sarfatti and Puthoff duke it = out behind the=20 ivory tower... or was that....who's behind the giant rat of = Sumatra? ...=20 "behind" you say? If it's be-hind, then it has to be Leftenant B. Hind,=20 no?
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=3DDownloads&a= mp;d_op=3Dgetit&lid=3D48
[I'm not sure if one is required to sign-up for this forum or = not]
 
I can't help but find a great deal of amusement in too brilliant = guys, with=20 way too much education and way too little common sense, cat-fighting=20 over how many angels can fit on a pin-head without pricking their=20 iridescent behinds... geeze, where is St Thomas Aquinas when we need = him?
 
The French have a most apt phrase, the "la loi d`emmerdement = maximum" which=20 is more intricate than a Gallic version of 'Murphy's Law' ... a common=20 mis-translation. To adequately appreciate the nuances of this = phrase, one=20 must understand what the French mean by their semi-vulgarity - "merde." = There is=20 an English equivalent, of course, but it is a bit more odorous, = vulgar, and=20 less psychological. Then one must appreciate that the suffix "-ment" = which in=20 French is roughly the same as in English, which is too say "a = long-standing and=20 well-established pile of the former"...
 
Do you see where this is going with respect to hypothetical = arguments over=20 unproven hypotheticals that benefit no one (except perhaps Randi) and = can only=20 lead to "la loi d' ridicule maximum"... and why the superficial = translation of=20 either their math or my French leaves everything to be desired ? BTW... = that=20 superficial translation of the "la loi d`emmerdement maximum" being = something=20 like "the Law of Maximum Annoyance"
 
Signed
 
Porgy Tirebiter
 
I guess one person *can* make a difference, but most of the time, = they=20 probably shouldn't" ...and should this be = fire-signed  "Coming=20 mother..."  Anyway, please leave me to my own samsaric delusions. I = am,=20 after all, old, out-of-shape and my Buddha potential is an approaching = an=20 inverse square....
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B0FB.D41F08A0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 13 10:48:39 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9DHmPp3000733; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:48:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9DHmHZL000702; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:48:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:48:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <416D6A61.30000@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:48:17 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: "la loi d'ZPE" References: <003a01c4b136$819b3780$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <003a01c4b136$819b3780$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56066 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: > Do Not Adjust Your Set. For a good chuckle and/or a lesson in how NOT > to present one's cutting edge... > > From Central Services and the continuing online comedy of who's > stinkin' up tha' ZPE palace grounds... aka, Sarfatti and Puthoff duke > it out behind the ivory tower You can watch this in real time at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SarfattiScienceSeminars/messages which does require you join the group. > that superficial translation of the "la loi d`emmerdement maximum" > being something like "the Law of Maximum Annoyance" Exactly how my French-speaking secretary translated the phrase after laughing out loud when I handed her the note. > Signed > > Porgy Tirebiter You know where Daddy George got his name? http://www.tirebiter.com/ Regards, Pastor Rod Flash Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 13 11:49:13 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9DImxdv024736; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:48:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9DImhcN024627; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:48:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:48:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005a01c4b154$f9edd8a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <003a01c4b136$819b3780$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <416D6A61.30000@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: "la loi d'ZPE" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:46:39 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56067 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Terry, > You know where Daddy George got his name? > http://www.tirebiter.com/ Yup... sad remebrance... I was one of the first on the scene, a mildly intoxicated golden bear no less (is there any other kind), that fateful day that Fall of '50, when Georgie succumbed after his last taste of rolling butadiene... poor fellow. We had just beaten that other bunch of butadiene lickers, you know... the Trojans... for about the last time, as fate would have it, for half a century... due mainly to the likes of a secret inbreeding program that gave them the likes of OJ and other similarly minded recruits... it was a muderous football program back then ... Well... would you expect less from the second best establishment in South Central....? > Pastor Rod Flash > Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light As the Right Honorable Flasher can attest... at the eulogy everyone joined in on a mighty-fine rendition of... what else... "A Mighty Hot Dog is Our Lord"... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 13 19:29:31 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9E2TQTk001970; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:29:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9E2T43N001889; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:29:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:29:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041013192736.04d24440@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:30:34 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: The 11th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_418561500==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56068 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --=====================_418561500==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 14 OCT., 2004 CONTACT: Professor Jean Paul Biberian, Conference Chairman Telephone: 33 660 14 04 85 (France) E-mail: biberian@crmcn.univ-mrs.fr ICCF-11: The 11th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (Formerly the International Conference on Cold Fusion) MARSEILLE, FRANCE, 14 Oct., 2004 -- The worldwide cold fusion community, awaiting a conclusion from the U.S. Department of Energy's review of the field, will convene in France for its annual conference 31 Oct. "We are pleased with the renewed government and public interest in this field," conference chairman Professor Jean Paul Biberian said. "Many of the researchers have worked steadily in the field for the last 15 years. However, important work remains." Cold fusion has the potential to fulfill the world's energy needs, using ocean water as fuel, safely, without pollution or harmful nuclear waste. "Clearly, the scientific community made a big error when it determined back in 1989 that there was nothing to the cold fusion claims," Nobel physics laureate and keynote speaker Professor Brian Josephson said. "This potentially very important area must now move forward rapidly in order to make up for lost time." Other conference highlights include a live cold fusion demonstration and the first annual general meeting of the International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. Last year's conference in Cambridge, Mass., USA, drew several hundred researchers from 13 countries. Two researchers demonstrated working cold fusion experiments. "The primary remaining question is whether this phenomenon can be scaled up to become a commercial energy source," Professor David J. Nagel of The George Washington University said. For priority registration, members of the press may send e-mail with their credentials to conference chairman Jean Paul Biberian at biberian@crmcn.univ-mrs.fr. Resource Web Sites: http://www.iccf11.org/ - Official conference Web site http://www.iscmns.org/ - International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science http://www.lenr-canr.org/ - Public library and bibliography of over 3,000 papers related to the field http://www.newenergytimes.com/ - Newsletter and educational resources --=====================_418561500==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
14 OCT., 2004
 
CONTACT:
Professor Jean Paul Biberian, Conference Chairman
Telephone: 33 660 14 04 85 (France)
E-mail: biberian@crmcn.univ-mrs.fr



ICCF-11: The 11th International Conference on
Condensed Matter Nuclear Science
 (Formerly the International Conference on Cold Fusion)


MARSEILLE, FRANCE, 14 Oct., 2004 -- The worldwide cold fusion community, awaiting a conclusion from the U.S. Department of Energy's review of the field, will convene in France for its annual conference 31 Oct.

"We are pleased with the renewed government and public interest in this field," conference chairman Professor Jean Paul Biberian said. "Many of the researchers have worked steadily in the field for the last 15 years. However, important work remains."

Cold fusion has the potential to fulfill the world's energy needs, using ocean water as fuel, safely, without pollution or harmful nuclear waste. 

"Clearly, the scientific community made a big error when it determined back in 1989 that there was nothing to the cold fusion claims," Nobel physics laureate and keynote speaker Professor Brian Josephson said. "This potentially very important area must now move forward rapidly in order to make up for lost time."

Other conference highlights include a live cold fusion demonstration and the first annual general meeting of the International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science.

Last year's conference in Cambridge, Mass., USA, drew several hundred researchers from 13 countries. Two researchers demonstrated working cold fusion experiments.

"The primary remaining question is whether this phenomenon can be scaled up to become a commercial energy source," Professor David J. Nagel of The George Washington University said.

For priority registration, members of the press may send e-mail with their credentials to conference chairman Jean Paul Biberian at biberian@crmcn.univ-mrs.fr.


Resource Web Sites:
http://www.iccf11.org/ - Official conference Web site
http://www.iscmns.org/ - International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science
http://www.lenr-canr.org/ - Public library and bibliography of over 3,000 papers related to the field
http://www.newenergytimes.com/ - Newsletter and educational resources

--=====================_418561500==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 13 23:02:44 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9E62doL013875; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:02:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9E62XsW013829; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:02:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:02:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Subject: Bruce Vicknair is out of the office this week. From: BVicknair@bjservices.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 01:00:36 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LnGW02/BJSUSA/BJSERVICES(Release 6.5.1|January 21, 2004) at 10/14/2004 00:57:07 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56069 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I will be out of the office starting 10/12/2004 and will not return until 10/18/2004. I will respond to your message when I return. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 00:00:58 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9E70ooL024942; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:00:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9E70nkK024936; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:00:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:00:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:00:48 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: "la loi d'ZPE" In-Reply-To: <005a01c4b154$f9edd8a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Message-ID: References: <003a01c4b136$819b3780$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <416D6A61.30000@rtpatlanta.com> <005a01c4b154$f9edd8a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56070 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Jones Beene wrote: > > Pastor Rod Flash > > Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the > Blinding Light http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/asacob.htm (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Oct 14 07:52:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EEqevt020386; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:52:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EEqc5v020366; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:52:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:52:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410414135144680@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Design Problem: Auger Electrons For Detecting Electronium (*e-) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:51:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ee400a453fd44e97387c200587b0bf9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.25 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56071 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Can anyone suggest a simple home-brew design? One way of getting the (* e-) out of an oxide-chloride or metal surface for electron mass spectroscopy detection using a 150- 1500 volt, 5 - 20 gauss detector and a fluorescent plate. Mass of (*e-) estimated to be twice the mass of the electrons, thus the magnetic deflection radius R of the electrons is (2)^1/2 greater than that of the (*e-). R is about 8.26 and 5.84 cm respectively for 150 volts , 5 gauss. http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~wittke/Microprobe/Interact-Auger.html AND: "The mechanism by which an Auger electron is released starts with an electron being ejected by the primary electron beam from its shell, say, the K-shell. Another electron from an outer shell (say, the L1-level) of the same atom emits energy in the form of a photon in order to go down to the K-shell position vacated by the ejected electron. The photon released by the second electron will either get lost or eject yet another electron from a different level, say, L2. Auger electrons are electrons ejected in this manner, such as the third electron from L2 in the example. Thus, the generation of an Auger electron requires at least three electrons, which in the example above are the K, L1, and L2 electrons. In this example, the emitted Auger electron is referred to as a KLL Auger electron. Hydrogen and Helium atoms have less than three electrons, and are therefore undetectable by AES." Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Can anyone suggest a simple home-brew design?
 
One way of getting the (* e-) out of an oxide-chloride or metal surface for electron mass spectroscopy
detection using a 150- 1500 volt,  5 - 20 gauss detector and a fluorescent plate.
 
Mass of (*e-) estimated to be twice the mass of the electrons, thus the magnetic
deflection radius R of the electrons is (2)^1/2 greater than that of the (*e-).
 
R is about 8.26 and 5.84  cm respectively for 150 volts , 5 gauss.
 
 
 
 
AND:

"The mechanism by which an Auger electron is released starts with an electron being ejected by the primary electron beam from its shell, say, the K-shell. Another electron from an outer shell (say, the L1-level) of the same atom emits energy in the form of a photon in order to go down to the K-shell position vacated by the ejected electron.  The photon released by the second electron will either get lost or eject yet another electron from a different level,  say, L2.  Auger electrons are electrons ejected in this manner, such as the third electron from L2 in the example.  

Thus, the generation of an Auger electron requires at least three electrons, which in the example above are the K, L1, and L2 electrons. In this example, the emitted Auger electron is referred to as a KLL Auger electron.  Hydrogen and Helium atoms have less than three electrons, and are therefore undetectable by AES."

 

Frederick

 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 10:36:43 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EHaas4003039; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:36:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EHaEP3002882; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:36:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:36:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 09:41:39 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56072 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'm not ignoring the following, just haven't had the time to compose a complete answer, with a detainled experiment plan. Short answer is I doubt there is a workable FTL scheme in the offing but there might be and it seems that between the last two schemes there is something to be learned about the nature of quantum reality. That is to say some of the possible quantum interpretations might posibly be dismissable in at least the case of these two experiments. This might be best demonstable in a synthesized experiment, an experiment wherein the three "bundles" (which were not aptly named) of the triad experiment might be constructed as a version of the FTL method posted just prior which depends on photons going through a filter not losing entanglement, call it here the FTL experiment. It all boils down to determining what constitutes a measurement. The triad experiment should be, with regards to probabilities of a match (which is verified at slower than light speed), identical to the probabilities in the Aspect experiment, provided one and only one of bundles is sampled at random in each time slice at each of Bob and Alice's ends, and then compared at light speed or less. Bell's inequallity should be applicable to show there are no hidden variables. The key to no hidden variables lies in the ability to not "measure" the other two channels, those *not* selected at random, on either end during each time slice. To eliminate the possiblitity of "measurement", the photons in channels not selected might be directed to a black surface for absorbtion, so that no measurement of polarization is possible in any sense. If the photons in the non-selected bundles are actually measured, at either end, then the conjugate photons still in flight have a determined orientation, they in effect have been forced to carry a hidden variable, and, by Bell's inequality, there will be matches more than 50 percent of the time. Now, here's the upshot of all this. The FTL experiment only fails to provide FTL communication if entanglement is broken whenever a photon travels through a filter, be it absorbed or not, independent of the observer, his consiousness. Travelling through a polarizing filter constitutes a measurement, be there an observer or not, be there a particle detector at the end of the photons path or not. This fact eliminates any observer-detector model of quantum reality. Quantum cats can not exist. That is the price of FTL communication being impossible, if it is. Otherwise the FTL experiment as proposed does provide FTL communication. On the other hand, and this is the more likely outcome I would guess, just because something as wonderful as FTL communication seems too good to be true, we are left with a seeming paradox or difficulty. What constitutes a photon absorbtion which does not set the photons polarization? The black photon absorbtion material might in fact involve momentary polarization, and thus set a hidden variable. For example, the "black" absorber might be made of two crossed polarizing filters sandwiched together. Or, there might be a mixture of granules which polarize before absorbtion. If the photons on their way to Bob have their polarizations already set, due to "measurement" at Alice's end, they carry hidden variables, and Bob's randomly sampled photon will match Alice's randomly selected photon more than 50 percent of the time. The same is true if "measurement" occurs at Bob's end first. And what if allowing the non-selected photons to continue in flight unabsorbed changes the results? This only says that the *timing* of the measurements is important. However, relativity says this is impossible, because determining which event occurs first can depend on the observer. We thus see that the triad style experiment, as opposed to an Aspect style experiment which depends on spins, might possibly shed light on relativity as well as quantum reality. It seems to me that some useful knowlege might come out of a syntehsized triad experiment. However, I am only an amateur and am not familiar with the literature. This is a learning experience for me. At 3:00 PM 10/11/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >Sorry I haven't picked up on this; the last time >I tried to wrap my head around Bell's theorem I got >a bit lost in the nomenclature. Maybe we can hash it >out here in terms less obscure. > >My understanding of all of these FTL schemes using >quantum teleportation is that some real physical event >is happening to the remote paired particle when the local >particle is detected. Yet, you are starting with the >condition that the particles be paired. This was Bertelmanns >critique; consider for example a pair of socks. We mix >up the right and left socks, and mail them off to >our two receivers. Bob opens his box, and sees he >has a left sock. Instantly, Marys sock "becomes" a >right sock, by virtue of the fact that according >to QM we can't treat the sock as right or left >until we measure it and thus it exists as a mixture >of the two states. This I see as an artifact of our >method of analysis; the using of statistics to study >a discrete real event. I am lead to understand that >Bells inequalities prove that no hidden variables exist, >but I'm wondering if there is any physical basis for >this? The sorts of experiments you are suggesting >are really to the point, if there is something physical >happening when we collapse the wave function then >some sort of FTL scheme ought to be realizable. I'm >skeptical of this only because I know from my meagre >study of statistics that the first thing that gets >thrown away in a statistical analysis is causality, >a requirement for any communication scheme. > >Do you still think one of your ideas presented earlier >on the list to be workable? > >K. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] >Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 11:53 AM >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method > > >Ooops! The post made sense to me at 2:30 in the morning, before going to >bed. Now that I have awoken, I see it is nonsense! Not an uncommon >experience for me these days. Sorry! > >The flaw is that, for Bell's inequality to be applied, Both Alice's and >Bob's individual results from observation of one photon selected at random >from each corresponding triad must be compared. This comparison takes >place at less than light speed. When this is done, however, the suggested >method does seem to provide a means to do an Aspect style experiment using >polarization instead of spin. The odd thing is the importance of timing to >the result, timing which relativity says can not always be provided because >Alice and Bob's time is relative to the observer. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 12:04:55 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EJ4ord029556; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:04:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EJ4fvG029507; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:04:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:04:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041014200418.00694cb0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:04:18 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56073 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:36:20 Keith Nagel wrote ------------------------------------------------------------ > Hi Horace. > Sorry I haven't picked up on this; the last time > I tried to wrap my head around Bell's theorem I got > a bit lost in the nomenclature. Maybe we can hash it > out here in terms less obscure. > My understanding of all of these FTL schemes using > quantum teleportation is that some real physical event > is happening to the remote paired particle when the local > particle is detected. Yet, you are starting with the > condition that the particles be paired. This was Bertelmanns > critique; consider for example a pair of socks. We mix > up the right and left socks, and mail them off to > our two receivers. Bob opens his box, and sees he > has a left sock. Instantly, Marys sock "becomes" a > right sock, by virtue of the fact that according > to QM we can't treat the sock as right or left > until we measure it and thus it exists as a mixture > of the two states. This I see as an artifact of our > method of analysis; the using of statistics to study > a discrete real event. I am lead to understand that > Bells inequalities prove that no hidden variables exist, > but I'm wondering if there is any physical basis for > this? The sorts of experiments you are suggesting > are really to the point, if there is something physical > happening when we collapse the wave function then > some sort of FTL scheme ought to be realizable. I'm > skeptical of this only > * because I know from my meagerstudy of statistics * > * that the first thing that gets thrown away in a * > * statistical analysis is causality, a requirement * > * for any communication scheme. * Interesting, that last comment. Many years ago I realised that research engineers had a tendency to hide their sloppy experimental techniques and designs behind a statistical smoke screen - so I wrote a Note [as one does :-) ] Below is the first page. ================================================================= SUMMARY The role of probability in structural engineering design is analysed in terms of the cybernetic concept of variety. A theoretical model is developed in which chance is viewed as the complement of law, both being seen as a manifestation of a mismatch between objective and subjective variety. The probabilistic approach to design is shown to be essentially antagonistic to the deterministic philosophy which necessarily underlies engineering design and a case is made out for recasting design problems in a deterministic mould wherever possible. A 17/485/1 July 1980 SP/FJG/SP 8/77 ================================================================= Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 12:46:21 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EJkF7U008786; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:46:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EJkE6f008775; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:46:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:46:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041014153852.0339c930@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:46:08 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: ICCF-11 abstract Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56074 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jean-Paul Biberian will soon upload the ICCF-11 abstracts to ICCF11.org. He scheduled me to give a talk on Thursday, which came as something of a shock, because I was expecting to give a poster session presentation only. Anyway, I have prepared the following abstract: Cold Fusion And The Future Abstract Cold fusion will be the ideal source of energy, provided its introduction can be handled properly. A few cells have shown power density and temperatures suitable for real-world applications. Once these cells can be replicated on demand, commercial development will be straightforward. Manufacturing should not be too demanding, so thousands of companies will compete, and costs will fall quickly. The transition from fossil fuel to cold fusion will be rapid. Many extraordinary new applications will become possible, and seemingly intractable problems such as global warming may be fixed. Some examples will be presented. Public support is essential to funding research, and commercialization. Here is the abbreviated version, which I promised Ed Storms I would not transmit to Jean-Paul: A new book describes how cold fusion will desalinate water, make the deserts bloom, eliminate invasive species, save the world, and improve your sex life. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 13:16:23 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EKGF2j010568; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:16:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EKGD59010554; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:16:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:16:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041014131513.04552df8@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:17:54 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: ICCF-11 abstract In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041014153852.0339c930@mail.lenr-canr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56075 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, I'm glad to hear you have found a way to tie sex into cold fusion. I knew there *had* to be some sort of connection. The field can get quite boring sometimes. Your book should do well. ;) Steve >Here is the abbreviated version, which I promised Ed Storms I would not >transmit to Jean-Paul: > >A new book describes how cold fusion will desalinate water, make the >deserts bloom, eliminate invasive species, save the world, and improve >your sex life. > >- Jed > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 15:53:35 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9EMrOdu009710; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:53:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9EMrNpo009701; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:53:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:53:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:58:46 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56076 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:04 PM 10/14/4, Grimer wrote: On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:36:20 Keith Nagel wrote >> * because I know from my meagerstudy of statistics * >> * that the first thing that gets thrown away in a * >> * statistical analysis is causality, a requirement * >> * for any communication scheme. * > > >Interesting, that last comment. > >Many years ago I realised that research engineers had a tendency to >hide their sloppy experimental techniques and designs behind a >statistical smoke screen - so I wrote a Note [as one does :-) ] Even more true I think in some other fields. I majored in phsychology briefly in the early 1960's, too briefly in fact to really call it a major, though I had an interesting student job training rats and doing decortications, etc. I was quickly discouraged when I saw published experiments considered important yet having a correlation coefficient of only 0.7. It was just too fuzzy an art for me. Psychiatric principles seemed to me to be even more fuzzily justified. Anyone who studies communication theory, however, knows that statistics play an important role in communication systems design. Randomness is an inherent part of the process of communication. Information can not be transmitted with complete certainty. There is always some finite chance of error in the transmission of any bit. I managed analog communication networks some decades ago, and know first hand that the probability of a bit error can be very high in practice. This is why the design of error correction schemes is so important. The design and testing of error correction schemes requires the use of probability and statisitics. As with communication theory, probability and statistics are an inherent and even definitve part of the theory of quantum mechanics. As for the role of probability in Bell's theorem, as applied to the subject experiments, I think (hope) that might be summarized fairly easily. I'll take a shot at that now. Assume the state of cojugates is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. Assume there are, as in the Aspect experiment, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurment, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possibile combination 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by Bob. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that Alice and Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 8/8 B E 4/8 B F 4/8 C D 8/8 C E 4/8 C F 4/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice choses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob choses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice choses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also choses axis A, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is beacuse there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. There is no hidden variable involved. What I have suggested is using the polarity of three separate photons in lieu of using the independent 3 spin axes of a single photon. This meets the implied requirement that the probabilities of spin observed on each of the 3 axes, or the equivalent observations, be independent. Now, if Alice doesn't observe the unchosen columns, and Bob behaves similarly, using photon triads should be identical to the Aspect experiment using spins. At least that is true under some of the possible quantum reality interpretations. Note that the 3 bundles, the 3 photons of a triad, might even be light years apart, with Bob and Alice, or even some third party referee, not knowing the actual results of their experiments for years. What is different about the protocol I suggest is that it is possible to discern and refine what exactly constitutes an observation. Unlike the spins in differing axes for a given photon, it *is* possible to determine all the polarization states for a given triad. Alice can force Bob's photons to carry hidden variables simply by observing all three of the photons in each triad before Bob observes his. Bob can achieve a similar result. There is now defined an experimental means to decide whether an "observation" is occuring or not, via the percentage of matches observed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 19:14:41 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F2EYqJ024121; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F2EW5H024111; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:19:56 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56077 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Slight typo correction noted below with ***. Assume the state of cojugates is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. Assume there are, as in the Aspect experiment, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurment, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possibile combination 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by Bob. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that Alice and Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 8/8 B E 4/8 B F 4/8 C D 8/8 C E 4/8 C F 4/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice choses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob choses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice choses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also choses axis A, then both *** [The above "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis A... " should say "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis D ...".] will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is beacuse there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. There is no hidden variable involved. What I have suggested is using the polarity of three separate photons in lieu of using the independent 3 spin axes of a single photon. This meets the implied requirement that the probabilities of spin observed on each of the 3 axes, or the equivalent observations, be independent. Now, if Alice doesn't observe the unchosen columns, and Bob behaves similarly, using photon triads should be identical to the Aspect experiment using spins. At least that is true under some of the possible quantum reality interpretations. Note that the 3 bundles, the 3 photons of a triad, might even be light years apart, with Bob and Alice, or even some third party referee, not knowing the actual results of their experiments for years. What is different about the protocol I suggest is that it is possible to discern and refine what exactly constitutes an observation. Unlike the spins in differing axes for a given photon, it *is* possible to determine all the polarization states for a given triad. Alice can force Bob's photons to carry hidden variables simply by observing all three of the photons in each triad before Bob observes his. Bob can achieve a similar result. There is now defined an experimental means to decide whether an "observation" is occuring or not, via the percentage of matches observed. Regards, Horace Heffner Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 19:14:54 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F2Eddu018079; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F2EbNx018062; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:14:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:20:02 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56078 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A slight typo is corrected at point marked ***. Assume the state of cojugates is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. Assume there are, as in the Aspect experiment, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurment, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possibile combination 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by Bob. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that Alice and Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 8/8 B E 4/8 B F 4/8 C D 8/8 C E 4/8 C F 4/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice choses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob choses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice choses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also choses axis A, *** [The above "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis A... " really should say "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis D ...". Axis A is in the same direction as axis D, axis B is in the same direction as axis E, and axis C is in the same direction as axis F.] then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is beacuse there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. There is no hidden variable involved. What I have suggested is using the polarity of three separate photons in lieu of using the independent 3 spin axes of a single photon. This meets the implied requirement that the probabilities of spin observed on each of the 3 axes, or the equivalent observations, be independent. Now, if Alice doesn't observe the unchosen columns, and Bob behaves similarly, using photon triads should be identical to the Aspect experiment using spins. At least that is true under some of the possible quantum reality interpretations. Note that the 3 bundles, the 3 photons of a triad, might even be light years apart, with Bob and Alice, or even some third party referee, not knowing the actual results of their experiments for years. What is different about the protocol I suggest is that it is possible to discern and refine what exactly constitutes an observation. Unlike the spins in differing axes for a given photon, it *is* possible to determine all the polarization states for a given triad. Alice can force Bob's photons to carry hidden variables simply by observing all three of the photons in each triad before Bob observes his. Bob can achieve a similar result. There is now defined an experimental means to decide whether an "observation" is occuring or not, via the percentage of matches observed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 20:27:27 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F3R9qJ005161; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:27:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F3R85m005149; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:27:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:27:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.0.6.2.20041014232138.02558ae0@pop.mtmc.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> X-Sender: crquin@rogers.com@pop.mtmc.phub.net.cable.rogers.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.0.6 Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:26:48 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Colin Quinney Subject: Re: ICCF-11 abstract In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20041014131513.04552df8@mail.dlsi.net> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041014153852.0339c930@mail.lenr-canr.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20041014131513.04552df8@mail.dlsi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56079 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steve, Pardon my interrupt here but regarding sex and cold fusion, it just won't sell. Jed must name the book "Warm Fusion", or better yet, "Steamy Fusion" :-) Colin At 04:17 PM 10/14/2004, you wrote: >Jed, > >I'm glad to hear you have found a way to tie sex into cold fusion. I knew >there *had* to be some sort of connection. The field can get quite boring >sometimes. Your book should do well. ;) > >Steve > > >>Here is the abbreviated version, which I promised Ed Storms I would not >>transmit to Jean-Paul: >> >>A new book describes how cold fusion will desalinate water, make the >>deserts bloom, eliminate invasive species, save the world, and improve >>your sex life. >> >>- Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 22:27:59 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F5RpqJ030581; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:27:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F5Roa9030572; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:27:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:27:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:33:19 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ICCF-11 abstract Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56080 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:26 PM 10/14/4, Colin Quinney wrote: >Steve, > >Pardon my interrupt here but regarding sex and cold fusion, it just won't >sell. Jed must name the book "Warm Fusion", or better yet, "Steamy Fusion" :-) > >Colin Though you make a good point I feel compelled to say that cold fusion was steamy unough for me when Elisabeth Shue was in the picture! Who cares about dry old books. We are way overdue for another good CF movie! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 14 22:48:51 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F5mgdu001174; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:48:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F5meMW001168; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:48:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:48:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041014224928.00b121d8@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:50:21 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: ICCF-11 abstract In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56081 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Indeed. Elizabeth Shue again or do we have votes for a new dream-fusionista? At 09:33 PM 10/14/2004 -0800, you wrote: >At 11:26 PM 10/14/4, Colin Quinney wrote: > >Steve, > > > >Pardon my interrupt here but regarding sex and cold fusion, it just won't > >sell. Jed must name the book "Warm Fusion", or better yet, "Steamy > Fusion" :-) > > > >Colin > > >Though you make a good point I feel compelled to say that cold fusion was >steamy unough for me when Elisabeth Shue was in the picture! Who cares >about dry old books. We are way overdue for another good CF movie! 8^) > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 00:16:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F7GZqJ017771; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:16:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F7GT7F017717; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:16:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:16:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:21:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hefner's energy plan Resent-Message-ID: <5gLHcC.A.sUE.Ml3bBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56082 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:40 PM 10/11/4, RC Macaulay wrote: > .. how do you enact the plan using " energy people" ? Where do you >find the people to make the plan work without recruiting " energy people" >? > At 10:26 AM 10/12/4, RC Macaulay wrote: > Talk about impossible tasks, trying to implement Hefner's plan reminds me >of the old western movie where the bad guy threatens to " whip the socks >off the good guy", the good guy told him .. you've got your work cut out >for you cause I ain't wearing any. It occurred to me the good guy might be wearing no socks because he has no legs to stand on! 8^) I would like to review some checks and balances built into the plan that are intended to prevent another ENRON. The plan is built on the principle of diversity. Part 5) of the plan specifies "The requests for proposals should be in large, medium and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each category, with roughly equal funding to each category. In the event of no or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent fund." If 50 percent of the fund is aimed at small to medium projects, there must then be a high diversity of projects. Only 25 percent of the fund income is aimed at the implementation of large projects. Further, the funds are committed (though not distributed) on a 10 year basis, not a 1 year basis. Continued funding depends on making a profit. Otherwise the agency can take over the operation (dispose of it) and either bid it out or operate it unitl the expected funds are recovered and then bid it out. For the fund to fail, there would have to be many mini-ENRON's, which were not detectible at bidding, and not detectible through 10 years of profitable operations. If an unsuccessful ENRON type corporation should be a succesful bidder, it would only deplete the fund for a brief period, and its assets would ultimately revert to the fund for operation or sale. Further, the bidders have a very strong incentive to be profitable over the 10 year period of their contract. That is because (a) they can inject up to 40 percent of their profits into property aquistion and other capital projects and (b) they retain a 10-20 percent advantage over other bidders on acquiring the property upon disposal after 10 years of successful operation. The objective of the fund is to provide profits to the successful bidders which at least border on windfall profits. Such "winfalls" are not possible without meeting the goal of the agency for at least 10 years. I would further point out that the proposals are suggested to be competitively bid. Similar procedures successfully sent us to the moon and supplies our military today. Other than cases where patent confidentiality is involved, in reasearch cases only, it would seem to me reasonable to make the proposal evaluation process entirely public in all its detail. The vast majority of the business of the agency should be conducted entirely in the public view. Should a prospective bidder fail, the loss of capital would likely be limited to the commitment of the first year of two of ten years. On the other hand, if a lynch-pin technology is developed, or a very successful model capable of rapid expansion, the agency and society as a whole should benefit enormously. The downside risk is small, the upside potential is enormous. The proposed plan achieves what a government should achieve economically. It creates an environment wherein desired business types can thrive. It quickly weeds out non-performers. It develops renewable energy sources as fast as possible and, failing that, it preserves capital for the time when such sources can be effectively tapped. The plan provides the best of all feasible worlds. Its success depends only on the choice of relatively few honest bureaucrats and the implementation of effective auditing. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 00:18:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F7I6qJ018090; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:18:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F7I4wP018073; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:18:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:18:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:23:35 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ICCF-11 abstract Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56083 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:50 PM 10/14/4, Steven Krivit wrote: >Indeed. Elizabeth Shue again or do we have votes for a new dream-fusionista? Sounds like a win-win decision to me. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 00:57:58 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F7vmqJ025356; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:57:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F7vlkL025337; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:57:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:57:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <19f.2ad03d5f.2ea0dcf1@aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:57:37 EDT Subject: Congrads Horace Heffner To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_19f.2ad03d5f.2ea0dcf1_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56084 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --part1_19f.2ad03d5f.2ea0dcf1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've just read that your working for the John Kerry. Doing that as well as reviewing manuscripts for Infinite Energy must keep you quite busy. Frank Z --part1_19f.2ad03d5f.2ea0dcf1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've just read that your working fo= r the John Kerry.  Doing that as well as reviewing manuscripts for Infi= nite Energy must keep you quite busy.

Frank Z




 --part1_19f.2ad03d5f.2ea0dcf1_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 01:53:59 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9F8rfdu002154; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:53:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9F8rdD9002125; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:53:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:53:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20041007225339.33282.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:53:30 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56085 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I've got a couple of questions about this matter. I assume that the aluminium tubes were suitable for use in a uranium separation process, but you know what happens when you assume. Then there is the matter of the post that Jones Beene made. Do I understand that hydrogen chloride, when the chlorine, has previously been in close contact with radioactive materials, can undergo a chemical reaction which will yield a shower of neutrons, this is just too strange. What kind of a chemical reaction does that? > that have not attacked us. iraq did >not attack us. Yah, what about the airplane that Saddam had in which they trained people to take over it with short bladed knives. Then there is the matter of Al Queda members being frequent quests in the country > >period. >and since weve killed more people in iraq so far than saddam Bull shit, haven't you heard about the mass graves that we continue to find on a regular basis? We've got a long way to go before we over take Saddam. >has in >the past decade, yeah, id argue over whether or not its better to have >him gone. he was a dictator. Yah, and he had intentions to build an atom bomb too, If the Jews hadn't taken out Osiris, he'd have built one >the traffic analogy was a way of saying, you cannot use 9/11 as >justification for iraq. > >ive lost a friend. i have a co worker who lost her son. to a stupid >war in iraq that should NEVER HAVE OCCURED. i have 2 friends there >now, and 3 more soon to be there. fight them there, or fight them here, which do you prefer? > >saddam disarmed. he complied with regulations. the rule of law was >being followed in iraq. > >as for cold blooded mass murderer, >and so was abraham lincoln by your logic. after all, What a stupid idea, like we were going to let all that terratory go! Not only that the abolitionist movement was obsessed with the idea of ending slavery. I would argue that was a good thing. > >-- >Fairy tales are more than true: not because >they tell us that dragons exist, but because >they tell us that dragons can be beaten. >-G.K. Chesterton This was beautiful From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 03:53:23 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FAr8du024261; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:53:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FAr5le024244; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:53:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:53:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:58:30 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Congrads Horace Heffner Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56086 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:57 AM 10/15/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >I've just read that your working for the John Kerry. Doing that as well as >reviewing manuscripts for Infinite Energy must keep you quite busy. > >Frank Z Once again a big surprise to me I'm doing all this! Actually, I didn't even have time to volunteer for a preliminary look at Jed's book - a chance which I normally would have jumpped at. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 04:30:32 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FBUOdu031000; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:30:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FBULJO030980; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:30:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:30:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:35:46 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56087 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:53 AM 10/15/4, thomas malloy wrote: >> that have not attacked us. iraq did >>not attack us. > >Yah, what about the airplane that Saddam had in which they trained >people to take over it with short bladed knives. Then there is the >matter of Al Queda members being frequent quests in the country Something that amazes me is the lack of recognition, even in the presidential debates, of the fact that we have been in a shooting war with Iraq since the gulf war. In the year or so prior to the Iraq invasion there were regular, sometimes daily, reports of Iraq shooting at US or British planes, or us shooting back. US and British pilots have been flying missions in harms way over Iraq for over 10 years. Iraq did not live up to the agreement that ended Desert Storm. It seems to me that was plenty of reason to finish off the war. The other thing that amazes me is the lack of recognition that if we wanted to do maximum harm to Iraq, to extract maximum revenge, this would have been most easily accomplished by immediately leaving the country after having destroying Iraq's heavy weapons. This would have left Iraq open to civil war and invasion by Iran. We also could have killed off Iraq's army in the field instead of letting them walk home. It seems no good deed goes unpunished in Iraq. The no-fly zones were created to protect Iraqis from Sadam, that is to say Iraqis from Iraqis. Perhaps we should simply threaten to pull out, or just pull out, and only protect the Kurds. It was not long ago South Koreans wanted US troops out - over a traffic mishap involving our troops. Now they are upset over our planned troop reductions. We were concerned about Iraq getting nuclear weapons. Many countries seem to have interest in obtaining weapons of mass destruction. It seems to me these countries must not be aware of the consequences of what they are doing. If a country with a small nuclear arsonal uses one of them, they have opened themselves up to unlimited war and complete annihilation. This kind of war the US can fight instantaneously with no additional manpower at all. It all makes no sense. It seems the world is going collectively insane. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 06:20:13 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FDK6du019498; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:20:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FDK32K019467; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:20:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:20:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c4b2b9$aaa23eb0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Heffner's energy plan Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:19:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B28F.AA384B60"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56088 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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_01C4B28F.AA384B60 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B28F.AA384B60" ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B28F.AA384B60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHorace, First, forgive my mis-spelling of your name. Second, I like the plan more as you flesh out particular parts of the = operating sequence. Our group of companies provide materials and services to the municipal = utilities industry. Your views follow our experience working with free = competitive enterprise brought about by standing in the marketplace = hawking our wares. There is a certain harmony within our industry = whereas the atmosphere permits a periodic cleansing of the slate so that = the cream rises.=20 Of all the products sold in our great nation, those that labor in the = marketplace of ideas have the very best to offer. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B28F.AA384B60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Horace,
 
First, forgive my mis-spelling of your = name.
 
Second, I like the plan more as you flesh out = particular parts=20 of the operating sequence.
 
 Our group of companies provide materials and = services to=20 the municipal utilities industry. Your views follow our = experience=20 working with free competitive enterprise brought about by standing in = the=20 marketplace hawking our wares. There is a certain harmony within our = industry=20 whereas the atmosphere permits a periodic cleansing of the slate so that = the=20 cream rises.
 
Of all the products sold in our great nation, those = that labor=20 in the marketplace of ideas have the very best to offer.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B28F.AA384B60-- ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B28F.AA384B60 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001901c4b2b9$92fa7d40$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B28F.AA384B60-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 10:54:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FHsYqJ020501; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:54:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FHsRcW020439; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:54:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:54:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41700ED9.40704@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:54:33 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: Newcastle's New Hydrogen Storage . . . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56089 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: uses nickel and nanotubes: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/3744326.stm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 11:25:22 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FIPDdu032481; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:25:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FIPAW9032452; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:25:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:25:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:30:40 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56090 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In all prior posts in this thread containing Table 2, I had a couple typos due to cutting and pasting the rows of Table 2. Sorry! These typos did not affect any of the conclusions or statements. The correct Table 2 follows. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 12:02:27 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FJ2Fdu008443; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:02:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FJ2D2b008429; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:02:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:02:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:31:35 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56091 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace. Thanks for the analysis! What bothers me about this is that the crux of the argument is based on the modelling of spin as being just that, like a ball spinning about an axis in 3 space. Yet QM makes a point of telling us that QM spin is NOT the same as a macroscopic spin. In fact this analysis points that fact out very clearly; for if it was you'd see the results predicted by Bell. We could come up with some arbitrary model for spin that would conform to the experimental results; and it would seem the hidden variable would return. If you're correct in your analysis of Bells argument, it would seem to prove that QM spin is not like a macroscopic spin rather than that all hidden variables are impossible. The logic I do not argue; the assumptions seem questionable to me. Do they seem so to you? We know one thing; that what model we choose does have to conform to the Aspect type experiments and thus spin cannot be as simple as modelling of a particle revolving in 3 space. K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 10:20 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method A slight typo is corrected at point marked ***. Assume the state of cojugates is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. Assume there are, as in the Aspect experiment, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurment, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possibile combination 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by Bob. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that Alice and Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 8/8 B E 4/8 B F 4/8 C D 8/8 C E 4/8 C F 4/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice choses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob choses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice choses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also choses axis A, *** [The above "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis A... " really should say "... Bob coincidentally also choses axis D ...". Axis A is in the same direction as axis D, axis B is in the same direction as axis E, and axis C is in the same direction as axis F.] then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is beacuse there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. There is no hidden variable involved. What I have suggested is using the polarity of three separate photons in lieu of using the independent 3 spin axes of a single photon. This meets the implied requirement that the probabilities of spin observed on each of the 3 axes, or the equivalent observations, be independent. Now, if Alice doesn't observe the unchosen columns, and Bob behaves similarly, using photon triads should be identical to the Aspect experiment using spins. At least that is true under some of the possible quantum reality interpretations. Note that the 3 bundles, the 3 photons of a triad, might even be light years apart, with Bob and Alice, or even some third party referee, not knowing the actual results of their experiments for years. What is different about the protocol I suggest is that it is possible to discern and refine what exactly constitutes an observation. Unlike the spins in differing axes for a given photon, it *is* possible to determine all the polarization states for a given triad. Alice can force Bob's photons to carry hidden variables simply by observing all three of the photons in each triad before Bob observes his. Bob can achieve a similar result. There is now defined an experimental means to decide whether an "observation" is occuring or not, via the percentage of matches observed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 13:27:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FKRXdu000357; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:27:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FKRV9R000342; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:27:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:27:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:32:58 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: EPR and Bell Revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56092 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that Alice and Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs in the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. Suppose spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to 2 row throw out Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. However. suppose at the formation of an entangled pair two rows of Table 4 are randomly and arbitrarily thrown out by the process that sets the hidden variables. Since Table 4 is symmetrical, we can arbitrarily throw out rows 2 and 7 to obtain Table 5. i A B C D E F 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 Table 5 - Hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Tabulation of Table 5 creates Table 6. a b matches - - ------- A D 4/4 A E 0/4 A F 1/4 B D 0/4 36 possibilites B E 4/4 18 matches B F 2/4 match probability 0.5 C D 1/4 C E 2/4 C F 4/4 Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being cojugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We now see that the imaginary experimental results shown in Table 3 can actually be obtained experimentally. Entries A D, B E, and C F in Table 6 remain at 4/4 no matter which rows are thrown out. The other rows of Table 6 will average 1/4 if the (random two row throw out) selection process is repeated enough. Bell's inequality no longer applies due to an unexpected limitation in the way spin might be carried by hidden variables in a given particle, and due to the rules by which the hidden variables are chosen at the time of entanglement. The spins in each of the three axes may not be independent after all, and may in fact be carried by hidden variables, at least with regard to this experiment. Bell's assumptions are destroyed if spin in a given particle exists as hidden variables and can not all be in the same direction in all three axes at the same time, and if values of entangled particle hidden variables are, at the moment of entanglement, chosen at random from only 4 rows of Table 4 at a time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 13:37:23 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FKb9du002847; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:37:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FKb7jD002824; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:37:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:37:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:42:33 -0800 To: , From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56093 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:31 PM 10/15/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >The logic I do not argue; the assumptions seem questionable >to me. Do they seem so to you? We know one thing; that what >model we choose does have to conform to the Aspect type >experiments and thus spin cannot be as simple as modelling >of a particle revolving in 3 space. I agree entirely. In fact, this morning I hopefully figured out a way hidden variables might in fact produce Aspect's results. I have already posted the write-up of this under the thread name "EPR and Bell Revisited". Hope I got it right. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 14:37:26 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FLbGqJ012460; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:37:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FLbEA2012439; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:37:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:37:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410515213639560@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "Akira Kawasaki" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 15, 2004 Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:36:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d8716fc3f8063b44b18599d6cd4e095382790fad917fc14d6b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.15.241 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56094 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > From: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 10/15/2004 12:14:27 PM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 15, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 15 Oct 04 Washington, DC 1. EXOTIC WEAPONS: WHAT'S NEW ESTABLISHES THE "EXCALIBUR PRIZE." The $10 million X-Prize for the first civilian sort-of space ship capable of offering affordable space sickness to the public got front-page coverage around the world. The WN editorial board was inspired to offer a prize of our own. We put our head together and came up with the Excalibur Prize for the weapon based on the most speculative physics. "Excalibur" was the code name of the fearsome X-ray laser that Edward Teller promised could wipe out the entire Soviet missile fleet simultaneously. They chose the name of another mythical weapon. Candidates abound, such as the hafnium bomb http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn041604.cfm , but lest you think the prize is wired for Carl Collins, there's the awesome anti-matter bomb, which comes up so often it's now called the "doesn't-matter bomb." The Air Farce slapped a secrecy lid on the "positron bomb" after the San Francisco Chronicle carried a story on it. No word on how many positrons the Air Farce has. The Excalibur Prize consists of a free subscription to WN. 2. HOMEOPATHIC E-MAIL: LOOKS LIKE THE TEST WILL BE DELAYED AGAIN. Jacques Benveniste, 69, died last week after a heart operation. The French biologist claimed in 1988 that biological effects of a dissolved substance persist, even after the dilution limit is exceeded. A decade later he discovered that infinitely dilute solutions emit an electronic signature that can be captured by a coil, digitized, and transmitted over the internet to transfer homeopathic properties to flasks of water anywhere in the world. I challenged him to a simple international double-blind test in which he would be asked to identify which of several flasks had been activated. The challenge was carried in a Time magazine article by Leon Jaroff (Time, 17 May '99). I met with Benveniste that June. A pleasant man, he agreed to everything, but said he needed time to get ready http://www.aps.org/WN/WN99/wn051499.cfm. Weeks became months. Years passed, trees fell, but to the end Jacques Benveniste needed more time. We all do. 3. CREATIONISM: THE BULL ABOUT EARTH BEING YOUNG IS GETTING OLD. You may recall that back in January, WN related that bookstores in Grand Canyon National Park carried "Grand Canyon: A Different View," a creationist account that contends the canyon can at most be a few thousand years old, since that's how old the Earth is. A federal review of whether the book should be sold in the Park has been delayed "over issues of church and state." What issues? Geology is a science. Meanwhile the book has been moved from Natural Science to Inspirational. That inspired me to complain. As Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education put it, "Nobody is saying this book should be burned, but it should not be sold at this bookstore." THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 14:56:00 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9FLtqqJ017782; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:55:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9FLtqm1017776; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:55:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:55:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:01:14 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56095 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. Suppose spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to 2 row throw out Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. However. suppose at the formation of an entangled pair two conjugate rows of Table 4 are randomly and arbitrarily thrown out by the process that sets the hidden variables. Since Table 4 is symmetrical, we can arbitrarily throw out conjugate rows 2 and 7 to obtain Table 5. Conjugate row pairs are defined as (2,7), (3,6) and (4,5). i A B C D E F 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 Table 5 - Hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Tabulation of Table 5 creates Table 6. a b matches - - ------- A D 4/4 A E 0/4 A F 1/4 B D 0/4 36 possibilites B E 4/4 18 matches B F 2/4 match probability 0.5 C D 1/4 C E 2/4 C F 4/4 Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being cojugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We now see that the imaginary experimental results shown in Table 3 can actually be obtained experimentally. Entries A D, B E, and C F in Table 6 remain at 4/4 no matter which rows are thrown out. The other rows of Table 6 will average 1/4 if the (random conjugate row pair throw-out) selection process is repeated enough. Bell's inequality no longer applies due to an unexpected limitation in the way spin might be carried by hidden variables in a given particle, and due to the rules by which the hidden variables are chosen at the time of entanglement. The spins in each of the three axes may not be independent after all, and may in fact be carried by hidden variables, at least with regard to this experiment. Bell's assumptions are destroyed if the spin values of a particle are not necessarily independent variables. There is no way to directly determine dependence of the hidden variables because spin can only be measured in one axis at a time. Futher, there could be a nearly infinite number of such variables, a set of three for each possible orientation of the orthogonal axes. This hypothesis sounds outlandish, but it certainly is no more outlandish than the all possible paths hypothesis in QED, and other quantum mysteries. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 15 17:34:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9G0YguT022678; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:34:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9G0Yaii022626; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:34:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:34:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <140.3498f92c.2ea1c68e@aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:34:22 EDT Subject: A reconciliation of quantum physics and special relativity To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_140.3498f92c.2ea1c68e_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56096 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_140.3498f92c.2ea1c68e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My analysis of the observables associated with cold fusion has permitted me=20 to determine many properties of matter.=A0 For example, the cold fusion proc= ess=20 has allowed me to determine the path of the quantum transition.=A0 Using thi= s=20 path I was then able to compute the intensity of the spectral lines. I have continued with the analysis.=A0 I have now discovered a reconciliatio= n=20 of quantum physics and special relativity.=A0 This in itself is a big step.= =A0 The=20 analysis is on page 11 of the attached link. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html The understanding of the implications will allow man to directly control all= =20 of the natural forces. cheers Frank Znidarsic --part1_140.3498f92c.2ea1c68e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My analysis of the observables asso= ciated with cold fusion has permitted me to determine many properties of mat= ter.=A0 For example, the cold fusion process has allowed me to determine the= path of the quantum transition.=A0 Using this path I was then able to compu= te the intensity of the spectral lines.

I have continued with the analysis.=A0 I have now discovered a reconciliatio= n of quantum physics and special relativity.=A0 This in itself is a big step= .=A0 The analysis is on page 11 of the attached link.

http://www.ang= elfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html


The understanding of the implications will allow man to directly control all= of the natural forces.

cheers

Frank Znidarsic
 --part1_140.3498f92c.2ea1c68e_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 05:53:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GCraBX030179; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:53:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GCrZUg030171; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:53:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:53:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041061611524170@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:52:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94084d9d4863a94a4ebe393dd21e9c1032b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.117 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56097 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I've been told that holding a couple of magnets external to an oscilloscope might show the presence of the electronium (*e-) particle with a mass of twice that of the electron (same charge) as a dim spot or line separated from the more intense electron spot or trace. The magnetic field passing through the front portion of the CRT need only be about 20 gauss or so, depending on the voltage of the CRT. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

 
I've been told that holding a couple of magnets external to an oscilloscope
might show the presence of the electronium (*e-) particle with a mass of twice
that of the electron (same charge) as a dim spot or line separated from the more
intense electron spot or trace.
 
The magnetic field passing through the front portion of the CRT need only be
about 20 gauss or so, depending on the voltage of the CRT.
 
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 06:03:28 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GD3OBX032617; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:03:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GD3Nc3032599; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:03:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:03:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:08:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56098 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I had a horrific error in Table 6. It should have been as follows: a b matches - - ------- A D 4/4 A E 0/4 A F 2/4 B D 0/4 36 possibilites B E 4/4 20 matches B F 2/4 match probability 5/9 C D 2/4 C E 2/4 C F 4/4 Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 There is in fact no way to select from the rows of table 5 to obtain a probability of 0.5 in Table 6. This is, in fact, what Bell's inequality says. This was Bell's point. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 13:05:38 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GK5ZBX024887; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:05:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GK5LJt024783; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:05:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:05:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 12:10:52 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: FTL Triad Quantum Communication Method Resent-Message-ID: <5ouEFB.A.LDG.A8XcBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56099 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:31 PM 10/15/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >The logic I do not argue; the assumptions seem questionable >to me. Do they seem so to you? We know one thing; that what >model we choose does have to conform to the Aspect type >experiments and thus spin cannot be as simple as modelling >of a particle revolving in 3 space. Well, it appears I agreed with this prematurely, at least on the basis that correlation of the hidden variables could get around Bell's assumptions. Even if the hidden variables for the 3 axes can be self-correlated, unlike for the spinning ball model, even by nature's equivalent of a computer program at the time of observation, it appears there is no way to obatain a 50 percent matching overall, like that shown in Table 3 below. In other words, Bell's inequality seems to work even if the spinning ball analogy is thrown out. If the correlation is perfect when Bob and Alice choose the same axis, then the correlation when they do not, i.e. only one match in four, can not be achieved, and vice versa, without knowlege of whether Bob and Alice have chosen the same axis of observation. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results Another way to look at this is that setting the hidden variables at the time of entanglement requires a priori knowlege of both Alice's and Bob's choice of axis. This is possibly is not so far fetched in the sense that, from the photons perspective, its time of flight is zero. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 14:14:20 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GLEFBX007488; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:14:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GLEDRa007475; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:14:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:14:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:19:46 -0800 To: "vortex-l" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56100 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:52 AM 10/16/4, Frederick Sparber wrote: >I've been told that holding a couple of magnets external to an oscilloscope >might show the presence of the electronium (*e-) particle with a mass of twice >that of the electron (same charge) as a dim spot or line separated from >the more >intense electron spot or trace. > >The magnetic field passing through the front portion of the CRT need only be >about 20 gauss or so, depending on the voltage of the CRT. I would think no external magnetic field is necessary. The scope's deflecting electrostatic (or magnetic) field will deflect a mass 3m particle less than a mass m particle with the same charge. Might try adding a DC bias to an AC signal and setting beam brightness on maximum and signal deflection just off screen and look for a ghost trace at about 1/3 screen. Alternatively, eliminate sweep and input signal altogether, and look for a spot at about 1/3 screen when main spot is biased to just off screen. Main problem is providing an electronium source to the electron gun. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 14:23:45 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GLNf8V015876; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:23:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GLNJ20015799; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:23:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:23:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:28:46 -0800 To: "vortex-l" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Resent-Message-ID: <7ySkrC.A.z2D.GFZcBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56101 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:52 AM 10/16/4, Frederick Sparber wrote: >I've been told that holding a couple of magnets external to an oscilloscope >might show the presence of the electronium (*e-) particle with a mass of twice >that of the electron (same charge) as a dim spot or line separated from >the more >intense electron spot or trace. > >The magnetic field passing through the front portion of the CRT need only be >about 20 gauss or so, depending on the voltage of the CRT. I would think no external magnetic field is necessary. The scope's deflecting electrostatic (or magnetic) field will deflect a mass 3m particle less than a mass m particle with the same charge. Might try adding a DC bias to an AC signal and setting beam brightness on maximum and signal deflection just off screen and look for a ghost trace at about 1/3 screen. Alternatively, eliminate sweep and input signal altogether, and look for a spot at about 1/3 screen when main spot is biased to just off screen. Main problem is providing an electronium source to the electron gun. Supplying an electronium source to an electron gun should be no problem, provided electronium particles can pass through conduction bands. Suppose, for example, that some electrolyte were full of electronium. It is then only necessary to connect the anode of an electrolysis cell containing that electrolyte in series with and just preceeding (in an electron flow model) the electron gun's filament DC supply. In other words pass the beam current through the electrolyte just prior to the gun. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 14:39:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GLdb8V018902; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:39:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9GLdZfY018868; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:39:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:39:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:45:07 -0800 To: "vortex-l" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56102 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Provided a steady electronium current in some concentration can be obtained, a hot filament of any kind of a vacuum tube should act as an electronium concentrator. That is because electronium is more massive, and thus should not boil off as easily as electrons do in a vacuum. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 17:13:22 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H0DGBX006590; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:13:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H0D67s006544; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:13:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:13:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:12:53 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <63e3n09bu849n7c780u90qcahhm9vicdhb@4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id i9H0CxBX006503 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56103 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:08:54 -0800: Hi, [snip] >There is in fact no way to select from the rows of table 5 to obtain a >probability of 0.5 in Table 6. This is, in fact, what Bell's inequality >says. This was Bell's point. [snip] I'm probably missing something, but it seems to me that a probability of 0.5 is exactly what one would expect if the spins were totally random and uncorrelated, i.e. if there were no effect at all, i.e. no hidden variables, and also no entanglement whatsoever. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 17:26:52 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H0QlBX009154; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:26:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H0Qkpu009140; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:26:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:26:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:26:39 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <8ve3n0lv9lsl768auh8412kkoipe6humog@4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id i9H0QhBX009022 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56104 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:35:46 -0800: Hi, [snip] >all. It all makes no sense. It seems the world is going collectively >insane. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > The world has been collectively insane since the advent of humanity. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 18:03:43 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H13ZBX017050; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:03:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H13Yko017041; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:03:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:03:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041017010323.97387.qmail@web81104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:03:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56105 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I think Horace is exactly correct. If such a particle exists, (*e-) would almost certainly be relegated to the inner orbital and not normally become a conduction electron. > a hot filament of any kind of a vacuum > tube should act as an > electronium concentrator. This is a good point and a possible way to test for the particle. Take an old tungsten filament and place it in a high x-ray or gamma field which is significantly below the ~.5 MeV binding energy (say .3 MeV, but nevertheless look for the .5 MeV signature. If a strong signal is seen in this spectrum, due to reemission following electronium decay (and it would be possible as it is probably on the energy tail of the Maxwellian distribution), then that is a very good indication for electronium, as there is no other good way AFAIK to explain any upshifting of gamma radiation. Jones IF this works,of course, it might also be a way to get some OU out of old filaments... Wouldn't that be an ironic turn of events? You pay $5 bucks for a bulb and they promise to buy it back for $25 if you will just put a few thousand hours of use on it !! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 18:36:42 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H1aa8V031039; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:36:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H1aPGx030974; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:36:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:36:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041001703528610@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:35:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a2985901518d59bd1f3c42b2a6946530350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.64 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56106 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Jones Beene wrote: > > I think Horace is exactly correct. If such a particle > exists, (*e-) would almost certainly be relegated to > the inner orbital and not normally become a conduction > electron. > Quite so. But the CRT cathodes are indirectly heated Barium and/or Strontium Oxides on nickel or such, which undergo some positive ion bombardment that could shake out some (*e-) particles. http://www.sfu.ca/phys/233/042/labscripts/expt42.pdf Also, electron bombardment of the Zinc "Salts" Phosphor and SiO2 glass, can shake out (*e-) as Auger electrons. We need volunteers with scopes and magnets. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Jones Beene wrote:
>
> I think Horace is exactly correct. If such a particle
> exists, (*e-) would almost certainly be relegated to
> the inner orbital and not normally become a conduction
> electron.
>
Quite so. But the CRT cathodes are indirectly heated Barium and/or Strontium Oxides on
nickel or such, which undergo some positive ion bombardment that could shake out some
(*e-) particles.
 
 
Also, electron bombardment of the Zinc "Salts" Phosphor and SiO2 glass, can shake out (*e-) as Auger
electrons.
 
We need volunteers with scopes and magnets.   :-)
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 19:04:40 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H24ZBX028201; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:04:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H24XQ6028175; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:04:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:04:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:10:02 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56107 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:12 AM 10/17/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:08:54 -0800: >Hi, >[snip] >>There is in fact no way to select from the rows of table 5 to obtain a >>probability of 0.5 in Table 6. This is, in fact, what Bell's inequality >>says. This was Bell's point. >[snip] >I'm probably missing something, but it seems to me that a probability of >0.5 is exactly what one would expect if the spins were totally random and >uncorrelated, i.e. if there were no effect at all, i.e. no hidden >variables, and also no entanglement whatsoever. Yes that's right. However, when the experiment is done there is always a match if the same axis is chosen. The results are not totally random at all. Just because the axes are chosen at random and Bell's inequality applies only to the total matches, doesn't mean that every result can not be tabulated and compared at a later time. Notice in the sample imaginary experiment tabulation that when Alice and Bob choose the same axis (A and D, B and E, or C and F) they get a perfect match: 800 out of 800. The other axes they get only a 1 in 4 match. Before looking at the situation this way I always thought the communication was primarily needed to get the perfect match. After looking at it this way, it has become clear to me the knowlege of when there is *not* an axis match is at least as important, because the number of matches has to be "decorrelated" down to only one hit in four. By the rules of the experiment, there can be no way to know until approximately the moment of the observations whether there is an axis match or not. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 21:08:18 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H48BBX025312; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:08:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H48Ahw025290; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:08:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:08:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:13:40 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #3) Resent-Message-ID: <7luvX.A.GLG.qAfcBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56108 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well, my hopes for learning something by engaging the subject continue to come to fruition. Unless I have made yet another calculation error or other typical amateur blunder, something amazing is afoot here. EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #3) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. Suppose spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to 2 row throw out Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. However, suppose at the formation of an entangled pair two rows of Table 4, say rows 2 and 3 for example, are thrown out by the process that sets the hidden variables. Further, suppose some rows are given more weight than others. For exapmple, suppose row 4 is given 5 times the probability as other rows. This results in Table 5. i A B C D E F 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Tabulation of Table 5 creates Table 6. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 1/8 A F 1/8 B D 1/8 72 possibilites B E 8/8 35 matches B F 6/8 match probability .486 C D 1/8 C E 1/8 C F 8/8 Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being conjugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We now see that it is possible to obtain dependent entries that yield less than a 0.5 probability of a match, thus violating Bell's inequality. The imaginary experimental results shown in Table 3 can actually be obtained experimentally via any stochastic model designed to converge the probability of a match to 0.5. Bell's assumptions are destroyed if the spin values of a particle are not necessarily independent variables. There is no way to directly determine dependence of the hidden variables because spin can only be measured in one axis at a time. Further, there could be a nearly infinite number of such variables, a set of three for each possible orientation of the orthogonal axes. This hypothesis sounds outlandish, but it certainly is no more outlandish than the all possible paths hypothesis in QED, and other quantum mysteries. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 16 21:17:32 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H4HJ8V006468; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:17:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H4HHhx006431; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:17:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:17:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:22:49 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #3) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56109 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "We now see that it is possible to obtain dependent entries that yield less than a 0.5 probability of a match, thus violating Bell's inequality. The imaginary experimental results shown in Table 3 can actually be obtained experimentally via any stochastic model designed to converge the probability of a match to 0.5." This should have said: "We now see that it is possible to obtain dependent entries that yield less than a 0.5 probability of a match, thus violating Bell's inequality. The imaginary experimental results shown in Table 3 can actually be obtained experimentally via any stochastic model designed to coverge on the probailities shown in Tables 2 and 3, and thus designed to converge on an overall 0.5 probability of a match." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 00:16:50 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H7Gf8V007831; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:16:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H7GV67007776; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:16:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:16:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:22:01 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #4) Resent-Message-ID: <-t08a.A.b5B.OxhcBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56110 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well once again a clerical error has blown my feeble attack on Bell's inequality, which stands firm. The only change below is from Table 5 on. I hope my suffering bumbling around is of at least some pedagogical use to someone, if not serving outright morbid curiosity. 8^) EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #4) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. Suppose spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to 2 row throw out Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. However, suppose at the formation of an entangled pair two rows of Table 4, say rows 2 and 3 for example, are thrown out by the process that sets the hidden variables. Further, suppose some rows are given more weight than others. For example, suppose row 4 is given w times the weight of other rows. This results in Table 5. i A B C D E F 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 Row 4 has weight w 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 i - possible combination (row) number 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Tabulation of Table 5 creates Table 6. a b matches - - ------- A D (3+w)/(3+w) A E 1/(3+w) A F 1/(3+w) w = weight B D 1/(3+w) total possibilites = 9*(3+w) B E (3+w)/(3+w) Total matches = 5*w + 15 B F (1+w)/(3+w) Match probability desired .5 C D 1/(3+w) C E (1+w)/(3+w) C F (3+w)/(3+w) Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being conjugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We need (matches)/(possibilities) = 0.5. That is to say (5*w + 15)/(9w + 27) = 0.5 10*w + 30 = 9*w + 27 w = -3 which is not possible. We now see that the above example can not violate Bell's inequality. A similar attack can be made giving unique weights to each of the 8 possible rows in table 1. This would be another means of proving Bell's inequality works. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 00:57:38 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9H7vYBX032485; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:57:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9H7vOkW032425; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:57:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:57:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:02:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #5) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56111 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Unless someone else has something to add, this draft pretty much wraps up the revisiting of Bell's theorm. A general analysis using probability weighting for each possible spin combination is included below. EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #5) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. Suppose spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to weighting considerations Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. However, suppose we now simply decide to weight each row's probability. This results in Table 5. w A B C D E F g 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: h 0 0 1 1 1 0 i 0 1 0 1 0 1 w - weight for given row j 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations k 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations m 1 0 1 0 1 0 n 1 1 0 0 0 1 Let T = (g+h+i+j+k+m+n+p) p 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Tabulation of Table 5 creates Table 6. a b matches - - ------- A D T/T A E (g+h+n+p)/T A F (g+i+m+p)/T B D (g+h+n+p))/T Total possibilites = 9*T B E T/T Total matches = 3*T + 6*g + 6*p + 2*(h+i+j+k) B F (g+j+k+p)/T Match probability desired .5 C D (g+i+m+p)/T C E (g+j+k+p)/T C F T/T Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being conjugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We can immediately see the justification for throwing out rows 1 and 8, as their weights g and p have factors of 9. We thus set g=p=0 and throw out rows 1 and 8. We now have T = h+i+j+k and total possibilities = 9*T. Total matches is 3*T + 2*T = 5*T. We want (matches)/(possibilities) = 0.5. However, the ratio (matches)/(possibilities) = (5*T)/(9*T) = 5/9, no matter what we chose for the weights. If g and/or p are nonzero the ratio is worse than 5/9. Bell's inequality thus holds no matter how the 8 possible spin combinations are weighted. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 05:01:37 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HC1X8V001384; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:01:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HC1Mrh001333; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:01:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:01:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 07:01:19 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <126dYC.A.vU.S8lcBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56112 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Horace Heffner posted; >Yes that's right. However, when the experiment is done there is always a > when Alice and Bob choose the same axis (A and >D, B and E, or C and F) they get a perfect match: 800 out of 800. The >other axes they get only a 1 in 4 match. Hum, is this proof that the observer (s) effect the outcome of the experiment? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 05:09:09 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HC908V005555; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:09:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HC8wac005531; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:08:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:08:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 07:09:01 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Iraqi aluminum tube story finis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56113 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace posted >This >kind of war the US can fight instantaneously with no additional manpower at >all. It all makes no sense. It seems the world is going collectively >insane. Brilliant observation Horace. Unfortunately that's what Bible Code says is going to happen. I was with a man tonight who has been studying the rise of the one World Government. He has reason to believe that Bush is negotiating such a treaty, more insanity. BTW, did any of you people catch the story on the implantable microchips? They are being manufactured by a company just to the east of me in South Saint Paul. Enjoy yourself while you can, I don't think this is going to last. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 05:18:00 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HCHsBX013624; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:17:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HCHnN3013587; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:17:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:17:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:23:21 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56114 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:01 AM 10/17/4, thomas malloy wrote: >>Horace Heffner posted; > > >>Yes that's right. However, when the experiment is done there is always a > >> when Alice and Bob choose the same axis (A and >>D, B and E, or C and F) they get a perfect match: 800 out of 800. The >>other axes they get only a 1 in 4 match. > > >Hum, is this proof that the observer (s) effect the outcome of the experiment? That the observers affect the outcome is one interpretation. Personally I doubt that interpretation, depending on what is called an observation and what is called an observer. I would expect a fully automated experiment to get the same results without the consiciousness of an observer at the moment of the observation. However, I do not know which quantum interpretations have been experimentally ruled out or are presently in favor. This is just personal opinion with little basis in experience. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 05:57:35 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HCvRBX021127; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:57:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HCvQAJ021122; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:57:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:57:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041017135654.0068e83c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 13:56:54 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Newcastle's New Hydrogen Storage . . . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56115 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:59:05 Terry Blanton wrote, >uses nickel and nanotubes: > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/3744326.stm Well spotted Terry. I normally read the BBC site but I didn't pick up this one. For anyone who missed this link I have copied the important part below. =========================================================== Scientists are now trying to get around this. The options include metal alloys that can be persuaded to absorb up to 1,000 times their own volume of hydrogen; and minuscule cylinders of carbon atoms, known as nanotubes, that are more efficient still. But both of these solutions have their drawbacks, and now the teams from Newcastle and Liverpool Universities have come forward with another approach. They have investigated a number of synthetic materials including a blue solid containing carbon, nickel, nitrogen and a little oxygen which together form a crystalline "tongue and groove" structure. Within this lattice there are tiny gaps that are millionths of a millimetre in size where the hydrogen can sit. What is more, these pores are protected by "windows" that "close" once the hydrogen is inside. ------------------ Better performance ------------------ Professor Matt Rosseinsky, of Liverpool's department of chemistry, said: "Our new porous materials can capture hydrogen gas within their channels, like a molecular cat-flap. "After allowing the hydrogen molecule - the 'cat' - in, the structure closes shut behind it. The important point is that the hydrogen is loaded into the materials at high pressure but stored in them at a much lower pressure - a unique behaviour." ============================================================ It seems to me that Rosseinsky has found a great way of producing synthetic Beta-atmosphere vacuum cavities in a controllable fashion in contrast to the production of metals like palladium. This sounds very promising in relation to initiating cold fusion. After all, if C60 cavities can change the rate of radioactive decay of Be7 by a significant amount then it's not unreasonable to imagine that nano cavities can catalyse cold fusion of deuterium. It wasn't that long ago that then current theory required that both rates and time distributions of decay events were truly random. Indeed, In CHEM and ENG.NEWS, Apr.7 1975, p.2. Prf.Dudley complained, ================================================ "Long and well taught is the axiom that radioactive decay rates are described by N = No - kt, with half-Iife constant = 0.693/ k. These equations result initially from studies done with crude instruments some 70 years ago. Bluntly, they are incorrect, nonetheless appear in our latest textbooks to compound the errors of past generations. This in spite of the more recent evidence. ================================================ Cheers, Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 06:59:05 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HDx08V031025; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:59:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HDwtQB030982; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:58:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:58:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002801c4b451$5534f0a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Cc: References: <410-220041001703528610@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:58:07 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56116 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber writes. > Also, electron bombardment of the Zinc "Salts" Phosphor and SiO2 glass, can shake out (*e-) as Auger electrons.... ...or what about this relevant possibility (which might just appeal to a few of the "free-thinker" experimenters on vortex)... Everyone who follows CF has a theory about the missing 24 MeV of energy which should be there in the form of a "signature" gamma when deuterium combines to form helium, but is notoriously absent... as Park and other skeptics of LENR will be quick to let you know. Yes, there are other (feeble) theories to account for this lack or absence of the characteristic photon, of course, but none of them are at all convincing... so let's add one more ingredient into the (mental) boiling kettle for your consideration, and see which one eventually rises to the top ... This new one being that in the CF reaction zone, most of the energy released goes into (*e-) synthesis !! We have hypothesized before that if the heavy electron (*e-) exists in the earth environment (and under one of the main tenets of string theory there is every reason to suspect that (*e-) must have existed at one time in the past), then some of it, or most of it, would have been created in energetic cosmological events, such as a supernova, perhaps the one from which our sun was born. I suspect that if one looks closely at the *effective* pressures and heat which are involved at the subangstrom focal point of helium formation in that brief picosecond before the D+D or "dirty deed" transpires within the tight confines of the Pd matrix, then perhaps something similar in the way of confinement parameters (to the supernova) may be occurring in an otherwise relatively cold matrix. At any rate, the end product of D+D cold fusion could be... not just the alpha, which is now well-documented, but in addition, a dozen of so (*e-) particles, which after depositing their thermal energy, would take up residence in both the Pd and the He... But is this wild hypothesis disprovable... YES ! ....if one can collect the He off of a running CF cell and run it through the most sensitive mass-spec, that procedure might be the easy way - and a method to find and document the elusive electronium, should it be the main product of the most typical CF reaction. I wonder what the sensitivity is of the very top of the line mass-spec? This article below seems to indicate that the leading edge of the test instrument art in common use for mass-energy measurement is "now 2-5 ppm, which many instruments achieve with an external calibration or lock mass..." http://www.lcgceurope.com/lcgceurope/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=88264 It is not clear if that is for atomic mass or group mass, but perhaps it is indicative of an instrument being available. If the He from a CF cell were doubly enriched with electronium it would have roughly 2 MeV greater mass energy. compared to the normal 3.728 GeV or .00027 greater than normal, or 2700 ppm, no? ... which should be measurable, one would think... even without a top of the line instrument. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 07:43:09 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HEh5BX014469; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 07:43:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HEgwrY014402; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 07:42:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 07:42:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041001713421150@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:42:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94098d8233833be4e2ba771eef23a994216350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56117 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > [Original Message] > From: Jones Beene > To: vortex > Cc: > Date: 10/17/04 8:58:56 AM > Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) > > Frederick Sparber writes. > > > Also, electron bombardment of the Zinc "Salts" Phosphor > and SiO2 glass, can shake out (*e-) as Auger electrons.... > > > ...or what about this relevant possibility (which might just > appeal to a few of the "free-thinker" experimenters on > vortex)... > > Everyone who follows CF has a theory about the missing 24 > MeV of energy which should be there in the form of a > "signature" gamma when deuterium combines to form helium, > but is notoriously absent... as Park and other skeptics of > LENR will be quick to let you know. > Given that many radioisotopes Internally Create Electron-Positron Pairs, I see no reason why the D-D to He4 reaction couldn't create a local plethora of pairs that combine with the resident electrons, and end up as the (*e-) particle, especially in the Pd-D lattice. > > Yes, there are other (feeble) theories to account for this > lack or absence of the characteristic photon, of course, but > none of them are at all convincing... so let's add one more > ingredient into the (mental) boiling kettle for your > consideration, and see which one eventually rises to the top > ... > > This new one being that in the CF reaction zone, most of the > energy released goes into (*e-) synthesis !! > Yes. Why not? > > We have hypothesized before that if the heavy electron (*e-) > exists in the earth environment (and under one of the main > tenets of string theory there is every reason to suspect > that (*e-) must have existed at one time in the past), then > some of it, or most of it, would have been created in > energetic cosmological events, such as a supernova, perhaps > the one from which our sun was born. > > I suspect that if one looks closely at the *effective* > pressures and heat which are involved at the subangstrom > focal point of helium formation in that brief picosecond > before the D+D or "dirty deed" transpires within the tight > confines of the Pd matrix, then perhaps something similar in > the way of confinement parameters (to the supernova) may be > occurring in an otherwise relatively cold matrix. > Note that the presemce of the Pd nucleous is also a facotor since the pair production cross-section increases as Z^2: http://www.sandia.gov/ASCI/russia/pdf_files/gryaznykh1998.pdf > > At any rate, the end product of D+D cold fusion could be... > not just the alpha, which is now well-documented, but in > addition, a dozen of so (*e-) particles, which after > depositing their thermal energy, would take up residence in > both the Pd and the He... > Why only a dozen? 24 Mev might create more than 20 (*e-) particles that can get in the mix as catalysts for more CF reactions. > > But is this wild hypothesis disprovable... YES ! > > ....if one can collect the He off of a running CF cell and > run it through the most sensitive mass-spec, that procedure > might be the easy way - and a method to find and document > the elusive electronium, should it be the main product of > the most typical CF reaction. > > I wonder what the sensitivity is of the very top of the line > mass-spec? This article below seems to indicate that the > leading edge of the test instrument art in common use for > mass-energy measurement is "now 2-5 ppm, which many > instruments achieve with an external calibration or lock > mass..." > http://www.lcgceurope.com/lcgceurope/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=88264 > It is not clear if that is for atomic mass or group mass, > but perhaps it is indicative of an instrument being > available. > > If the He from a CF cell were doubly enriched with > electronium it would have roughly 2 MeV greater mass energy. > compared to the normal 3.728 GeV or .00027 greater than > normal, or 2700 ppm, no? > > ... which should be measurable, one would think... even > without a top of the line instrument. > Possibly, but remember Pons and Fleischmann claim their experiment "blew a 14 inch diameter hole in the benchtop. :-) > Frederick > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 08:13:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HFDcBX022783; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:13:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HFDbhP022758; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:13:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:13:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003e01c4b45b$c43ef360$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "Robin van Spaandonk" Cc: "vortex" References: <010c01c4ae37$4e7f0cc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <002301c4aedb$129a7600$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: The GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR with hydrino augmentation Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:12:36 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56118 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In some prior speculation about the possibility of designing an environmentally acceptable and safe uranium fission reactor, which employs direct thermal to electric conversion and depends on "makeup" neutrons in the form of fully shrunken hydrinos, an idea was present by Robin van Spaandonk which is intriguing in the context of a particular manufacturing technique. Robin writes, "It seems to me that the overall efficiency would be higher if you just used the electrons freed by the fission fragments directly [snip] This avoids losses involved in producing coherent light, and in transferring the energy of that light to free electrons." At first, this idea seemed attractive but did not seem possible in actual practice... at least not for the situation were a high multiplication ratio in a subcritical reactor must be maintained using only natural uranium. Even if several pounds of hydrinos can be produced in situ per day and an acceptable percentage of those result in virtual neutrons, one would still need several thousand pounds of unenriched uranium to achieve a high multiplication ratio. How do you get that much uranium thin enough and still use it as a cathode? Here is the Energy (in MeV) distribution in typical fission reactions Kinetic energy of fission fragments 161 MeV Prompt gamma 9 Kinetic energy of fission neutrons 8 Delayed Gamma (fission products) 8 Beta decay of fission products 7 Antineutrinos 7 total 200 MeV per fission The fission fragements are both around half the mass of the original uranium, therfore even with about 80 MeV each, they will not travel far in a solid fuel rod. I would suspect the the free-path would be submicron. If one wanted to engineer a situation where a substanial number of the fragments (or at least the electrons displaced by them) were to be able geometrically to actually exit the cathode of a thermionic fuel rod, then the prospect looks hopeless... at first it did anyway. How does one convert several thousand pounds of natural uranium into a form thin enough but with structural integrity for use in a thermionic situation at 2000 K or higher ? Here is a partial answer based upon a particular manufacturing techniuqe... which is close to some which are in use today in metal fabrication factories, but is not itself exactly like anything which has been done before. First, realize that pure U is very malleable and ductile, bur very reactive with O2. It can be rolled as thin as aluminum foil and stamped using common metal working equipment so long as this is done in a very dry and O2 reduced environment. IOW it is difficult but not impossible. It can then be easily anodized or nitrided into a very heat resistent ceramic, using normal nitriding techniques. This alos binds the layers into a structural unit. In mass production, therefore, one can imagine that a tubular cathode of U ceramic with a high porosity can be manufactured ( 70-90 % porosity and not just random porosity, but micro-channeled so that all the channels are aligned radial to the fuel pipe axis. It would involve rolling, stamping, stacking and annodizing very thin disks of uranium robotically. The resulting cathode pipe would have porous channels all radiating out from the central axis in the direction of an accelerating grid but OTOH it would also be a one-piece heat resistent structural cathode. What this might allow, in terms of added efficency could be very promising... but who knows... The $64 question is - in a geometry in which a high proportion of all fissions result in the expelling of ballistic electrons, due to the kinetics of the fission fragments, can this be highly efficent even without high-probability coupling of the emitted electrons to semi-coherent IR from the fuel pipe? I don't think any of the garage experimenters on vortex are equiped to find out the answer, but I wonder if the "not invented here" syndrome extends all the way throught the entrenched nuclear bureaucracy? A curious note. Uranium is the second most dense element, so even if it is manufactured in a form with a porous solid with a gazzillion aligned microchannels, so that it has a porosity of say 85% (IOW 85 percent open space and 15 percent cermet) it will still be as dense as solid aluminum. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 08:37:27 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HFbLBX029709; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:37:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HFbKRh029695; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:37:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:37:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410017143624330@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:36:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e9136187c8b18dc9925142bcd77fefe1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.221 Resent-Message-ID: <-Y2UU.A.7PH.wGpcBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56119 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Jones Beene's post reminds me of Les Cases' claimed heat with Pd-D in an activated charcoal catalyst matrix. Wouldn't a hardwood board heated above 350 C in an oven under a few hundred atmospheres of D2 pressure produce a "charcoal board" that could replace Pd as an electrolysis cathode? BTW, biomass inherently contains potassium and lithium (usually carbonates). Maybe my biomass technology experience will finally yield some fruit. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Jones Beene's post reminds me of Les Cases' claimed heat with Pd-D in an
activated charcoal catalyst matrix.
 
Wouldn't a hardwood board heated above 350 C in an oven under a few hundred atmospheres
of D2 pressure produce a "charcoal board" that could replace Pd as an electrolysis cathode?
 
BTW, biomass inherently contains potassium and lithium (usually carbonates).
 
Maybe my biomass technology experience  will finally yield some fruit.  :-)
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 09:03:58 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HG3q8V025782; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:03:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HG3lid025738; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:03:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:03:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041001715249640@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: The GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR with hydrino augmentation Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:02:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940041bbdac642cf9e676783243caf8d362350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.13 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56120 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Look up the Russian "Topaz" Thermionic Converter space power system, Jones. http://www.kiae.ru/eng/inf/tex/t6.html You are hitting all around it. :-) That technology transfer was conducted in this area in the early to mid 90s. They had a Topaz on display at the National Atomic Museum here. a beautiful piece of engineering. http://www.atomicmuseum.com/ Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Look up the Russian "Topaz" Thermionic Converter space power  system, Jones.

http://www.kiae.ru/eng/inf/tex/t6.html

You are hitting all around it.   :-)

That technology transfer was conducted in this area in the early to mid 90s.

They had a Topaz on display at the National Atomic Museum here. a beautiful piece of engineering.

http://www.atomicmuseum.com/

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 10:10:00 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HH9vBX023552; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:09:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HH9l4C023411; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:09:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:09:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006e01c4b46b$fc206ba0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Cc: References: <410-220041001715249640@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: The GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR with hydrino augmentation Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:08:55 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56121 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: "Frederick Sparber" > Look up the Russian "Topaz" Thermionic Converter space power system http://www.kiae.ru/eng/inf/tex/t6.html > You are hitting all around it. :-) > That technology transfer was conducted in this area in the early to mid 90s. > They had a Topaz on display at the National Atomic Museum here. a beautiful piece of engineering. http://www.atomicmuseum.com/ Yes, but unfortunately it was just a TIC diode and rather inefficient... except, I suppose, compared with everything else they could have used in space. IOW it would not replace steam conversion for terrestrial use - side-by-side, and that is what is needed for the future. Most of the problems with fission revolve around the steam cycle and/or fuel enrichment, one way or another. I am told that those cooling towers alone cost $400 million apiece, and many plants have three or four. I wish someone back in mother Russia had at least tried the multipactor tetrode, before their fascination with nuclear technology went out with the wormwood, so to speak ... but. alas, it is conceivable... admittedly, that some of the hype today about Farnsworth and the very high multipactor efficiency is just a form of Tesla-esque nostalgia - IOW an extreme form of misplaced hero worship... I have spent about a full day in the Cal engineering library looking through dusty journals to try to find one bona-fide peer-reviewed article about the press-reported efficiency of the multipactor... but came up empty. The same would be even more true about almost any of the present day Tesla claims. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 11:02:49 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HI2e8V027844; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:02:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HI2bMe027827; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:02:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:02:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:08:09 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: <0JUi1D.A.pyG.9OrcBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56122 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. It may be that spin direction in orthogonal axes are not independent variables. Suppose, for example, that spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to weighting considerations Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. The expected percent of total matches exceeds 50 percent. However, suppose we now simply decide to weight each row's probability. This results in Table 5. w A B C D E F g 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: h 0 0 1 1 1 0 i 0 1 0 1 0 1 w - weight for given row j 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations k 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations m 1 0 1 0 1 0 n 1 1 0 0 0 1 Let T = (g+h+i+j+k+m+n+p) p 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Table 6, below, is a tabulation of the entries in Table 5. a b matches - - ------- A D T/T A E (g+h+n+p)/T A F (g+i+m+p)/T B D (g+h+n+p))/T Total possibilities = 9*T B E T/T Total matches = 3*T + 6*g + 6*p + 2*(h+i+j+k+m+n) B F (g+j+k+p)/T Match probability desired .5 C D (g+i+m+p)/T C E (g+j+k+p)/T C F T/T Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being conjugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We can immediately see the justification for throwing out rows 1 and 8, as their weights g and p have factors of 9. We thus set g=p=0, which throws out rows 1 and 8. Further, even with g=p=0, to obtain the desired probabilities of 1/4 for the case where differing axes are chosen, we obtain from Figure 6 the following equations: (h + n)/T = 1/4 (i + m)/T = 1/4 (j + k)/T = 1/4 which says: 4h + 4n = T 4i + 4m = T 4j + 4k = T and adding all the above: 4(h+i+j+k+m+n) = 3T 4T = 3T T=0 so the weights all disappear in a flash! This in itself is sufficient to prove the impossibility of hidden variables. Bell's inequality, however, rests on the overall observed hits. We have from Table 5 that T = h+i+j+k+m+n and from Table 6 that total possibilities = 9*T. Total matches from Table 6 is 3*T + 2*T = 5*T. We want (matches)/(possibilities) = 0.5. However, the ratio (matches)/(possibilities) = (5*T)/(9*T) = 5/9, no matter what we chose for the weights. If g and/or p are non zero the ratio is worse than 5/9. Bell's inequality thus holds no matter how the 8 possible spin combinations are weighted. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 11:59:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HIx98V011465; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:59:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HIx83W011446; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:59:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:59:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410017175811550@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Scoping Electronium, (*e-) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:58:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403ef8f6f29947b780249f525d69222378350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.125 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56123 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Yesterday I wrote: > > We need volunteers with scopes and magnets. > Since it might be possible to use high strength ceramic magnets that can generate 20 gauss through the CRT cover without removing it from the scopes ( there is already a slight deflection due to the ~ 0.5 gauss earth's magnetic field) the beam can be "calibrated" by centering it at low intensity, then bringing the magnets close enough to the sides of the scope for the spot to deflect up or down about a centimeter. If there is a dim (*e-) spot (with a safe intensity for the e beam spot) it should appear above or below the e beam spot. Thanks. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Yesterday I wrote:
>
> We need volunteers with scopes and magnets.
>
Since it might be possible to use high strength ceramic magnets that can generate
20 gauss through the CRT cover without removing it from the scopes ( there is
already a slight deflection due to the ~ 0.5 gauss earth's magnetic field) the beam can  be
"calibrated" by centering it at low intensity, then bringing the magnets close enough to the sides
of the scope for the spot to deflect up or down about a centimeter.
 
If there is a dim (*e-) spot (with a safe intensity for the e beam spot) it should appear above or
below the e beam spot.
 
Thanks.
 
Frederick
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 12:02:38 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HJ2I8V012664; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:02:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HJ2E2V012614; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:02:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:02:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041017190204.3213.qmail@web41526.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:02:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Re: The GAIA SUBCRITICAL REACTOR with hydrino augmentation To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <003e01c4b45b$c43ef360$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56124 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- Jones Beene wrote: > In some prior speculation about the possibility of > designing > an environmentally acceptable and safe uranium > fission > reactor, which employs direct thermal to electric > conversion > and depends on "makeup" neutrons in the form of > fully > shrunken hydrinos, an idea was present by Robin van > Spaandonk which is intriguing in the context of a > particular > manufacturing technique. Robin writes, > > "It seems to me that the overall efficiency would be > higher > if you just used > the electrons freed by the fission fragments > directly [snip] > This avoids losses involved in producing coherent > light, and > in transferring the energy of that light to free > electrons." I am impressed with the volume of speculation here on vortex, and the great amount of information that accompanies these speculations. Robin's above comment touches on a similar subject I was dealing with. My comments here are "off topic" to the uranium thread, but possibly more practical as a direct experimental study. This would be the subject of turning heat directly into electricity. I can describe what I did and why I abandoned the approach. I could detect delfection voltage, but not deflection current via lorentz law. In some experiments with SrFe, the common ceramic magnet material, I could make it glow red hot , but on cooling the ceramic would fracture. This was done by passing electrical currents through the ferrite, where because of its semiconductor characteristics, it would rapidly loose resistance, and a 3/8 inch block might start out registering some 30,000 ohms, but at 3/8th in width of current direction; at glow factor it was acting only as some 7 to 10 ohms. Approximately 160 volts was necessary to start this process off, where the material starts rapidly loosing resistance and heating up, but that voltage supply also must have the ability to supply at least 3 to 4 amps to produce the glow factor. The ferrite looses resistance with heat, opposite to normal metal action. Now the idea of extracting electricity via heat involved using lorentz law and using 3 dimensions of the ferrite piece for the experiment. The dimensions of the (unmagnetised) ferrite block were 3/8 in * 7/8 in * 1/2 in. Strong neodymium magnets, insulated by ceramic tile were placed across the 1/2 in. width, and current was passed along the 7/8th in. length. The currie temp of neodymium-iron-boron, (NIB) magnets is only ~ 350 degrees, but the ferrite heat glow phenomenon can approach its curie temp of~ 850 degrees F, so care is taken to insulate the NIB from any excessive heat. In fact these excessive heats were not even employed in this first experiment. A current limited supply available from alternator passed .725 A lengthwise through the ferrite, where the imposed DC voltage was measured at ~45 DC volts. Meter voltage probes were touched on the remaining 3rd dimension which showed that 3 DC volts were present as a lorentz deflection of voltage. It takes about 3 Amps before the structural integrity of the ferrite suffers on cooling, but then the temps have approached this 850 degree F level, which would quickly destroy the NIB magnet. Next experiment I doubled the amperage to some 1.5 A. The deflection voltage increased to 10.5 volts. Doubling the amperage had tripled the lorentz force deflection of voltage. Unfortunately in all of these effects the deflection voltage caused by the exterior magnetic field seemed to yeild little or no deflection amperage. Perhaps this is similar in principle to the electret phenomenon, which can manifest a voltage, but not an applied current. After all the ceramic ferrite isnt supposed to have free electrons to begin with, but since electricity is being passed through the material after a certain electrical pressure is reached, this implies free electrons passing from domain to domain. NIB also readily passes electrical currents without any seeming damage to the magnet. I will look for the existence of lorentz deflection of currents with this material also, but that has nothing to do with direct conversion of heat into electricity. Perhaps this lorentz deflection principle can be used with the uranium principle here being advocated. Sincerely HDN ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 16:20:08 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9HNJw8V006038; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 16:19:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9HNJpnk005823; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 16:19:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 16:19:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Cc: Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 19:49:01 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56125 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace. Your posts are like a fine French cheese, they need to age a bit before reaching the peak of flavour... Are we there yet? Anyway, as you seem to be taking some liberties with your models, let me try this notion on you. Let's question the assumption of 3 quantum variables. String theory suggests that more than our 3 visible dimensions exist; the number varying depending on the theory, time of day, etc. Consider for a moment the case of four dimensions... A B C D E F G H 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 AE 16/16 AF 8/16 AG 8/16 AH 8/16 BE 8/16 BF 16/16 BG 8/16 BH 8/16 CE 8/16 CF 8/16 CG 16/16 CH 8/16 DE 8/16 DF 8/16 DG 8/16 DH 16/16 4 matches over 16 combinations 4*16 + 12*8 160/256 = .625 Getting closer to our magic .5, but not there yet... Let's try 6 dimensions. -snip huge table- 16 full matches over 256 combinations 16*256 + 240*128 4096 + 30720 34816/65536 = .53125 Closer and closer... Now 8 dimensions 256 full matches over 65536 combinations -snip ungodly huge table- .502 The more dimensions we add, the closer we get. What do you think? If you think this is cheating ( and maybe it is ) where is the assumption of only 3 quantum variables coming from ( other than our much beleagured common sense ). K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 2:08 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Assume, as did Einstein, Podolski, and Rosen (EPR), the state of conjugate entangled particles is set at the time of the creation of the conjugates, at the moment of entanglement. EPR maintained that entangled particles in effect carry hidden variables, or an equivalent of a computer program, that determines how they will act when observed. Assume there are, as in Alain Aspect's experiment designed to examine this assumption, three independent quantum values involved. That is to say there are three axes of spin observation, in which a particle is in either a clockwise or counterclockwise spin state upon observation. Unfortunately, spin can only be observed in one axis, not all three at the same time. However, Bell figured out how to see if the quantum variables were set before measurement, i.e. how to see if a hidden variable was involved. The situation is shown in Table 1, below. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob Table 1 assumes that when an entangled particle pair is created that all three quantum variables, i.e. spins, are set at that time and carried as "hidden variables". Columns A, B and C are possible spins observed by a sender Alice in orthogonal axes A, B and C, and are denoted "o" for clockwise spin and "1" for counterclockwise spin. Columns D, E, and F are the corresponding spins observed by receiver Bob in the axes A, B and C. It is assumed there is no error in the detection of the spins or the transmission of the hidden variables. As the variables are independent, and it is well known from observation of single particles that the spin probability of clockwise spin being observed in any axis is 0.5, we see that there are exactly 8 equally probable combinations, possibilities denoted 1 - 8 in column i. Bell suggested that sender Alice and receiver Bob, for each particle pair, select a column at random and observe the spin. That's all there is to the experiment. To see the expected results, look at Table 2. a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results In Table 2 column a indicates the axis Alice chooses to observe. Column b indicates the axis Bob chooses to observe at the same time. We can determine the probability of a match by comparing the two columns of equally probable outcomes shown in table in Table 1. By "match" here we mean the observation of opposed, i.e. conjugate, spins. For example, the first row of Table 2 has the entries, A, D, and 8/8. This means that when Alice chooses axis A, and Bob coincidentally also chooses axis A, i.e column D, then both will always observe complimentary spins. We get 8 out of 8 matches. This is the principle of, the definition of in this case, entanglement. When we look at row 2 of Table 2, we have the entries A, E, 4/8. This is because there are only 4 possible ways out of 8 outcomes, each equally probable, that a match occurs. Summing up the entries in Table 2, we see that there are 9*8 = 72 possible outcomes to the observation of a single entangled pair, and there 3*(8+4+4) = 48 possible matches. There is thus a 2/3 probability of a match for a given particle pair. That is all there is to it! If there are hidden variables, then there will be a 2/3 probability of a match. The Aspect experiment actually yields a 1/2 probability of a match. It was deduced from this there is no hidden variable involved. This is quite amazing. If the (thought) experiment data for 7200 trials is tabulated in the format of Table 2, we might expect it to look something like the idealization shown in Table 3. a b matches - - ------- A D 800/800 A E 200/800 A F 200/800 Total matches 3600 B D 200/800 Total trials 7200 B E 800/800 Match probability 0.5 B F 200/800 C D 200/800 C E 200/800 C F 800/800 Table 3 - Idealized experimental results The amazing thing that has happened is a reduction of the probability of a match when Alice and Bob have chosen differing axes to observe. We know they get a match 100 percent of the time when choosing the same axes, i.e in the combinations A D, B E, and C F. The matches in the differing axes have in effect been "discorrelated", to coin a term, reduced in matching by 50 percent from what they should be if programmed by hidden variables. The computer programs inside the particle pairs appear to have no means to accomplish this discorrelation without knowing what choice of axis was made by both Alice and Bob. Since Alice and Bob can chose the axis to observe the last moment, it appears the computer programs would have to communicate faster than light to do their work. However, perhaps Table 1 can be modified to restrict possible combinations. After all, the spin of one particle can not be measured in all three axes at once. It may be that spin direction in orthogonal axes are not independent variables. Suppose, for example, that spin in all three axes can not be the same at one time. We then have Table 4. i A B C D E F 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 Table 4 - Hidden variable table prior to weighting considerations Tabulation of Table 4 still shows Bell's inequality to be in effect. The expected percent of total matches exceeds 50 percent. However, suppose we now simply decide to weight each row's probability. This results in Table 5. w A B C D E F g 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: h 0 0 1 1 1 0 i 0 1 0 1 0 1 w - weight for given row j 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations k 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations m 1 0 1 0 1 0 n 1 1 0 0 0 1 Let T = (g+h+i+j+k+m+n+p) p 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob Table 6, below, is a tabulation of the entries in Table 5. a b matches - - ------- A D T/T A E (g+h+n+p)/T A F (g+i+m+p)/T B D (g+h+n+p))/T Total possibilities = 9*T B E T/T Total matches = 3*T + 6*g + 6*p + 2*(h+i+j+k+m+n) B F (g+j+k+p)/T Match probability desired .5 C D (g+i+m+p)/T C E (g+j+k+p)/T C F T/T Table 6 - Expected results based on Table 5 Here again the term "match" refers to spin orientations being conjugate, i.e. 1 and 0 or 0 and 1 in the columns chosen in Table 5. We can immediately see the justification for throwing out rows 1 and 8, as their weights g and p have factors of 9. We thus set g=p=0, which throws out rows 1 and 8. Further, even with g=p=0, to obtain the desired probabilities of 1/4 for the case where differing axes are chosen, we obtain from Figure 6 the following equations: (h + n)/T = 1/4 (i + m)/T = 1/4 (j + k)/T = 1/4 which says: 4h + 4n = T 4i + 4m = T 4j + 4k = T and adding all the above: 4(h+i+j+k+m+n) = 3T 4T = 3T T=0 so the weights all disappear in a flash! This in itself is sufficient to prove the impossibility of hidden variables. Bell's inequality, however, rests on the overall observed hits. We have from Table 5 that T = h+i+j+k+m+n and from Table 6 that total possibilities = 9*T. Total matches from Table 6 is 3*T + 2*T = 5*T. We want (matches)/(possibilities) = 0.5. However, the ratio (matches)/(possibilities) = (5*T)/(9*T) = 5/9, no matter what we chose for the weights. If g and/or p are non zero the ratio is worse than 5/9. Bell's inequality thus holds no matter how the 8 possible spin combinations are weighted. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 18:10:30 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9I1AQBX029563; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:10:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9I1AArZ029466; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:10:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:10:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003901c4b4af$2e941670$dd037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: EPR and Bell revisited Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:09:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B485.451460F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56126 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B485.451460F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0036_01C4B485.451460F0" ------=_NextPart_001_0036_01C4B485.451460F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWatching with interest. Some years back some grad students at Rice = University started a parallel computing study. At the time the idea was = proposed that four ,not two computer would be necessary for the complex = math programs of this century. The program could begin at Baylor University in Texas. They are = recruiting the people and have the desire. ------=_NextPart_001_0036_01C4B485.451460F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Watching with interest. Some years = back some grad=20 students at Rice University started a parallel computing study. At the = time the=20 idea was proposed that four ,not two computer would be necessary for the = complex=20 math programs of this century.
The program could begin at Baylor = University in=20 Texas. They are recruiting the people and have the desire.

 

------=_NextPart_001_0036_01C4B485.451460F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B485.451460F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <003401c4b4af$2de75bb0$dd037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4B485.451460F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 18:19:25 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9I1JD8V002897; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:19:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9I1JBZo002874; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:19:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:19:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:24:44 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56127 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:49 PM 10/17/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >Your posts are like a fine French cheese, they need to age >a bit before reaching the peak of flavour... Are we there yet? Well it was smelling pretty bad, so I suppose so. 8^) My only defense for the confusion is momentary excitement and youthful exhuberance ... well I had the excitement anyway. At least it only took me about a day to get it right. > >Anyway, as you seem to be taking some liberties >with your models, let me try this notion on you. > >Let's question the assumption of 3 quantum variables. >String theory suggests that more than our 3 visible >dimensions exist; the number varying depending on the >theory, time of day, etc. Consider for a moment >the case of four dimensions... > >A B C D E F G H >0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 >0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 >0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 >0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 >0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 >0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 >0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 >0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 >1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 >1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 >1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 >1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 >1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 >1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 >1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 >1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 > >AE 16/16 >AF 8/16 >AG 8/16 >AH 8/16 >BE 8/16 >BF 16/16 >BG 8/16 >BH 8/16 >CE 8/16 >CF 8/16 >CG 16/16 >CH 8/16 >DE 8/16 >DF 8/16 >DG 8/16 >DH 16/16 > >4 matches over 16 combinations >4*16 + 12*8 > >160/256 = .625 Interesting!! Suppose we assume that the entanglement prevents all 4 "axes" from having identical spin. We now have the following 14 possible combinations: A B C D E F G H 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 AE 14/14 AF 6/14 AG 6/14 AH 6/14 BE 6/14 BF 14/14 BG 6/14 BH 6/14 CE 6/14 CF 6/14 CG 14/14 CH 6/14 DE 6/14 DF 6/14 DG 6/14 DH 14/14 4*14 + 12*6 = 128 Now if there were only some justification for counting all 16 rows instead of just the 14 we'd have 128/256 = 0.50. Suppose similar liberties were taken with the 3 dimensional array, Table 1. i A B C D E F 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 i - possible combination (row) number 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 1 - Possible observations by Alice and Bob a b matches - - ------- A D 6/8 A E 2/8 A F 2/8 B D 2/8 B E 6/8 B F 2/8 C D 2/8 C E 2/8 C F 6/8 Table 2 - Expected results Taking the same liberty of not counting any matches when all 3 spins are the same, we have 6*2 + 3*6 = 30/64 = 0.46875, even better than needed. Maybe too much. We need an excuse to reduce the 64 to 60? Or maybe add 2 to the 30? At any rate there seems to be no physical interpretation available for this. Something looks a bit magical about 4 dimensions with the all-4-spins-alike combinations getting a special treatment, though there is no apparent physical justification. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 17 18:23:34 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9I1NQ8V005095; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:23:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9I1NOeH005070; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:23:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:23:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Cc: Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:52:47 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <_Ts7LC.A.HPB.MsxcBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56128 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oops, I meant to say 16 dimensions and 256 dimensions rather than 6 and 8. Otherwise I think the rest is OK. Presumably an infinite number of dimensions would yield our .5 exactly. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 04:17:11 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9IBH28V028593; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 04:17:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9IBGsZo028533; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 04:16:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 04:16:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410118101555990@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Slow-Burning D-D ---> He4 Reaction Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 05:15:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409e30f5e0bdbce5416ffde74dd42e2f19350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.83 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56129 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII If the 24 Mev D + D ---> He-4 reaction occurred over minutes (or even hours) rather than the fast/brute force fusion reactions D + D ---> He-3 + n or D + D ---> T + Proton, wouldn't this still show up as a gradual heat rise in CF experiments? This could still allow some generation of (*e-) from pair production and satisfy conservation of momentum requirements. This isn't far afield from "delayed neutrons" : http://lpsc.in2p3.fr/gpr/PPNPport/node47.html Or Isomer Transition/Internal Conversion effects: http://www.phy.anl.gov/div/ar02/pdf/I.Heavy-IonSec.F.pdf More questions than answers. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

If the  24 Mev D + D ---> He-4 reaction occurred over minutes (or even hours) rather than
the fast/brute force fusion reactions D + D ---> He-3 + n or D + D ---> T + Proton, wouldn't
this still show up as a gradual heat rise in CF experiments?
 
This could still allow some generation of (*e-) from pair production and satisfy
conservation of momentum requirements.
 
This isn't far afield from "delayed neutrons" :
 
 
Or Isomer Transition/Internal Conversion effects:

http://www.phy.anl.gov/div/ar02/pdf/I.Heavy-IonSec.F.pdf

More questions than answers.

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 09:42:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9IGgZBX001401; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:42:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9IGgPdh001276; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:42:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:42:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:47:55 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56130 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The problem with explaining an Aspect style experiment by hidden variables boils down to explaining 3 results which, taken together, appear to eliminate the possibility of hidden variables and require faster than light communicaton. These are: 1. Alice and Bob each use 3 mutually orthogonal detectors, or detector orientations. In each orientation the probability of a clockwise spin or counterclockwise spin, as observed by either Alice or Bob with or without the other observing on their end, is observed to be exactly 0.5. 2. When both Alice and Bob observe the same axis the entangled particle spins match exactly. 3. If Bob and Alice each choose their axes at random, then when Alice and Bob observe differing axes the probability of a match for entangled particles is exactly 0.25. Using spin variables in more than three dimensions still has the problem of meeting all three conditions simultaneously, especially condition 2. There are only 3 detector orientations used, so if Bob's a detector can observe (choose) a spin variable from more than 1 dimension, of some function of variables in multiple dimensions, how is this choice managed so as to always correlate with the value observed by Alice from her corresponding detector? The need for faster than light communication still exists, though it has simply taken another form. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 10:10:20 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9IHADBX016130; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:10:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9IHABYM016104; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:10:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:10:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:39:37 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56131 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace. you write: >Something looks a bit magical about 4 dimensions with the all-4-spins-alike >combinations getting a special treatment, though there is no apparent >physical justification. Yes, I was hoping four would suffice. It's interesting to me that adding more dimensions drives the number closer to .5, one might profit from considering how to manipulate these "hidden" hidden variables. I don't know how you can pick and choose from the rows though; that seems more arbitrary than the system we're trying to replace. I spent some time yesterday looking for detailed descriptions of the actual instruments used to make these measurements, with limited success. Most QM texts start ( and end ) with math and seem to only vaguely touch on actual experiments. That's the second part of my attack, to start from the experiments themselves rather than the theory as we have been discussing. I have little doubt that the theory is correct, but it's rather like saying that I have no doubt that the Bohr model of the atom is correct. It is, but of course it's not, if you know what I mean. All this to say that I still don't understand the QM meaning of spin. It's clearly a poor choice of words to describe the physical reality, especially if the QM view is correct regarding entanglement. You and I got into a long dicussion earlier about nomenclature concerning GravitoKinetic theory, and I'm sure many list members were wondering why I was so hung up on the words. Well, here's a good example of the kind of confusion that comes from calling something "spin" when the reality is substantially different.... Anyway, if you have any good links about measuring particle spin experimentally, now's the time to break them out. My recollection is that magnets were used in the Aspect experiment(?) and deflection direction determined the handedness of the spin. I also seem to remember that what initially puzzled researchers is that the particles all deflected an equal distance, rather than distribute based on their (random) orientation as they entered the magnet. Right there the 3D spin model as assumed in our discussion fails. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 15:22:31 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9IMMQ8V000994; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:22:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9IMM4Lc000827; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:22:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:22:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041018232004.00691968@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:20:04 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56132 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:39 pm 18-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Horace. > >you write: >>Something looks a bit magical about 4 dimensions with the all-4-spins-alike >>combinations getting a special treatment, though there is no apparent >>physical justification. > >Yes, I was hoping four would suffice. It's interesting to me that >adding more dimensions drives the number closer to .5, It seems to me, Keith, that you have put your finger on it. The real world is multi-multi-dimensional. See:- http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/5-3/commentary5-3a.pdf ============================================== "...If we return to more primitive methods of measuring time and length we will appreciate that the notion that time and space are simple entities or simple concepts is illusory. They are as complex as the world they describe. Likewise the notion that time and space are one and three-dimensional respectively is also illusory. The dimensionality of any concept or physical entity is merely a reflection of the hierarchical level from which we are viewing it. Space has as many or as few dimensions as we wish to give it, and so has time. ============================================== The sooner we adopt finite arithmetics for Cartesian dimensions, the sooner we will be able to nest spaces within spaces within spaces and recognise the true relationship between time and space. 8-) Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 15:25:08 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9IMOs8V001980; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:24:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9IMOq2J001954; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:24:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:24:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041018182156.0339c220@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:23:16 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: SAFE fission spacecraft engines Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56133 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here are some folks at NASA who really, really, REALLY want to blast a fission reactor into space: http://www.spacetransportation.com/ast/presentations/7b_vandy.pdf You have to hand it to them for enthusiasm. And colorful graphics! - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 16:40:40 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9INeRJW026863; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9INeOuU026841; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041018234016.65110.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: EPR and causality To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56134 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello all, This sort of thing, FTL and such, is a subject that is quite interesting to me, and could be described as 'near and dear to my heart.' So for the sake of discussion; Has anyone given any thought as to the nature of causal effects resulting from the possible use of EPR-like effects to convey a meaningful signal? As a matter of fact, it is not even necessary to define a meaningful signal insofar as information is transferred, to demonstrate that causality is in danger if: A. FTL velocities are allowed B. Relativity of simultaneity is assumed It is well known that the relativity of simultaneity is implied by the Lorentz transforms of special relativity (and then generalized in the later form): x' = gamma(x-vt) t' = gamma(t-vx) where gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2) assuming units of velocity are such that c=1 and v is some decimal fraction of c. It is the second transform, relating the time coordinate between two frames of reference which causes the problems. It can be quite simply demonstrated via spacetime diagram that for some moving frames of reference, something moving FTL will be seen to be moving acausally (i.e., backwards in time). Relativity also teaches us that all (inertial) frames of reference are to be treated equivalently, thus none is more 'right' or 'wrong' in observation than any other. If we adopt this philosophy and keep the relativity of simultaneity as implied by the second Lorentz transform above, we find that it is possible to set up a sequence of events whereby the emitter of the FTL signal can be prevented from emitting said signal by a response to said signal, a logical paradox created by backwards-in-time effects. It is easy to envision situations which would allow apparently endless creation of energy, matter, replicas of whatever was sent FTL, etc., from nothing. The solution accepted by most of modern science is thus, due to the success of Einsteinian relativity theory, that FTL is inherently impossible. Now, existance of phase velocities exceeding c are well known, as is the EPR effect, quantum tunneling with velocities exceeding c, etc. Thus there is some experimental evidence undeniably in favor of FTL. It has been argued that since none of these effects can be employed to carry a meaningful message (yet) that they do not in any way threaten Einsteinian relativity. This is a rather bad place to be mentally, I feel. It is equivalent to saying that since I cannot use some hypothetical device I do not yet understand how to use, that it is not physically meaningful. So my question to you all is this: what are your thoughts on the relationship between EPR (FTL) and the causal nature of time? How do we reconcile the experimentally detected FTL effects with the postulated relativity of simultaneity? I am not going to state my thoughts on this right now, I will wait and see if there is any interest in pursuing this line of thought first. Also keep in mind that anything which will be extended to explain the interactions in greater than c realms must also predict correctly the experimental results for less than c velocities, and the host of correct predictions of phenomena made by Special and General relativity. --Kyle _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 17:07:58 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9J07dJW004119; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:07:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9J07ceU004100; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:07:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:07:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1d4.2d0fd4a4.2ea5b4c1@aol.com> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:07:29 EDT Subject: Re: SAFE fission spacecraft engines..ref colorful graphics To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1d4.2d0fd4a4.2ea5b4c1_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56135 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_1d4.2d0fd4a4.2ea5b4c1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been working on some simple animations of my own. Pick the link and scroll down to page 11. The traveling wave is a Java script animation. If you go to view source you can see the script that does this. By changing the x and the y coordinates of the implication and the image a lot can be done with versions of this script. The traveling wave is a marquee. It's a very simple way to produce movement on a page. enjoy Chapter 7 Frank Znidarsic --part1_1d4.2d0fd4a4.2ea5b4c1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've been working on some simple an= imations of my own.  Pick the link and scroll down to page 11.  Th= e traveling wave is a Java script animation.  If you go to view source=20= you can see the script that does this.  By changing the x and the y coo= rdinates of the implication and the image a lot can be done with versions of= this script.

The traveling wave is a marquee.  It's a very simple way to produce mov= ement on a page.

enjoy



Chapter 7=


Frank Znidarsic --part1_1d4.2d0fd4a4.2ea5b4c1_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 21:37:14 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9J4bAvM010007; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:37:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9J4b8FF009996; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:37:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:37:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041019053629.006ebbc0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 05:36:29 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: SAFE fission spacecraft engines..ref colorful graphics Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56136 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:07 pm 18-10-04 EDT, you wrote: >I've been working on some simple animations of my own. Pick the link and >scroll down to page 11. The traveling wave is a Java script animation. If you >go to view source you can see the script that does this. By changing the x and >the y coordinates of the implication and the image a lot can be done with >versions of this script. > >The traveling wave is a marquee. It's a very simple way to produce movement >on a page. > >enjoy > > Chapter 7 In the introduction to chapter 7 you say, --------------------------------------------- (...) Democritus believed that the substances of the creation are composed of atoms. These atoms are the smallest bits into which a substance can be divided. Any additional subdivision would change the essence of the substance.(...) -------------------------------------------- Did he really believe that? I always thought that he believed that atoms were absolutely indivisible and that subdivision was impossible. Clearly, if we are going to have a hierarchy of *atoms*, a hierarchy of *substances*, then we have to start making a distinction between hierarchical substance and the ultimate Substance of Thomas Aquinas, for example. Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 21:49:17 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9J4mr5j023656; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:48:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9J4mf0f023525; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:48:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:48:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <148.36298d99.2ea5f69f@aol.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:48:31 EDT Subject: Re: SAFE fission spacecraft engines..ref colorful graphics To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_148.36298d99.2ea5f69f_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56137 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_148.36298d99.2ea5f69f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/19/2004 12:37:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk writes: > Did he really believe that? > > I believe so. Did you like the traveling and standing waves. I did the same sort of thing in Java. It requires a compilers and slow to implement. Java script is interpreted and you just enter the code into you HTML document. Frank Z --part1_148.36298d99.2ea5f69f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/19/2004 12:37= :47 AM Eastern Standard Time, f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk writes:

Did he really believe that?



I believe so. 


Did you like the traveling and standing waves.  I did the same sort of=20= thing in Java.  It requires a compilers and slow to implement.  Ja= va script is interpreted and you just enter the code into you HTML document.=

Frank Z --part1_148.36298d99.2ea5f69f_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 18 23:28:54 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9J6Si5j015912; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:28:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9J6Sg6N015893; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:28:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:28:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EPR and causality Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:28:33 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4ic9n01dr0ssov1msrfbbo4gp07cjcs4c3@4ax.com> References: <20041018234016.65110.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041018234016.65110.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id i9J6Sc5j015866 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56138 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Kyle Mcallister's message of Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:16 -0700: Hi, [snip] >Has anyone given any thought as to the nature of >causal effects resulting from the possible use of >EPR-like effects to convey a meaningful signal? As a >matter of fact, it is not even necessary to define a >meaningful signal insofar as information is >transferred, to demonstrate that causality is in >danger if: > >A. FTL velocities are allowed >B. Relativity of simultaneity is assumed > >It is well known that the relativity of simultaneity >is implied by the Lorentz transforms of special >relativity (and then generalized in the later form): > >x' = gamma(x-vt) >t' = gamma(t-vx) > >where gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2) assuming units of velocity >are such that c=1 and v is some decimal fraction of c. > >It is the second transform, relating the time >coordinate between two frames of reference which >causes the problems. It can be quite simply >demonstrated via spacetime diagram that for some >moving frames of reference, something moving FTL will >be seen to be moving acausally (i.e., backwards in >time). Relativity also teaches us that all (inertial) I suspect that the critical word in this sentence is "seen". IOW nature isn't fooled, only the senses of the observer. This happens in a more mundane sense when we guess the position of a high flying jet based on the sound from it's engines, and get it wrong by a large margin. This error in judgment is also caused by the difference in speed of transmission of information via two different media. In short, causality isn't really violated, it only appears that way to an observer relying on EM signal transmission for his/her information. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 00:22:16 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9J7M65j028195; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:22:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9J7M51T028179; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:22:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:22:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:27:41 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56139 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:39 PM 10/18/4, Keith Nagel wrote: [snip bunch of good stuff] >... I >also seem to remember that what initially puzzled researchers >is that the particles all deflected an equal distance, rather >than distribute based on their (random) orientation as they >entered the magnet. Right there the 3D spin model as assumed >in our discussion fails. > I feel the spinning ball model results in a 2/3 probability of a match. However, the model wherein each possible combination has an arbitrary weight, as I presented, accounts for much more than the spinning ball model. In fact, I think all possible stochastic process results, without instantaneous knowlege of Both Alice and Bob's choices, are accomodated. There are only 16 possible combinations of results. There has to result from any such process columns A B and C, no matter what process is used. Those are the only possibilities. Given that, corresponding columns D, E and F also are necessary. The only way the final outcome of any such process can affect the 16 possible outcomes is to change their frequency. This is true no matter how many dimesions from which those final outcomes are chosen. This is true even if an infinite number of angels ride with each particle and can all interact to make the final choices. The are three and only three sensors available to Alice and Bob each, and final results for each must be produced because none of the three can be left out a priori as a possibility. None can be left out without knowing at least slightly in advance, or instantaneously, what choices Alice and Bob both made. A choice must be provided for each of the 3 axes. The lower bound of 5/9 probability of match, when axes are chosen at random, and only hidden variables are involved, is thus an absolute lower boundary, and is not dependent at all on a ball-like model of spin. It is a boundary that is inherent to the experiment design. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 06:38:06 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JDbt5j021357; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:37:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JDbmgi021323; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:37:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:37:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041019143657.006ae0f8@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:36:57 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: SAFE fission spacecraft engines..ref colorful graphics Resent-Message-ID: <0B51JB.A.HNF.siRdBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56140 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:48 am 19-10-04 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 10/19/2004 12:37:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, >f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk writes: > >> Did he really believe that? >> >> > >I believe so. With all respect, I think you may be mistaken. ====================================================== Democritus expanded the atomic theory of Leucippus. He maintained the impossibility of dividing things ad infinitum. From the difficulty of assigning a beginning of time, he argued the eternity of existing nature, of void space, and of motion. He supposed the atoms, which are originally similar, to be impenetrable and have a density proportionate to their volume. http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/d/democrit.htm ===================================================== Mind you, I think what you believe he believed is a much better idea than what he actually did believe. Atoms which are relatively atomic, rather than absolutely atomic. A bit like temperature really. 8-) Little atoms have tiny atoms, Within, which must delight 'em, And tiny atoms have teeny atoms, So on, ad infinitem Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 06:46:31 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JDkPvM030293; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:46:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JDkN9M030272; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:46:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:46:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041019134603.42392.qmail@web61101.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:46:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: Re: EPR and causality To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <4ic9n01dr0ssov1msrfbbo4gp07cjcs4c3@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1396195724-1098193563=:41495" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56141 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-1396195724-1098193563=:41495 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Kyle Mcallister's message of Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:16 -0700: Hi, [snip] It can be quite simply >demonstrated via spacetime diagram that for some >moving frames of reference, something moving FTL will >be seen to be moving acausally (i.e., backwards in >time). Relativity also teaches us that all (inertial) I suspect that the critical word in this sentence is "seen". IOW nature isn't fooled, only the senses of the observer. This happens in a more mundane sense when we guess the position of a high flying jet based on the sound from it's engines, and get it wrong by a large margin. This error in judgment is also caused by the difference in speed of transmission of information via two different media. In short, causality isn't really violated, it only appears that way to an observer relying on EM signal transmission for his/her information. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. My sentiments exactly Robin. Causality occurs at the point of action, in the reference frame of said action. In order for a signal moving in an (apparently) acausal reference frame to interact with its own source it would need to be transferred to another reference frame traveling back toward the source, the round trip thus taking an absolute amount of time in any reference frame. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. --0-1396195724-1098193563=:41495 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii


Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
In reply to Kyle Mcallister's message of Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:40:16 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
 It can be quite simply
>demonstrated via spacetime diagram that for some
>moving frames of reference, something moving FTL will
>be seen to be moving acausally (i.e., backwards in
>time). Relativity also teaches us that all (inertial)

I suspect that the critical word in this sentence is "seen".
IOW nature isn't fooled, only the senses of the observer.
This happens in a more mundane sense when we guess the position of a high flying jet based on the sound from it's engines, and get it wrong by a large margin. This error in judgment is also caused by the difference in speed of transmission of information via two different media.
In short, causality isn't really violated, it only appears that way to an observer relying on EM signal transmission for his/her information.
[snip]

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

All SPAM goes in the trash unread.

My sentiments exactly Robin.  Causality occurs at the point of action, in the reference frame of said action.  In order for a signal moving in an (apparently) acausal reference frame to interact with its own source it would need to be transferred to another reference frame traveling back toward the source, the round trip thus taking an absolute amount of time in any reference frame.


Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. --0-1396195724-1098193563=:41495-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 07:09:27 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JE9H5j029791; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:09:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JE9DxF029756; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:09:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:09:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: From: R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Propulsion paper Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:09:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4B5E5.340CA55E" Resent-Message-ID: <3EqBdD.A.1QH.JASdBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56142 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4B5E5.340CA55E Content-Type: text/plain Dear Vortex, Won't subscribe for long because of traffic. Thought the propulsion paper might interest you. http://luna.brighton.ac.uk/~roc1/index.htm All the best, Remi. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4B5E5.340CA55E Content-Type: text/html

Dear Vortex,

Won't subscribe for long because of traffic. Thought the propulsion paper might interest you.

 

http://luna.brighton.ac.uk/~roc1/index.htm

All the best,

Remi.

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4B5E5.340CA55E-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 07:50:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JEoAvM025910; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:50:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JEo74C025891; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:50:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:50:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:55:43 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56143 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:39 PM 10/18/4, Keith Nagel wrote: [snip bunch of good stuff] >... I >also seem to remember that what initially puzzled researchers >is that the particles all deflected an equal distance, rather >than distribute based on their (random) orientation as they >entered the magnet. Right there the 3D spin model as assumed >in our discussion fails. > I can't seem to get anything right the first time lately! There are 8 poossibilites, not 16. Corrected version of last post follows below. I feel the spinning ball model results in a 2/3 probability of a match. However, the model wherein each possible combination has an arbitrary weight, as I presented in DRAFT #6, accounts for much more than the spinning ball model. In fact, I think all possible stochastic process results, without instantaneous knowlege of Both Alice and Bob's choices, are accomodated. There are only 8 possible combinations of final results. There has to result from any such process columns A, B and C, no matter what process is used. Those are the only possibilities. Given that, corresponding columns D, E and F also are necessary. The only way the final outcome of any such process can affect the 8 possible outcomes is to change their frequency. This is true no matter how many dimesions from which those final outcomes are chosen. This is true even if an infinite number of angels ride with each particle and can all interact to make the final choices. There are three and only three sensors available to Alice and Bob each, and final results for each must be produced because none of the three can be left out a priori as a possibility. None can be left out without knowing at least slightly in advance, or instantaneously, what choices Alice and Bob both made. A choice must be provided for each of the 3 axes. There are exactly 8 ways this is possible. The lower bound of 5/9 probability of a match, when axes are chosen at random, and only hidden variables are involved, is thus an absolute lower boundary, and is not dependent at all on a ball-like model of spin. It is a boundary that is inherent to the experiment design. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 08:01:14 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JF155j012230; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:01:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JF13Lw012209; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:01:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:01:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <047c01c4b5ec$54879ee0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Cc: "Mark Goldes" References: Subject: Re: Propulsion paper Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:00:09 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56144 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Remi, If you have managed to stay on vortex long enough to consider a certain question releating to your prior (non propulsion) ideas, here it is: Since you have been playing around with the Neel temperature and the related frequency near 100 Ghzin the "phase Transitions" paper of 2 years ago), I have recently and coincidentally wondered about a certain similar application. For those on vortex who don't recognize the Neel temperature, it is analogous to the Curie temperature and the temperature at which an antiferromagnetic material becomes paramagnetic - that is, the thermal energy becomes large enough to upset the magnetic ordering within the material. But unlike the Curie temperature, it can (probably) produce results in an adiabatic process (in which no significant heat is gained or lost sequentially by the system). Have you considered this in regard to Mark Goldes' Ultraconductor? http://ultraconductors.com/primer.html which, one can assume, would show unusual magnetic ordering properties when placed in the path of magnetic flux between a strong magnet and a coil, such that irradiation of the ultraconductor by even milliwatt pulses of RF at 100 Ghz should alter the flux patterns enough to produce fairly intense current in an adjoining coil? Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 11:37:09 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JIb3vM013425; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:37:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JIb1HI013374; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:37:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:37:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:06:18 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56145 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace. You write: >The only way the final outcome of any such >process can affect the 16 possible outcomes is to change their frequency. >This is true no matter how many dimesions from which those final outcomes >are chosen. This is true even if an infinite number of angels ride with >each particle and can all interact to make the final choices. I may be being boneheaded here, help me out. I thought that I showed by adding extra dimensions it was possible to do exactly what you describe above, changing the outcome probabilities for the three visible axis of measurement. If I didn't, show me where I blew it. Perhaps I'm not understanding all the constraints on the results required by experiment? Here's the 4D table again. I'll add the constraint ( if I understand your argument ) that we only choose the visible axis columns to calculate our final probability. A B C D E F G H 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 AE 16/16 AF 8/16 AG 8/16 BE 8/16 BF 16/16 BG 8/16 CE 8/16 CF 8/16 CG 16/16 96/144 = .666... full table 160/256 = .625 As regards angels flying along with the particles, you'll have to put that question to Thomas or RC, they seem to have a direct line to God. I've been left to figure this stuff out on my own. It's lonely at times, but freedom is a Good Thing don't you know (grin). K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 12:25:03 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JJOqvM005989; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:24:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JJOpEY005972; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:24:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:24:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:30:27 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56146 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:06 PM 10/19/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >I may be being boneheaded here, help me out. I thought that I showed >by adding extra dimensions it was possible to do exactly what you >describe above, changing the outcome probabilities for the three visible >axis of measurement. If I didn't, show me where I blew it. Perhaps >I'm not understanding all the constraints on the results required by >experiment? Here's the 4D table again. I'll add the constraint ( if >I understand your argument ) that we only choose the visible axis >columns to calculate our final probability. > >A B C D E F G H >0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 >0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 >0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 >0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 >0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 >0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 >0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 >0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 >1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 >1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 >1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 >1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 >1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 >1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 >1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 >1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 > >AE 16/16 >AF 8/16 >AG 8/16 >BE 8/16 >BF 16/16 >BG 8/16 >CE 8/16 >CF 8/16 >CG 16/16 > >96/144 = .666... > >full table >160/256 = .625 OK, just to check that I understand what you are saying I'll attempt to rephrase it. You are saying that nature uses the above table but only columns A, B, and C are applied to Alice's sensors and columns E, F and G are applied to Bob's sensors. We thus can take the above table and covert it to the following form: A B C E F G 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 All I did to obtain this table was to cut and paste the initial 4 dimensional table and delete columns D and H. It seems this is what you inrend bcasue you get the tabulation: AE 16/16 AF 8/16 AG 8/16 BE 8/16 BF 16/16 BG 8/16 CE 8/16 CF 8/16 CG 16/16 Do I have this all correct? If so, the following is my response. We could also, for convenience and consistency with prior 3 dimensional tables rename E, F, and G to D, E and F. This gives: A B C E F G 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 * 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 * 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 * 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 * 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 * 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 * 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 * This is just the original 3 dimensional table, Table 1, but with some rows duplicated. For convenience I have flagged the rows which are handily each duplicates of the row preceeding them. My point was that duplicating entries merely has the effect of weighting those entries. To see a similar table with weights consider Table 5. w A B C D E F g 0 0 0 1 1 1 Key: h 0 0 1 1 1 0 i 0 1 0 1 0 1 w - weight for given row j 0 1 1 1 0 0 A, B, C - Alice's possible observations k 1 0 0 0 1 1 D, E, F - Bob's corresponding observations m 1 0 1 0 1 0 n 1 1 0 0 0 1 Let T = (g+h+i+j+k+m+n+p) p 1 1 1 0 0 0 Table 5 - Prospective hidden variable table for observations by Alice and Bob We can eliminate the *'ed rows by assigning weights g=h=i=j=k=m=n=p=2 in Table 5. Since, in the above table all the weights are exactly equal to 2, we can normalize them to 1, i.e. g=h=i=j=k=m=n=p=1, so we are then right back to: a b matches - - ------- A D 8/8 A E 4/8 A F 4/8 B D 4/8 B E 8/8 B F 4/8 C D 4/8 C E 4/8 C F 8/8 Table 2 - Expected results The same process applies no matter how many dimensions you use. You always end up with Table 2. That is because under the experiment protocol, Alice and Bob only have three possible ways to observe. You can get much fancier, say by setting weights g and p to zero, and plaing around with the weights by any imaginary way. However, as I showed, there is no way to get better than 5/9 overall matches without knowlege of which axes Bob and Alice have chosen at least some of the time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 12:54:38 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JJsT5j011065; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:54:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JJsRrw011050; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:54:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:54:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:00:05 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: EPR and Bell Revisited (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: <1vsUDD.A.msC.zDXdBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56147 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:06 PM 10/19/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >As regards angels flying along with the particles, >you'll have to put that question to Thomas or RC, >they seem to have a direct line to God. As you must have sensed, the choice of the angels metaphor indeed was not directed to you, but I think it does portray the important notion that regardless of the choice of any set of three deterministic or stochastic boolean functions to compute D, E and F, be the functions finite or not, the final result is merely the weighting of the eight possible outcomes. Such a weighting can not achieve the experimental results. An angel here is really only a metaphor for function or computer program or even arbitraryness. >As regards angels flying along with the particles, >you'll have to put that question to Thomas or RC, >they seem to have a direct line to God. I've been >left to figure this stuff out on my own. It's lonely >at times, but freedom is a Good Thing don't you know (grin). That is my feeling too. Without quantum reality we would have no freedom at all. Our existence would be lockstep determined at every level at every instant. It sees to me reasonable that the only way God could give us a meaningful world, and yet also freedom, is by providing the randomness of the quantum underpinning of reality. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 13:02:25 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JK2F5j012939; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:02:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JK2EOG012916; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:02:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:02:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007c01c4b614$c173a800$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: "Neel effect" OU with flux gate? Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:49:31 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56148 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To lighten your day, let's start out with a spelling pun... or as they say in the South... some of that thar fern spelling, to wit: The Neel effect is in 'grave' need of attention. Few on vortex will get it, but in the more likely event that there are a few experimenters listening with electroplating skills who wish to discover whether the Neel temperature, or the related frequency near 100 Ghz, can be exploited in an overunity "flux switching device", here are some suggestions. As mentioned previously the Neel temperature is analogous to the Curie temperature and represents the kinetic motion at which an antiferromagnetic material becomes paramagnetic. Some experimenters here have tried the Curie thermo-cycling technique and found it lacking, of course, which it no doubt is. But unlike the Curie temperature, the Neel effect can (probably) produce results in an adiabatic process (in which no significant heat is gained or lost sequentially by the system). This is due to the fact that an extremely thin layer is sufficient to totally shield, and even more importantly, the frequency range (which substitutes for temperature) is both narrow and of an energy factor which is at least 100 times lower than the mid-terahertz range - which is involved with the Curie technique; where in addition (with Curie cycling) one must modify a large mass of material over a wide spread of energies and all that cycled heat is wasted. The 100 Ghz frequency, which is the substitute for heating, may be easier to attain than one realizes due to the fact that a number of Gunn-type diodes and other solid state oscillators will reach this range and they would require minimum circuitry - some just a battery and relay. Less than a watt should be needed. Getting hold the ultraconductor-type of material might be possible also, even if Mark Goldes' firm is not selling any of it yet. There is an apparently validated claim that "colossal conductivity" of the type which will likely possess, as a natural consequence of this conductivity, the necessary kind of antiferromagnetic blocking which is needed for flux gating, has been discovered and is not really all that uncommon. Plus it can be manufactured fairly easily: see "Colossal Electric Conductivity in Ag–defect Ag5Pb2O6" by Djurek, et. al. ... the citation: http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0310011 In this paper, a "Byström–Evers compound" which in this case is a ceramic composed of silver and lead oxide which has been annealed at 500–540 K under flow of electric current - which results in "colossal electric conductivity" which they define as > 10^(-9) ohm/cm or about 700% better than copper, but not as good as the Ultraconductor (TM) of Room Temperature Superconductors, Inc. at least in their specifications. Would either of these materials be antiferromagnetic? Although no precise claims seem to have been made for this, either should be antiferromagnetic, according to a least one theory. In the simplest incarnation of this Byström–Evers compound, silver and lead are plated in several thin layers onto a substrate and annealed in air or O2 while passing an electric current through the material. Afterwards this layer is connected to an oscillator and physically interposed between a strong magnet and a coil. Any of the geometries which have been tried in the past, are feasible like (dare I mention) the MEG but also more advanced geometries like that of US Patent #4,006,401 (expired now) of Villasenor de Rivas which describes what seems like the best design for a flux gate type transformer. It is my belief that this thing will work best (if it works at all) at liquid nitrogen temps, especially for a continuously running transformer. But just to scope it and test for robust OU effects, room temperature would be fine. Once you were convinced of a substantial OU, then anyone would jump at the chance to apply cryogenics to it, without much complaint. If there is OU at all, it should be of high enough COP to carry the parasitic load of cryogenics. ... dream on? .... Jones Half my life's in books' written pages Live and learn from fools and from sages You know it's true: All things come back to you.... Sing with me, sing for the years Sing for the laughter and sing for the tears Sing with me... if it's just for today Maybe tomorrow the good Lord will take you away... Dream on, dream on, Dream yourself a dream come true... ...with apologies to Steven Tyler From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 14:32:29 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JLWLvM002425; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:32:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JLWJVo002382; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:32:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:32:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:31:12 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: "Neel effect" OU with flux gate? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <001e01c4b622$f4b0b060$6401a8c0@geh> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <007c01c4b614$c173a800$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56149 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Jones, Is it possible that you are confusing antiferromagnetic, which is a ferromagnetic material where the electron spins in alternating layers of atoms are in opposite directions with magnetic shielding such as is provided by superconductors. Antiferromagnetic to paramagnetic transitions provide only very small changes in mu. Antiferromagnetic to ferromagnetic or paramagnetic to ferromagnetic would provide large changes in mu and would therefore be suitable for magnetic gates. George Holz Varitronics Systems 1924 US Hwy 22 East Bound Brook NJ 08805-1520 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 15:03:36 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JM3RvM021064; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:03:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JM3Pkj021033; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:03:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:03:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041019220322.36837.qmail@web12406.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:03:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: EPR and causality To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <4ic9n01dr0ssov1msrfbbo4gp07cjcs4c3@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56150 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In short, causality isn't really violated, it only > appears that way to an observer relying on EM signal > transmission for his/her information. > [snip] This could be argued from a certain point of view in the one way FTL sense. But if we allow round trip FTL signals, we find that according to the relativity of simultaneity and thus the equivalence of all inertial reference frames, as given by SR and later GR, that we can allow events to happen which not only appear to go backwards in time, but really do in measureable ways. Such as, frame A, not moving, can send an FTL signal to frame B, moving at some high fraction of c. Frame B will, according to his view of things (which according to relativity is just as valid as A's) receive the message before it is sent from A. Now, if he sends an FTL signal in reply fast enough (this is nowhere near infinity, just for clarification), frame A will see this signal arrive before A ever sends the first signal. So what if A decides then not to send the signal? A reply from nowhere, literally. These are serious consequences of mixing FTL and relativity theory as it is currently held to be true. However, there is a nice solution to this, it involves modifying the transformation equations so that simultaneity is not relative, but absolute. Therefore, there is an underlying ordering of cause and effect, and no time travel paradoxes occur...the FTL signal just gets there very fast, but never before it is sent. Note that this is perfectly acceptable and compatible with observed relativistic effects, such as Lorentz contraction and Larmor retardation (commonly called time dilation). The only necessary changes involves the distance-related term in the t' transform, thus removing the time 'desynchronization' from our results. The work of Tangherlini and Selleri demonstrates this nicely. --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 15:20:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JMK45j020035; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:20:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JMK2f9020019; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:20:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:20:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: <96.17c3a51f.2ea6ed0b@aol.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:19:55 EDT Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_96.17c3a51f.2ea6ed0b_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: <3mIWHC.A.r4E.SMZdBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56151 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_96.17c3a51f.2ea6ed0b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/8/04 8:59:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, blantont@rtpatlanta.com writes: > > > > > > I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would > have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. > This article: > > http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html > > claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by > The UK has the whole ocean at its shores, and can use water turbines and windmills to generate a great deal of electrical power, which many land locked nations cannot do. If the UK promoted compressed air cars and electrical cars as is France, then the UK can get most of its car energy needs from electrical energy powered by the ocean waves and air. The UK could also modify corn genes to grow bigger and faster to get 4 times the crop, to be used just to make ethanol, so that only 1/4 of the UK needs to grown corn. Also some sea plants should be able to be grown in the ocean shores of the UK to also make ethanol. 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 Making a difference one person at a time Get informed. Inform others. --part1_96.17c3a51f.2ea6ed0b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message=20= dated 10/8/04 8:59:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, blantont@rtpatlanta.com writ= es:







I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would=20
have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. &nb= sp;
This article:

http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html

claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by= =20
cracking water.


The UK has the whole ocean at its shores, and can use water turbines and= windmills to generate a great deal of electrical power, which many land loc= ked nations cannot do.  If the UK promoted compressed air cars and elec= trical cars as is France, then the UK can get most of its car energy needs f= rom electrical energy powered by the ocean waves and air.  The UK could= also modify corn genes to grow bigger and faster to get 4 times the crop, t= o be used just to make ethanol, so that only 1/4 of the UK needs to grown co= rn.  Also some sea plants should be able to be grown in the ocean shore= s of the UK to also make ethanol.=20


Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.co= m\baron, Email: www.rhf= web.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb= .com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.= rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at w= ww.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at = www.rhfweb.com

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. Inform others.


--part1_96.17c3a51f.2ea6ed0b_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 15:29:44 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JMTY5j025235; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:29:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JMTX4G025211; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:29:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:29:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009801c4b629$65af05e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <007c01c4b614$c173a800$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <001e01c4b622$f4b0b060$6401a8c0@geh> Subject: Re: "Neel effect" OU with flux gate? Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:17:18 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56152 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi George, > Is it possible that you are confusing antiferromagnetic, which > is a ferromagnetic material where the electron spins in alternating > layers of atoms are in opposite directions with magnetic shielding > such as is provided by superconductors. Yes. My terminology is confusing and non-standard. What I am referring to is antiferromagnetic spin reorientation and the exchange-bias effect where a (virtual ?) antiferromagnetic layer (which can be superconducting or not but is not ferromagnetic, so I guess it would be called "virtual") can either expel the flux of a nearby ferromagnet or else, on paramagnetic transition, partially align with it. A true antiferromagnetic effect would be more robust, of course, but is it even possible, and if so how easily switched? BTW... care to share or report on any of your recent efforts at this flux gate approach to OU ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 15:44:21 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JMiEvM015008; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:44:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JMiCsk014971; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:44:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:44:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041019183229.0339c940@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:44:08 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: "Cold Fusion And The Future" book review copies Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56153 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Reviewers & My Editor have made many suggestions, and the text of this book has been extensively revised. Anyone who would like an updated review copy should please contact me. This includes people who have not seen it yet. It is not secret, but I am still eliminating embarrassing mistakes and waiting for permission to use some of the figures. Per suggestions from Tom Benson, I am trying to increase the fluff quotient of the book, despite what My Editor may say. (Take that!) I plan to upload the entire book to the public section of LENR-CANR.org after ICCF-11. On another subject, does anyone have a handy guide showing the exact decay series for plutonium-238? As far as I can tell, it is all alpha decay, all the time, right down to lead-214, but maybe part of it goes to carbon-14. Or maybe I am reading the chart wrong. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 15:50:45 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JMoV5j001706; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:50:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JMoRuV001674; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:50:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:50:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c4b62e$02d104a0$4e037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: EPR and Bell revisited Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:49:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B604.032187B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56154 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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_01C4B604.032187B0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B604.032187B0" ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B604.032187B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankAh, yes! Horace.. The freedom of the randomness of the quantum = underpinnings of reality..well said.. may I add.. the " awareness" of = the freedom... Observation. A 100 MGD wastewater treatment plant effluent channel 14 ft wide, flow = 2+ fps, 30 degree sharp bend in channel. A push type feeder mixer = installed immediately downstream of the bend. Feeding 15% hypo solution. = Random visible vertical surface vortexes can be seen forming and = dissipating at the bend. The mixer 15 hp motor has superb monitoring,, voltage, amps, phase etc. = Normal running amps 16, low amp trip set at 15 amps. The monitor stores = power events.=20 Corrected for voltage fluctuations from the electric power system, we = experience periodic increases in amperage load and more strangely, = decreases in amperage below 15 amps for a period. It interests us in = that the rise in amps is a momentary event whereas the drop in amps is a = sustained ( a longer time interval) event. We believe these event are caused by a submerged " horizontal" vortex = introduced at the face of the high speed propeller( although the prop = is pushing against the flow) enhanced by the sharp bend in the channel. = We have observed horizontal vortexes form in a glass test tank and = "ponder" the possibility. Some studies of porpoise motion and speed have considered the = possibility of their use of vortexes. They cannot be seen unless air is = inducted to trace the pattern.. but...=20 how much do we fail to see because, like water, the picture is too clear = ? Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B604.032187B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Ah, yes! Horace.. The freedom of the = randomness=20 of the quantum underpinnings of reality..well said.. may I add.. the "=20 awareness" of the freedom...
 
Observation.
 
A 100 MGD wastewater treatment plant = effluent=20 channel 14 ft wide, flow 2+ fps, 30 degree sharp bend in channel. A push = type=20 feeder mixer installed immediately downstream of the bend. = Feeding=20 15% hypo solution. Random visible vertical surface vortexes can be = seen=20 forming and dissipating at the bend.
 
The mixer 15 hp motor has superb = monitoring,,=20 voltage, amps, phase etc. Normal running amps 16, low amp trip set at 15 = amps.=20 The monitor stores power events. 
 
Corrected for voltage fluctuations = from the=20 electric power system, we experience periodic increases in amperage load = and=20 more strangely, decreases in amperage below 15 amps for a  period. = It=20 interests us in that the rise in amps is a momentary event whereas the = drop in=20 amps is a sustained ( a longer time interval) event.
 
We believe these event are caused by = a submerged=20 " horizontal" vortex introduced at the face of the  high speed = propeller(=20 although the prop is pushing against the flow) enhanced by the = sharp bend in the channel. We have observed = horizontal=20 vortexes form in a glass test tank and "ponder" the = possibility.
 
Some studies of porpoise motion and = speed have=20 considered the possibility of their use of vortexes. They cannot be seen = unless=20 air is inducted to trace the pattern.. but...
how much do we fail to see because, = like water,=20 the picture is too clear ?
 
Richard
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4B604.032187B0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B604.032187B0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001901c4b62d$ebefee90$4e037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4B604.032187B0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 16:20:18 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JNKCvM001557; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:20:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9JNKBut001539; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:20:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:20:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: EPR and causality Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:49:34 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20041019220322.36837.qmail@web12406.mail.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56155 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Kyle. I think the causality paradoxes you mention will in practice prove to be no impediment to realizing an FTL signaling system. For the purposes of your discussion, consider the sender and receiver to be in the same ref frame. A superluminal signal will appear somewhere between instantly and the time it takes a c delayed signal. You could argue the bit about instantaneity is paradoxical; but from the point of the view of the observers it will be easy to say who is doing the signaling. In such a case a new speed limit of "instantly" would take the place of c. Nothing can go faster than instantly... The dragons drawn around the map of this new world are for illustrative purposes only and not to be taken too literally. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 17:47:31 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9K0lC5j004635; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:47:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9K0l8m2004609; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:47:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:47:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Originating-IP: [4.243.143.97] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: jonesb9@pacbell.net Subject: RE: "Neel effect" OU with flux gate? Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:46:50 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Oct 2004 00:47:01.0810 (UTC) FILETIME=[4FE8C920:01C4B63E] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56156 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones, Interesting. However, the collossal conductivity claimed by Djurek turned out to be a collossal disappointment when we and another superconductor lab each measured two sets of his samples. Perhaps one day he will achieve what he has claimed, but we saw no evidence of it to this point. I've passed this on to our magnetics team. Mark >From: "Jones Beene" >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: "vortex" >Subject: "Neel effect" OU with flux gate? >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:49:31 -0700 > >To lighten your day, let's start out with a spelling pun... >or as they say in the South... some of that thar fern >spelling, to wit: The Neel effect is in 'grave' need of >attention. > >Few on vortex will get it, but in the more likely event that >there are a few experimenters listening with electroplating >skills who wish to discover whether the Neel temperature, or >the related frequency near 100 Ghz, can be exploited in an >overunity "flux switching device", here are some >suggestions. > >As mentioned previously the Neel temperature is analogous to >the Curie temperature and represents the kinetic motion at >which an antiferromagnetic material becomes paramagnetic. >Some experimenters here have tried the Curie thermo-cycling >technique and found it lacking, of course, which it no doubt >is. But unlike the Curie temperature, the Neel effect can >(probably) produce results in an adiabatic process (in which >no significant heat is gained or lost sequentially by the >system). This is due to the fact that an extremely thin >layer is sufficient to totally shield, and even more >importantly, the frequency range (which substitutes for >temperature) is both narrow and of an energy factor which is >at least 100 times lower than the mid-terahertz range - >which is involved with the Curie technique; where in >addition (with Curie cycling) one must modify a large mass >of material over a wide spread of energies and all that >cycled heat is wasted. > >The 100 Ghz frequency, which is the substitute for heating, >may be easier to attain than one realizes due to the fact >that a number of Gunn-type diodes and other solid state >oscillators will reach this range and they would require >minimum circuitry - some just a battery and relay. Less than >a watt should be needed. > >Getting hold the ultraconductor-type of material might be >possible also, even if Mark Goldes' firm is not selling any >of it yet. > >There is an apparently validated claim that "colossal >conductivity" of the type which will likely possess, as a >natural consequence of this conductivity, the necessary kind >of antiferromagnetic blocking which is needed for flux >gating, has been discovered and is not really all that >uncommon. Plus it can be manufactured fairly easily: see >"Colossal Electric Conductivity in Ag–defect Ag5Pb2O6" by >Djurek, et. al. ... the citation: >http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0310011 > >In this paper, a "Byström–Evers compound" which in this case >is a ceramic composed of silver and lead oxide which has >been annealed at 500–540 K under flow of electric current - >which results in "colossal electric conductivity" which they >define as > 10^(-9) ohm/cm or about 700% better than >copper, but not as good as the Ultraconductor (TM) of Room >Temperature Superconductors, Inc. at least in their >specifications. Would either of these materials be >antiferromagnetic? Although no precise claims seem to have >been made for this, either should be antiferromagnetic, >according to a least one theory. > >In the simplest incarnation of this Byström–Evers compound, >silver and lead are plated in several thin layers onto a >substrate and annealed in air or O2 while passing an >electric current through the material. Afterwards this layer >is connected to an oscillator and physically interposed >between a strong magnet and a coil. Any of the geometries >which have been tried in the past, are feasible like (dare I >mention) the MEG but also more advanced geometries like that >of US Patent #4,006,401 (expired now) of Villasenor de Rivas >which describes what seems like the best design for a flux >gate type transformer. > >It is my belief that this thing will work best (if it works >at all) at liquid nitrogen temps, especially for a >continuously running transformer. But just to scope it and >test for robust OU effects, room temperature would be fine. > >Once you were convinced of a substantial OU, then anyone >would jump at the chance to apply cryogenics to it, without >much complaint. If there is OU at all, it should be of high >enough COP to carry the parasitic load of cryogenics. > >... dream on? .... > >Jones > > >Half my life's in books' written pages >Live and learn from fools and from sages >You know it's true: All things come back to you.... > >Sing with me, sing for the years >Sing for the laughter and sing for the tears >Sing with me... if it's just for today >Maybe tomorrow the good Lord will take you away... > >Dream on, dream on, >Dream yourself a dream come true... > >...with apologies to Steven Tyler > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 19:36:17 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9K2a7vM012749; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:36:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9K2a0mH012681; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:36:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:36:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:41:39 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56157 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:49 PM 10/19/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >Observation. > >A 100 MGD wastewater treatment plant effluent channel 14 ft wide, flow 2+ fps, Some off the top of the head comments follow. OK, so about 154 ft^2/sec, thus channel is running about 5.5 feet deep. > 30 degree sharp bend in channel. A push type feeder mixer installed >immediately downstream of the bend. Feeding 15% hypo solution. Random >visible vertical surface vortexes can be seen forming and dissipating at >the bend. > >The mixer 15 hp motor has superb monitoring,, voltage, amps, phase etc. >Normal running amps 16, low amp trip set at 15 amps. The monitor stores >power events. > >Corrected for voltage fluctuations from the electric power system, we >experience periodic increases in amperage load and more strangely, >decreases in amperage below 15 amps for a period. It interests us in that >the rise in amps is a momentary event whereas the drop in amps is a >sustained ( a longer time interval) event. Just a wild guess, but current draw changes could be caused by change of vortex mode, horizontal to vertical. The channel is wider than deep so a vertical vortex would flow slower than a horizontal one. The higher the speed the higher the resistance. A horizontal vortex would take more energy to drive. Due to the bend a vertical vertex would be the normal mode, a much more common mode, and, depending on which side of the channel the pump is located, the natural flow of the pump can be aided by the normal flow. > >We believe these event are caused by a submerged " horizontal" vortex >introduced at the face of the high speed propeller( although the prop is >pushing against the flow) enhanced by the sharp bend in the channel. We >have observed horizontal vortexes form in a glass test tank and "ponder" >the possibility. > >Some studies of porpoise motion and speed have considered the possibility >of their use of vortexes. They cannot be seen unless air is inducted to >trace the pattern.. but... >how much do we fail to see because, like water, the picture is too clear ? > >Richard Initial "instrumentation" to investigate might be fairly cheap. All you need is a piece of transparent tubing attached to a pole, with a piece of pipe on the end of the pole bent into the current flow, like a Pitot tube. This could then indicate relative pressure wherever placed, by the water column. Simply moving such a thing around by hand might give enough info., but ideally a set of 4 would be used, a pair above and below the pump outlet, and a pair to the sides. Relative pressure would then indicate vortex flow direction. Just food for thought. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 19:49:55 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9K2nW5j005068; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:49:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9K2nOuQ004980; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:49:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:49:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:54:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: <92gj5C.A.lNB.zIddBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56158 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If you want to eliminate horizontal vortices and run the pump at lower amperage, simply add some vertical vanes across the channel near the pump outlet. If you want to run in horizontal vortex mode to increase mixing and keep current above 15 amps, simply place horizontal vanes across the channel near the pump. That's my guess anyway. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 19 22:28:17 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9K5Qpos028843; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:28:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9K5QnHn028832; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:26:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:26:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:32:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56159 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I posted in a hurry earlier as I was leaving the house. Some corrections follow. Flow is about 154 ft^3/sec, thus channel is running about 5.5 feet deep. If you want to eliminate horizontal vortices, run a vertical vortex and thus run the pump at lower amperage, simply add some horizontal vanes across the channel near the pump outlet. If you want to run in horizontal vortex mode in order to increase mixing and keep current above 15 amps, simply place vertical vanes all the way across the channel near the pump. That's my guess anyway. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 02:38:26 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9K9cFos000759; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 02:38:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9K9cDsC000729; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 02:38:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 02:38:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041020103730.006b45e0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:37:30 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56160 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:49 pm 19-10-04 -0500, you wrote: >Ah, yes! Horace.. The freedom of the randomness >of the quantum underpinnings of reality..well said.. >may I add.. the " awareness" of the freedom... >Some studies of porpoise motion and speed have considered >the possibility of their use of vortexes. They cannot be >seen unless air is inducted to trace the pattern.. but... >how much do we fail to see because, like water, the picture >is too clear ? > >Richard Funny you should say that, Richard, because I've been pondering how one could physically visualize high order derivatives of distance with respect to time. dL/dT ......VELOCITY .......moving scenery - no problem d2L/dT2 ....ACCELERATION ...being pushed back in ones seat as the plane takes off - no problem d3L/dt3 ....JERK............Mmm..more difficult - being hit over the head with a bottle perhaps? d4L/dT4 ....JOUNCE..........I have no feeling whatsoever for this or high derivatives. But the failure to visualise these higher order derivative is because I am thinking in terms of straight line motion. If I think instead in terms of circular motion, or better still, helical motions, then things become very much easier. If I allow myself to be pinned to the wall of a fairground centrifuge then I can experience being "pushed back in my seat on a continuous basis. By imposing a circular motion on this circular motion to form an open vortex helix I can visualize the next derivative, though I am well past the age where I would want to experience it - and so on - and so forth. Now I suspect that phenomena such as sparks and lightning - and perhaps even that stream which comes from a leaky tap (faucet) may have these high order derivative motions. I believe that is why they give rise to such strange phenomena as ball lightning, buckminster fullerines, etc. Also, I've been following all those enthusiasts who claim they can get OU by using sparks and batteries - very difficult to be sure they are not deluding themselves. But I noticed one interesting thing. They say that it had to be sparks and the equivalent electronic circuits wont work - or something like that. Well, it could be that sparks have higher orders of dnL/dtn motion than the electronic circuits. But there's more. 8-) Some years ago I had a desultory correspondence with Dr Paul Rowe who was convinced he had evidence that electric discharges in a vacuum could generate hydrogen. Perhaps his stuff is on the web somewhere. Let's see. Google "paul rowe" - 3100 hits. Mmm...Paul Rowe baritone?.. Paul Rowe is obviously a common name. Let's add hydrogen - 213 hits - that's more like it. Fancy that now! Right at the top of the page. ====================================== HYDROGEN FROM THE VACUUM? and More.... by Dr. Paul Rowe Infinite Energy Magazine page 79 Issue 17 Dec 1997 - Jan 1998 ====================================== I think St Eugene must be looking over my shoulder. 8-) Well if, like the boy on the burning deck, sparks can roll up little balls of carbon to make C60, etc. I don't see why sparks shouldn't roll up materons to make protons. And if they can - that sure beats the hell out of Cold Fusion, eh! There can't be any question that the spark generation of hydrogen from the empty (allegedly) vacuum is MASS-ively OU. :-) Grimer ================================= The boy stood on the burning deck Picking his nose like mad. He rolled it up in little balls And flicked it at his dad. ================================= From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 04:52:43 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KBqZiX012043; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:52:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KBqXA6012034; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:52:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:52:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041020125155.006c501c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:51:55 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56161 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:37 am 20-10-04 +0000, you wrote: >At 05:49 pm 19-10-04 -0500, grimer wrote: >Some years ago I had a desultory correspondence with >Dr Paul Rowe who was convinced he had evidence that >electric discharges in a vacuum could generate hydrogen. >Perhaps his stuff is on the web somewhere. Let's see. >Google "paul rowe" - 3100 hits. Mmm...Paul Rowe baritone?.. >Paul Rowe is obviously a common name. >Let's add hydrogen - 213 hits - that's more like it. > >Fancy that now! Right at the top of the page. > > ====================================== > HYDROGEN FROM THE VACUUM? and More.... > by Dr. Paul Rowe > Infinite Energy Magazine page 79 > Issue 17 Dec 1997 - Jan 1998 > ====================================== Further googling - "Paul Rowe" hydrogen - turned up the following. =============================================================== INE'99 SYMPOSIUM FOR NEW ENERGY AUGUST 27 & 28, 1999, SLC, UTAH 11:30 Paul Rowe's Paper - "The Rowe Effect and Transmutation" ABSTRACT: Hal Fox published a paper of mine which attempted to demonstrate that hydrogen gas has been produced in and from vacuum. It included direct quotes from many highly respected experimenters, along with results of my own experiments. Hal named the transformation of vacuum into hydrogen: "the Rowe Effect". In subsequent papers 2-3-4, I have proposed that vacuum is not a void but a rather a highly concentrated matrix of protons and electrons and suggested that the matrix might be Bose-Einstein condensed hydrogen.In this speech, I will attempt to show that presence of such a matrix is not as unlikely as it seems and that neutrons produced in or from such a matrix might cause transmutation while avoiding the Coulomb barrier. In the process, I will discuss physical phenomena that many scientists have forgotten that they can't explain. ================================================================ Now I suggest that it is not "a highly concentrated matrix of protons and electrons" but a Beta-atmosphere of materons that are being condensed by the intensely high pF Beta atmosphere vacua generated by dnL/dTn motion. Both Ing.Saviour and I have quite independently recognised that mass has the dimension of T/L (see http://www.blazelabs.com/) and it is evident that materons have "hidden mass". Just consider this account by D.L.Hotson talking about himself in the third person. I have pasted it from Bill Beaty's excellent web site, ================================================== "...Unfortunately, he could not resist asking awkward questions. His professors taught that conservation of mass-energy is the never-violated, rock-solid foundation of all physics. In 'pair-production', a photon of at least 1.022 MeV 'creates' an electron-positron pair, each with 0.511 MeV of rest energy, with any excess being the momentum of the 'created' pair. So supposedly the conservation books balance. But the 'created' electron and positron both have spin (angular momentum) energy of h/4p. By any assumption as to the size of electron or positron, this is far more energy than that supplied by the photon at 'creation'. 'Isn't angular momentum energy?' he asked a professor. 'Of course it is. This half-integer spin angular momentum is the energy needed by the electron to set up a stable standing wave around the proton. Thus it is responsible for the Pauli exclusion principle, hence for the extension and stability of all matter. You could say it is the sole cause of the periodic table of elements.' 'Then where does all this energy come from? How can the 'created' electron have something like sixteen times more energy than the photon that supposedly 'created' it? Isn't this a huge violation of your never-violated rock-solid foundation of physics?' 'We regard spin angular momentum as an 'inherent property' of electron and positron, not as a violation of conservation.' 'But if it's real energy, where does it come from?' 'Inherent property' means we don't talk about it, and you won't either if you want to pass this course.' Later, Mr. Hotson was taken aside and told that his 'attitude' was disrupting the class, and that further, with his 'attitude', there was no chance in hell of his completing a graduate program in physics, so 'save your money'. He ended up at the Sorbonne studying French literature and later became a professional land surveyor." ================================================ I sure some smart Vortexian will be able to calculate how many materons are needed to make a proton - or even a neutron perhaps, since this will soon decay to a proton and an electron. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 05:31:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KCVAiX022390; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 05:31:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KCV8cT022354; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 05:31:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 05:31:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:36:47 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: EPR and Bell revisited Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56162 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "If you want to run in horizontal vortex mode in order to increase mixing and keep current above 15 amps, simply place vertical vanes all the way across the channel near the pump." The vanes would have to be fairly long in the flow direction, and located at the elevation of the feeder mixer outlet, but in order to get good mixing overall, not very deep, only 1 to 2 feet deep. The long vertical vanes prevent a channel wide vertical axis vortex from forming. Horizontal axis vortex action could be increased by directing feeder mixer wash slightly upward or downward, or putting a small low-angle downward deflecting vane directly in front of the mixer. Maybe the need for the long vertical vanes could be eliminated simply by directing the pump output slightly upward or downward, and making sure its flow is not directed side to side at all. =================================================\channel wall ----------------------------vane <---- 100 MGD current O-----> feeder mixer outlet /wash ----------------------------vane <---- current =====================================\ channel wall Fig. 1 - Top view of channel Again, all just food for thought. I may not have a good picture of your configuration. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 07:24:04 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KENvos030416; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:23:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KENtWE030383; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:23:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:23:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c4b6b0$69335e50$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Freedom of the randomness Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:23:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B686.67D1EBA0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56163 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B686.67D1EBA0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B686.67D37240" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B686.67D37240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankSomething mentioned by Heffner and Grimer " triggered" a notion = concerning a series of vortex enhancing tests we are running. The mixer distributor induces a vortex as the flow is drawn toward the = rotating member and disbursed perpendicular to the cone of the vortex. = The vortex is visible and does it's classic " dancing wobble". = Periodically, the vortex " resets". The inductor actually " jumps" = against it's slide mounting from the force of this radical event.. We = observe the vortex seems to impact the rotating member at this time to = produce this mechanical "jump". Afterwards, the vortex again forms and = begins it's dance. As the vortex gains shape, a seeming cadence of = vortexes are spun off in vertical, diagonal and horizontal patterns of = 1-3 second duration. These patterns appear to follow some order like = music as they seem to achieve harmony in motion until they are again = upset by the " reset". Heffner mentioned randomness. In automatic flow control a setpoint is = maintained by selecting a proportional band and determining the number = of resets per minute that would permit the control to average the flow. = The randomness is controlled by permitting freedom within limits. There appears to be reset mechanisms built into everything.. creating = chaos or harmony ? In Texas, a country beerjoint cannot stay in business = without one good fight per week to release the tension. Richard =20 ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B686.67D37240 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Something mentioned by Heffner and Grimer " triggered" a notion = concerning=20 a series of vortex enhancing tests we are running.
 
The  mixer distributor induces a vortex as the flow is drawn = toward=20 the rotating member and disbursed perpendicular to the cone of the = vortex. The=20 vortex is visible and does it's classic " dancing wobble".  =20 Periodically, the vortex " resets". The inductor actually "=20 jumps"  against  it's slide mounting from the force of = this=20 radical event.. We observe the vortex seems to impact the rotating = member at=20 this time to produce this mechanical "jump". Afterwards, the vortex = again forms=20 and begins it's dance. As the vortex gains shape, a seeming cadence of = vortexes=20 are spun off in vertical, diagonal and horizontal patterns of = 1-3=20 second duration. These patterns appear to follow some order like music = as they=20 seem to achieve harmony in motion until they are again upset by the "=20 reset".
 
Heffner mentioned randomness. In automatic flow control a setpoint = is=20 maintained by selecting a proportional band and determining the number = of resets=20 per minute that would permit the control to average the flow. The = randomness is=20 controlled by permitting freedom within limits.
 
There appears to be reset mechanisms built into everything.. = creating chaos=20 or harmony ? In Texas, a country beerjoint cannot stay = in business=20 without one good fight per week to release the tension.
 
Richard
 
 
 
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4B686.67D37240-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B686.67D1EBA0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c4b6b0$50a05280$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4B686.67D1EBA0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 07:43:40 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KEhUiX032730; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:43:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KEhPx0032685; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:43:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:43:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41766BB9.9EF6E10A@ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:59:53 -0600 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K. Systems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: "Cold Fusion And The Future" book review copies References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041019183229.0339c940@mail.lenr-canr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56164 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Pu238 emits a 5.5 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 87.7 y. This makes U234 which decays by 4.8 MeW alpha with a 1/2 life of 2.46 x10^5 years. This makes Th230 which decays by 4.7 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 7.54 x 10^4 years. This makes Ra226 which decays by 4.8 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 1599y. This makes Rn222 which decays by 5,5 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 3.8 days. This makes Po218 which decays by 6.0 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 3.1 min. This makes Pb214 which decays by beta to Bi214, which decays by beta to Po214, which decays by alpha to Pb210, which decays by beta to Bi210, which decays either by beta or alpha. Both paths end with Pb206. Jed, please send me the latest version of your book. I'm back from Washington and have a little more time to comment. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > Reviewers & My Editor have made many suggestions, and the text of this book > has been extensively revised. Anyone who would like an updated review copy > should please contact me. This includes people who have not seen it yet. It > is not secret, but I am still eliminating embarrassing mistakes and waiting > for permission to use some of the figures. > > Per suggestions from Tom Benson, I am trying to increase the fluff quotient > of the book, despite what My Editor may say. (Take that!) > > I plan to upload the entire book to the public section of LENR-CANR.org > after ICCF-11. > > On another subject, does anyone have a handy guide showing the exact decay > series for plutonium-238? As far as I can tell, it is all alpha decay, all > the time, right down to lead-214, but maybe part of it goes to carbon-14. > Or maybe I am reading the chart wrong. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 07:53:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KErDos027104; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:53:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KErCfT027089; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:53:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:53:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041020145301.90713.qmail@web61104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:53:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: Re: EPR and causality To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041019220322.36837.qmail@web12406.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-434803565-1098283981=:88486" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56165 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-434803565-1098283981=:88486 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Kyle Mcallister wrote: [snip] This could be argued from a certain point of view in the one way FTL sense. But if we allow round trip FTL signals, we find that according to the relativity of simultaneity and thus the equivalence of all inertial reference frames, as given by SR and later GR, that we can allow events to happen which not only appear to go backwards in time, but really do in measureable ways. Such as, frame A, not moving, can send an FTL signal to frame B, moving at some high fraction of c. Frame B will, according to his view of things (which according to relativity is just as valid as A's) receive the message before it is sent from A. Now, if he sends an FTL signal in reply fast enough (this is nowhere near infinity, just for clarification), frame A will see this signal arrive before A ever sends the first signal. So what if A decides then not to send the signal? A reply from nowhere, literally. [snip] Actually Kyle, this is a mis-conception. Yes, any reference frame is equally valid. However one cannot switch reference frames in the middle of the experiment. A sends an FTL signal to B, who sends an FTL response back. In A's reference frame, He see's his signal travel out to B, and recieves a response from B before his signal appears to reach B. But the response happens AFTER he sends his signal. In B's reference frame, he receives a signal from nowhere and responds, before he perceives A sending his signal. However, B sees his signal reach A AFTER A sends his signal. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --0-434803565-1098283981=:88486 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii


Kyle Mcallister <kyle_mcallister@yahoo.com> wrote:

 [snip]

This could be argued from a certain point of view in
the one way FTL sense. But if we allow round trip FTL
signals, we find that according to the relativity of
simultaneity and thus the equivalence of all inertial
reference frames, as given by SR and later GR, that we
can allow events to happen which not only appear to go
backwards in time, but really do in measureable ways.
Such as, frame A, not moving, can send an FTL signal
to frame B, moving at some high fraction of c. Frame B
will, according to his view of things (which according
to relativity is just as valid as A's) receive the
message before it is sent from A. Now, if he sends an
FTL signal in reply fast enough (this is nowhere near
infinity, just for clarification), frame A will see
this signal arrive before A ever sends the first
signal. So what if A decides then not to send the
signal? A reply from nowhere, literally.

[snip]

Actually Kyle, this is a mis-conception.  Yes, any reference frame is equally valid.  However one cannot switch reference frames in the middle of the experiment.  A sends an FTL signal to B, who sends an FTL response back.  In A's reference frame, He see's his signal travel out to B, and recieves a response from B before his signal appears to reach B.  But the response happens AFTER he sends his signal.  In B's reference frame, he receives a signal from nowhere and responds, before he perceives A sending his signal.  However, B sees his signal reach A AFTER A sends his signal.



Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com --0-434803565-1098283981=:88486-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 08:31:53 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KFVViX015343; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:31:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KFVSqX015311; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:31:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:31:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041020112748.0339c3c0@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:31:25 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: "Cold Fusion And The Future" book review copies Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56166 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms writes: > Pu238 emits a 5.5 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 87.7 y. This makes U234 which > decays by 4.8 MeW alpha with a 1/2 life of 2.46 x10^5 years. This makes Th230 > which decays by 4.7 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 7.54 x 10^4 years. . . . . . . This > makes Pb214 . . . I got it right up to this point, but somehow I went off the track. Okay, part of the reason is that WebElements.com does not list Pb214. I somehow got the idea it was stable. > Jed, please send me the latest version of your book. I'm back from Washington > and have a little more time to comment. Will do, as soon as I finish entering the latest batch of corrections. I hope you had a nice trip. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 10:19:15 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KHIgiX002627; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:18:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KHIUjb002481; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:18:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:18:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003001c4b6be$7615d400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <000e01c4b6b0$69335e50$0100007f@xptower> Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:04:20 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: <_AJhfC.A.km.i3pdBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56167 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: RC Macaulay writes (regarding pumped vortex motion), "There appears to be reset mechanisms built into everything.. creating chaos or harmony" When you think about this chaos --> harmony appearance, which at some level is a shared value judgement or a "perception" of humans trying to understand a seemingly a disorganized system (chaotic vortex), the "reset" mechanisms are actually not a huge mystery, as they are invariably the lower order power laws. Frank mentioned the higher order derivatives of distance with respect to time. What appears as "chaotic" to our eyes - I would guess that the term "chaos" usually begins with "jerk" or at least "acceleration" on two different vectors (which is not exactly the same as jerk). dL/dT ......VELOCITY .......moving scenery - no problem d2L/dT2 ....ACCELERATION ...being pushed back in ones seat as the plane takes off - no problem d3L/dt3 ....JERK............Mmm..more difficult - being hit over the head with a bottle perhaps? d4L/dT4 ....JOUNCE..........I have no feeling whatsoever for this or high derivatives. Consequently, the "reset" mechanism for "jerk" is merely a drop down into the lower order of "acceleration" from which our human sensory perception is pretty good at identifying (goes back in evolution perhaps, such as aiming a spear at an escaping bar-be-que dinner). Which brings up an interesting question in regard to finding free energy in mechanical motion, like a vortex. I am assming that there is some there (free energy), but that it is very difficult to reproduce, being a fairly precise combination of thermo-electro-chemical and mechanicam parameters. But just trying to maximize the mechanical parameters first seems like the correct way to proceed. This seems to be what Richard is doing. Which brings up the next issue. Lets say that "cavitation" w ithin a swirling vortex is getting pretty close to mechanical "jerk" . Can we mechanically go beyond "jerk," where we get the benefit of yet an even higher order power law? IOW the $64 question: is it possible to move from jerk to jounce mechanically or does that jump require the electro-chemical addition to the vortex parameters? Maybe Richard will discover that... " In Texas, a country beerjoint cannot stay in business without one good fight per week to release the tension." Richard ...only one per week? Texas has definitley started to gentrify... ;-) Jones Speaking of trying to visualize rotation in four dimensions, here is a semi-serious fractal attempt: http://home.att.net/~Fractals_2/FotD_00-10-15.html I call it semi-serious, because there is no doubt that the author of this chose the fractal (or at least the coloration), even if the math behind it does express rotation in four dimension, because of the vague resemblence to either a scream or related utterance or horror... perhaps that famous painting Edward Munch expressing the existential fright of a world at war... not unlike my feelings going into this election. Which is to say...its still not too late for that previously forecast "October surprise"... or stated another way, if I had tickets to a football game at Shea or some such high profile venue on Sunday (Foxboro would be making a statement also, no?), I think it would be prudent to see what a scalper would offer for them... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 10:59:17 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KHwdiX016728; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:58:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KHwc0m016696; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:58:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:58:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041020185755.006a055c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:57:55 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56168 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:04 am 20-10-04 -0700, you wrote: >RC Macaulay writes (regarding pumped vortex motion), > >"There appears to be reset mechanisms built into >everything.. creating chaos or harmony" > >When you think about this chaos --> harmony appearance, >which at some level is a shared value judgement or a >"perception" of humans trying to understand a seemingly a >disorganized system (chaotic vortex), the "reset" mechanisms >are actually not a huge mystery, as they are invariably the >lower order power laws. > >Frank mentioned the higher order derivatives of distance >with respect to time. What appears as "chaotic" to our >eyes - I would guess that the term "chaos" usually begins >with "jerk" or at least "acceleration" on two different >vectors (which is not exactly the same as jerk). > >dL/dT ......VELOCITY .......moving scenery > - no problem > >d2L/dT2 ....ACCELERATION ...being pushed back in ones > seat as the plane takes off > - no problem > >d3L/dt3 ....JERK............Mmm..more difficult - being > hit over the head with a > bottle perhaps? > >d4L/dT4 ....JOUNCE..........I have no feeling whatsoever > for this or high derivatives. > >Consequently, the "reset" mechanism for "jerk" is merely a >drop down into the lower order of "acceleration" from which >our human sensory perception is pretty good at identifying >(goes back in evolution perhaps, such as aiming a spear at >an escaping bar-be-que dinner). > >Which brings up an interesting question in regard to finding >free energy in mechanical motion, like a vortex. I am >assuming that there is some there (free energy), but that it >is very difficult to reproduce, being a fairly precise >combination of thermo-electro-chemical and mechanical >parameters. But just trying to maximize the mechanical >parameters first seems like the correct way to proceed. This >seems to be what Richard is doing. > >Which brings up the next issue. Lets say that "cavitation" >within a swirling vortex is getting pretty close to >mechanical "jerk" . Can we mechanically go beyond "jerk," >where we get the benefit of yet an even higher order power >law? IOW the $64 question: is it possible to move from jerk >to jounce mechanically or does that jump require the >electro-chemical addition to the vortex parameters? > That is indeed the $64,000 dollar question, Jones. Personally I believe that electric flux involves deL/dTe and magnetic flux involves dmL/dTm, where e and m are positive integers and 'm' is greater than 'e'. I think the enthusiast OU searchers are quite right to concentrate on magnetism. I wonder if any of them have yet passed magnetic flux down a coiled-coil yet - or even a coiled-coiled-coiled-........coil. After all look at what Faraday discovered when he passed electricity down only a single order coil. 8-) A good example of moving things to higher order motion is the Hutchinson effect. =========================================================== The Hutchison Effect is a collection of phenomena which were discovered accidentally by John Hutchison during attempts to study the longitudinal waves of Tesla back in 1979. The Hutchison Effect occurs as the result of radio wave interferences in a 3 dimensional zone space volume radiated by two or more high voltage sources, usually a Van de Graff generator, and two or more Tesla coils. The results are levitation of heavy objects, fusion of dissimilar materials such as metal and wood (as shown in the upper right corner of the photo), ...... see: http://www.blazelabs.com/f-p-hutch.asp for the photo ........the anomalous melting (without heating) of metals without burning adjacent material, spontaneous fracturing of metals (which separate by sliding in a sideways fashion), and both temporary and permanent changes in the crystalline structure and physical properties of metals as shown above. =========================================================== A more familiar example of something somewhat similar is, of course, the microwave oven. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 12:02:02 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KJ1sos002256; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:01:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KJ1q32002232; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:01:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:01:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: Dimensions of mass Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:31:09 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041020125155.006c501c@pop.freeserve.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56169 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank writes: >Both Ing.Saviour and I have quite independently recognised that >mass has the dimension of T/L (see http://www.blazelabs.com/) >and it is evident that materons have "hidden mass". Add me to the list too. In '91 I was studying the CGS system of measure and whilst contemplating the fact that a unit of magnetic charge was defined solely by the force, it occurred to me that the same trick can be played with defining mass. I'm looking at my old notes, and I have the unit of mass being something like. m = L^3 T^-2 G I wonder if this is because I couched things in terms of the CGS system, whereas saviour and yourself are using SI? ( particularly I'm thinking that in CGS methodology the G value would be handled as a dimensionless constant ) I'll have to check... I never pursued the idea in the direction saviour takes it; I should like to post on this after having had a chance to digest what he is saying. Also, you mentioned Jerk and Jounce ( sounds like a b-list rap group ). I've also puzzled over the physical meaning of these terms. It's rather like trying to imagine higher dimensional shapes. One dimension up is about all I can muster, which in this case is Jerk. Standing on a carosel, with the speed increasing and decreasing sinusoidally, ought to do it. Perhaps a better term would be "projectile vomiting" rather than jerk, huh??? (grin). Your idea about the coils is very intriguing. I'd be willing to try a quick experiment if you have some particular idea in mind. Good posting today, BTW. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 12:08:17 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KJ84os006150; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:08:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KJ84PQ006141; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:08:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:08:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4176A9C5.84CD0935@ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:09:09 -0600 From: Edmund Storms Organization: Energy K. Systems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: "Cold Fusion And The Future" book review copies References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041020112748.0339c3c0@mail.lenr-canr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56170 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > Edmund Storms writes: > > > Pu238 emits a 5.5 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 87.7 y. This makes U234 > which > > decays by 4.8 MeW alpha with a 1/2 life of 2.46 x10^5 years. This makes > Th230 > > which decays by 4.7 MeV alpha with a 1/2 life of 7.54 x 10^4 years. > > . . . > > . . . This > > makes Pb214 . . . > > I got it right up to this point, but somehow I went off the track. Okay, > part of the reason is that WebElements.com does not list Pb214. I somehow > got the idea it was stable. Pb214 is a beta emitter with a 27 min half-life. All lead above 208 is unstable and they all are short-lived beta emitters. > > > > Jed, please send me the latest version of your book. I'm back from > Washington > > and have a little more time to comment. > > Will do, as soon as I finish entering the latest batch of corrections. I > hope you had a nice trip. Good trip going, bad trip returning. Apparently you people in Atlanta got some bad weather that threw the system out of whack. However the natives were friendly in Washington even though the Government area is like an armed camp. A person can not leave the street without passing through a metal detector, even to visit a museum. There were armed guards at every entrance. They must think they are more important than chemical plants and nuclear reactors. Most people on the street, except tourists, were wearing badges. It was like being at Los Alamos. Ed > > > - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 12:12:52 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KJCjos009441; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:12:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KJCi5e009416; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:12:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:12:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041020201203.006b179c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:12:03 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56171 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:04 am 20-10-04 -0700, you wrote: >...only one per week? Texas has definitley started to >gentrify... ;-) > >Jones > >Speaking of trying to visualize rotation in four dimensions, >here is a semi-serious fractal attempt: >http://home.att.net/~Fractals_2/FotD_00-10-15.html Whilst on the subject of hierarchical patterns, I wonder how much high order differential vortices are responsible for controlling the growth structure of Haeckel's Radiolarians. http://tinyurl.com/4cgoq Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 12:46:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KJk2iX027951; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:46:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KJjqdB027876; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:45:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:45:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:51:05 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Interatomic Coulombic Decay Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56172 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: "Interatomic Coulombic Decay" as described below may have relevancy to cold fusion in various ways. For one thing, it provides a mechanism, without detectable radiation, for releasing free electrons in a stressed lattice or even in an electrolyte. Perhaps such liberated at a distance electrons might play a role in catalysing fusion. Such an energy transfer mechanism might play a role in energy dispersion in the vicinity of a cathode? The long range of the effect seems to be capable of jumping the two atom thick interface layer at the cathode, perhaps even locally neutralizing the interface momentarily. Neutralizing the interface would improve electrolysis efficiency. Such an effect may provide a limited degree of electron conductivity in electrolytes, something I noted in my experiment reports here measuring the rate of charge equalization over the length of a 10 meter long electrolytic cell with a flowing electrolyte. A snipped summary of those experiments is included below, following the quote of the Physics News Update article immediately below. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 705 October 20, 2004 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein ATOMS CAN TRANSFER THEIR INTERNAL "STRESS" TO OTHER ATOMS, new experiments have revealed. Compared to atoms that are all by themselves, atoms with a close neighbor have a very efficient and surprising way to get rid of excess internal energy. An excited atom can hand over its energy to a neighbor, a research team led by the University of Frankfurt has demonstrated experimentally in a measurement carried out at the Berlin synchrotron facility BESSY II (R. Doerner, doerner@hsb.uni-frankfurt.de). Predicted in 1997 by a group at Heidelberg University (Cederbaum et al., Phys Rev. Lett, 15 Dec 1997), this decay mechanism occurs when atoms or molecules lump together. Once an excited particle is placed in an environment of other particles such as in clusters or fluids, the novel de-excitation mechanism, called "Interatomic Coulombic Decay," leads to the emission of very low-energy electrons from a particle that is neighboring the initially excited one (see figure at www.aip.org/png). The researchers demonstrated the effect in a pair of weakly bound neon atoms. The two neon atoms were separated by 3.4 Angstroms (about 6 times the radius of the neon atom) and held together by a weak "van der Waals" bond. Removing a tightly bound electron from one of the neon atoms allowed one of the less tightly bound atoms to jump down to the tightly bound spot and in the process gained energy. The extra energy was not sufficient to liberate any of the remaining electrons in the same neon atom, but it was sufficient to release an electron in the neighboring atom. This newly verified effect may have a wide-ranging impact in chemistry and biology since it is predicted to happen frequently in most hydrogen-bonded systems, most prominently liquid water. Furthermore, it may be an important, and so far unknown, source of low-energy electrons, which have recently been shown to cause damage to DNA (see http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/636-1.html). (Jahnke et al., Physical Review Letters, 15 October 2004; also see researchers' website at http://hsb.uni-frankfurt.de/photoncluster/ICD.html) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End Phys. Rev. Lett. article - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 meter Electrolytic Cell Experiment Horace Heffner - 4/15/96 [Selected text] To further investigate the rate of electric potential travel and conductivty changes vs. flow rate, I constructed a super-stretch 10 m cell to enable measurement of timing using my very unstable 1960's vintage war surplus oscilloscpe. If I ever get a Patterson Power Cell to output as much heat as that scope I will jump for joy. The 10 m cell length is actually 10.31 m of 1/8" ID tygon tubing. The length of the Pt exposed to the electrolyte is 6 cm, the NiCr wire 18 cm. The length of Pt wire exposed to moving electrolyte is 3 cm., the NiCr wire, 13 cm. The difference is due to the fact the wires are inserted into the flow using a 1/8" ID barbed T connector, where the electrolyte enters from a 90 degree angle and the wire goes straight through the T. The end seals are compression fittings made by cutting halfway though a rubber stopper and inserting the wire. This was fit into the large end of a threaded 1/4" pipe to hose fitting. A compression cap was made by drilling a 1/4" hole in an ordinary 1/4" pipe cap. A piece of 1/6" thick rubber spacer was cut to fit on the end of the stopper and a small hole was punched through the middle to accept the wire. The compression cap was fitted over the spacer with the wire extending through the middle and tightened down. All the seal parts were bought at Eagle Hardware. The electrolyte used was 200 ml of 1 M Li2SO4. Fluid flow velocity was 9'5" in 60 s or 4.78 cm/s. Fluid flow rate was 23.9 ml in 60 s or 0.40 ml/s. Pressure oscillated between 21 and 22 mmHg at the pump rotational frequency of 2 Hz. A drip degasser was included in the fluid circuit to ensure the current flow was one way. The steady state and flowing state battery voltage from the Pt-NiCr battery was .382 V. For this experiment flow was always from the NiCr electrode towards the Pt. electrode. The electrode leads were switched between the two sets of measurements. To check propagation rate a 5 V 1 kHz A/C square wave, with the plus pulse slightly longer than the negative pulse, was applied in both flowing and steady state electrolytes. The results were indistinguishable. The output waveform matched the shape of the input, except the there was a typical RC response delay curve in both the rise and fall edges, indicating a significant capacitance. To check that the RC curve was not due to inductance, a copper wire was laid out on the floor next to the 10 m loop of Tygon and connected in the circuit in place of the fluid circuit. The ouput waveform exactly matched the square input waveform. The time constant of the RC response was about 40 us, i.e. the waveform reached 66 percent in two divisions or 4x10-5 seconds. This means the peak voltage is 99 percent reached in 2x10-4 s on a pulse width of 1/2000 th of a second, or 5x10-4 s. To check this the Tygon tubing was pinched with thumb and forefinger, thus increasing resistance, and the curve flattened out. As a cross check a DMM was used to measure the capacitance. With the + lead connected to the Pt the capacitance was .094 nF or 9.4x10^-11 F. Reversing the leads the capacitance was measured at .084 nF, or 8.4x10-11 F. Using the first V vs uA table value of 17.8 uA at 5 V, we get a resistance of 280k, or 2.8x10^5 ohms. This yields a time constant Tc = (9.4E-11 F)*(2.8E5 Ohm) = 2.6E-5 s, or about 26 microseconds, which is not far from the 40 microsecond Tc approximated from the waveform. This large time constant is an indication that the capacitance of the fluid will prevent better measurments of propagation rate of the electric pulse using this technique, even with a better oscilloscope, due to the long rise time caused by the fluid capacitance and resistance in a 10 m cell. DIRECT CONCLUSIONS FROM DATA (1) The most significant conclusion is that charge differential can be equalized in a 1 m Li2SO4 electrolytic cell at a velocity of more than 10^6 m/s in a field gradient as small as 1 V/m, and this can happen in an electrolyte flowing at over 4 cm/s in either direction. This is determined by looking at the rise time of the square wave at output of cell vs input of cell. (2) Cell current appears to be slightly improved by a flowing electrolyte. [Regardless of direction of flow.] SOME DISCUSSION Electromagnetic fields can convey only oscillating fields, not a static charge. Only a particle can carry a charge. Even a purely static electrostatic field can only extend potentials according to the inverse square law. A static 10 V EMF at the tip of a .015" wire can barely be measured at 1 m, much less 10 m. You certainly can not do it with my equipment. If EM fields conveyed potential through conductors you could simply remove the water from the 10 m cell and still measure the same EMF. That will not work. The EMF can not be carried by photons, except *between* particles. The charge bearing particles receiving the impulse then must *move* to propagate a field strength change on to the neighboring (chargewise downstream) particles. I can believe an EM pulse could induce voltages, at least a momentary field gradient, at 10 m distance, but it would require major energy, and would be clearly dynamic. If you look at the 1 kHz pulse it comes up to equilibrium - it in effect is not a pulse. If you connected a 10 V battery instead of the square wave generator, it would come up to the same potential at the same speed and stay there indefinitely. An electromagnetic field is propagated in a sinusoidal [or at least oscillating] form. For every potential swing there is an equal energy but opposite polarity swing due to the generated magnetic field collapse. EM waves inside wires are propagated via electrons in metal conduction bands. Since the proton is 1836 times heavier than an electron, it seems a propagation mechanism involving the proton would be limited to C/1836 = 1.63x10^5 m/s. There is some evidenence the potential can be carried forward by electrons in electrolytes. That evidence is the fact the Faradaic efficiency is not 100 percent. Some of the currrent must be in the form of electrons. It takes only a very small number of electrons to carry a potential forward. The number required to do so in a conductor that is open at the end strictly depends on the capacitance of the conductor, as determined strictly by it' surface area and geometry. Electrons must carry forward the potential in electrolytes in a manner similar to the way a lightning leader is formed. The heavy nuclear ions would respond eventually with motion. Fast charge propagation via electrons is not surprizing when you think about the size of the de Broglie wavelength of a thermal Electron. It is huge, much larger than the largest atom. And the mass is very small. Free electrons, and conduction band electrons, must be very very good at EMF propagation. Thinking aloud about this a bit, it is possible for electrons to propagate charge without leaving their orbitals. This is by simply deforming their atoms to create dipoles. The electron orbital moves relative to its nucleus, in a local field gradient, but the enertia of the nucleus prevents motion so the wave potential is propagated. Ions in the solution can then eventually respond (but in parallel) to the local gradients in a speed that approximates spontaneous inertial recovery of the atomic dipoles, i.e. due to the atomic dipole nuclei finally responding with motion. It seems like each atomic dipole nucleus would overshoot, resulting in a resonant decay mode frequency characteristic of the mass of the nucleus. Wierd thought, EMP resonance instead of NMR. Forensics applicatio there? Much slower effects, like H2O (nautrally a dipole) molecular rotation could also complete the job of EMF propagation. It is interresting that Storms in his "Critical Review of the "Cold Fusion Effect", page 42, item 10, states that RF frequencies, especially 82 MHz, is helpful. Maybe the electrolyte plays a role as a resonator/oscillator in this regard. If you get the right electrolyte mix, you get the right resonant frequency. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 13:34:10 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KKY0iX009999; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:34:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KKXwcl009984; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:33:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:33:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4176CBC1.9020600@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:34:09 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: Freedom of the randomness References: <000e01c4b6b0$69335e50$0100007f@xptower> <003001c4b6be$7615d400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <003001c4b6be$7615d400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56173 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >Speaking of trying to visualize rotation in four dimensions > Here's a neat hypercube: http://dogfeathers.com/java/hyprcube.html (requires Java). And Dali's hypercubic "Crucifixion": http://www.art.com/asp/sp.asp?PD=10008536&RFID=251591 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 13:40:58 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KKenos005313; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:40:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KKelJI005266; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:40:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:40:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041020204035.74588.qmail@web60308.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:40:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Nick Reiter Subject: anti-neutrons To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041020145301.90713.qmail@web61104.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56174 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Side road sojourn here, kids. I myself shouldn't even be concerning myself with it, what with my dear little heavy water Wisp reactor runs going. (yes, reporting on that will come soon) OK, the diversion for the day is about matter, antimatter, and time. Translations mine, I've gathered that quite some time ago Feynman and Wheeler declared, proved, or insinuated that a positron moving forward in time is indistinguishable from an electron moving backward in time. If this is so, then presumably the same would hold true for a proton and anti-proton. Now what concerns me isn't so much proof of this, but more a matter of what in the deuce differentiates a neutron from an anti-neutron, if they are...er...neutral! IS it spin? Whatever the cause or metric, if the F and W idea of antiparticles being time reversed is so, then what would stop time reversed neutrons from infiltrating normal matter and causing all sorts of really silly things to happen? Strange matter? Or if neutrons and anti-neutrons are different only in spin, then if you take a beam of neutrons and find a way to reverse their magnetic moment, do you suddenly have a beam of antiparticles? If I am not cautious, I could get sucked into this more, despite my eschewing the math. Somebody set me straight and pull me out, por favor. NR __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 14:05:44 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KL5Wos020674; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:05:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KL5VcH020643; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:05:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:05:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:11:10 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56175 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:23 AM 10/20/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >Heffner mentioned randomness. In automatic flow control a setpoint is >maintained by selecting a proportional band and determining the number of >resets per minute that would permit the control to average the flow. The >randomness is controlled by permitting freedom within limits. I think randomness at this scale is not so much based on quantum randomness (except for the butterfly effect) as it is in the quasi-randomness of systems wherein motion is described by differential equations. Typically such systems can be nearly perfectly stablized with the right controls. If you are looking for free energy from a vortex the odds are slim! You might try looking in the archives at www.escribe.com/science/vortex under the keyword "Yusmar". Proving free energy, even if you have it, is tough too, and it typically requires energy balancing experiments, not power measuring experiments ... unless that holy grail of a self sustaining device can be obtained! That is not to say that the fundamental assumption of the existence of free energy, or at least an economically tappable new source of energy, is not practically a mantra of myself or this group in general! I feel compelled to suggest that the free energy from a 15 kW pump may be trivial compared to the renewable energy in the offing from a 100 million gallons a day of wastewater! Recovery of this energy in the form of oil or direct energy may be very feasible using pressure cooking or other means. Fred Sparber, on this list, has lots of ideas and experience along those lines. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 14:35:51 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KLZfos006523; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:35:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KLZefe006515; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:35:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:35:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:41:11 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: anti-neutrons Resent-Message-ID: <5sisPC.A.vlB.sotdBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56176 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I don't know what I am talking about in this arena, but that hasn't curtailed my audacity to comment on most other things here, so why stop now. 8^) At 1:40 PM 10/20/4, Nick Reiter wrote: >Side road sojourn here, kids. > >I myself shouldn't even be concerning myself with it, >what with my dear little heavy water Wisp reactor runs >going. (yes, reporting on that will come soon) > >OK, the diversion for the day is about matter, >antimatter, and time. > >Translations mine, I've gathered that quite some time >ago Feynman and Wheeler declared, proved, or >insinuated that a positron moving forward in time is >indistinguishable from an electron moving backward in >time. If this is so, then presumably the same would >hold true for a proton and anti-proton. Now what >concerns me isn't so much proof of this, but more a >matter of what in the deuce differentiates a neutron >from an anti-neutron, if they are...er...neutral! IS >it spin? Whatever the cause or metric, if the F and W >idea of antiparticles being time reversed is so, then >what would stop time reversed neutrons from >infiltrating normal matter and causing all sorts of >really silly things to happen? Strange matter? Neither strange nor charming! Nor top nor bottom either! Neutrons are composed of one up and two down quarks. Anti-neutrons are composed of an anti-up and two anti-down quarks. There is no low energy way to create an anti-neutron from a neutron, AFAIK. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 15:43:25 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KMhJiX018678; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:43:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9KMgcwG018507; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:42:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:42:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008a01c4b6f5$f77ca3c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: All Over Reactance Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:41:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0087_01C4B6BB.4AC23E40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56177 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0087_01C4B6BB.4AC23E40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you have shopped around for a new computer lately and have had a look = inside the box, you may have wondered about, well... shrinkage....not = Costanza-type shrinkage from a cold shower, but - as Jerry might opine = "what's the deal with those new power supplies? Did they go on the = Atkins diet or something"...[crowd grumbles and someone hollers, "don't = quit your day job"]. But anyway... A newer 300-400 watt PS is now a = fraction of its former pre-Pentium size, probably a quarter of the = volume and weight. But you are not getting cheated... well, at least not = any more so than normal. The short answer as to how something as mundane as a power supply can = shrink so fast, is not dietary but reactionary in two ways - or at least = it can be narrowed down to the electrical term "reactance" which term = might also have some bit of relevance to overunity, as well. The other = reactionary thing which one might add is that the "mainstream" of = engineering pretty much blew it for several decades by not adapting the = advantages of higher reactance earlier. The following is both comic ranting with some interesting tidbits about = the interaction of *reactance* with emf *frequency* opening perhaps a = narrow pathway to overunity. If I didn't promise the OU payoff, would = anybody follow the lunatic rant without grumbling or hollering, "don't = quit your day job" ? The very mention of those forbidden letters "OU" is sure to bring out = the law-abiders. LAWS? Laws, excuse me !!. Laws may not be "meant" to be = broken, depending on how much devious-intent can be imputed to the cadre = of do-gooders who dream some of them up, but from the number of = "correctional institutions" we have scattered around the good old USA, = it would seem that many laws aren't very compelling, at least as being = self-evident truisms worthy of respect. But most laws are fairly = temporal kludges, and no amount of corrective brainwashing will change = that. Hey, things change in surprising ways and one of these days, = vortex may morph into an ersatz correctional institution for = "regrooving" the mainstream physics establishment. Let's just say that = it is all but guaranteed that the most immediate thing which many new = (particularly tax) laws accomplish is to marginalize a certain segment = of society, the ones who believe (apparently erroneously) that they are = a better judge of how their own work-rewards are to be allocated than = are the sops who do less real work for more rewards, as a rule... not = that I am personally a tax-evader or anything like that. Everyone should = pay their fair share, agreed, but if Jesus asks no more than 10%, should = Sam?=20 END of first rant. The so-called Laws of Thermodynamics may have been put in place by = equally self-righteous do-gooders to prevent assorted nonconformist = hackers and slackers from wasting valuable time experimenting with = magnets et al., when otherwise they could be out converting the unwashed = masses to whatever belief structure is in power, or else bravely = fighting our Oil-Wars, or whatever ... but the punishment is somewhat = similar - to be banned from free association with certain "necessary" = others (and most regrettably, R&D funders). But as for most of = mainstream do-gooders, as Mark Twain recognized in the larger scheme of = things... no one would want to go to Heaven except for the climate as = Hell offers the more enjoyable company. Go figure. END of second rant. The Laws of Physics have proven to be tough nuts to crack, so we haven't = needed science-prisons thus far, other than the self-imposed ones like = Psi-Cops. But being branded as a "perpmo" (perpetual motion advocate) = will get you about as much general scorn these says as the average = serial killer or Boston Priest. Honestly, I would be extremely reluctant = to even mention the phrase "cold fusion" in mixed company... or if I = did, be quick to say that it's just the latest music craze in = Switzerland, you know Thelonius covers Heidi's yodel. And BTW, is = turning off "Days of our Lives" tantamount to being a serial killer. Fortunately, just because such-and-such Law of nature may have been = proven right every time up until now doesn't mean it won't be broken = tomorrow. Usually it was broken long ago but no one was looking in the = right place. Many of today's most mainstream PhD experts on everything = will probably end up tomorrow=92s laughing stock, just as more than a = few of their predecessors from the recent past are viewed....it wouldn't = surprise me if the word "luddite" is replaced by the even more obnoxious = DIS-word - ta da you guessed it : "parkite" or should that be "parkski" = in the next few years....one of these days, he will definitely have to = sit in the corner for his vortex regrooving, with a dunce cap, should he = hang around that long. Speaking of Laws, as Jerry might quip, what's the deal with Murphy's = Law? Why doesn't Murphy's Law take precedence over the Laws of = Thermodynamics? Don't tell me perpetual motion does not exist when Terra = & Sol have had this circle-dance going on for several billion years. = Only square dancers, or squares, could call vortexians - perpmos, given = the cosmic ambiance. There is perpetual motion all around us. It's easy = to produce more than you take in - ask any Red Sox player (but do it = quick). 110% is what the coach always demands, right. The theoretical = limit should be 100% but athletes always find a way to do a little = more...=20 END of last rant, or getting close Like Joe Newman, I can definitely build a device that will consume 20 = watts and generate 500 volt-amperes of AC out - but, unlike Joe, I may = be willing to admit that the volts and current are almost 90 degrees out = of phase, and the power factor is low. The real power-out of the device = would be substantially less than input... unless that is, I was able to = put a new *spin* on things. There is no obvious way in traditional = physics to have more than a watt out per watt in, magnets or not, but on = the other hand, there IS this curious item on the books called = "conservation of spin." If the device was extracting energy from = magnets, then either the magnets would be depleted soon and loose their = spin quality ... or else they would need to be somehow rejuvenated from = a hidden source. And magnets have lots of spin. If they (magnets) are = stressed to the limit by inducing emf in another system, will spin still = be conserved and if so, by what? That is where ZPE comes in, and if = Sarfatti and Puthoff would just climb down form the ivory tower for long = enough to perhaps enlighten us with something more specific. On to Reactance in overly simplified terms. When you are comparing a = high frequency motor with a 60 cycle motor, things start to get out of = proportion. Grid AC is a bit of an anachronism, with lots of built-in = inefficiency. Sixty cycle was almost a political decision - kind of a = terrible choice from the start for any number of reasons, the most = evident being that motors using it require a lot of iron to provide = enough *reactance.* At least that is one way the situation can be = verbalized. Iron was cheap back then and getting high frequency required = vacuum tubes which burned out too quickly. But simply changing the = frequency changes the amount of iron needed in most of the appliances = where AC is used. A great example is take an old fashioned power supply = with a 60 cycle transformer of about 300 watts like my old Mac. The = transformer will weigh maybe four pounds and get quite hot due to eddy = currents. Now compare it to a modern switching mode power supply. They = still use an iron core (powdered iron) but less than a pound and it runs = much cooler and all that was done by the simple expedient of raising the = CPS-ante to the 50,000 and beyond. Isn't is fair to ask why - why did it = take till the late 90s to get these into mass production, but let's not = embarrass too many EEs. We used 480 cycle power for airplanes 50 years = ago and knew then that it was obviously more efficient and lighter in = weight for the "system", but even that 480 frequency is far from optimum = - way short of optimum. Is the "status quo" of doing something one-way = for so long so fundamentally entrenched at every level that it takes = this much time to get around to doing the obvious, in very simple items = like transformers?=20 Not only is the amount of iron, in cores, needed to provide adequate = reactance much less at higher frequency, but this has a far reaching = cascading effect. When the core is smaller, the windings can be shorter = to reach around a smaller core. Less heat and no fan is needed. Shorter = wire means less wire IR squared losses. Now the transformer is smaller = than a pack of Luckys (and costs less too) and makes less heat. This is = the simple reason 60 cycle power is an anachronism, but what are the = limits of going far higher in frequency?=20 Ironically, it is no iron... Recently it was mentioned that at 100 Ghz certain unusual = electromagnetic effects can take place in very low resistance = conductors, requiring zero iron but can that idea be applied to other = systems. Is there anything special with this mid-Ghz level representing = the merger of the old electrical technology with the new? I would say yes, and it has to do with geometry. 100 Ghz has an = associated wavelength of about a third of centimeter. And when you get = your wavelength down to close to being the actual size of the device in = which you want to use it, then beneficial things can happen with = resonance. Resonance and reactance "go together like"... like a Wink & = a Smile?... ;-) When it gets down to visualization, reactance is kind of like the old = tuning fork analogy. If you have been following the alternative energy = field for a while, you have no doubt heard of it, but it is surely urban = myth. My first remembrance of hearing about the concept of "overunity" = (at least at the level of it being taken seriously by non-gullible = educated people) was on the old Keeley net (yes, I know, many of them = don't qualify for the previous standard). There used to be some claim by = Keeley or ilk that if you assembled 1000 tuning forks and struck the one = in the middle, and totaled up the work accomplished by all of them, the = system would be mechanical overunity. I have never actually seen this = claim being disproved in experiment, and though I will buy into may = strange claims, this is one which is not very compelling....but it does = make a good analogy for what can happen when reactance meets resonance. So how would reactance fit into an overunity scheme? Well, it all gets = back to spin and conservation of spin - and there's resonance in there = as well. More on those details when I put together another batch of = fringe-lunatic-rants.=20 Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0087_01C4B6BB.4AC23E40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If you have shopped around for a new computer lately and have had a = look=20 inside the box, you may have wondered about, well... shrinkage....not=20 Costanza-type shrinkage from a cold shower, but - as Jerry might opine = "what's=20 the deal with those new power supplies? Did they go on the Atkins diet = or=20 something"...[crowd grumbles and someone hollers, "don't quit your day = job"].=20 But anyway... A newer 300-400 watt PS is now a fraction of its former=20 pre-Pentium size, probably a quarter of the volume and weight. But you = are not=20 getting cheated... well, at least not any more so than normal.

The short answer as to how something as mundane as a power supply can = shrink=20 so fast, is not dietary but reactionary in two ways - or at least it can = be=20 narrowed down to the electrical term "reactance" which term might also = have some=20 bit of relevance to overunity, as well. The other reactionary thing = which one=20 might add is that the "mainstream" of engineering pretty much blew it = for=20 several decades by not adapting the advantages of higher reactance = earlier.

The following is both comic ranting with some interesting tidbits = about the=20 interaction of *reactance* with emf *frequency* opening perhaps a narrow = pathway=20 to overunity. If I didn't promise the OU payoff, would anybody follow = the=20 lunatic rant without grumbling or hollering, "don't quit your day job" = ?

The very mention of those forbidden letters "OU" is sure to bring out = the=20 law-abiders. LAWS? Laws, excuse me !!. Laws may not be "meant" to be = broken,=20 depending on how much devious-intent can be imputed to the cadre of = do-gooders=20 who dream some of them up, but from the number of "correctional = institutions" we=20 have scattered around the good old USA, it would seem that many laws = aren't very=20 compelling, at least as being self-evident truisms worthy of respect. = But most=20 laws are fairly temporal kludges, and no amount of corrective = brainwashing will=20 change that. Hey, things change in surprising ways and one of these = days, vortex=20 may morph into an ersatz correctional institution for "regrooving" the=20 mainstream physics establishment. Let's just say that it is all but = guaranteed=20 that the most immediate thing which many new (particularly tax) laws = accomplish=20 is to marginalize a certain segment of society, the ones who believe = (apparently=20 erroneously) that they are a better judge of how their own work-rewards = are to=20 be allocated than are the sops who do less real work for more rewards, = as a=20 rule... not that I am personally a tax-evader or anything like that. = Everyone=20 should pay their fair share, agreed, but if Jesus asks no more than 10%, = should=20 Sam?

END of first rant.

The so-called Laws of Thermodynamics may have been put in place by = equally=20 self-righteous do-gooders to prevent assorted nonconformist hackers and = slackers=20 from wasting valuable time experimenting with magnets et al., when = otherwise=20 they could be out converting the unwashed masses to whatever belief = structure is=20 in power, or else bravely fighting our Oil-Wars, or whatever ... but the = punishment is somewhat similar - to be banned from free association with = certain=20 "necessary" others (and most regrettably, R&D funders). But as for = most of=20 mainstream do-gooders, as Mark Twain recognized in the larger scheme of=20 things... no one would want to go to Heaven except for the climate as = Hell=20 offers the more enjoyable company. Go figure.

END of second rant.

The Laws of Physics have proven to be tough nuts to crack, so we = haven't=20 needed science-prisons thus far, other than the self-imposed ones like = Psi-Cops.=20 But being branded as a "perpmo" (perpetual motion advocate) will get you = about=20 as much general scorn these says as the average serial killer or Boston = Priest.=20 Honestly, I would be extremely reluctant to even mention the phrase = "cold=20 fusion" in mixed company... or if I did, be quick to say that it's just = the=20 latest music craze in Switzerland, you know Thelonius covers Heidi's = yodel. And=20 BTW, is turning off "Days of our Lives" tantamount to being a serial = killer.

Fortunately, just because such-and-such Law of nature may have been = proven=20 right every time up until now doesn't mean it won't be broken tomorrow. = Usually=20 it was broken long ago but no one was looking in the right place. Many = of=20 today's most mainstream PhD experts on everything will probably end = up=20 tomorrow=92s laughing stock, just as more than a few of their = predecessors from=20 the recent past are viewed....it wouldn't surprise me if the word = "luddite" is=20 replaced by the even more obnoxious DIS-word - ta da you guessed it = : "parkite" or should that be "parkski" in the next few = years....one of=20 these days, he will definitely have to sit in the corner for his vortex=20 regrooving, with a dunce cap, should he hang around that long.

Speaking of Laws, as Jerry might quip, what's the deal with Murphy's = Law? Why=20 doesn't Murphy's Law take precedence over the Laws of Thermodynamics? = Don't tell=20 me perpetual motion does not exist when Terra & Sol have had this=20 circle-dance going on for several billion years. Only square dancers, or = squares, could call vortexians - perpmos, given the cosmic ambiance. = There is=20 perpetual motion all around us. It's easy to produce more than you take = in - ask=20 any Red Sox player (but do it quick). 110% is what the coach always = demands,=20 right. The theoretical limit should be 100% but athletes always find a = way to do=20 a little more...

END of last rant, or getting close

Like Joe Newman, I can definitely build a device that will consume 20 = watts=20 and generate 500 volt-amperes of AC out - but, unlike Joe, I may be = willing to=20 admit that the volts and current are almost 90 degrees out of phase, and = the=20 power factor is low. The real power-out of the device would be = substantially=20 less than input... unless that is, I was able to put a new *spin* on = things.=20 There is no obvious way in traditional physics to have more than a watt = out per=20 watt in, magnets or not, but on the other hand, there IS this curious = item on=20 the books called "conservation of spin." If the device was extracting = energy=20 from magnets, then either the magnets would be depleted soon and loose = their=20 spin quality ... or else they would need to be somehow rejuvenated from = a hidden=20 source. And magnets have lots of spin. If they (magnets) are stressed to = the=20 limit by inducing emf in another system, will spin still be conserved = and if so,=20 by what? That is where ZPE comes in, and if Sarfatti and Puthoff would = just=20 climb down form the ivory tower for long enough to perhaps enlighten us = with=20 something more specific.

On to Reactance in overly simplified terms. When you are comparing a = high=20 frequency motor with a 60 cycle motor, things start to get out of = proportion.=20 Grid AC is a bit of an anachronism, with lots of built-in inefficiency. = Sixty=20 cycle was almost a political decision - kind of a terrible choice from = the start=20 for any number of reasons, the most evident being that motors using it = require a=20 lot of iron to provide enough *reactance.* At least that is one way = the=20 situation can be verbalized. Iron was cheap back then and getting = high=20 frequency required vacuum tubes which burned out too quickly. But simply = changing the frequency changes the amount of iron needed in most of the=20 appliances where AC is used. A great example is take an old fashioned = power=20 supply with a 60 cycle transformer of about 300 watts like my old Mac. = The=20 transformer will weigh maybe four pounds and get quite hot due to eddy = currents.=20 Now compare it to a modern switching mode power supply. They still use = an iron=20 core (powdered iron) but less than a pound and it runs much cooler and = all that=20 was done by the simple expedient of raising the CPS-ante to the 50,000 = and=20 beyond. Isn't is fair to ask why - why did it take till the late 90s to = get=20 these into mass production, but let's not embarrass too many EEs. We = used 480=20 cycle power for airplanes 50 years ago and knew then that it was = obviously more=20 efficient and lighter in weight for the "system", but even that 480 = frequency is=20 far from optimum - way short of optimum. Is the "status quo" of doing = something=20 one-way for so long so fundamentally entrenched at every level that = it=20 takes this much time to get around to doing the obvious, in very simple = items=20 like transformers?

Not only is the amount of iron, in cores, needed to provide = adequate=20 reactance much less at higher frequency, but this has a far reaching = cascading=20 effect. When the core is smaller, the windings can be shorter to reach = around a=20 smaller core. Less heat and no fan is needed. Shorter wire means less = wire IR=20 squared losses. Now the transformer is smaller than a pack of Luckys = (and costs=20 less too) and makes less heat. This is the simple reason 60 cycle power = is an=20 anachronism, but what are the limits of going far higher in frequency? =

Ironically, it is no iron...

Recently it was mentioned that at 100 Ghz certain unusual = electromagnetic=20 effects can take place in very low resistance conductors, requiring zero = iron=20 but can that idea be applied to other systems. Is there anything special = with=20 this mid-Ghz level representing the merger of the old electrical = technology with=20 the new?

I would say yes, and it has to do with geometry. 100 Ghz has an = associated=20 wavelength of about a third of centimeter. And when you get your = wavelength down=20 to close to being the actual size of the device in which you want to use = it,=20 then beneficial things can happen with resonance. Resonance and = reactance "go=20 together like"...  like a Wink & a Smile?... ;-)

When it gets down to visualization, reactance is kind of like the old = tuning=20 fork analogy. If you have been following the alternative energy field = for a=20 while, you have no doubt heard of it, but it is surely urban myth. My = first=20 remembrance of hearing about the concept of "overunity" (at least at the = level=20 of it being taken seriously by non-gullible educated people) was on the = old=20 Keeley net (yes, I know, many of them don't qualify for the previous = standard).=20 There used to be some claim by Keeley or ilk that if you assembled 1000 = tuning=20 forks and struck the one in the middle, and totaled up the work = accomplished by=20 all of them, the system would be mechanical overunity. I have never = actually=20 seen this claim being disproved in experiment, and though I will buy = into may=20 strange claims, this is one which is not very compelling....but it does = make a=20 good analogy for what can happen when reactance meets resonance.

So how would reactance fit into an overunity scheme? Well, it all = gets back=20 to spin and conservation of spin - and there's resonance in there as = well. More=20 on those details when I put together another batch of = fringe-lunatic-rants.=20

Jones

 

------=_NextPart_000_0087_01C4B6BB.4AC23E40-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 17:44:25 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9L0i4o0024579; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:44:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9L0i25Z024566; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:44:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:44:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:49:37 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: All Over Reactance Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56178 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:41 PM 10/20/4, Jones Beene wrote: Now the transformer is smaller than a pack of Luckys (and costs less too) and makes less heat. This is the simple reason 60 cycle power is an anachronism, but what are the limits of going far higher in frequency? > >Ironically, it is no iron... One of the reasons 60 Hz was chosen over higher frequencies is the prevention of transmission line losses. One main problem with using high freqency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was rectification. Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency. These days the availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 17:56:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9L0uOc8028692; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:56:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9L0uMvM028684; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <82.1959c355.2ea8632c@aol.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:56:12 EDT Subject: Re: All Over Reactance To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_82.1959c355.2ea8632c_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56179 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_82.1959c355.2ea8632c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/20/2004 8:44:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > One main problem with using high > frequency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was > rectification. Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency. These days the > availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to > achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs > still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > Not so. Common variable speed drives now use switching transistors not diodes. They commonly switch at about 10 kilohertz. This is done to reform the sin wave using a bunch of square waves. Rectification at megahertz frequencies is not a problem. This country started off with several standards. 25 hertz was used in the steel mills and coal mines until the early 1980s. The low frequency produced noticeable flicker in lights. I could see it out of the corner of my eye. It was not visible looking forward. 60 hertz produces no flicker, however, it is quite a feat to make a large steam turbine that can spin at 3600 rpm. This was not possible in the early days. Aircraft commonly use 400 hertz. The spinning mass of the generator is small and transformers are of a much lighter weight. Frank Znidarsic --part1_82.1959c355.2ea8632c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/20/2004 8:44:= 32 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:

One main problem with using hig= h
frequency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was
rectification.  Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency.  These d= ays the
availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to
achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK.

Regards,

Horace Heffner     



Not so.  Common variable speed drives now use switching transistors not= diodes.  They commonly switch at about 10 kilohertz.  This is don= e to reform the sin wave using a bunch of square waves.  Rectification=20= at megahertz frequencies is not a problem.

This country started off with several standards.  25 hertz was used in=20= the steel mills and coal mines until the early 1980s.  The low frequenc= y produced noticeable flicker in lights.  I could see it out of the cor= ner of my eye.  It was not visible looking forward.

60 hertz produces no flicker, however, it is quite a feat to make a large st= eam turbine that can spin at 3600 rpm.  This was not possible in the ea= rly days.

Aircraft commonly use 400 hertz.  The spinning mass of the generator is= small and transformers are of a much lighter weight.

Frank Znidarsic --part1_82.1959c355.2ea8632c_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 18:17:01 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9L1Grc8002573; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:16:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9L1Gqp3002559; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:16:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:16:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <12d.4db43ee6.2ea867f9@aol.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:16:41 EDT Subject: fun with sine waves To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_12d.4db43ee6.2ea867f9_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56180 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_12d.4db43ee6.2ea867f9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I wanted to make an animation for simple harmonic motion. I used the sin function. It worked great. I then wanted to make an animation showing a ball bouncing in a box. The sin wave motion did not look correct. I needed a saw tooth wave. No saw tooth function exists. I did a simple Fourier analysis. I found an approximated sawtooth wave could be had by. wave sawtooth = .95 sin t - .5 sin 3t It looks better. here is the link that shows the two motions. Can you see the difference? Chapter 7 here is the script that gets embedded into the HTML enjoy Frank Znidarsic --part1_12d.4db43ee6.2ea867f9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I wanted to make an animation for s= imple harmonic motion.  I used the sin function.  It worked great.=

I then wanted to make an animation showing a ball bouncing in a box.  T= he sin wave motion did not look correct.  I needed a saw tooth wave.&nb= sp; No saw tooth function exists.

I did a simple Fourier analysis.  I found an approximated sawtooth wave= could be had by.

wave sawtooth =3D .95 sin t - .5 sin 3t

It looks better.

here is the link that shows the two motions.  Can you see the differenc= e?

Chapter 7=

here is the script that gets embedded into the HTML


<SCRIPT language=3D"JScript">
count2=3D0;
function onInterval2() {
            =        with(document.body)
{
           &n= bsp; 
if(clientWidth>200)
           {
{imagefly2.style.left=3D 81*( .95*Math.sin(count2) - .05*Math.si= n(3*count2))+ (clientWidth -305);}

imagefly2.style.top=3D158;
            &nbs= p;            &n= bsp;            =    count2=3Dcount2+.07;

if(count2>4300)
{count2 =3D 0;}




           &n= bsp;   }
}
}



writeRetrun("");

setInterval("imagefly2.style.display=3D'';onInterval2();",30);

            &nbs= p;      function writeRetrun(displaySetting) {

var frmSnip=3D' style=3D"POSITION:Relative;background-color:none;top:0;l= eft:'+0;
document.writeln('<DIV align=3Dleft id=3Dimagefly2'+frmSnip+'display:= none;visibility:visible;"><IMG SRC=3D"images/ball.gif" border=3D0 USEM= AP=3D#sticky_map><br><map name=3Dsticky_map><area coords= =3D95,0,130,158 href=3D"sounds/drum.mid" ></map></DIV>');

            &nbs= p;            &n= bsp;            =             &nbs= p;            &n= bsp;            =       }



</SCRIPT>


enjoy

Frank Znidarsic --part1_12d.4db43ee6.2ea867f9_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 20 18:31:36 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9L1VRo0004476; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:31:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9L1VP6u004460; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:31:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:31:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4177117A.4050905@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:31:38 -0400 From: Terry Blanton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: All Over Reactance References: <008a01c4b6f5$f77ca3c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <008a01c4b6f5$f77ca3c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080308030001020504070109" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56181 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080308030001020504070109 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jones Beene ranted: > Isn't is fair to ask why - why did it take till the late 90s to get > these into mass production, but let's not embarrass too many EEs. > Resonant or "switched mode" power supplies have been in use for forty years. They were noisy and expensive until the late 70's when MOSFETs came into play. http://www.steve-w.dircon.co.uk/fleadh/mphil/history.htm -unembarrassed EE --------------080308030001020504070109 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Jones Beene ranted:

Isn't is fair to ask why - why did it take till the late 90s to get these into mass production, but let's not embarrass too many EEs.


Resonant or "switched mode" power supplies have been in use for forty years.  They were noisy and expensive until the late 70's when MOSFETs came into play. 

http://www.steve-w.dircon.co.uk/fleadh/mphil/history.htm

-unembarrassed EE
--------------080308030001020504070109-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 01:40:17 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9L8eBQI024115; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:40:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9L8e1in023992; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:40:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:40:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041021093921.0069ee68@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:39:21 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56182 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:31 pm 20-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >Frank writes: >>Both Ing.Saviour and I have quite independently recognised that >>mass has the dimension of T/L (see http://www.blazelabs.com/) >>and it is evident that materons have "hidden mass". > >Add me to the list too. In '91 I was studying the >CGS system of measure and whilst contemplating the fact >that a unit of magnetic charge was defined solely by the >force, it occurred to me that the same trick can be >played with defining mass. I'm looking at my old notes, >and I have the unit of mass being something like. > >m = L^3 T^-2 G > >I wonder if this is because I couched things in terms >of the CGS system, whereas saviour and yourself are >using SI? I doubt it. My approach was totally different to Ing.Saviour's and in my case the system, SI or CGS, or Imperial for that matter, is totally irrelevant. In fact my derivation led to mass being T/L whereas his gave T^3/L^3 - but that difference is merely cosmetic. The important thing is to recognised that mass is the manifestation of a closed path inverse velocity. of some kind. Whether this velocity is in one two or three nested dimensions is of secondary importance. In short, I'm saying it's d(n)T/dL(n) Saviour's saying it's {d(n)T/dL(n)}.{d(n+1)T/dL(n+1)}.{d(n+2)T/dL(n+2)} Consider this. Q. What is the dimension of velocity? A. [L]/[T] Q. But what is the dimension of speed? A. [L]/[T] So clearly, we can go unambiguously from property to dimensions but not from dimensions to property. If we are asked, "What property is [L]/[T], and I say speed and you say velocity, we are both right. Let's take another example Consider the fraction 3.3.3/4.4.4 Let the property of divisibility by 3 be T and the property of divisibility by 4 be L Supposing I view the fraction at the global level as 27/64 then I will say that the dimensions are [T]/[L] and I will be correct because 27 has the property of divisibility by three and 64 has the property of divisibility by 4. Supposing Ing. views the fraction at the local level as (3/4).(3/4).(3/4) He will say that the dimensions are [T]/[L].[T]/[L].[T]/[L] Since all the threes have the property of divisibility by three and all the fours have the property of divisibility by four, he will also be right. The essential point is - Mass is the same elephant viewed from different angles. Once upon a time a great man wrote a great book. The man was the late Professor J.L.Synge a mathematician at Trinity College Dublin. The book (Science and Nonsense) was based on his acute insights into the nature of scientific research made public in a series of Statutory Lectures in the college's School of Theoretical Physics. Synge showed that definitions of the qualitative concepts of physics are inevitably circular. This idea is most readily illustrated by considering the definition of words using a dictionary. Ultimately the definitions must be circular since words can only be defined in terms of other words. If the vicious circles of definition are large there is a natural but unfortunate tendency to loose sight of the fact that a chain of definitions must close upon itself. In terms of the dictionary this danger can be avoided by setting up small vicious circles of definitions such as, To exist is to occur. To occur is to exist. Emulating Synge we can show mass has the dimensions of an inverse velocity by a minimalist argument. We can simply take the conservation of momentum and write it in the PV = a constant format as MV = a constant where M is mass, V is velocity Since the choice of units is arbitrary we can put MV = 1 And further more we can choose to look at mass in a way that will make 1 dimensionless. Whence from simple dimensional analysis [M] = [T].[L]^-1 And since we know that we can use up mass to give us velocity, what could be simpler. 8-) And if the cognitive dissonance is too intense let's look at it another way. Turn on a monospace font. Consider in the FIGURE 1 a body with the properties, Mass M, Velocity V, direction L (i.e. from the Left) which is heading towards a black box where a conservation of momentum is going to take place. Consider also a second body with the properties, Mass M, Velocity V, direction R (i.e. from the Right) which is also heading towards a black box where a conservation of momentum is going to take place. -------------------------------------------------------- Identity ----------- | | ----- V=4 | Black | V=2 --------- |M=2| ============>> | Box | <<====== | M=4 | ----- Lefty | | Righty --------- ----------- FIGURE 1 -------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- ----------- | | V=4 ----- | Black | --------- V=2 <<============ |M=2| | Box | | M=4 | ======>> Righty ----- | | --------- Lefty ----------- FIGURE 2 -------------------------------------------------------- Normally we think of the mass property as defining the identity of the body just as Keith defines the identity of your body. But suppose we choose the direction as defining the identity of the body. To help you psychologically to do this I will tell you a true story. When I was at school my friend John Barry had a cycle race on the main road outside the school with another classmate Peter Chamberlain. Peter fell under a lorry and lost his right arm. After that everyone called him Lefty. Cruel but very descriptive. So in FIG.1 we see master Lefty entering the Black Box with a mass of 2 and a velocity of 4. In FIG.2 master Lefty exits the Box with velocity of 4 and a mass of 2. Likewise with master Righty, who lost his arm in the U.S. where they drive on the wrong side of the road Conservation of momentum. Q.E.D. In "The Strange Story of the Quantum", Hoffmann describes something a bit like this. ========================================== "When Wheeler first has his idea he saw in a flash a stupendous cosmic pattern: a single electron shuttling back and forth, back and forth, back and forth on the loom of time to weave a rich tapestry containing perhaps all the electrons and positrons in the world." ========================================== Now you might think that direction is a rather abstract property to be taken as Identity. But why should you think that, Keith. After all, once upon a time your mass was only half what it is now - but you are still the same Keith. And if you live long enough you will be only able to run half as fast as you once did, but you will still be the same Keith. ------------------------------------------------ I took a longer, less mentally traumatic route to show that mass had the dimensions of [T].[L]^-1 Ing.Saviour has part of the maths on his website. When I've OCR'd it I'll put the whole Note on my web site for you to read. As for experiments, I haven't a clue. There are three orders of angels and there are three divisions of Scientific Civil servants. Just like the army in fact. There are those who think about what to do. There are those who think about how to do it. There are those who do it. I was in the First Division. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 03:44:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LAicqZ004471; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:44:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LAiZ51004451; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:44:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:44:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041042194336960@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Beta Minus Decay, Antineutrinos & Electronium Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 04:43:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9400ba59e5b5e835539b326f35dd0df9d11350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.135 Resent-Message-ID: <6fnACD.A.eFB.TM5dBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56183 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Beta Minus decay is always accompanied by an Antineutrino. The reaction of an Antineutrino (*v) from Beta Minus decay in the atmosphere, hydrosphere, or in the earth with any Free or Nuclear Proton: Antineutrino + Proton -----> Neutron + (e+) Note that a Neutron + Proton ----> Deuterium. Constant source? This can lead to the several interesting antineutrino reaction cycles. 7 Nitrogen 14 + (*v) ---> 6 Carbon 14 + (e+) The radioactive 6 Carbon 14 with a half-life of 5,715 years beta minus decays back to 7 Nitrogen 14 with emission of an antineutrino. 7 Nitrogen 15 + (*v) ----> 6 Carbon 15 + (e+) Stable 20 Calcium 40 + (*v) -----> 19 Potassium 40 + (e+) The radioactive 19 Potassium 40 with a half-life of 1.26 billion years beta minus decays back to 20 Calcium 40 or decays by (e+) emission or Electron Capture to Stable 18 Argon 40 The interacting Antineutrino (Terrestrial, Solar or Cosmic) Must Have at least the 1.02 Mev Energy required for Electron-Positron Pair Production, which frees up 2 external electrons to form the Electronium (*e-) particle. This "cycle" can occur with any of the elements, thus acting as another "constant" source of Electronium: Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Beta Minus decay is always  accompanied by an Antineutrino.
 
The reaction of an Antineutrino (*v) from Beta Minus decay in the atmosphere,
hydrosphere, or in the earth with any Free or Nuclear Proton:
 
Antineutrino + Proton -----> Neutron + (e+)
 
Note that a Neutron + Proton ---->  Deuterium. Constant source?
 
This can lead to the several interesting antineutrino reaction cycles.
 
7 Nitrogen 14 + (*v) ---> 6 Carbon 14 + (e+)
 
The radioactive 6 Carbon 14 with a half-life of 5,715 years beta minus decays
back to 7 Nitrogen 14 with emission of  an antineutrino.
 
7 Nitrogen 15 + (*v) ----> 6 Carbon 15 + (e+) Stable
 
20 Calcium 40 + (*v) ----->  19 Potassium 40 + (e+)
 
The radioactive 19 Potassium 40 with a half-life of 1.26 billion years beta
minus decays back to 20 Calcium 40 or decays by (e+) emission or Electron Capture
to Stable 18 Argon 40
 
The interacting Antineutrino (Terrestrial, Solar or Cosmic) Must Have at
least the 1.02 Mev Energy required for Electron-Positron  Pair Production,
which frees up 2 external electrons to form the Electronium (*e-) particle.
 
This "cycle" can occur with any of the elements, thus acting as another "constant"
source of Electronium:
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 05:05:24 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LC5FqZ024507; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:05:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LC5DQK024488; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:05:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:05:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003a01c4b766$3215c050$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Freedom of the randomness#2 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:04:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4B73C.306AE890" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56184 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4B73C.306AE890 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0037_01C4B73C.306AE890" ------=_NextPart_001_0037_01C4B73C.306AE890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWe are not seeking OU in our studies of mechanical vortexes. The = task we face is to meet an ever growing demand for better mixing of = chemicals into liquids.The nightmare scenario of problems presented the = water treating industry by the entrance of exotic toxic chemicals, drugs = , viruses and new immune strains of bacteria provide us with a days work = without entering the energy domain. The vortex group stimulates my thinking. The collection of ideas and = subjects are enriching for the mind. In my small way, I attempt to repay = by offering observations of our tests in hope of providing like stimuli. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0037_01C4B73C.306AE890 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
We are not seeking OU in our studies of mechanical vortexes. The = task we=20 face is to meet an ever growing  demand for better mixing of = chemicals=20 into liquids.The nightmare scenario of problems presented the water = treating=20 industry by the entrance of exotic toxic chemicals, drugs , viruses and = new=20 immune strains of bacteria provide us with a days work without entering=20 the energy domain.
 
The vortex group stimulates my thinking. The collection of ideas = and=20 subjects are enriching for the mind. In my small way, I attempt to repay = by=20 offering observations of our tests in hope of providing like = stimuli.
 
Richard
 
 
------=_NextPart_001_0037_01C4B73C.306AE890-- ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4B73C.306AE890 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <003501c4b766$1937c8d0$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4B73C.306AE890-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 05:36:36 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LCaMQI004301; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:36:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LCaLop004282; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:36:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:36:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <3f7601c4b769$4154ebb0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <008a01c4b6f5$f77ca3c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: All Over Reactance Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:09:42 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56185 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Jones Beene To: vortex Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 6:41 PM Subject: All Over Reactance The short answer to Jone's comments about shrinking power supplies and why did it take so long, etc. is that transformers are needed to isolate the circuits from the mains and to get different voltages at high currents efficiently. The reactance come in in making efficient transformers and that's a matter of configuration and frequency. The ferrites are insulators and so have negligible eddy current loss at high frequencies. The other limit is the speed of the switching transistors. They dissipated very little power when hard on or hard off, but get hot on the way to and fro, so the quicker the better, like CMOS chips. The higher the frequency, the higher the percentage of the time in hot transit. Keep improving transistor and materials and you can keep pushing the switching frequency up and the size down. Carver has been noted for audio amplifier designs that provide gobs of power with few components and little iron. In some of these, the speaker is basically connected to the mains through a pulse width modulator with a bit of inductive smoothing. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 05:52:04 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LCpsQI014752; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:51:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LCpqGj014717; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:51:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:51:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: Subject: Re: All Over Reactance Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:38:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56186 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace wrote: > One of the reasons 60 Hz was chosen over higher frequencies is the > prevention of transmission line losses. One main problem with using high > freqency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was > rectification. Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency. These days the > availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to > achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs > still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK. Horace has a point, for over long distances even widely spaced high voltage transmission line have shunt capacitance. The frequency standards were set early on when a lot of the AC machines had cast iron magnetic circuits and eddy current losses were greater the higher the frequency. Laminated construction came later. Traction systems still use 25 Hz for commutated motors. Series-wound 'DC' motors will run off AC, with lots of arcing from mechanical switching of the inductance of the field coils. The lower rhe frequency the easier this is. Series wound motors are preferred for traction service because their starting torque can be very high. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 07:36:55 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LEalqZ025920; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:36:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LEai0o025900; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:36:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:36:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041021103432.0339c1f0@mail.lenr-canr.org> X-Sender: log733sup@lenr-canr.org@mail.lenr-canr.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:36:41 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: ICCF11 abstracts posted Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56187 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: See: http://www.iccf11.org/images/All%20abstracts.pdf http://www.iccf11.org/index2.htm Message from Biberian: Dear colleague, The ICCF11 web site has been updated, it includes now the full program, and all the abstracts. We also have added a press section. Please contact me if you see any error so that it can be corrected before printing the official program. See you in Marseille Jean Paul Biberian From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 07:58:32 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LEwOqZ032207; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:58:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LEwJOX032158; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:58:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:58:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041021155738.006a3f80@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:57:38 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness#2 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56188 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:04 am 21-10-04 -0500, you wrote: >BlankWe are not seeking OU in our studies of mechanical vortexes. The task we face is to meet an ever growing demand for better mixing of chemicals into liquids. The nightmare scenario of problems presented the water treating industry by the entrance of exotic toxic chemicals, drugs , viruses and new immune strains of bacteria provide us with a days work without entering the energy domain. > >The vortex group stimulates my thinking. The collection of ideas and subjects are enriching for the mind. In my small way, I attempt to repay by offering observations of our tests in hope of providing like stimuli. > >Richard Your post reminded me of an amusing incident early on in my career. The chemistry section of my division were always having to take representative samples of particulate materials such cements, sands, silts and dry powdered clays. The standard way of doing this is to use a riffle box which consists of a long row of slots. The odd slots shoot material into one bin. The even slots shoot material a second bin. The splitting process is repeated until the required sample size is obtained. Now the section head thought this process was too time consuming and had a machine manufactured which was going to automate (allegedly ;-) ) the process. It consisted of a large conical hopper which fed material down on to a spinning flattish cone. Arranged around the perimeter were 8 bins into which the material was thrown as it spun off the flat cone. I happened to be passing through the lab when I saw them load up the hopper for the first time. "That's not going to work," I said. "What do you mean, 'That's not going to work'? Of course it will work." "No it wont - and I'll prove it." So I fitted a panel to the hopper dividing it down the middle. In one half cone I poured fine sand and in the other half I poured coarse sand. I then turned on the machine. The result was that four adjacent receiving bins filled up with fine sand. The other four filled up with coarse sand. The overlapping composition, where the two sets of bins met, was so small that it surprised even me. All the spinning action had achieved was to turn the separate streams of fine and coarse sand through an angle. A few weeks later the chemists had the spinning disc replaced with a rotating nozzle which sprayed the bins sequentially. Of course, if striped toothpastes had been around at that time the chemists might have realised the machine wouldn't work at the design stage. I suppose the most egregious absence of feeling for engineering principles was a very senior chemist who thought the if you heated up a steel plate so that it expanded, then the holes in the plate would get smaller. Nothing I could say or do would convince him otherwise. Mind you, one could see his line of thinking. "The steel surfaces are moving towards the air. Therefore the steel surface around the hole is moving towards the air. Therefore the hole gets smaller." I did a lot of work on mixing and found it a very interesting subject. In fact, it gave me many useful insights into the effect of clay structure on the pF variable. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 09:06:40 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LG6SqZ029216; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:06:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LG6QTa029200; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:06:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:06:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:12:06 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: All Over Reactance Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56189 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:56 PM 10/20/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 10/20/2004 8:44:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, >hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > >> One main problem with using high >> frequency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was >> rectification. Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency. These days the >> availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to >> achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs >> still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK. >> >> Regards, >> >> Horace Heffner >> >> > >Not so. Common variable speed drives now use switching transistors not >diodes. They commonly switch at about 10 kilohertz. This is done to >reform the >sin wave using a bunch of square waves. Rectification at megahertz >frequencies >is not a problem. The subject, though, was 100 GHz rectification and power supply size. My point was that FETs overcame the drop in efficiency of diodes at high frequencies, but FETs too have their limitations and drop off in efficiency with frequency. High power switching at 100 GHz to achieve any kind of practical current rectification is a problem for a tiny power supply. > >This country started off with several standards. 25 hertz was used in the >steel mills and coal mines until the early 1980s. The low frequency produced >noticeable flicker in lights. I could see it out of the corner of my eye. It >was not visible looking forward. > >60 hertz produces no flicker, however, it is quite a feat to make a large >steam turbine that can spin at 3600 rpm. This was not possible in the early >days. Commercial generators, like those at Niagra, had many stators, so produced multiple cycles per rotation and thus did not rotate at 3600 rpm to produce 60 Hz. > >Aircraft commonly use 400 hertz. The spinning mass of the generator is small >and transformers are of a much lighter weight. > >Frank Znidarsic I remember in the early days of computing that some mainframes, like the IBM 360/65 used 400 Hz or 600 Hz motor-generator sets in order to isolate from the mains and reduce power supply size in boxes in the raised floor. Computing was a powerful thing in those days! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 09:30:44 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LGUVqZ004250; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:30:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LGUQIZ004209; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:30:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:30:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: Tranmission line losses Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:26:48 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56190 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Looks like I managed to inadvertently offend quite a few EEs with previous posting. My apologies... as that was not the intention. The main culprits in the "big picture" of the national electric "grid" then as now, is/was lack of adequate long-term planning, the jealous guarding of antiquated commercial ties (such as is epitomized in the Edison/Westinghouse feud), and most of all: lack of coordinated R&D across many competing corporations. These are problems of Capitalism, more so than any particular engineering failure. I am not anti-capitalist by any means, but we all must realize that it is the "best" system now only because the other choices are even more inefficient and it would be a mistake to keep it the same forever, just because it occasionally works well. Capitalism has a great deal of room for improvement, especially in the area of long-term coordinated planning across related industries - which of necessity temporarily is require to ally normal competitors. The one industry to do a decent job of this has been semiconductors - and that is probably why we now have the small efficient PS. Now if our government had gotten into the picture early-on, before Edison electrocuted all of those elephants, who knows what would have happened. Edison was not necessarily backing the wrong horse, as it turns out. Its just that the right horse had the wrong saddle, so to speak. BTW, I doubt if there are any college engineering students on this forum, but if there are any - this advice: if undecided go "electrical" first - that major will likely be the hardest in your school, but if you are going geek, they are all going to be difficult, and any of them will force you to give up valuable beer-drinking time, but electrical provides the best foundation for every other engineering discipline to build on, should you change your mind IMHO.... And you can catch up on the beer-drinking after one of the many Cons which dominate the industry (like Con-Ed) hires you to do some petty job. Mike Carrell wites: Horace wrote: > > One of the reasons 60 Hz was chosen over higher frequencies is the > > prevention of transmission line losses. One main problem with using high > > freqency transformers in power supplies until fairly recently was > > rectification. Diodes drop in efficiency with frequency. These days the > > availability of high current low voltage FETs (with switching logic to > > achieve the rectification) permits efficient rectification, but even FETs > > still have frequency limitations, just much higher AFAIK. > > Horace has a point, for over long distances even widely spaced high voltage > transmission line have shunt capacitance. The frequency standards were set > early on when a lot of the AC machines had cast iron magnetic circuits and > eddy current losses were greater the higher the frequency. Laminated > construction came later. This is all true historically, but in hindsight we can ask - were there any missed opportunities along the way? When it comes to moving lots of power hundreds of miles through Transmission Lines, and given that historically "other" considerations have dominated over what is theoretically ideal, one major point needs to be made. In theory, Tesla notwithstanding - at any given voltage and everything else being equal (which it seldom is) - one is always better off with DC than AC. That is a fact that is often swept under the carpet with the down-conversion-loss broom. Electric energy is transported across the countryside with high-voltage lines because the line losses are much smaller than with low-voltage lines. The choice between AC and DC is unrelated to this one fact. All wires in commercial use have resistance, but the development of high-temperature superconductors will probably change this soon and when it does, AC will be a goner, mas o menos, even if it takes several centuries. Let's call the total resistance of the transmission line leading from, say a turbine-mounted generator in a dam or steam station to your local substation R. Let's also say the local community demands a power P=IV from that substation. This means the current drawn by the substation is I=P/V and the higher the transmission line voltage, the smaller the current. The line loss is given by P(loss)=I^2 R, or, substituting for I, P(loss) = P²R/V² (notice there is no place of AC/DC in this formula) Since P is fixed by community demand, and R is as small as Aluminum permits(using big fat copper cable would help were it not for the cost), line loss decreases strongly in power law fashion with increasing voltage, whether it be AC or DC but for the same line, there are *additional* albeit small AC heating loss at any given voltage. Kind of like friction. The reason is simply that you want the smallest amount of current that you can use to deliver the most power P; and when you calculate the "power factor" AC will always require a higher peak current than average. Another important note: the loss fraction from downshifting DC has been high historically, actually unacceptable high, but that does not mean that it "had to be" that way, then or now. We might well have overlooked a few things along the way (such as, is there really such a thing as a super-efficient cavity diode?). Would a national R&D effort a century ago have given us a nearly lossless HV DC down-conversion technology? Perhaps not, given that semiconductors were still 50 years off ... but don't be too sure - if you believe what some experts in the field of advanced cavity-type diodes will tell you (yeah, I know, where's the beef?) Again, this deficiency in AC is inherent in the system and should not be glossed over (by the long-term planners) by DC down-conversion issues - because power is proportional to current but line loss is proportional to current squared, and if your current fluctuates, its peak will always exceed its average. Line loss can be quite large over long distances, up to 30% or so. By the way, line loss power goes into heating the transmission line cable which, per meter length, isn't very much heat until you multiply by the total meters. Its a long way from Hoover Dam to LA. Given that we want to reduce line loss by using high voltage, the choice between AC and DC becomes historically straightforward. It has been lossy and difficult to reduce a DC high voltage to low voltage AC or DC without additional significant losses - whereas with AC, it is easy to reduce AC high voltage to low voltage using a step-down transformer. You see lots of these when you walk by a substation. An ideal transformer reduces V and increases I so that the power IV is constant within a percent or two of loss due to eddy current heating of the iron core. To compete with this, one would need HV DC downshifting with comparable losses - 1-2%. You can get pretty close now with semiconductors in a small computer PS. In the big picture, however, is it possible to even imagine downconverting HV DC "from the grid" to street voltage AC? Of course it wasn't possible back in Edison's day, but he was still correct in theory, and therefore one is free to wonder the result, had we institutionalized a coordinated R&D effort back then... ? Doubtful if things would be different. Ergo, we didn't really make an unforgivable error; and our EEs actually did all that their government allowed them to do. Side note: A neighborhood substation typically reduces 3 phase incoming HV voltage, 5000 volts and up, to a reasonable value for street lines, say 330-500 V, and then a small transformer outside your house will center-tap this and reduce it to 110 V. Between your computer and the dam, there may be 4-6 parasitic transformers, up-down-and sideways, each taking its own small toll, but it is cumulative. This is an area that is subject to improvement, even without a switch to HV DC for the transmission line itself. There is some reason to suspect that the transformer itself, using optimized cores and frequencies, could become the first major ZPE product to hit the market. Quien sabe? BTW we call it two-phase by the time it gets to the toaster - but to be precise this is not exactly the case. Your house wiring is technically NOT even AC at all from one perspective, but instead is pulsed DC positive at the 60 cycle frequency. The AC-like component is supplied by the capacitance of all the gadgets in your house and the house wiring itself. If you don't believe this, look in your breaker box and you will see that only one line is actually "hot" and both the other two are essentially grounded (but at different places). The end result looks like AC on a scope, but there can be some distortion, depending on the capacitance quirks of "this old house". Here is the main point which I meant to make before. Although the low loss technology for HV DC was not in place during the Westinghouse-Edison-Tesla days, one wonders if some kind of imposed national R&D effort would have changed the situation then. And we should give Edison, not Tesla, the credit for being correct in principle. It probably is too late now For HV DC, that is, until low cost superconductivity comes along. BUT... are we now making adequate plans for that day in a national coordinated effort? Perhaps EPRI is doing so, and perhaps they can fit in the OU transformer as well... ;-) Jones BTW You Might Be an EE if: Dilbert is your hero, You have saved the power cord from a discarded old appliance, You have purchased an appliance "as-is" at a yard sale just to see if you can fix it (after which you saved the power cord) Your spouse sends you an e-mail instead of calling you to dinner You look forward to Christmas as a chance to put together the latest Hi-tek toys You can quote from Monty Python o Firesign theatre Your idea of interpersonal communication means getting the decimal point in the right place At Christmas, it goes without saying that you will be the one to find the burnt-out bulb in the string. You window shop at Radio Shack or Sharper Image instead of Macys You are convinced you can build a phazer out of a camera's flash attachment.... You will find an egregious geek error in the spiel above, and embarrass the author once again.... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 10:53:49 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LHrdqZ006035; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:53:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LHrbGR006022; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:53:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:53:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1aa.2a1a6627.2ea95198@aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:53:28 EDT Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1aa.2a1a6627.2ea95198_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <4nSy7B.A.CeB.he_dBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56191 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_1aa.2a1a6627.2ea95198_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/21/2004 12:31:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes: > Here is the main point which I meant to make before. > Although the low loss technology for HV DC was not in place > during the Westinghouse-Edison-Tesla days, one wonders if > some kind of imposed national R&D effort would have changed > the situation then. The primary reason for AC power is that it is easy and efficient to change voltages. Power plants transmit power at a half a million volts. Million volt lines were tried. At that voltage corona losses compete with resistive losses. One million volts as about the limit. There was some talk a while back about bringing HV DC transmission lines into service. I believe there is one in Russia. There is a slight advantage in that DC lines carrying the same power have a little less corona loss (a factor of the square root of 3 better). Power factors losses are a bit lower as DC has no power factor. The power has to rectified then inverted and down converted. The additional steps do add losses. The really big advantage is system stability. At distances of 1000 miles an electrical transmission line begins to act like a coaxial cable. The wavelength at 60 hertz is significant at these distances. This causes problems with system stability. It is like coupling two motors with a very long shaft. Envision a shaft one mile long. The twisting of the shaft could result in a harmonic oscillation of the two motors The harmonic oscillation would begin with a sudden change of load. It would then grow until it was out of control. Of course, the same electronics that allows for power inversion has lead to better control of system stability. Frank Znidarsic --part1_1aa.2a1a6627.2ea95198_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/21/2004 12:31= :11 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes:

Here is the main point which I=20= meant to make before.
Although the low loss technology for HV DC was not in place
during the Westinghouse-Edison-Tesla days, one wonders if
some kind of imposed national R&D effort would have changed
the situation then.


The primary reason for AC power is that it is easy and efficient to change v= oltages.  Power plants transmit power at a half a million volts. =20= Million volt lines were tried.  At that voltage corona losses compete w= ith resistive losses.  One million volts as about the limit.

There was some talk a while back about bringing HV DC transmission lines int= o service.  I believe there is one in Russia.   There is a sl= ight advantage in that DC lines carrying the same power have a little less c= orona loss (a factor of the square root of 3 better).  Power factors lo= sses are a bit lower as DC has no power factor.  The power has to recti= fied then inverted and down converted.  The additional steps do add los= ses.  The really big advantage is system stability.  At distances=20= of 1000 miles an electrical transmission line begins to act like a coaxial c= able.  The wavelength at 60 hertz is significant at these distances.&nb= sp; This causes problems with system stability.  It is like coupling tw= o motors with a very long shaft. Envision a shaft one mile long.  The t= wisting of the shaft could result in a harmonic oscillation of the two motor= s  The harmonic oscillation would begin with a sudden change of load.&n= bsp; It would then grow until it was out of control.    Of co= urse, the same electronics that allows for  power inversion has lead to= better control of system stability. 

Frank Znidarsic --part1_1aa.2a1a6627.2ea95198_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 11:00:24 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LI0DqZ009651; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:00:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LI0CuD009631; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:00:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:00:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <102.5266f19c.2ea95320@aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:00:00 EDT Subject: Re: All Over Reactance To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_102.5266f19c.2ea95320_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56192 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_102.5266f19c.2ea95320_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/21/2004 12:07:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > The subject, though, was 100 GHz rectification and power supply size. My > point was that FETs overcame the drop in efficiency of diodes at high > frequencies, but FETs too have their limitations and drop off in efficiency > with frequency. High power switching at 100 GHz to achieve any kind of > practical current rectification is a problem for a tiny power supply. > > Remember the power transformer that used to be in old radios and television sets. You will not find one now. Where did it go? These devices still require a multitude of voltages. In televisions the power line frequency is unshifted and then ran through a light small light weight transformer. It looks more like a tuning coil than a transformer. The is done because the inversion electronics are cheeper than transformer iron. Much smaller filter capacitors are required at high frequency. Frank Znidarsic --part1_102.5266f19c.2ea95320_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/21/2004 12:07= :05 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:

The subject, though, was 100 GH= z rectification and power supply size.  My
point was that FETs overcame the drop in efficiency of diodes at high
frequencies, but FETs too have their limitations and drop off in efficiency<= BR> with frequency.  High power switching at 100 GHz to achieve any kind of=
practical current rectification is a problem for a tiny power supply.



Remember the power transformer that used to be in old radios and television=20= sets.  You will  not find one now.  Where did it go?  Th= ese devices still require a multitude of voltages.  In televisions the=20= power line frequency is unshifted and then ran through a light small light w= eight transformer.  It looks more like a tuning coil than a transformer= .  The is done because the inversion electronics are cheeper than trans= former iron.  Much smaller filter capacitors are required at high frequ= ency.

Frank Znidarsic --part1_102.5266f19c.2ea95320_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 11:54:26 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LIsHqZ031042; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:54:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LIsFYs031015; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:54:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:54:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:59:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: All Over Reactance Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56193 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:00 PM 10/21/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 10/21/2004 12:07:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, >hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > >> The subject, though, was 100 GHz rectification and power supply size. My >> point was that FETs overcame the drop in efficiency of diodes at high >> frequencies, but FETs too have their limitations and drop off in efficiency >> with frequency. High power switching at 100 GHz to achieve any kind of >> practical current rectification is a problem for a tiny power supply. >> >> > >Remember the power transformer that used to be in old radios and television >sets. You will not find one now. Where did it go? These devices still >require a multitude of voltages. In televisions the power line frequency is >unshifted and then ran through a light small light weight transformer. It >looks >more like a tuning coil than a transformer. The is done because the inversion >electronics are cheeper than transformer iron. Much smaller filter capacitors >are required at high frequency. > >Frank Znidarsic I hear tea in China is getting more expensive these days, due to their holding massive reserves in dollars which are depreciating. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 11:58:32 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LIwJQI021173; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:58:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LIwHtS021129; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:58:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:58:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <417806D5.2060500@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:58:29 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: Tranmission line losses References: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <4Ioo_.A.6JF.IbAeBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56194 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: Way too much. You haven't done much transmission and distribution design I gather. :-) AC has one great advantage when clearing fault currents: it goes through zero current 120 times a second. DC faults tend to burn until you melt away enough bus structure that the air gap resistance gets too high. I don't know where you learned about house current, but that center-tapped transformer on the pole provides two hot buses 180 degrees out of phase. Either bus gives you 120 VAC rms to ground (neutral) and 240 VAC rms phase-to-phase. BTW, hardly any system uses 5 kV for distribution anymore. Georgia Power uses 20 kV to keep distributon conductor sizes down. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 12:04:13 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LJ42qZ002204; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:04:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LJ41PF002185; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:04:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:04:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00b901c4b7a0$978a7360$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:03:03 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56195 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: One further even more highly speculative thought... free-form thinking permitted. Lets say that between your house and the power station there are six transformers, three up and three down, and 16% total line loss; and each transformer is 98% efficient. Note that these losses are all COMPOUNDED just as is compound interest, so that instead of having 16+12 = 28% net losses its more like 33% Lets say that some garage inventor, or left-coast visionary, finds that by using some particular combination of parameters like a new ferrite core material at a resonant high frequency, pulsed DC at a certain duty factor, etc which results in a partial secondary reactance which is effectively regauged from ZPE energy, etc, so that he can produce a high reactance, high resonance transformer which is 102% efficient... What does this mean for the grid? Because of compounding, and the fact that the gain goes both ways, and because HV DC would give you maybe half the line losses of HV AC at the same peak voltage, it could mean quite a lot on the bottom line. Also don't forget that on the supply side, at the dam or steam plant, if you use numerous DC generators in series, you might even get around the some of up-conversion losses... oops, wait a minute.. OTOH who would want to go that route if your transformer was 102%? We don't want to change every appliance in America, so we still want 110 AC at the house. This means that HV DC will need to go to pulsed HV DC then downconverted, rectified and later converted to neighborhood 3 phase. How about this for starters. Even with this modest COP of 2% per stage, and because of compounding and adding more stages, the inventor in one fell swoop has effectively "created" just about the same amount of power as every single nuclear plant in the USA produces. You wouldn't close those, however, just close most of the plants which burn dirty coal or fuel oil. ...big OOPS...on second thought, things get even more interesting... And here is a lesson on how having a particular "mind-set" can get you into trouble... Of course the realist would counter that after further appraisal, even with a modest but presently impossible 102%, you would really need zero power plants at all, that's right none anywhere - and zero national grid to boot... just a single start-up battery and lots of transformers at every house and you have no grid and no line losses and a ready high demand market for several billion slightly OU transformers...!! Time for another chorus of "dream on..." Jones BTW do you know about Doubling Times and the Rule-of-70? The Rule-of-70 provides a simple way to calculate the approximate number of cycles or units which it takes for a variable, which is growing at a constant rate to double. This rule states that the approximate number of cycles n for a variable growing at the constant growth rate of R percent, to double is n= 70/R For example, a state like California with an annual population growth rate of 5% will double its population in approximately 14 years. If the growth rate were 7%, it would double its population in approximately 10 years. I dread to see real estate prices here in 2018... but by then I will have likely moved on to more spacious accommodations, shall we say. Back to the subject of getting off the grid with an OU transformer of a COP of only 1.02. If transformers like this are not just imaginary and can cohere ZPE at a reliable rate, you will need about 35 to double your initial input... but it gets a lot more complicated than that...Lets say you need 10 kilowatts of constant power for your house and can store the excess for peak periods. One way to do this is to produce 20 and recycle 10 of that back through the 35 stages. There probably is also a formula or rule which gives the fewest number of transformers of a particular size or cost, but, hey... first things first... lets worry about how to design that transformer before we start looking for lots of unused closet space.... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 12:23:16 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LJN4QI007039; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:23:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LJN3I1007031; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:23:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:23:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00c701c4b7a3$407e7c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <417806D5.2060500@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:22:05 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: <8X9ZyD.A.xtB.XyAeBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56196 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry, > You haven't done much transmission and distribution design I gather. :-) Nope... but this was meant to be mildly thought-provoking with a touch of geek humor, rather than time to see if the bootleged CAD program will load... > Either bus gives you 120 VAC rms to ground (neutral) and > 240 VAC rms phase-to-phase. Yep. Which is pretty much why I said that 110-120 house wiring cannot be called true AC... the assumption being that only phase-to-phase would precisely fit that definition. BTW, do I detect that you are professionally involved in power transmission and distribution design now ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 12:26:56 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LJQjqZ010327; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:26:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LJQb3X010222; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:26:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:26:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: "Vortex" Subject: New superconductor paper on XXXLanl ( for Mark ) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:55:56 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56197 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi. I was wondering if Mark Goldes had a comment about this paper that just came over my (virtual) desk. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cond-mat/0410503 It sounded sort of familiar. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 12:39:35 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LJdMQI018885; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:39:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LJdLIK018868; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:39:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:39:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41781076.3030602@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:39:34 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: Tranmission line losses References: <3f9501c4b76a$fa54e2e0$994eccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <417806D5.2060500@rtpatlanta.com> <00c701c4b7a3$407e7c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <00c701c4b7a3$407e7c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56198 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >BTW, do I detect that you are professionally involved in >power transmission and distribution design now ? > No, that was another life, 17 years ago. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 12:49:34 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LJnOqZ018383; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:49:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LJnKBU018354; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:49:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:49:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041021194914.21520.qmail@web41528.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:49:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Polyphase Transmission line losses To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <003a01c4b78a$c3ed5fa0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56199 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --- Jones Beene wrote: > This is all true historically, but in hindsight we > can ask - > were there any missed opportunities along the way? > When it > comes to moving lots of power hundreds of miles > through > Transmission Lines, and given that historically > "other" > considerations have dominated over what is > theoretically > ideal, one major point needs to be made. In theory, > Tesla > notwithstanding - at any given voltage and > everything else > being equal (which it seldom is) - one is always > better off > with DC than AC. That is a fact that is often swept > under > the carpet with the down-conversion-loss broom. > > Electric energy is transported across the > countryside with > high-voltage lines because the line losses are much > smaller > than with low-voltage lines. The choice between AC > and DC > is unrelated to this one fact. All wires in > commercial use > have resistance, but the development of > high-temperature > superconductors will probably change this soon and > when it > does, AC will be a goner, mas o menos, even if it > takes > several centuries. Okay, lets not get totally rediculous here. No one has even commented on the aspect of poly-phasing. How are you going to "poly-phase" DC? Has everyone forgot in the rush to show DC superior to AC, that in fact a three phase AC motor is far superior to the single phase AC version? That the three phase AC motor is the workhorse of the industrial revolution? Let us also recognize that with poly phase AC, the sending wire and the recieving wire can be the same thing. How are you going to do that with DC? Lets return to the simple electrical theory, here espoused by Thomas Jackson; pg 644: Intro to Electric Circuits "The phase current of the source is defined as the current flowing in a particular {stator} coil of the source of emf, and the phase current of the load is the current flowing in a particular arm of the load. In the wye-connected system, the source phase current, load phase current, and line current are all one and the same. But careful inspection of the delta system shows us that each line has to carry current for TWO arms of the load. Closer inspection shows us that the tracing direction for one of these currents is AWAY from the source and the other is TOWARD the source. Therefore, the line current to the delta load must be the vector DIFFERENCE between the two load phase currents flowing in that line." "The line current to a balanced delta load has a magnitude of the square root of 3, (1.7) times the phase current in each arm of the load and is displaced 30 degrees from the phase current." HDN Note; the vector addition of the WYE source of three phase emf in an alternator is actually the inverse of vector subtraction, because the voltages made on each winding tied in WYE vectorially sum to 1.7 times the voltage created on only a single stator winding. By making an electrical system where the vector addition delivers the same result as the vector subtraction, we must conclude that system is symmetrically equal on both the inside-out and outside-in applications. The sole drawback of the quadrature phasing system that I can see is that the series made wiring, or the analogy to quadrature WYE, where stator delivery from the polyphased generators are combined in series, then we again obtain only 1.4 times the individual stator voltages instead of 1.7 times that amount as is made in the current system. SO... if you wish to ponder the above statement... were there any missed opportunities along the way? Yes there was and still is the missed opportunity! For the 120 degree phasing system, it takes 1.7 amps of the delivery "transmission line" to divide into two one amp deliveries. For the quadrature 90 degree phasing system, it takes 1.4 Amps to do the same division into two 1 amp currents. This system is not in use to my knowledge, but the simple fact then becomes that with this "better" polyphase system the transmission line losses should be 82% less then what the current system uses. Ask yourself a simple question, what is the phase angle that will hold the least amount of current on the delivery line vs the load lines? Nobody seems to fathom that a "symmetrically" phased distribution system means that the vector subtraction, as with the noted delta delivery, yeilds the same result as with a "WYE" vector addition. Perhaps I havent thought this out correctly, and I am open to corrections? Maybe a poem is in order/// Between Yellow and Blue a Green can be seen; if you look on the rainbow it is right in between. In the beginning was the Void, and the Void was with God; and the Void was God; who appeared with no rotation to itself, being the object without support in the void until multiplicity came into being. So the ONE became many from the void, into the realm of trisection, into the three primary colors of the rainbow, RED, YELLOW and BLUE. Next came the subbdivision into seven, by the mixing of primary vibrations. The void, being beyond its creations in the absolute sense, left its sourcing as the seventh color, beyond the realm of sight, which next became the evolution of vibration lowered into the next octave; which became sound vibrations, THE MUSIC OF THE SPHERES. This will satisfy some; from the time when it was written. Roses are Red Violets are Blue But the Violet Ray always comes from two. One can be seen the other cannot. In the rainbow of life it's the violet thats sought. It's easy to see how the other colors merge. But to make the violet requires a special urge. If you look at a rainbow, blue's separate from red. To understand this enough has been said. The colors are six, should it be seven? Maybe the red had to come back from heaven. To meet with her blue who would give her a clue how she came from above and was known as a dove. The violet ray is next to the blue. Where are its parents? How can one make two? >From opposite ends of the rainbow they merge, blue and red mix to make violet surge. The red who is used is one that cant be seen, Next to the violet is an octave between. An octave's not eight, when sound becomes light, it divides into seven, with one hidden from sight. At the vibrations of sound came a movement around; and an interpreter there, so the movement could be found. The movement around became the magnetic field, and the interpreter of this was formed as a shield. Encompassing motion the sheild came to be: Tesla's motionally made electricity. Trisection for him, was a passion of sorts, but not in the plannings, which he tried to abort. Instead he has shown, by writings of four; that it is the quadrature that opens the door. So here we will see why this is so, by telling a story of phasings to show. In the beginning was the moving magnetic field. Three phases came up and around on the sheild. Each one saw the same on its partners to be, but the timing was different for each one to see. Together they thought would be better then one, so they joined all the hands in a circle to be done. This became DELTA, the square root of three, coming out from the corners where only one used to be. Then they were thinking about their own source, and a new formation then came on course. Let us take one hand apart from the other, so that two of us here are in series as mother, and each ending hand can go outwards as WYE to make each of our voltages sum together as a tie. >From the inside-out this was generated to be, so that all of the shields became WYE electricity. But from the outside-in things were not that equal, so the endings used DELTA, until the time of the sequel. Finally it was seen according to symmetry, that the cross in the diamond would balance the trigonometry For three phases ending on DELTA, we end up with subtraction; so that the square root of 3, being 1.7 amps extraction serves the arms of delta each only one unit of action. Now using the cross for a better delivery; Four becomes one, so the the line goes into chivalry, making the most for what is at hand, and giving the most back to the land. For here it is seen that the square root of two; can still deliver the same two units to you. What this means is that 1.4 amps go shared through the line; dividing into two, where each one unit is fine. So for nature to divide into three timings, means 70% more current in sharing the linings. but for even delivery divisible by four, means only 40% extra current before it divides to your door. We can also see from the magic square, that the workable combos for three are rare. But for four to a side, and multiples of those the solutions are so numerous that more can be chose. The electrical system based on the even by four can use magic squares in formation to tap out some more. This is because of what we can do to go faster then time, and to trap the electricity right in the lines! We will have succeeded in switching so fast, that what went in is trapped in the past! Postnote; da, da, da ...More old hat stuff for the masses... For those unfamiliar with electrical doctrines I will show the reason that four phasings should someday replace that of three. When we come to efficiency of three phase delivery a Delta line delivery employs subtraction of the summed vectors when it gets delivered to the triangle. When it is created in WYE it employs vector addition. Each of these things of course give different results. However for SYMMETRY, both the vector additions and subtractions would give the SAME results. We only get the same results from both a vector addition and subtraction when the angle between the vectors is at 90 degrees. As for the magic square stuff, that is also totally about symmetry, where the additions of all winding numbers sum to the same number whether added horizontally, vertically or diagonally. Up until the present time no one has realized what the magic squares are good for, they have only remained a mathematical mystery, or amuzement. If we construct a coil with the winding numbers corresponding to a magic square, what we have actually done when using 4 sided square wire is to construct a coil that will immensely slow the speed of light propagation through that coil. Normally a coil approximately resonates as if it were bouncing back and forth on the wire length at the speed of light. If things are made in unison between how you beat the coil frequency wise to the coils natural resonant frequency, you obtain a huge rise in voltage until the coil emits a small lightening bolt, and this is why a tesla coil works the way it does. By making the coil in a constructed way so that it stores voltage by having the highest possible (uniformally symmetrical) differences of voltage between windings on all four sides of each wire, that mathematical solution expresses itself as a magic square. The voltage between windings establishes what is known as "internal capacity." Internal capacity has the effect of reducing a coils "natural resonant" frequency, so that it acts as if the electrical impulse is actually bouncing back and forth slower then the speed of light. Thus in the future when finances are better I should be able to construct such a large magic square coil, where the generator sending the impulses through the coil can actually reverse polarity BEFORE the impulse reaches the end of the winding; and this is what I mean by "trapping" electricity into the past within a coil structure. The load demand from the generator for such a coil furthermore acting as a primary for energy delivery by a secondary should of course be minimal. I hope I have tried to explain some aspects of this poem then.... HDN ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 15:06:35 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LM6NmD016726; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:06:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LM6IDO016682; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:06:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:06:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:06:08 EDT Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, a-albionic@yahoogroups.com, NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups.com, ThomasClark123@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d8.1790d9b5.2ea98cd0_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: <4YmfrB.A.lEE.aLDeBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56200 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_d8.1790d9b5.2ea98cd0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/20/04 7:24:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time, walhalla@cvtv.net writes: > Heffner mentioned randomness. In automatic flow control a setpoint is > maintained by selecting a proportional band and determining the number of resets > per minute that would permit the control to average the flow. The randomness > is controlled by permitting freedom within limits. > > There appears to be reset mechanisms built into everything.. creating chaos > or harmony ? In Texas, a country beerjoint cannot stay in business without > one good fight per week to release the tension. > Thanks for this post. This information about automatic flow control and randomness can be very useful in engineering self sustaining communities which utilize programmed randomness in society and in social control flows to create the illusion of freedom and randomness in specified ranges and yet maintain order, safety and civilization over the ages. 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 Making a difference one person at a time Get informed. Inform others. --part1_d8.1790d9b5.2ea98cd0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message=20= dated 10/20/04 7:24:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time, walhalla@cvtv.net writes:


Heffner mentioned randomnes= s. In automatic flow control a setpoint is maintained by selecting a proport= ional band and determining the number of resets per minute that would permit= the control to average the flow. The randomness is controlled by permitting= freedom within limits.
=20
There appears to be reset mechanisms built into everything.. creating ch= aos or harmony ? In Texas, a country beerjoint cannot stay in business witho= ut one good fight per week to release the tension.


Thanks for this post.  This information about automatic flow contro= l and randomness can be very useful in engineering self sustaining communiti= es which utilize programmed randomness in society and in social control flow= s to create the illusion of freedom and randomness in specified ranges and y= et maintain order, safety and civilization over the ages.  

Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.co= m\baron, Email: www.rhf= web.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb= .com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.= rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at w= ww.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at = www.rhfweb.com

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. Inform others.


--part1_d8.1790d9b5.2ea98cd0_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 15:39:14 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LMd3CM014022; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:39:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LMd0GJ013971; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:39:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:39:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:44:43 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: <4jJKq.A.PaD.EqDeBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56201 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Something that I would personally like to see is all electrical transmission and distribution under ground. Here in Alaska there are various nice neighborhoods that have underground power, but there are many neighborhoods and great vistas along the roadsides spoiled by unsightly power lines. One of the many reasons Washington DC is a beautiful city is the lack of overhead power lines. We Alaskans successfully outlawed billboards only to mess up the scenery with power lines. Transmission loss for overhead transmission lines is only about 7 percent on average nationwide. Unfortunately this loss more than triples for long line AC transmission underground because of losses via capacitive coupling to the required insulation. This capacitive loss disappears when DC is used though. However, since speculation has been called for, underground transmission might be an application for high frequency or microwave power distribution? Perhaps even transmission by high intensity light would work, but then power conversion would be a major problem. The advantages of underground transmission are many. Aesthetics, reduced risk of accidental electrocutions and small plane crashes (a real problem in Alaska), elimination of LF near-field cancer and genetic malformation scares, reduced maintenance overhead for lightning, wind, tree growth, and icing problems. There are still right-away maintenance problems and possibly increased capital cost problems though. Perhaps line loss problems go away if a well tuned transmission line is used, especially a coaxial line or micrwave waveguide? It certainly is true that transmission loss in modern glass is fairly low, perhaps AC or microwave transmission by waveguide can work? As with DC, the problem then is at either end of the transmission line. Perhaps these considerations will go way with room temperature superconductors, but you can just bet electric companies will initially want to string them between existing poles and towers. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 16:42:21 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9LNgAmD031817; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:42:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9LNg8I4031786; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:42:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:42:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com From: "Mark Goldes" To: knagel@gis.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: New superconductor paper on XXXLanl Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:41:32 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Oct 2004 23:42:01.0123 (UTC) FILETIME=[8FBEAF30:01C4B7C7] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56202 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, These are indeed our Ultraconductors. David has been a consultant to the Company in the past. He studied these polymers on a U.S. government grant for a year before we met him back about 1995. He has published several papers about these polymers before and since and has a somewhat different theoretical perspective from that of Dr. Grigorov or our own team. This paper suggests that the Tc (critical temperature) may be 350 C (upwards of 650 degrees F). Grigorov believes it to be 1,000 C, which is far above the temperature at which the polymers disintegrate. From a practical viewpoint I'm not sure it matters much. We believe the upper temperature limit for practical applications is not more than 200 C (390 F). Others in our firm are better qualified than I to comment on such technical issues and doubtless will eventually do so. >From: "Keith Nagel" >Reply-To: >To: "Vortex" >Subject: New superconductor paper on XXXLanl ( for Mark ) >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:55:56 -0400 > >Hi. > >I was wondering if Mark Goldes had a comment about this >paper that just came over my (virtual) desk. > >http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cond-mat/0410503 > >It sounded sort of familiar. > >K. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 18:37:09 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9M1aEIm011548; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:36:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9M1a5p6011514; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:36:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:36:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:41:41 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56203 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: More food for thought. Efficient underground long line bulk electric energy transmission, like that from nuclear plants, might be achieved using very low frequencies, like 1 Hz or less. Unlike pure DC, this approach would facilitate using low frequency motor-generator sets at the delivery end to convert low Hz to 60 Hz. They would not be large compared to steam plants and the capital cost might be affordable for long lines power, especially considering that the motor generator costs offset normal step-down transformer costs. The capacitive coupling problem can be solved using gas insulation. If room temperature superconductors are developed, they would work immediately with this low frequency low technology approach, especially if the conductors are in conduits and don't have to be dug up to be replaced. This low Hz approach would facilitate the building of nuclear plant farms in small highly protected isolated regions and avoid many environmental impact study costs and avoid widely distributed protests etc. due to building sites all over the place in conjested metropolitan areas. The enviromental and regulatory impact could also be minimized by utilizing existing power line, rail, and pipeline rights of way. On the other hand, hydrogen pieplines are a cheaper form of energy transmission after only a few hundred miles, and hydrogen is readily storable in old gas wells, etc. The main problem is the source of the hydrogen. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 21 23:30:34 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9M6U4mM011036; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:30:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9M67gj5001632; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:07:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:07:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 22:13:03 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56204 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:44 PM 10/21/4, Horace Heffner (I) wrote: >Perhaps line loss problems go away if a well tuned transmission line is >used, especially a coaxial line or micrwave waveguide? It certainly is >true that transmission loss in modern glass is fairly low, perhaps AC or >microwave transmission by waveguide can work? As with DC, the problem then >is at either end of the transmission line. I suppose this was a probably dumb idea, as attenuation is always greater in waveguides than in low frequency or DC conductors. Optical energy transmission might have a chance, but energy conversion is a problem. Microwave transmission (from solar collectors in space) to an ocean surface located antenna I think is already shown to be safe and feasible though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 04:45:14 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MBjAlF014669; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:45:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MBinE2014558; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:44:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:44:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:50:24 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: China Syndrome Cure? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56205 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If the bottom of the inside of a nuclear reactor containment building were a mesh of boron carbide, or possibly even just a bunch of boron carbide balls, then a hot glob melting out of the reactor core would flow down into narrow channels between what are effectively control rods and automatically go sub-critical. A passive cure to the China Syndrome? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 05:59:23 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MCxGlF000519; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:59:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MCxEct000507; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:59:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:59:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:04:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness#2 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56206 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:04 AM 10/21/4, RC Macaulay wrote: [snip] >We are not seeking OU in our studies of mechanical vortexes. The task we >face is to meet an ever growing demand for better mixing of chemicals >into liquids.The nightmare scenario of problems presented the water >treating industry by the entrance of exotic toxic chemicals, drugs , >viruses and new immune strains of bacteria provide us with a days work >without entering the energy domain. [snip] If you are looking for effective low capital and energy cost mixing, then it seems to me that big vortices are not the way to go. Good mixing I think occurs in turbulent flow. It takes a lot of energy to drive the laminar shear in the vortex, and it ends up mostly as heat. It is interresting to watch sugar dissolve in coffee or tea. Add about 3 or 4 teaspoons full to a cup (this is not a recipe!) Spin up a vortex with a teaspoon. The sugar dissolves comparatively slowly. However, the moment you reverse the spin the sugar dissoves very rapidly. I think this is due to the effectivness of tubulance in mixing liquids. I suspect a good vortex, or set of a few vortices, might be useful to distribute a chemical across a 14 ft wide channel, but 15 hp seems like a lot of power to simply distribute a chemical across such a channel. Possibly a more effective way to do the mixing is to use a series of vertical pipes, having holes in their leading edges, to dispense the chemicals. These would be placed about every foot or less across the effluent, and reach the bottom of the channel. A flat plate could be welded or attached to the trailing edge of the pipes. The surfaces of the plate could be covered with crescent or chevron shaped protrusions to generate turbulent flow at the trailing edge of the chemical dispursing pipes. It shoudn't take a lot of horsepower to dispurse a chemical into the effluent that way. A separate pipe could be used at the leading edge to simultaneously inject air or gas if desired, and that should improve mixing as well. Another thought, if extremely energetic mixing is desired, and you really want to use up 15 hp, is to dispurse from holes in spinning pipes, which should create significant turbulence. This might be achieved by driving each pipe with a separate motor, or, more simply, by using slanted discharge holes in a pipe free to rotate outside a smaller central distribution pipe with holes in it. Such a set-up might be pretty cheap to make using plastic pipe. Just some ideas. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 06:11:24 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MDBHlF004621; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:11:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MDBGHh004601; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:11:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:11:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:16:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness#2 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56207 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Another variation. Use a series of vertical pipes, having holes in their leading edges, to dispense the chemicals. These would be placed about every foot or less across the effluent, and reach the bottom of the channel. A separate pipe on the leading edge could be used for air or gas injection. Following each dispersal pipe, locate a spinning tube, which should create significant turbulence. The spinning tubes might have projections on them to increase turbulance. Such a set-up might be pretty cheap to make using plastic pipe. Just some more ideas. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 08:03:46 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MF3blF009526; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MF3Ylp009408; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001c01c4b849$c4c53b40$6701a8c0@mshome.net> From: "revtec" To: References: <001601c4ad36$4d76d850$0f027841@xptower> Subject: Re: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:14:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4B828.3BFF3480" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Resent-Message-ID: <4XCB4B.A.xSC.GFSeBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56208 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4B828.3BFF3480 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4B828.3BFF3480" ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4B828.3BFF3480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank ----- Original Message -----=20 From: RC Macaulay=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20 Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 8:57 AM Subject: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Did it ever occur to anyone here that the Grand Canyon is shaped = entirely wrong for a geological feature that is millions of years old, = that the outer canyon walls are too steep, and the debris field is too = small? If the canyon was formed over millions of years, the seasonal = changes with countless freezing and thawing cycles should have fractured = and collapsed all vertical walls on a continuous basis so that the = canyon would be a large V shaped valley composed of rock rubble at = approximately 45 degree angle of repose. =20 Canyon De Chelly, 150 mi east of the Grand Canyon is an even more = extreme example of this delema. Sheer vertical walls extend from top to = bottom with no rubble whatsoever. The stream that runs through it can = be crossed on foot without getting your ankles wet. De Chelly can barely = be thousands of years old.=20 I have been to the base of El Capitan in Yosemite; the rubble at its = base is unimpressive in size. The rubble at the base of Devil Tower = likewise seems insufficient for a millions year old geologic feature. On July 13 1993 my wife and I were at Capital Reefs national park. We = were in a vertical walled canyon near the trail head to Cassidy Arch. = It was nearing sunset and windy. =20 We had back packs and intended to climb to Cassidy Arch and spend the = night. While contemplating the wisdom of this idea, I was staring at = the far canyon wall. Suddenly, tons of the canyon ledge fell away right = before my eyes! Half way down, the rock fall struck the canyon wall, = shattering into a rain of fragments, and leaving a white mark on the = wall. As I scanned the far wall I noticed numerous white marks. Yet. = the rubble field was not of impressive size. If the canyon in Capital Reef is another Millions year old feature, = what is the chance that I would see a major rock fall during my 2 = minutes of contemplation? We decided to spend our 25th wedding = anniversary in a motel. When I was a kid a local business backfilled an area to extend a = parking lot. They used ash from a coal fired power station to fill the = area to over 10 ft deep. At some time later a 15 minute thunder storm = cut a 8 ft deep canyon through the semistable ash. I walked through the = canyon an hour later. It was astounding! All of the features that make = the Grand Canyon instantly recognizable to anybody were laid out before = my eyes in miniature with walls as high as I could reach. When Mt St Helen exploded it generated a flood of mud and ash that = formed a canyon system out of the Touttle river basin complete with = vertical walls of visibly layered rock all formed from mud and ash. If = you were to blind fold a geologist and transport him to the Touttle = canyon he would never guess that he was inspecting a geologic feature = only 25 years old. This Vortex-L group knows better than anyone that a reputable = scientist can loose a lucrative career by publically believing CF to be = possible. How much more a geologist or paleontologist who gives = credence to young earth evidence! How many important discoveries and = artifacts have been destroyed, reburied, or "filed" into oblivion in the = basement of some museum to perpetuate the old earth dogma, but primarily = to protect ones paycheck? We of all people know it must be happening. =20 I'm just getting started, but I will quit for now. Richard is right. = Let's cut the bull and get to some real science.=20 Jeff Fink P.E. Answer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs were made = into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone accepted the fact back = then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon and read the = plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took umpeen = million years for the river to carve a canyon 20 miles wide and a mile = deep. From there I traveled to White Sands to read another plaque = stating ...the sands were millions of years old and traveled x inches = per year and the sands had drifted 40 miles after the gypsum had = leached from the adjacent mountain. Hmmm... I was viewing a giant hourglass,,, inches per year times miles = roughly equaled 6000 to 12000 years,, not millions of years. Meanwhile , = back at the ranch, my experience with liquids contol systems and = cavitation gave me pause when attempting to reconcile a cavitation cut = 20 miles wide and a mile deep in just under.. say 120 millions years. A = few years ago the Hoover Dam bypass valves were opened against warnings = by people that know better. The damage done in a few hours by cavitation = demonstrated how to cut concrete pipe without using a saw or spend 30 = million years to wear it down. A rather long way around to answering your inquiry about earth = expansion. Imagine the depth and volume of water required to produce = cavitation sufficent to cut the Grand Canyon and toss in the Hudson = River Canyon etc in a years time. I am not an earth scientist but I = think its time to stop the dinasaur stuff about crude oil and let = science be pursued.=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4B828.3BFF3480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 RC = Macaulay=20
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 = 8:57=20 AM
Subject: Episode 2: Joy of=20 discussion
Did it ever occur to anyone here that the Grand Canyon is shaped entirely wrong for a geological = feature that=20 is millions of years old, that the outer canyon walls are too steep, = and the=20 debris field is too small?  If the canyon was formed over = millions of=20 years, the seasonal changes with countless freezing and thawing cycles = should=20 have fractured and collapsed all vertical walls on a continuous basis = so that=20 the canyon would be a large V shaped valley  composed of rock = rubble at=20 approximately 45 degree angle of repose. 
 
Canyon De Chelly, 150 mi east of the Grand Canyon = is an even=20 more extreme example of this delema.  Sheer vertical walls extend = from=20 top to bottom with no rubble whatsoever.  The stream that runs = through it=20 can be crossed on foot without getting your ankles wet. De Chelly can = barely=20 be thousands of years old.
 
I have been to the base of El Capitan in Yosemite; = the=20 rubble at its base is unimpressive in size.  The rubble at the = base of=20 Devil Tower likewise seems insufficient for a millions year old = geologic=20 feature.
On July 13 1993 my wife and I were at Capital = Reefs national=20 park.  We were in a vertical walled canyon near the trail head to = Cassidy=20 Arch.  It was nearing sunset and windy. 
We had back packs and intended to climb to Cassidy = Arch and=20 spend the night.  While contemplating the wisdom of this idea, I = was=20 staring at the far canyon wall.  Suddenly, tons of the canyon = ledge fell=20 away right before my eyes!  Half way down, the rock fall struck = the=20 canyon wall, shattering into a rain of fragments, and leaving a white = mark on=20 the wall. As I scanned the far wall I noticed numerous white = marks.  Yet.=20 the rubble field was not of impressive size.
If the canyon in Capital Reef is another Millions = year old=20 feature, what is the chance that I would see a major rock fall during = my 2=20 minutes of contemplation?  We decided to spend our 25th wedding=20 anniversary in a motel.
 
When I was a kid a local business backfilled an = area to=20 extend a parking lot.  They used ash from a coal fired power = station to=20 fill the area to over 10 ft deep.  At some time later a 15 minute = thunder=20 storm cut a 8 ft deep canyon through the semistable ash.  I = walked=20 through the canyon an hour later.  It was astounding!  All = of the=20 features that make the Grand Canyon instantly recognizable to anybody = were=20 laid out before my eyes in miniature with walls as high as I could=20 reach.
 
When Mt St Helen exploded it generated a flood of = mud and=20 ash that formed a canyon system out of the Touttle river basin = complete with=20 vertical walls of visibly layered rock all formed from mud and = ash.  If=20 you were to blind fold a geologist and transport him to = the=20 Touttle canyon he would never guess that he was inspecting a geologic = feature=20 only 25 years old.
 
This Vortex-L group knows better than anyone that = a=20 reputable scientist can loose a lucrative career by publically = believing=20 CF to be possible.  How much more a geologist or paleontologist = who gives=20 credence to young earth evidence!  How many important discoveries = and=20 artifacts have been destroyed, reburied, or "filed" into oblivion in = the=20 basement of some museum to perpetuate the old earth dogma, but = primarily to=20 protect ones paycheck?  We of all people know it must be = happening. =20
 
I'm just getting started, but I will quit for = now. =20 Richard is right.  Let's cut the bull and get to some real=20 science. 
 
Jeff Fink  P.E.

Answer for Wyley..I came from the = old days when=20 dinasaurs were made into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone = accepted=20 the fact back then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon = and=20 read the plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took = umpeen=20 million years for the river to carve a canyon 20 miles wide and a mile = deep.=20 From there I traveled to White Sands to read another plaque stating = ...the=20 sands were millions of years old and traveled x inches per year = and the=20 sands had drifted  40 miles after the gypsum had leached from the = adjacent mountain.
 
Hmmm... I was viewing a giant = hourglass,,,=20 inches per year times miles roughly equaled 6000 to 12000 years,, not = millions=20 of years. Meanwhile , back at the ranch, my experience with liquids = contol=20 systems and cavitation gave me pause when attempting to reconcile a = cavitation=20 cut 20 miles wide and a mile deep in just under.. say 120 millions = years. A=20 few years ago the Hoover Dam bypass valves were opened against = warnings by=20 people that know better. The damage done in a few hours=20 by cavitation demonstrated how to cut concrete pipe without using = a saw=20 or spend 30 million years to wear it down.
 
A rather long way around to = answering your=20 inquiry about earth expansion.  Imagine the depth and volume of = water=20 required to produce cavitation sufficent to cut the Grand Canyon and = toss in=20 the Hudson River Canyon etc in a years time. I am not an earth = scientist but I=20 think its time to stop the  dinasaur stuff about crude oil and = let=20 science be pursued.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4B828.3BFF3480-- ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4B828.3BFF3480 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001701c4b849$c2f86a80$6701a8c0@mshome.net> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4B828.3BFF3480-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 08:03:50 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MF3dq8029884; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MF3beK029872; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:03:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004101c4b848$26a944c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:02:28 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56209 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace, > More food for thought. Efficient underground long line bulk electric > energy transmission, like that from nuclear plants, might be achieved using > very low frequencies, like 1 Hz or less. Unlike pure DC, this approach > would facilitate using low frequency motor-generator sets at the delivery > end to convert low Hz to 60 Hz. Yes. All this food for thought was giving me mental indigestion last night. Given these two most general constraints for long distance transmission: 1) Maximizing both voltage AND power factor at the same time 2) And at the same time having your power arrive in a form such that a time-varying magnetic field accompanies it for ease of down-conversion This may put the problem into clear perspective. Low frequency appears not to be the answer *by itself* as the power factor is still low, unless you can do something with the waveforms. Now square waves with a maximized duty factor come to mind. Bizzaro. Forget for a moment that this is "artificial," but what about 1 Hz square waves of pulsed DC which are clipped to the maximum extent possible. IOW the ratio of the pulse duration to the pulse period is maximized. Bizzaro. I Hz square waves on a 99% duty factor ! Yes. I know. Even if you could send it out that way, which you couldn't do easily, it would not arrive at the other end that way... ...its just some spicy salsa for that "food for thought" > On the other hand, hydrogen pieplines are a cheaper form of energy > transmission after only a few hundred miles, and hydrogen is readily > storable in old gas wells, etc. The main problem is the source of the > hydrogen. Yes. I think you have hit upon a possible *real* solution, using nuclear thermochemical to produce the H2 at double the efficiency of electricity. The best part about it is that the total system can also can be used for the transportation fuel infrastructure as well AND with your fuel-cell substations located near public building, you get a ton of free heat... hey, the residents of Fargo (or wherever you are in the far north) would love to have a heated (for free) outside swimming pool... to pass away the February blahs... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 11:31:18 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MIV2q8003564; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:31:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MIV0i6003532; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:31:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:31:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:00:18 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041021093921.0069ee68@pop.freeserve.net> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56210 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hey, >I doubt it. My approach was totally different to >Ing.Saviour's and in my case the system, SI or CGS, >or Imperial for that matter, is totally irrelevant. But it does matter, in how you divide and compose the derived units. As you say, this stuff can be cut up in any number of ways. Some more meaningful than others. I generally adhere to the notion that !more! dimensions are more enlightening than less, yet the '91 version of me ( allusion to your earlier post ) seemed enamored enough of the LT system to write several pages of notes... >In fact my derivation led to mass being T/L whereas >his gave T^3/L^3 - but that difference is merely >cosmetic. >I took a longer, less mentally traumatic route to >show that mass had the dimensions of [T].[L]^-1 I look forward to seeing it. I seem to remember somewhere else running into the notion of momentum being more fundamental than mass. >Ing.Saviour has part of the maths on his website. >When I've OCR'd it I'll put the whole Note on my >web site for you to read. I seem not to have the link anymore... What is it? Here's my derivation based on the CGS style of a fundamental definition using the force law. As you may know, the basic quantities of magnetic and electric charge are derived units based on the inverse square force laws ( Coulombs law ). ----------------------------------------------------------- LT System : Units for the derived quantity of mass ----------------------------------------------------------- Newton's law has the gravitational attraction between two masses as (1) F = GM^2L^-2 with G being a constant having dimensions (2) G = M^-1L^3T^-2 so that relation (1) can be satisfied. The old CGS system used Coulombs laws to define the basic quantities of magnetic and electric charge. This stands distinct from the SI system which uses a velocity ( C ) to tie magnetic and electric systems together. We'll use the force law approach below, saving the SI approach for a separate paper. What we want to do is find a new dimension for mass M so that instead of (2) we can satisfy (1) with (3) G = 1 We'll call the new thing M prime, to distinguish it from the old symbol for mass. It can be shown that (4) M' = L^3T-2 will satisfy the new relationship from (1) (5) F = M'^2L^-2 as so. (6a) M'LT^-2 = M'^2L^-2 (6b) ML^3T-2 = M'^2 (6c) L^3T-2 = M' -------------------------------------------------------- Comments or criticism gladly accepted. Sincerely, K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 12:19:03 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MJIrq8020228; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:18:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MJIpXq020207; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:18:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:18:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041022201809.0068da58@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:18:09 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Hydrogen from the Aether. Cc: rowepaul@gis.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id i9MJImq8020190 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56211 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ain't Google wonderful. By putting in the search string ----------------------------- hydrogen "paul rowe" -jukebox ----------------------------- I managed to boil things down to only 18 hits which enabled me to find these two gems from Dr Aspden's work. ====================================================== http://www.aspden.org/books/Poc/1edpocch9.pdf Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Rowe’s claim seriously and see that he has discovered a way of generating hydrogen from the aether. Whether or not this could be developed into a new source of power depends upon the energy involved in setting up those electrical discharges, but at the very least research confirming his findings will surely be research proving that a real aether of the kind envisaged in this work does exist. Such research could include testing the composition of the hydrogen produced to see if it contains the normal percentage of deuterium. Newly created atomic hydrogen should not be contaminated by the presence of the deuterium isotope. Such a finding would confirm Dr. Rowe’s claim that hydrogen is being produced ab initio rather than being absorbed somehow from the chemical environment of the test apparatus. ====================================================== Another extract bearing on the same topic which ... (as someone who never quite got to grips with the EM part of my engineering degree :-( ), .................................I found rather encouraging: ====================================================== The reason, of course, is that scientists do not recognize the vacuum as a source of energy. They tell us that the vacuum is, in simple words, a mere ‘nothing’, but yet they teach by reference to textbooks which declare that the vacuum has a magnetic permeability expressed as µo of value 4 p 10 -7 henries per metre and a permittivity 1/µoc 2 of 8.854187817x10 -12 farads per metre. How can the vacuum, as a medium devoid of matter, be said to have such curious properties if it is a mere nothing? Consider what we mean by that word ‘permittivity’. It tells us how much energy we can store by setting up a voltage between two metal plates in a vacuum. That energy sits in the vacuum - not in those metal plates! The vacuum has a way of releasing that energy when that voltage is reduced and that mysterious quantity we call `permittivity' governs that action. Note now my point that a magnetic property is also involved owing to that µo term, as is c, the speed of light. Magnetism is basically a dynamic action arising from electric charge in motion and motion implies energy. The vacuum, that mere ‘nothing’, also somehow determines the speed of light c, a factor in the famous energy equation E = Mc 2 , and yet scientists ignore the vacuum as a potential source of energy. ====================================================== Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 13:08:05 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MK7pq8000735; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:07:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MK7m9l000704; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:07:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:07:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:13:32 -0800 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56212 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I'd like to make some general remarks, though I'm not sure they really go anywhere. Playing with fundamental units can be an error prone experience. For example mass and energy are equivalent so E = m ?? but also: E = mc^2 m = mc^2 1=c^2 c=1 3x10^8 m/s = 1 1 second = 3 x 10^8 meters ?? thus time and distance are also equivalent?? It seems to me that playing with units can not provide new physical knowlege. That is because, if it is done validly, the derived new system of physical laws, the new expression of physicality, must be fully isomorphic with the original system. It is a 1-1 mapping of the old system upon the new system preserving all operations. Physical variables are like any other numbers, except they carry their unit baggage with them. They are equally valid members of sets and subsets as any ordinary numbers. The new representation of the physical universe that results from unit mapping must, with certainty, be consistent with all existing experimental data to be valid, or at least as consistent as the original representation. It must necessarily, by the isomorphism, make exactly the same predictions as the old system. Thus new physical information is not provided. The gain to be obtained then must necessarily be in computational ease, in simplified symbology. That is not meant to dismiss such an effort. A new way of expressing things can be a powerful conceptual tool. Sometimes a new way of thinking can not be accomplished or accepted until the notion is expressed in a profoundly simple way. Einstein said after years of working on a unified field theory that he felt he lacked the proper language to deal with the problem. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 13:18:18 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MKI3q8003596; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:18:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MKI1o0003558; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:18:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:18:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041022211709.006ade0c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:17:09 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com, knagel@gis.net From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Cc: info@blazelabs.com Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56213 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:00 pm 22-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >Hey, > >>I doubt it. My approach was totally different to >>Ing.Saviour's and in my case the system, SI or CGS, >>or Imperial for that matter, is totally irrelevant. > >But it does matter, in how you divide and compose >the derived units. As you say, this stuff can be >cut up in any number of ways. Some more meaningful >than others. I generally adhere to the notion that !more! dimensions >are more enlightening than less, It's a point of view 8-) >yet the >'91 version of me (allusion to your earlier post) >seemed enamored enough of the LT system to write >several pages of notes... > >>In fact my derivation led to mass being T/L whereas >>his gave T^3/L^3 - but that difference is merely >>cosmetic. >>I took a longer, less mentally traumatic route to >>show that mass had the dimensions of [T].[L]^-1 > >I look forward to seeing it. I seem to remember somewhere >else running into the notion of momentum being >more fundamental than mass. Well, since mass is [T]/[L] and velocity is [L]/[T] it follows as night follows day that, [T].[L] Momentum = ------- [L].[T] Mmm....Now THAT is interesting - very! 8-) It follows that momentum is a pure number. What's more, since the unit values of L and T are arbitrary it follow that we can choose unit values of T and L so that dimensionless Momentum = 1 The number 1 more fundamental than mass? Yes. I think I'll buy that. ;-) And if you can dredge up from the depths of your memory just where you ran into: "the notion of momentum being more fundamental than mass." I'm sure Ing.Saviour and I would be most appreciative. >>Ing.Saviour has part of the maths on his website. >>When I've OCR'd it I'll put the whole Note on my >>web site for you to read. > >I seem not to have the link anymore... What is it? The URL for Ing.Saviour's website is: http://www.blazelabs.com/ The page which contains a quotation from Synge I gave in N103/87 and part of the maths derivation is: http://www.blazelabs.com/f-u-massnature.asp >Here's my derivation based on the CGS style of a fundamental >definition using the force law. As you may know, the basic >quantities of magnetic and electric charge are derived units >based on the inverse square force laws ( Coulombs law ). > >----------------------------------------------------------- >LT System : Units for the derived quantity of mass >----------------------------------------------------------- >Newton's law has the gravitational attraction >between two masses as > >(1) F = GM^2L^-2 > >with G being a constant having dimensions > >(2) G = M^-1L^3T^-2 > >so that relation (1) can be satisfied. > >The old CGS system used Coulombs laws to >define the basic quantities of magnetic and electric >charge. This stands distinct from the SI system >which uses a velocity ( C ) to tie magnetic >and electric systems together. We'll use >the force law approach below, saving the >SI approach for a separate paper. > >What we want to do is find a new dimension for mass M >so that instead of (2) we can satisfy (1) with > >(3) G = 1 > >We'll call the new thing M prime, to distinguish it >from the old symbol for mass. It can be shown that > >(4) M' = L^3T-2 > >will satisfy the new relationship from (1) > >(5) F = M'^2L^-2 > >as so. > >(6a) M'LT^-2 = M'^2L^-2 >(6b) ML^3T-2 = M'^2 >(6c) L^3T-2 = M' > >-------------------------------------------------------- > >Comments or criticism gladly accepted. Well apart from the Synge quotation regarding the virtue of small vicious circles, I would only add the quotation the Ing.Saviour saw fit to put on his excellent website. =================================================== ..... Thought is difficult and painful. The difficulties and pain are due to confusion. From time to time, with enormous intellectual effect, someone creates a little order - a small spot of light in the dark sea of confusion. At first we are all dazzled by the light because we are used to living in the darkness. But when we regain our senses and examine the light we find it comes from a farthing candle - the candle of common sense. To change the metaphor, the sages chase their own tails through the ages. A little child says 'Gentlemen, you are chasing your own tails.' The sages gradually lose their angular momentum, and, glancing over their shoulders, see what they are pursuing. But most of them cannot believe what they see, and the tail chasing does not die out until a generation has passed..... =================================================== Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 13:28:41 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MKSVlF022971; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:28:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MKSTNt022923; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:28:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:28:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041022212747.006b23cc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:27:47 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56214 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:13 pm 22-10-04 -0800, you wrote: >I'd like to make some general remarks, though I'm not sure they really go >anywhere. > >Playing with fundamental units can be an error prone experience. For >example mass and energy are equivalent so > >E = m ?? > >but also: > >E = mc^2 >m = mc^2 >1=c^2 >c=1 >3x10^8 m/s = 1 >1 second = 3 x 10^8 meters ?? > >thus time and distance are also equivalent?? > >It seems to me that playing with units can not provide new physical >knowledge. That is because, if it is done validly, the derived new system >of physical laws, the new expression of physicality, must be fully >isomorphic with the original system. It is a 1-1 mapping of the old system >upon the new system preserving all operations. Physical variables are like >any other numbers, except they carry their unit baggage with them. They >are equally valid members of sets and subsets as any ordinary numbers. The >new representation of the physical universe that results from unit mapping >must, with certainty, be consistent with all existing experimental data to >be valid, or at least as consistent as the original representation. It >must necessarily, by the isomorphism, make exactly the same predictions as >the old system. Thus new physical information is not provided. The gain >to be obtained then must necessarily be in computational ease, in >simplified symbology. That is not meant to dismiss such an effort. A new >way of expressing things can be a powerful conceptual tool. Sometimes a >new way of thinking can not be accomplished or accepted until the notion is >expressed in a profoundly simple way. Einstein said after years of >working on a unified field theory that he felt he lacked the proper >language to deal with the problem. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner I'll go along with that, Horace. Something I wrote in a previous post bears repeating. --------------------------------------------------------- A small digression. When I was a young Scientific Officer I was having a conversation with Dr Randall Wood on the subject of dimensional analysis. He said, when he was working at NPL. there was a chap who has the knack of solving the most amazingly intractable problems in heat transfer, etc. by using dimensional analysis techniques. I am confident that the reason he was so successful is that dimensional analysis implicitly bypasses the jerry built conceptual variables, like FORCE, etc., of traditional physics. As Clayton remarks in a recent e-mail where he comments on Buchanan's UBIQUITY ======================================== >He observes that "the world is simpler >than it seems" (p72). As you always >said, it is just that we look at it in >the wrong terms. >Nigel ======================================= --------------------------------------------------------- Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 13:58:39 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MKwTq8018258; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:58:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MKwSes018250; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:58:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:58:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1e2.2ce89057.2eaace67@aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:58:15 EDT Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e2.2ce89057.2eaace67_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56215 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_1e2.2ce89057.2eaace67_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/22/2004 11:04:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes: > be achieved using > >very low frequencies, like 1 Hz or less. Unlike pure DC, > this approach > I weight of a transformer goes down with the frequency. That's why they use high frequencies on aircraft. At one hertz transformers would have to be 60 times larger. Motors would have to be 60 times larger. Not a practicable idea. Frank Znidarsic --part1_1e2.2ce89057.2eaace67_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/22/2004 11:04= :07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes:

be achieved using
>very low frequencies, like 1 Hz or less.  Unlike pure DC,
this approach


I weight of a transformer goes down with the frequency.  That's why the= y use high frequencies on aircraft.  At one hertz transformers would ha= ve to be 60 times larger.  Motors would have to be 60 times larger.&nbs= p; Not a practicable idea.

Frank Znidarsic --part1_1e2.2ce89057.2eaace67_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 14:29:29 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MLTLlF007996; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:29:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MLTJGP007974; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:29:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:29:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410522212851100@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "Akira Kawasaki" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 22, 2004 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:28:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d88710db3d5a2a3ecd336a5213ca13d1d5790fad917fc14d6b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.15.108 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56216 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > [Original Message] > From: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 10/22/2004 12:48:43 PM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 22, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 22 Oct 04 Washington, DC 1. PRIVACY: HAS "TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS" BEEN OUTSOURCED? Remember the Pentagon program to create a data base of personal information? It would record our movements, purchases, who we talk to, what we read. It was the nightmare of the computer age http://www.aps.org/WN/WN02/wn122002.cfm . It still is. Killed by Congress http://www.aps.org/WN/WN03/wn012403.cfm , or so we thought, but it was too bad an idea to be allowed to die. It was privatized and moved offshore, out of reach of U.S. regulators. Bahamas-based Global Information Group Ltd. offers such products as the "Terrorist Risk Identity Assessment." But is it accurate? Hey, war is not pretty; there are always civilian casualties. 2. MISSILE DEFENSE: UNTESTED SYSTEM MEETS NON-EXISTENT THREAT. A full-color, full-page ad by Boeing in the Washington Post showed an interceptor missile being lowered into a silo in Fort Greely, Alaska. "Countering today's ballistic missile threat..." the ad begins. The policy of "peremptory strikes" to deal with weapons of mass destruction apparently applies only to countries that don't have any. A New York Times editorial today says that Iran and North Korea "have been emboldened by the sorry plight of the US and its coalition partners in Iraq." North Korea, despite its ambitions, has neither a long range missile nor a warhead at this time. "Boeing is committed to this vital program and the promise of a safer America," the ad concludes. WN assures readers that with missiles in the Ft. Greely silos we are safe from a North Korean nuclear missile attack. 3. THE EXCALIBUR PRIZE: DISTINGUISHED SELECTION PANEL IS NAMED. Ranging from a hand-held worm-hole projector that zaps opponents to the other side of the galaxy, to an exotic payload delivery system, about which little is known except a mysterious acronym ups. nominations for a weapon based on the most speculative physics have been pouring in since last week's announcement, The deadline for nominations is Thursday, Oct 28. A diverse group of experts, familiar to regular readers of What's New, has agreed to assist in the final selection: Puff Panegyric, Pentagon News Office General Persiflage Missile Defense Agency Elie Mosinari Congressional Budget Expert Professor Basilisk Renowned Ornithologist Ann Thropojinic Veteran Astronaut Hi Rodomontade NASA Scheduler 4. POLITICAL SCIENCE: SCIENTISTS ARE MORE PARTISAN THIS TIME. The New York Times wrote about it Tuesday, so I guess it's fair game. I got an e-mail this week from a journalist in the UK, who begged me to give him the name of a Bush-Republican scientist he could interview. I did, but it wasn't easy. THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 16:18:23 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9MNIGlF005407; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:18:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9MNIEbQ005398; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:18:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:18:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:23:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56217 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:58 PM 10/22/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >> be achieved using >> >very low frequencies, like 1 Hz or less. Unlike pure DC, >> this approach >> > >I weight of a transformer goes down with the frequency. That's why they use >high frequencies on aircraft. At one hertz transformers would have to be 60 >times larger. Motors would have to be 60 times larger. Not a practicable >idea. A motor being 60 times larger is not necessarily a problem. It depends on the details of the economics. Like I said, the idea applies to long line bulk delivery, like the steady baselilne power delivery from nuclear plants. Steel is cheap. Copper is cheap. The cost of a couple 1 Hz motors driving 60 Hz generators at the end of the line is not going to make a 2000 mile transmission line infeasible. It seems to me the problem needing the most attention is underground cable cost, finding a cheap effective means of insulating with low capacitive losses. This has been achieved in the past using insulating gasses. DC circumvents this problem entirely, but requires a semiconductor power conversion at the terminal end. For reliability purposes such facilities have to be redundant too. It is not so clear to me the comparative economics of a couple 1 Hz motors vs a silicon solution. I would expect at some point the silicon solution would be cheaper. I would also expect a low Hz transmission line to be easily convertable to a DC line without major loss of capital investment in the line. The exciting question to me is: is it economically and politically possible to implement something today, without waiting for complex technology development or new science, by simply engineering the problem? I think the answer is yes. I think it is possible to locate large energy sources in a few locations and distribute the power without blighting the country with towers and power lines and eminent domain lawsuits and issues, and environmental problems. With sufficient government emphasis, it could be achieved in a decade. I would also note that delivering power in electric form is essential to the economy. Hydrogen pipelines, like gas pipelines, carry some major risks. Since their engineering and implementation would be fairly new, and hydrogen is more difficult to manage, I would assume hydrogen risks to be higher than those for natural gas, both in tranmission and delivery. Affordable fuel cell vehicles are pobably at least a decade away. The economics of a 10 MW or 100 MW fuel cell vs a 10 MW or 100 MW 1 Hz motor-generator would be interesting to develop. It has often bothered me that, though hydrogen is a good ulitmate solution, a natural gas solution might be the best that can be delivered in the time needed. I takes very little time to convert vehicles to natural gas. If one has a plentiful source of hydrogen then it doesn't take much to make that hydrogen into natural gas and get energy from the process too. All interesting issues I think. The problem is getting the ball rolling. There is no irresistable force to move the immovable ball. Maybe all it takes is a means to assure those in the US in the energy business that (a) they won't be economically damaged by the changes and (b) there is an opportunity to make a lot of money. Everybody in the US should benefit if the cost of energy drops dramatically and reliance on foreign sources is eliminated. The economy should benefit enormously. It might even benefit the economic during the activity to make it happen. The problem of government is spreading and managing the economic load to make it happen. Ten years is very ambitious, but considering we just threw 20 years away, why worry about doing something in just another 10 years? SOMETHING needs to be done now. It is preferable to do something now that can adapt to expected future technological developments, rather than to continue waiting on pie in the sky. Renwable development and new energy science is desirable, and I put forth a detailed plane for that. However, a 20 to 40 year timeline is not good enough. More needs to be accomplished sooner. We need a comprehensive four pronged energy war plan: (1) available known resources, (2) conservation, (3) renewables, and (4) new energy science. However, we can't wait for a comprehensive plan to be debated ad infinitem. There needs to be an immediate way to get mobilized while getting new recruits into basic training. It's time for government to focus heavily on energy in addition to terror, and I suspect that is well recognized. The link between the two is indisputable. That's all my opinion anyway. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 19:20:53 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9N2KklF027691; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:20:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9N2Kirq027681; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:20:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:20:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003101c4b8a6$e2cc53a0$bc017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Freedom of the randomness #2 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:20:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4B87C.F96E2FE0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56218 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4B87C.F96E2FE0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4B87C.F96FB680" ------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4B87C.F96FB680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankUsing mechanical systems for mixing chemicals in liquids is = actually in it's infancy. Heffner's thoughts on a simple piping network = for distributing chemical has been a standard practice in our industry. = The need for reducing the amount of chemical product used has led us = toward the study of vortexes. Presently, we create a vortex by inducing = the flow towards the rotating member (" rather than use a propeller that pushes"). The vortex in turn "spins" off a host of mini vortexes depending on the = shape of the rotating member (and the shroud around the member). The = minis actually gain energy from the primary vortex. By using segmented = parabolic shaped cavities in lieu of external propeller blade, we are = able to use the concentrating and sonic features of parabolic segments = to achieve the velocity shear ( 110f/p/s) necessary to "slice and = hammer" the chemical into the water. From that point , we discharge the = mix past the serrated edges of the shroud which produce a host of "mini = vortexes" capable of traveling outward 8 feet radially. In effect , we = can bounce a mini vortex off the wall of a channel 16 feet wide from a = center mounted inductor pump. The chemical concentrated within the mini = vortex disburses the chemical better than "diffuser tubes". By shrouding = the member in a "cap" results in cavitation rapidly destroying the = member. Our interests are in further enhancing the mechanical properties of the = vortex by several means including increasing the rotational speed above = 3450 rpm, using adjustable frequency sound generators, light sources = including laser and certain activating chemicals to create a " = reaction". Lotsa work, lotsa empirical data gained for a base. Hope keeps telling us we are closer to reaching the potential of the = vortex theme. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4B87C.F96FB680 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Using mechanical systems for mixing chemicals in liquids is = actually in=20 it's infancy. Heffner's thoughts on a simple piping network for = distributing=20 chemical has been a standard practice in our industry. The need for = reducing the=20 amount of chemical product used has led us toward the study of vortexes. = Presently, we create a vortex by inducing the flow towards the rotating=20 member
(" rather than use a propeller that pushes").

The vortex in turn "spins" off a host of mini vortexes = depending=20 on the shape of the rotating member (and the shroud around the member). = The=20 minis actually gain energy from the primary vortex. By using = segmented=20 parabolic shaped cavities in lieu of external propeller blade, we are = able to=20 use the concentrating and sonic features of parabolic segments to = achieve the=20 velocity shear ( 110f/p/s) necessary to "slice and hammer" the chemical = into the=20 water. From that point , we discharge the mix past the serrated edges of = the=20 shroud which produce a host of "mini vortexes" capable of traveling = outward=20 8 feet radially. In effect , we can bounce a mini vortex off the wall of = a=20 channel 16 feet wide from a center mounted inductor pump. The = chemical =20 concentrated within the mini vortex disburses the chemical better than = "diffuser=20 tubes". By shrouding the member in a "cap" results in cavitation rapidly = destroying the member.
 
Our interests are in further enhancing the mechanical properties of = the=20 vortex by several means including increasing the rotational speed above = 3450=20 rpm, using adjustable frequency sound generators, light sources = including laser=20 and certain activating chemicals to create a " reaction". Lotsa work, = lotsa=20 empirical data gained for a base.
Hope keeps telling us we are closer to reaching the potential of = the vortex=20 theme.
 
Richard
------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4B87C.F96FB680-- ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4B87C.F96E2FE0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002c01c4b8a6$e23c96c0$bc017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4B87C.F96E2FE0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 22 21:41:57 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9N4fnxs003886; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:41:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9N4fRVW003823; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:41:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:41:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:47:12 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness #2 Resent-Message-ID: <93uJPC.A.r7.2DeeBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56219 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:20 PM 10/22/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >BlankUsing mechanical systems for mixing chemicals in liquids is actually >in it's infancy. Heffner's thoughts on a simple piping network for >distributing chemical has been a standard practice in our industry. Interesting. Do you have any references to a spinning tube array technology? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 01:19:49 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9N8JgDC016592; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:19:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9N8JeEF016575; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:19:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:19:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041023091856.006ab7d8@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:18:56 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56220 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:23 pm 22-10-04 -0800, you wrote: >............. Hydrogen pipelines, like gas pipelines, carry some major >risks. Since their engineering and implementation would be fairly new, and >hydrogen is more difficult to manage, I would assume hydrogen risks to be >higher than those for natural gas, both in transmission and delivery. When I was a boy my older brother used to make model airships out of balsa wood and tissue paper. He filled them with "coal gas" from the gas stove and they flew around the kitchen OK so I presume coal gas must contain a lot of hydrogen. A search on the web gives the following data on "coal gas". ================================================================== A typical composition of town gas would be about 51% hydrogen, 15% carbon monoxide, 21% methane, 10% carbon dioxide and nitrogen, ================================================================== They seemed to be able to handle toxic coal gas without killing too many people* in those early days of the 20th century. I can't see why handling a gas which is 100% hydrogen would be much of a problem in the 21st century. Even in the most famous accident involving hydrogen (the Hindenburg disaster) two thirds of the nearly one hundred people on board escaped. Cheers Grimer * apart from those distraught housewives who deliberately put their head in the gas oven. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 02:32:27 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9N9WLDC031530; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:32:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9N9WJwl031506; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:32:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:32:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:38:04 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56221 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:18 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: >At 03:23 pm 22-10-04 -0800, you wrote: > >>............. Hydrogen pipelines, like gas pipelines, carry some major >>risks. Since their engineering and implementation would be fairly new, and >>hydrogen is more difficult to manage, I would assume hydrogen risks to be >>higher than those for natural gas, both in transmission and delivery. > >When I was a boy my older brother used to make model airships out of balsa >wood and tissue paper. He filled them with "coal gas" from the gas stove and >they flew around the kitchen OK so I presume coal gas must contain a lot of >hydrogen. A search on the web gives the following data on "coal gas". > > ================================================================== > A typical composition of town gas would be about 51% hydrogen, > 15% carbon monoxide, 21% methane, 10% carbon dioxide and nitrogen, > ================================================================== > >They seemed to be able to handle toxic coal gas without killing too many >people* >in those early days of the 20th century. I can't see why handling a gas >which is >100% hydrogen would be much of a problem in the 21st century. Even in the most >famous accident involving hydrogen (the Hindenburg disaster) two thirds of the >nearly one hundred people on board escaped. > >Cheers > >Grimer > * apart from those distraught housewives who > deliberately put their head in the gas oven. Yes, and I've seen lots of support for limited exposure to explosion when filling tanks and in accidents, etc. However, I would still expect transmission lines to have some surprises due to hydrogen embrittlement. This would especially be a problem for the gas tubines which would be hydrogen fueled and for the compressor blades used to push hydrogen upstream in the pipeline. High pressure valves, bearings, seals and lubricants would have to be tested long term, etc. In addition, a lot of engineering related to operations would have to be done, like modelling linepack, supercompressibility effects, jet engine performance, storage reservoir performance, and other parameters used in gas transmission simulations and operating models currently. Transmisson lines are considerably different from distibution systems, and a lot more dangerous. Broken natural gas transmission lines can and have wiped out very large areas by explosion. Hydrogen transmission lines might be able to do the same thing. The problem is doing the engineering to find out what kind of maintenance and operating procedures must be used to prevent it. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 02:48:49 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9N9miDC003092; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:48:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9N9mhWt003072; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:48:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:48:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:54:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56222 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:18 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: >I can't see why handling a gas which is >100% hydrogen would be much of a problem in the 21st century. Even in the most >famous accident involving hydrogen (the Hindenburg disaster) two thirds of the >nearly one hundred people on board escaped. I forgot to address the Hindenburg analogy. The Hindenburg was a gas bag filled to about atmospheric pressure. It ignited before dumping its contents, not after. When that happens you essentially have a flare. If a big transmission line breaks, it is like opening the valve on a 600-1000 psi gas bottle 30" in diameter and 5 miles or more long. It tends to mix its contents with air. If it does not ignite right away then you get a big explosion. Hydrogen is explosive at a wider range of mixtures than natural gas. My memory is not good, but a gas transmission line broke in a valley in West Virginia or Pennsylvania back in the 1930's I think. I may have the facts a bit wrong but the basic truth is there. It destroyed several square miles of the valley. Fortunately the valley wasn't densely populated. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 03:55:13 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NAtADC017303; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 03:55:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NAt4s8017262; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 03:55:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 03:55:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041023115420.0069a0cc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:20 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56223 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:38 am 23-10-04 -0800, you wrote: >At 1:18 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: >>At 03:23 pm 22-10-04 -0800, you wrote: >> >>>............. Hydrogen pipelines, like gas pipelines, carry some major >>>risks. Since their engineering and implementation would be fairly new, and >>>hydrogen is more difficult to manage, I would assume hydrogen risks to be >>>higher than those for natural gas, both in transmission and delivery. >> >>When I was a boy my older brother used to make model airships out of balsa >>wood and tissue paper. He filled them with "coal gas" from the gas stove and >>they flew around the kitchen OK so I presume coal gas must contain a lot of >>hydrogen. A search on the web gives the following data on "coal gas". >> >> ================================================================== >> A typical composition of town gas would be about 51% hydrogen, >> 15% carbon monoxide, 21% methane, 10% carbon dioxide and nitrogen, >> ================================================================== >> >>They seemed to be able to handle toxic coal gas without killing too many >>people* >>in those early days of the 20th century. I can't see why handling a gas >>which is >>100% hydrogen would be much of a problem in the 21st century. Even in the most >>famous accident involving hydrogen (the Hindenburg disaster) two thirds of the >>nearly one hundred people on board escaped. >> >>Cheers >> >>Grimer >> * apart from those distraught housewives who >> deliberately put their head in the gas oven. > > >Yes, and I've seen lots of support for limited exposure to explosion when >filling tanks and in accidents, etc. However, I would still expect >transmission lines to have some surprises due to hydrogen embrittlement. When they dug up my road to replace the old gas pipes they used what looked like a yellow plastic pipe. Would that kind of pipe suffer from hydrogen embrittlement? Did the metal gas pipes of the old town gas transmission system suffer from hydrogen embrittlement. Mind you, in those days they probably wouldn't have known about hydrogen embrittlement anyway. ;-) When ignorance is bliss....... >This would especially be a problem for the gas turbines which would be >hydrogen fueled and for the compressor blades used to push hydrogen >upstream in the pipeline. Would it be a problem for carbon-fibre blades? >High pressure valves, bearings, seals and >lubricants would have to be tested long term, etc. > >In addition, a lot of engineering related to operations would have to be >done, like modeling linepack, supercompressibility effects, jet engine >performance, storage reservoir performance, and other parameters used in >gas transmission simulations and operating models currently. Transmission >lines are considerably different from distribution systems, and a lot more >dangerous. Broken natural gas transmission lines can and have wiped out >very large areas by explosion. I know that there was one famous case in Russia. There must have been others presumably. How bad were they? I suppose I can google to find out. ============================================================== 12. The impacts of pipeline accidents are usually only environmental, i.e. release of hydrocarbon liquid to surface and groundwater and release of gas to the atmosphere. There have been no recorded fatal accidents involving inhabitants following gas releases from transmission pipelines over the period 1970-2000 in those countries included in the EGIG database (all within Western Europe). However, fatal incidents can certainly occur, as illustrated horrendously by an accident near Ufa, Russia on 4 th June 1989, when two trains, each carrying more than 500 passengers, passed each other within a cloud of natural gas arising a pipeline leak (see Table 1). The gas exploded and most of the passengers in one train were killed outright; hundreds of passengers in the other (many of them children) suffered severe burns. ============================================================== That's from a United Nations Economic Commission for Europe document. I know Yanks aren't keen on the UN - or Europe for that matter - but I would think that's pretty reliable info, wouldn't you Horace? ;-) >Hydrogen transmission lines might be able >to do the same thing. Hydrogen does have the advantage over methane, though, that it is lighter than air. Presumably that is why so many Hindenburg passengers survived. If the gas had been heavier than air they would all have been roasted. Mind you - the airship would have needed a good anti-grav engine or it would never have got off the ground. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 04:21:20 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NBL5iH008853; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:21:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NBL0ox008799; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:21:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:21:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041023122012.006965d0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:20:12 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56224 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:54 am 23-10-04 -0800, you wrote: >At 1:18 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: >>I can't see why handling a gas which is >>100% hydrogen would be much of a problem in the 21st century. Even in the most >>famous accident involving hydrogen (the Hindenburg disaster) two thirds of the >>nearly one hundred people on board escaped. > > >I forgot to address the Hindenburg analogy. The Hindenburg was a gas bag >filled to about atmospheric pressure. It ignited before dumping its >contents, not after. When that happens you essentially have a flare. If a >big transmission line breaks, it is like opening the valve on a 600-1000 >psi gas bottle 30" in diameter and 5 miles or more long. It tends to mix >its contents with air. If it does not ignite right away then you get a big >explosion. Hydrogen is explosive at a wider range of mixtures than natural >gas. My memory is not good, but a gas transmission line broke in a valley >in West Virginia or Pennsylvania back in the 1930's I think. I may have >the facts a bit wrong but the basic truth is there. It destroyed several >square miles of the valley. Fortunately the valley wasn't densely >populated. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner The "basic truth" is that fatalities rarely happen as even your dimly remembered example confirms. Surely, far more people must be killed in domestic leaks than in major transmission line failures. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 05:43:32 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NChODC010296; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:43:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NChM11010277; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:43:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:43:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410623114220300@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Beta Minus Decay, Antineutrinos & Electronium Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:42:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94018663d21cd1628197f6fbc9b6bfd43a5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.56 Resent-Message-ID: <5fCg-.A.hgC.pHleBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56225 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:49:22 I wrote about the antineutrino (*v) : > > 20 Calcium 40 + (*v) -----> 19 Potassium 40 + (e+) > > The radioactive 19 Potassium 40 with a half-life of 1.26 billion years beta > minus decays back to 20 Calcium 40 or decays by (e+ and neutrino) emission or Electron Capture > to Stable 18 Argon 40. > OTOH, (*v) + 19 Potassium 40 ---> 18 Argon 40 too. Wouldn't this mess up Potassium-Argon Dating, thus making the earth appear older, Richard? :-) Antineutrinos ARE REAL: http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/39/3/13 "KamLAND: neutrinos from heaven and Earth " "The Japanese Kamiokande underground detector played a leading role in the study of neutrinos produced via cosmic rays and also helped to pioneer the subject of neutrino astronomy. With Kamiokande now having given way to Superkamiokande, the Kamioka mine becomes the scene of a new neutrino project." http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/43/2/5 "KamLAND detects electron antineutrinos through the inverse beta-decay process, in which an electron antineutrino interacts with a proton to create a positron and a neutron. For data collected on 145.1 days between March and October 2002, the experiment recorded 54 electron antineutrino events in the energy range 1-10 MeV, as opposed to around 86 events predicted by the Standard Model, assuming that no oscillations occur. More precisely, the ratio of the number of observed inverse beta-decay events to the expected number (i.e. without disappearance) was found to be 0.611 ± 0.085 (stat) ± 0.041 (syst), for antineutrino energies greater than 3.4 MeV. " "The first results from six months of data-taking by the KamLAND experiment in Japan indicate that electron antineutrinos from distant nuclear reactors are "disappearing" on their way to the detector. This is the first observation of such a disappearance in a reactor-based experiment. The results support evidence from solar neutrino experiments for neutrino oscillations, in which the electron neutrinos change into another " You might ask. "How does Electronium (*e-) fit into this?" Quite simply; any nuclear process that produces a Positron (e+) can produce the Electronium (*e-) particle by forming "positronium" (known to exist for brief periods with the electron it could annihilate with) and then combine with a second atomic electron, thus maintaining charge balance. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

 
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:49:22  I wrote about the antineutrino (*v) :
>
> 20 Calcium 40 + (*v) ----->  19 Potassium 40 + (e+) 
>
> The radioactive 19 Potassium 40 with a half-life of 1.26 billion years beta
> minus decays back to 20 Calcium 40 or decays by (e+ and neutrino) emission or Electron Capture
> to Stable 18 Argon 40.
>
OTOH, (*v) + 19 Potassium 40 ---> 18 Argon 40 too.
 
Wouldn't this mess up Potassium-Argon Dating, thus making the earth appear older, Richard?   :-)
 
Antineutrinos ARE REAL: 
 
 
"KamLAND: neutrinos from heaven and Earth "

"The Japanese Kamiokande underground detector played a leading role in the study of neutrinos produced via cosmic rays and also helped to pioneer the subject of neutrino astronomy. With Kamiokande now having given way to Superkamiokande, the Kamioka mine becomes the scene of a new neutrino project."

 
 
 "KamLAND detects electron antineutrinos through the inverse beta-decay process, in which an electron antineutrino interacts with a proton to create a positron and a neutron. For data collected on 145.1 days between March and October 2002, the experiment recorded 54 electron antineutrino events in the energy range 1-10 MeV, as opposed to around 86 events predicted by the Standard Model, assuming that no oscillations occur. More precisely, the ratio of the number of observed inverse beta-decay events to the expected number (i.e. without disappearance) was found to be 0.611 ± 0.085 (stat) ± 0.041 (syst), for antineutrino energies greater than 3.4 MeV. "
 
"The first results from six months of data-taking by the KamLAND experiment in Japan indicate that electron antineutrinos from distant nuclear reactors are "disappearing" on their way to the detector. This is the first observation of such a disappearance in a reactor-based experiment. The results support evidence from solar neutrino experiments for neutrino oscillations, in which the electron neutrinos change into another "
 
You might ask. "How does Electronium (*e-) fit into this?"
 
Quite simply; any nuclear process that produces a Positron (e+) can produce the Electronium (*e-) particle
by forming "positronium" (known to exist for brief periods with the electron it could annihilate with) and then
combine with a second atomic electron, thus maintaining charge balance.
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 08:17:48 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NFHeiH004533; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:17:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NFHcX6004527; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:17:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:17:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001301c4b913$6bccfd50$40027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: References: Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness #2 Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:17:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56226 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My post did not cover the complexity of a " spinning tube array", I only thought about diffusion piping . I am aware that one must have his thinking cap firmly in place when posting in the vortex group because some can think light years faster than myself... which is what makes it interesting. I did spend some time thinking about Heffner's idea of a of a "spinning tube" but laid it aside .. Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" To: Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 11:47 PM Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness #2 > At 9:20 PM 10/22/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >>BlankUsing mechanical systems for mixing chemicals in liquids is actually >>in it's infancy. Heffner's thoughts on a simple piping network for >>distributing chemical has been a standard practice in our industry. > > Interesting. Do you have any references to a spinning tube array > technology? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 09:22:34 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NGMOiH022993; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:22:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NGMN5F022976; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:22:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:22:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410623152121110@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Helium-Burning Stars Etc. Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:21:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940cd04e99386291f93b2605908687eef21350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.249 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56227 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII While I'm on the subject. :-) If an Electronium (*e-) particle goes to a fractional orbit in Helium, the coulomb repulsive force (F) drops appreciably: F = Z1*Z2* kq^2/r^2 Hence the Helium (Z = 2) charge can drop to zero if it has two "low orbit" (*e-) particles in it. Same game for the burning of the heavier elements as "the stars get hotter, i.e. more Electronium (*e-) is produced in them. Vis, the "Carbon-Nitrogen" Cycle etc. Helium burning in CF, possible ? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

 
While I'm on the subject.  :-)
 
If an Electronium (*e-) particle goes to a fractional orbit in Helium, the
coulomb repulsive force (F) drops appreciably:
 
F = Z1*Z2* kq^2/r^2
 
Hence the Helium (Z = 2) charge can drop to zero if it has two "low orbit" (*e-) particles in it.
 
Same game for the burning of the heavier elements as "the stars get hotter, i.e. more
Electronium (*e-) is produced in them.
 
Vis,  the "Carbon-Nitrogen" Cycle etc.
 
Helium burning in CF, possible ?
 
Frederick
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 09:32:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NGWdDC002074; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:32:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NGWbWV002056; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:32:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:32:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:38:20 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56228 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:54 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: [snip] >When they dug up my road to replace the old gas pipes they used what >looked like a yellow plastic pipe. Would that kind of pipe suffer from >hydrogen embrittlement? That kind of pipe I think is used only in distribution systems. >Did the metal gas pipes of the old town gas >transmission system suffer from hydrogen embrittlement. Probably did, but they were not apparently operated at transmission system pressure. >Mind you, in >those days they probably wouldn't have known about hydrogen >embrittlement anyway. ;-) When ignorance is bliss....... It just does not sound to me like there was a transmission system involved. >Would it be a problem for carbon-fibre blades? Who knows? The engineering tests need to be made. However, just off the top of my head, I would be concerned about carbon blade ablation in a hydrogen atmosphere. Turbine blades run hot, so I would expect hydrocarbon formation. > >I know that there was one famous case in Russia. There must have been >others presumably. How bad were they? The one I heard about killed most everyone in the valley at the time (I think less than 200). The explosion caused a huge overpressure. A lot of gas was dumped before it was ignighted. If the population had been a million then it would have killed close to a million. However, if the population had been a million it probably would have ignighted sooner, so would have been reduced in severity. Hydrogen, being lighter, might be capable of not reaching an ignition source for a long time, unless there happened to be one very close by. A big methane transmission dump often self-ignites due to electrostatic sparks being generated, so that probably helps a lot. Don't know if hydrogen does the same, but my guess is it does. >Hydrogen does have the advantage over methane, though, that it is >lighter than air. Presumably that is why so many Hindenburg passengers >survived. If the gas had been heavier than air they would all have been >roasted. Mind you - the airship would have needed a good anti-grav >engine or it would never have got off the ground. Methane is lighter than air also, but just barely. The lightness of hydrogen should help it mix better and faster in air, given the time before ignition. At 4:20 AM 10/23/4, Grimer wrote: >The "basic truth" is that fatalities rarely happen as even your dimly >remembered example confirms. Surely, far more people must be killed in >domestic leaks than in major transmission line failures. Well yes ... these days. But gas engineering skills were developed over many years. Hydrogen would be a new ball game. That is my point. You often don't know what you don't know until you find out by trial and error. I must admit that explosion danger is probably the least likely of the engineering worries. Much more likely problems are maintaining up time, maintaining compressor stations economically, and learning how to operate transmission lines safely and economically. Transmission line operation involves a lot of expertise and accurate computer models. Corrosion control is a big issue for pipeline maintenance, and hydrogen only complicates that too. It would be embarrasing to spend a few billion on a hydrogen pipeline only to have to shut it down for a year or more to develop some new kind of lubricant, or pipe, or to figure out why all the welds have gone bad. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 09:44:28 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NGiMDC005577; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NGiK4Q005558; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410623154318940@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Helium-Burning Stars Etc. Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:43:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940bd55842ae474ac7436e0b7dc4e2068c0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.80 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56229 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII More about Stellar Burning. http://www.er.doe.gov/production/henp/np/origins.html "Stars like our sun are essentially very large fusion reactors where hydrogen nuclei are fused into helium. The reactions usually occur at energies much too low, and temperatures much too high, to be studied in the laboratory. Therefore nuclear physicists have developed techniques for measuring reaction rates down to the lowest possible energies, usually at smaller university-based accelerators, and then extrapolating these data down to stellar energies. In our sun, the most uncertain reaction rate is that for fusing hydrogen with Be-7 to form B-8. Several new techniques are being developed that should substantially reduce the uncertainty in this rate. A crucial test of our theories of stellar energy generation is provided by the neutrinosemitted in the fusion process. These neutrinos are the only particles that can pass directly from the center of the sun to the earth where they are detected as described below. " "In later stages of stellar evolution, when the hydrogen fuel is exhausted, many stars fuse helium to form carbon, and then helium and carbon to form oxygen. The helium plus carbon fusion rate determines the relative amounts of carbon and oxygen in massive stars, which has a profound effect on the heavier nuclei produced when such stars explode as supernovas. Despite heroic efforts, the helium plus carbon fusion rate is still very poorly known. Improving our understanding of this process is one of the key challenges in nuclear astrophysics. " Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

More about Stellar Burning.
 
 

"Stars like our sun are essentially very large fusion reactors where hydrogen nuclei are fused into helium. The reactions usually occur at energies much too low, and temperatures much too high, to be studied in the laboratory. Therefore nuclear physicists have developed techniques for measuring reaction rates down to the lowest possible energies, usually at smaller university-based accelerators, and then extrapolating these data down to stellar energies. In our sun, the most uncertain reaction rate is that for fusing hydrogen with Be-7 to form B-8. Several new techniques are being developed that should substantially reduce the uncertainty in this rate. A crucial test of our theories of stellar energy generation is provided by the neutrinosemitted in the fusion process. These neutrinos are the only particles that can pass directly from the center of the sun to the earth where they are detected as described below. "

"In later stages of stellar evolution, when the hydrogen fuel is exhausted, many stars fuse helium to form carbon, and then helium and carbon to form oxygen. The helium plus carbon fusion rate determines the relative amounts of carbon and oxygen in massive stars, which has a profound effect on the heavier nuclei produced when such stars explode as supernovas. Despite heroic efforts, the helium plus carbon fusion rate is still very poorly known. Improving our understanding of this process is one of the key challenges in nuclear astrophysics. "

 

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 09:45:12 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NGiuiH032766; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NGisMU032736; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:44:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041023174405.006be720@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:44:05 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Cc: rowepaul@gis.net Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56230 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Having divined the dimensions of momentum in terms of length and time, the next job is to see what light this finding can cast on the dimensions of energy. In my Note No.103/87 I wrote, ==================================================== However, there is an important difference between the hierarchical forms of the two conservation laws. Whereas the momentum equation is dimensionless, the energy equation is not. This hierarchical hiatus between the traditional anthropocentric concepts of energy and momentum has important physical implications but it is not appropriate to elucidate these in this note. ==================================================== It wasn't appropriate because at the time I only had the dimmest of notions how to go about it. However, Saviour............ ("Despite the appellation, he is not an eccentric nut-case - perhaps closer to genius", as Jones puts it) ............................has provided the inspiration to tackle the problem successfully. To get you in the right mood, let's consider the following scenario. Lois and Clark are watching a body move from left to right at a constant velocity. Lois says, I see that the body has the property of [M].[L]/[T] momentum. Clark says, indeed it has. Not only that but it also has the property of [M].[L]/[T].[L]/[T] kinetic energy. Lois is very puzzled. She can't possibly figure out where Clark gets his second velocity from. Surely Clark must be seeing the same picture of the moving body as she is. Then it slowly dawns on her. Clark Kent must be Superman. She always had her suspicions. He's using his X-ray vision to penetrate the outside of the body and he can see things moving about within. Let's now substitute the dimensions of [T]/[L] for [M] and see what things look like. [T] [L][L] [energy] = --- . ------ [L] [T][T] That doesn't look right. It's all unbalanced. It's not hierarchically symmetrical. Remembering the minimalist Mendeleev table we can put some brackets in to balance things up. [-].[T] [L].[L] [energy] = ------- . ------- [-].[L] [T].[T] Now, I ask you 8-) , what can possibly be missing from those brackets. It's obvious isn't it. That's right, T and L. Which means, Vortexians, that somewhere along the line someone has cocked up. ;-) The dimensions of M in equation for kinetic energy are [T]^2/[L]^2 So now we have filled in the missing gap between Grimer mass ([T]/[L]) and Saviour mass ([T]^3/[L]^3) with Cockup mass ([T]^2/[L]^2) and [T].[T] [L].[L] [energy] = ------- . ------- [L].[L] [T].[T] So how did such a blooper come about. Simone Weil put her finger on the root cause in an unfinished essay written in 1941 entitled, "La Science et nous". I've posted it before on Vortex but it bears repeating. 8-) ===================================== What is disastrous is not the rejection of classical science but the way it has been rejected. It is wrongly believed it could progress indefinitely and it ran into a dead end about the year 1900; but scientists failed to stop at the same time in order to contemplate and reflect upon the barrier, they did not try to describe it and define it and, having taken it into account, to draw some general conclusion from it; instead they rushed violently past it, leaving classical science behind them. And why should we be surprised at this? For are they not paid to forge continually ahead? Nobody advances in his career, or reputation, or gets a Nobel prize, by standing still. To cease voluntarily from forging ahead, any brilliantly gifted scientist would need to be a saint or a hero, and why should he be a saint or a hero? With rare exceptions there are none to be found among the members of other professions. So the scientists forged ahead without revising anything, because any revision would have seemed a retrogression; they merely made an addition. ======================================== Quite so. When they found that mass was not a measure of matter but merely a property of matter like temperature, or colour, or weight, they didn't stop to ask themselves, "What are the implications of this discovery?" The definition of conventional mass is based on linear motion, But Kinetic Energy involves the internal motions within a body, closed path motions in other words. Before they knew that mass could be transmuted into motion they had reason not to realise that mass and matter were not indissolubly (cf. the bloodyarchitect joke in a previous post.) Now as you might imagine, when the waves of cognitive difference have finally died down, all this will have some pretty interesting consequences. There would seem to be a Jacob's ladder of scale for motion. I would guess that electric field flow comes below mass and magnetic field flow comes below electric. Therefore the Rowe effect seems eminently plausible to me. I wonder which country will be the first to develop the Rowe process. Not mine, that's for sure. Probably all those eager beavers who built the Pacific end of the American railway. Aspden has said of the Rowe process ===================================================== In conclusion, I feel obliged to draw attention to the fact that the generation of hydrogen from the aether, if pursued on a large scale, could, in the long term, be destructive of life on Earth because our oxygen supply is limited and by creating water as we burn up our atmospheric oxygen resource we merely add a few metres to the levels of our oceans to leave us with only nitrogen to breathe. Some other energy resource is needed and that brings me to our next and final topic of discussion. ====================================================== but I can't see why it would be any worse than burning fossil fuels. Isn't oxygen buffered in some way or other. I was musing on last night the way things come in fours. Four horsemen of the Apocalypse Empedocles/Aristotle's four elements: earth, air, fire and water. ... I rather go for that one. A good symbolic tool. And of course, one mustn't forget, ============================ Matthew, Mark, Luke and John Guard the bed that I lie on: Four corners to my bed Four angels round my head, One to watch and one to pray And two to bear my soul away. ============================ Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 09:59:23 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NGxDDC008964; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:59:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NGxCAk008950; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:59:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:59:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:04:59 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Freedom of the randomness #2 Resent-Message-ID: <60xWx.A.yLC.g3oeBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56231 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:17 AM 10/23/4, RC Macaulay wrote: >My post did not cover the complexity of a " spinning tube array", I only >thought about diffusion piping . I am aware that one must have his thinking >cap firmly in place when posting in the vortex group because some can think >light years faster than myself... which is what makes it interesting. I did >spend some time thinking about Heffner's idea of a of a "spinning tube" but >laid it aside .. Richard The reason I suggested using spinning tubes is that I was impressed with how effective even a tiny spinning tube can be to achieve mixing in a calorimeter. It is quite amazing the amount of effect you get for the energy used. The effect is large even without blades or turbulence producing roughness, or chevrons etc., on the tube surface. The use of a long tube can also be effective in establishing a stable vortex. The large surface area of a long tube can help avoid cavitation problems too. Another effect that may be of interest: two close-together counter rotating tubes can exert a pumping action on the effluent if the area between them, where the rotation direction of both tubes is upstream, is shielded from the upstream effluent by a barrier. This kind of two-tube counter-rotating assembly can be repeated across the effluent channel to pump the effluent. The action is kind of like a gear-pump, but without close tolerances or even gear teeth, or a need for lock-step rotation. Might be useful for pumping concrete, etc. too. Just some more ideas for the grist mill ... Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 11:31:47 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9NIVdDC000798; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:31:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9NIVcc5000771; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:31:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:31:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: "Vortex" Subject: Gravity Probe B scooped! Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 15:01:02 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56232 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi All. Tail chasing, you say? Well I'll cop to that, if not my own than others more pleasing. On another subject dear to my heart, Gravito-Kinetic theory gets a boost with this... http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041018/full/041018-11.html Still waiting for the B probe results, should prove interesting. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 17:13:56 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O0Dqj7024998; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:13:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O0DlRZ024965; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:13:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:13:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:13:34 EDT Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the Aether. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups.com, a-albionic@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_cf.1a3f3a99.2eac4dae_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56233 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_cf.1a3f3a99.2eac4dae_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en In a message dated 10/22/04 12:19:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time,=20 f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk writes: > pdf >=20 > Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Rowe=E2=80=99s=20 > claim seriously and see that he has discovered a=20 > way of generating hydrogen from the aether.=20 By projecting a holographic neutrino scalar wave image of the nuclear=20 structure of a hydrogen atom into the air by using Reich's orgon pipes to ca= rry=20 computer generated template images and vortex patterns of the hydrogen atom,= we=20 should then be able to then create and materialize real hydrogen atoms from=20 neutrino particles which exist already in the air by slowing down the neutri= no=20 hydrogen energy pattern with tesla coils or air vortexes such as clouds to=20 materialize the neutrino hydrogen into a more denser material hydrogen form=20= that=20 stabalizes and may be used as hydrogen energy. =20 Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\ba= ron, Email: www.rhfweb.= com\emailform.html President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20 Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb.com= \personal New Age Production's Inc., www.rhfw= eb.com\newage Star Haven Community Services, at www.r= hfweb.com\sh. Radiation Health Foundation Trust at www.= rhfweb.com Making a difference one person at a time Get informed. Inform others. --part1_cf.1a3f3a99.2eac4dae_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en In a message=20= dated 10/22/04 12:19:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve= .co.uk writes:


pdf

    Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Row= e=E2=80=99s
    claim seriously and see that he has= discovered a=20
    way of generating hydrogen from the aether.

By projecting a holographic neutrino scalar wave image of the nuclear st= ructure of a hydrogen atom into the air by using Reich's orgon pipes to carr= y computer generated template images and vortex patterns of the hydrogen ato= m, we should then be able to then create and materialize real hydrogen atoms= from neutrino particles which exist already in the air by slowing down the=20= neutrino hydrogen energy pattern with tesla coils or air vortexes such as cl= ouds to materialize the neutrino hydrogen into a more denser material hydrog= en form that stabalizes and may be used as hydrogen energy.  

Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.co= m\baron, Email: www.rhf= web.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb= .com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.= rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at w= ww.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at = www.rhfweb.com

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. Inform others.


--part1_cf.1a3f3a99.2eac4dae_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 19:31:21 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O2VCt8013343; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:31:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O2V5dn013139; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:31:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:31:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001001c4b971$66fa4fe0$96017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: References: Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the Aether. Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:30:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4B947.7D483FC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56234 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4B947.7D483FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are some interesting video of tornados that show an occasional = visible burst of flame within the vortex. I had first thought the flash = came from contact with electric power lines but a closer view showed no = power lines in the path of the tornado. Could this flame by caused by = hydrogen combustion ? Richard ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Baronvolsung@aol.com=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com ; NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups.com ; = a-albionic@yahoogroups.com=20 Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 7:13 PM Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the Aether. In a message dated 10/22/04 12:19:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, = f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk writes:=20 pdf=20 Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Rowe=E2=80=99s=20 claim seriously and see that he has discovered a=20 way of generating hydrogen from the aether.=20 By projecting a holographic neutrino scalar wave image of the nuclear = structure of a hydrogen atom into the air by using Reich's orgon pipes = to carry computer generated template images and vortex patterns of the = hydrogen atom, we should then be able to then create and materialize = real hydrogen atoms from neutrino particles which exist already in the = air by slowing down the neutrino hydrogen energy pattern with tesla = coils or air vortexes such as clouds to materialize the neutrino = hydrogen into a more denser material hydrogen form that stabalizes and = may be used as hydrogen energy. =20 Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron, Email: = www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html=20 President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,=20 Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb.com\personal=20 New Age Production's Inc., www.rhfweb.com\newage=20 Star Haven Community Services, at www.rhfweb.com\sh.=20 Radiation Health Foundation Trust at www.rhfweb.com=20 Making a difference one person at a time=20 Get informed. Inform others.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4B947.7D483FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
There are some interesting video of = tornados that=20 show an occasional visible burst of flame within the vortex. I had first = thought=20 the flash came from contact with electric power lines but a closer view = showed=20 no power lines in the path of the tornado. Could this flame by caused = by =20 hydrogen combustion ?  Richard
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Baronvolsung@aol.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com ; NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups= .com=20 ; a-albionic@yahoogroups.com=
Sent: Saturday, October 23, = 2004 7:13=20 PM
Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the=20 Aether.

In a=20 message dated 10/22/04 12:19:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, f.grimer@grimer2.freeser= ve.co.uk=20 writes:


pdf

    Accordingly, I do = think we=20 need to take Dr. Rowe=E2=80=99s
    claim = seriously and see=20 that he has discovered a
    way of = generating=20 hydrogen from the aether.


By projecting = a holographic=20 neutrino scalar wave image of the nuclear structure of a hydrogen atom = into=20 the air by using Reich's orgon pipes to carry computer generated = template=20 images and vortex patterns of the hydrogen atom, we should then be = able to=20 then create and materialize real hydrogen atoms from neutrino = particles which=20 exist already in the air by slowing down the neutrino hydrogen energy = pattern=20 with tesla coils or air vortexes such as clouds to materialize the = neutrino=20 hydrogen into a more denser material hydrogen form that stabalizes and = may be=20 used as hydrogen energy.  

Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron, Email: = www.rhfweb.com\emailform.ht= ml=20
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.ht= ml,=20
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb.com\personal =
New Age=20 Production's Inc., www.rhfweb.com\newage =
Star Haven=20 Community Services, at www.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation = Health=20 Foundation Trust at www.rhfweb.com=20

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. = Inform=20 others.


------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4B947.7D483FC0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 22:53:21 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O5r5AA016758; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:53:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O5r2qZ016747; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:53:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:53:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041024065256.0069a318@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:52:56 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the Aether. Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56235 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:30 pm 23-10-04 -0500, you wrote: >There are some interesting video of tornados >that show an occasional visible burst of flame >within the vortex. I had first thought the flash >came from contact with electric power lines but >a closer view showed no power lines in the path >of the tornado. Could this flame by caused by >hydrogen combustion ? Richard Absolutely Richard. The trouble with anomalous observations of that kind is that they don't fit into the scientific canon and they are ignored until they become coercive. They will therefore be explained away. People will "know" that the flame came from some mundane source of flammable material such a gas canisters exploding, or the like. With ephemeral phenomena such as tornadoes and earthquakes it is very difficult to produce the scientific evidence that high priests demand. These phenomena are not repeatable at will because they are not under man's control. Until hydrogen can be generated by lightning in the lab the scientific establishment will not believe it. Quite apart from anything else it means that in the academic race of snakes and ladders they will have fallen down a snake which takes them back, virtually to the beginning of the board. Imagine you were dumped in the middle of China. You would have to learn a new language, a new form of writing, etc. etc. - not an easy thing to do when you are over the hill, eh! It's the stones falling from heaven all over again I'm afraid. You have to admit that the idea of hydrogen being created ab initio is the stuff of science fiction. If I hadn't come on the possibility by a completely different route, I certainly wouldn't believe it. It's appropriate to give a quote from Bill Beaty's brilliant website. =================================================== WEIRD SCIENCE VERSUS REVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE --------------------------------------------------- While it's true that at least 99% of fringe science announcements are just as bogus as they seem, we cannot dismiss every one of them without any investigation. If we do, then we'll certainly take our place among the ranks of scoffers who dismissed (or even blocked) a large number of major scientific discoveries through history. Beware! Many apparently-sane discoveries such as powered flight and drifting continents appear normal and acceptable to us only because we have such powerful HINDsight. These same advancements seemed obviously wrong during the times they were first discovered. In science, pursuing revolutionary advancements can be like searching for diamonds hidden in sewage. It's a shame that the realms of questionable ideas contain "diamonds" of great value. It makes judging crazy theories much more difficult. If crazy discoveries were *always* bogus, then we'd have good reason to automatically reject them. However, since the "diamonds" exist, we must never automatically discard ideas and observations which seem appear to be part of the "sewage." Sometimes the "obvious" craziness turns out to be a genuine cutting edge discovery. ==================================================== Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 23:06:23 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O66CAA019076; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:06:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O66BRT019058; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:06:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:06:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 01:05:57 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Singtech Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <5jLGlB.A.upE.TZ0eBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56236 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I would like to thank the person who posted the Singtech URL. I spent a very enjoyable evening reading the website. Now if I can figure out what a standing wave boson generator is. Now that I think about there is a lot of what he says that goes right over my head. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 23 23:35:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O6ZGrH026519; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:35:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O6ZE2h026513; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:35:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:35:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: Hydrogen from the Aether. Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:04:40 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041024065256.0069a318@pop.freeserve.net> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56237 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Frank + RC. In this case, the color of the flame ought to tell us. Generally H2 flames are slightly blue if at all visible, although I suppose there would be doping of some sort from all the salts and junk flying around. I don't think an ordinary camera would expose with the flame though; aren't IR cameras and viewers used to fight H2 fires? The UV from the H2 flame wouldn't get very far past the water vapor in the air. K. -----Original Message----- From: Grimer [mailto:f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 2:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrogen from the Aether. At 09:30 pm 23-10-04 -0500, you wrote: >There are some interesting video of tornados >that show an occasional visible burst of flame >within the vortex. I had first thought the flash >came from contact with electric power lines but >a closer view showed no power lines in the path >of the tornado. Could this flame by caused by >hydrogen combustion ? Richard Absolutely Richard. The trouble with anomalous observations of that kind is that they don't fit into the scientific canon and they are ignored until they become coercive. They will therefore be explained away. People will "know" that the flame came from some mundane source of flammable material such a gas canisters exploding, or the like. With ephemeral phenomena such as tornadoes and earthquakes it is very difficult to produce the scientific evidence that high priests demand. These phenomena are not repeatable at will because they are not under man's control. Until hydrogen can be generated by lightning in the lab the scientific establishment will not believe it. Quite apart from anything else it means that in the academic race of snakes and ladders they will have fallen down a snake which takes them back, virtually to the beginning of the board. Imagine you were dumped in the middle of China. You would have to learn a new language, a new form of writing, etc. etc. - not an easy thing to do when you are over the hill, eh! It's the stones falling from heaven all over again I'm afraid. You have to admit that the idea of hydrogen being created ab initio is the stuff of science fiction. If I hadn't come on the possibility by a completely different route, I certainly wouldn't believe it. It's appropriate to give a quote from Bill Beaty's brilliant website. =================================================== WEIRD SCIENCE VERSUS REVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE --------------------------------------------------- While it's true that at least 99% of fringe science announcements are just as bogus as they seem, we cannot dismiss every one of them without any investigation. If we do, then we'll certainly take our place among the ranks of scoffers who dismissed (or even blocked) a large number of major scientific discoveries through history. Beware! Many apparently-sane discoveries such as powered flight and drifting continents appear normal and acceptable to us only because we have such powerful HINDsight. These same advancements seemed obviously wrong during the times they were first discovered. In science, pursuing revolutionary advancements can be like searching for diamonds hidden in sewage. It's a shame that the realms of questionable ideas contain "diamonds" of great value. It makes judging crazy theories much more difficult. If crazy discoveries were *always* bogus, then we'd have good reason to automatically reject them. However, since the "diamonds" exist, we must never automatically discard ideas and observations which seem appear to be part of the "sewage." Sometimes the "obvious" craziness turns out to be a genuine cutting edge discovery. ==================================================== Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 00:00:11 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9O702rN031891; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 00:00:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9O6ppqT030320; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:51:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:51:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 01:51:50 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56238 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner posted; > addition, a lot of engineering related to operations would have to be >done, like modelling linepack, supercompressibility effects, jet engine >performance, storage reservoir performance, and other parameters used in >gas transmission simulations and operating models currently. Transmisson Given the problem of hydrogen embrittlement, which would necessiate rebuilding the whole system, why not convert the hydrogen into an alcohol or other liquid? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 03:30:21 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OAUHrH013494; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:30:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OAUAFH013447; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:30:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:30:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 02:35:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56239 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:51 AM 10/24/4, thomas malloy wrote: >Given the problem of hydrogen embrittlement, which would necessiate >rebuilding the whole system, why not convert the hydrogen into an >alcohol or other liquid? That is certainly feasible, as has been much discussed on vortex, though there may be a drop in energy efficiency in the production of a liquid. The principle objections to that approach would probably be based on the fact the carbon content that would result would still leave us with air pollution problems in the cities. For my 2 cents worth though, it may be necessary or advantageous to quicky obtain some intermediate range solutions, so a liquid or methane product or both could easily end up viable for a while. Global warming would not be affected if the carbon came from the atmosphere, but I would expect that to not be feasible short term. In fact, I suspect coal gassification would probably be the principle intermediate range source of methane. Methane might be a good intermediate step simply because there is a lot of experience with it and capacity to use it. It burns fairly clean, and the carbon/hydrogen ratio is low. If there is in fact a quick way to jump into a purely hydrogen economy then the environmental benefits would be much larger. If the price of energy keeps going up I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of things developing simultaneously, and competition sorting out the winners. The big issue is where the government might best play a role, because it is probably true that government fininancing, regulatory relief, and long term bipartisan commitment are the only means by which the US can become energy independent in the near future. I think energy price fluctuations and the economic damage that accompanies them has been worse for the energy industry than the weather has been for farming. The main problem boils down to the fact that there are no lobbiests for the public good. Periods of low energy price lull us into a false sense that business can continue as usual. Most politicians, Americans in general, and even radical environmentalists, simply do not have enough long range vision to see the economic and social calamity that will almost inevitably result, or the sense that they are responsible for it. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 08:05:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OF5cAA024513; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:05:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OF5bfY024508; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:05:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:05:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <001601c4b9da$e2051710$6a58ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:05:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56240 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "thomas malloy" > Given the problem of hydrogen embrittlement, which would necessiate > rebuilding the whole system, why not convert the hydrogen into an > alcohol or other liquid? Because that adds carbon, and when burned you get carbon dioxide, which is a greehouse gas, and you are in the same position as gasoline. The only argument over some hydrogen-containing liquid is what gets you the highest hydrogen/carbon ratio, and that is for stuff like ethanol. Hydrogen isn't easy. The most potent way to use hydrogen is in a BLP reactor, which gets you some 100 times the energy as burning, but such aren't quite ready for the market yet. Mike Carrell > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 11:46:22 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OIkHAA018017; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:46:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OIk9i8017968; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:46:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:46:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:51:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tranmission line losses Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56241 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A hydrogen transmission system test loop, including a compressor station and transmission pipe loop with variable flow resistance, is an important project to get underway if we are serious about developing a hydrogen economy. A similarly important project then would be a bulk hydrogen generator pilot plant, one which could utilize reactor heat or other sources of heat to directly produce hydrogen. Based on our discussion here on vortex, these facts seem now blatantly obvious. I wonder, though, if this is obvious to any existing government agencies or politicians? These would be expensive projects, but not nearly as expensive as ITER, and they represent possibly equally important ingredients of a hydrogen based energy economy. More importantly, this kind of research can be done with a high payoff expectancy. The engineering involved is well within our capability, not requiring major scientific breakthroughs like the trip to the moon required when Kennedy announced the goal, and practical immediately usable results can be reasonably expected. One of the problems with conventional hot fusion power generation seems to be the scale, the size of the required facility. If it should turn out that practical cold fusion or other new energy sources are not available in the next 10 to 20 years, yet hot fusion does come to fruition in some fashion, then efforts spent developing an interim hydrogen generation and transportation system will pay off not only in the interim, but very long term. Whatever the case, we will obtain an energy transmission system that does not blight the landscape with utility towers, and permits the location of energy generating assets in remote protectable locations. A this point in history a dedicated sustainable multi-faceted attack on the energy problem seems clearly justifiable. Such an attack has many of the attributes of a real war, but the war on the energy problem is a war of peace, with peace and life as the ultimate objective. It should be a non-partisan war enjoined by environmentalist and industrialist alike. It is a win-win war. In which direction should the attacks on the energy problem be directed? All available directions. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 14:35:02 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OLYnAA001072; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:34:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OLYlFd001052; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:34:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:34:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004b01c4ba11$224d05e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Cc: "vortex" References: <410-2200410623152121110@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium & Helium-Burning Stars Etc. Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:33:41 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56242 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Very provocative point about effective charge in the alpha which has captured two heavy electrons, and it leads to much more... Fred Sparber writes: > If an Electronium (*e-) particle goes to a fractional orbit in Helium, the > coulomb repulsive force (F) drops appreciably: > > F = Z1*Z2* kq^2/r^2 > > Hence the Helium (Z = 2) charge can drop to zero if it has two "low orbit" (*e-) particles in it. Fred, I'm surprised nobody picked up on this, since there is, in the reported literatue, so much strange transmutation results showing up in CF experiments, some from competent experimenters. Few have dared an explanation for these oddball isotopes. Now, for the first time we have not only an explanation but anelegant explanation that covers so much more than just transmutation. How do you get heavier elements than Pd, such as silver, gold, iridium, mercury, etc... without somethting like what Fred has suggested here? I hope that Fred and I have not gotten so far afield here with this theory that others think this (*e-) is not a serious pursuit, nor valid model. Think about it. You know that some of these transmutation results are solid - so how else can you get some of these isotopes without Pd in the cathodes taking on alphas (and quite a few at that)? Or... what other plausible mechanism is out there ? or which explains how alphas, normally so stable, can react with Pd? > Helium burning in CF, possible ? Yes. There are so many odd combinations of isotopes showing up in CF cathodes that there must be some very strange nucleonics going on at a *low* level, building up from the bottom rather than down from the top i.e. a reactant way below palladium in terms of Z. There are really only three choices deuterium, oxygen and helium. Usually the D2 is assumed. But nobody thought much of the possibility of alphas reacting, because this fact has been drummed into our collective heads from the educational system - that alphas are extraordinarily stable. Which is true, normally. But alphas may also have a big "appetite" for electronium, and after a two course dinner, then they are a pushover to fuse with almost anything in the neighborhood. And compared with D2 they are four time more greedy and will always snatch the heavy electron away. Very interesting with regard to Carbon showing up when there shouldn't be any there, being the result of 3 alphas combining... or even more provocative would be the many anecdotal reports of Carbon turning to Fe, etc. such as this report from G. Mallove some time ago (which I first read it, I thought the guy had finally gone bonkers... carbon to iron... no way, right?) WAY!! But a non-obvious way that depends on the existence of the heavy electron electronium (*e-) which is a triad of Ps+e- with fully a third of its pre-formation mass tied up as binding energy. You start pumping a lot of amps into carbon, then what happens? we suggest that it will start accumulating electronium. At a certain point there will be so much electronium "wanting" to get into low but forbidden orbits in that C nucleus that it becomes very unstable. It will tend to oscillate within the strong force limits (morph into "probability wave-forms") between either 3 alphas and/or the Carbon 12. You get enough of these wannabe alphas pulsating in Carbon which has too much electronium, and who knows...? The role of high current: Rather than forcing the nucleus into an excited state which low voltage, high amperage electrical stimulation, which it could scarcely do anyway, an imposed high current serves only to push all the electronium into the closest possible "orbital" of certain elements - which orbital has an ionization energy of about 244.8 eV or less, where the radius of the heavy electron has been reduced to below e-12 meters, giving the inner orbital a sphere-smear which is about 3000 times smaller than that of a normal hydrogen atom (for comparison). Somehow... the extent of the strong force is periodically expanded out nearer to this radius. The strong force has a normal range of about e-15 meters BUT don't forget that it is normally 137 times greater in magnitude than electrostatic repulsion, so it doesn't have to go all the way out to the close electronium orbital. At this close range, the probability of catalyzing any oddball LENR reactions with have been increased by many orders of magnitude, and we can let QM tunneling. or some correlate take over from there, but is this modality a pure invention? In truth, even I am far from convinced that the rationalization is not much closer to science fiction. It is compelling NOT because of any real proof but only because it provides so very many elegant answers to so very many vexing problems. And the same was said of Jules Verne's wild guesses in his day - he was going with his inner logic - so let me just end this by saying that on the off-chance that this all this anecdotal evidence continues to persist with stronger experimentation, then the electronium modality above is the best (probably the only) plausible way to account for this improbability (the fusion of higher Z elements)... and, in the history of science, more improbable things have proven true. ....but not many... Here is Mallove's account: "The second source of a carbon arc in air experiment is from ICCF6: Kenjin Sasaki from Tokyo, an agronomy consultant from Tokyo distributed a very interesting protocol which is like METHOD #3. He gave me photos of the process and the results, which would seem possible for any high-school group to verify. I will be publishing these photos and protocols in Infinite Energy #10, asking readers to try it. In the inimitable "Japanese English" - only slightly fixed, Sasaki's instructions: ************** 1. Ready for Job 2. Graphite crucible (four nines purity) Carbon rod Copper plate (for cooling) Tray for water cooling Electric welder (100 V, 10 A) or Auto Battery 3. MaterialsCarbon powder (high purity) Cooling water 4. Order of Experiment A Put 2 to 3 grams of carbon powder in graphite crucible B Strike electric discharge arc with the electrode, about 1 minute, done about 3 to 4 times only (i.e. no more than four times) -- [implies pausing between 1-minute arcs] 5. Inspection A. Spread remaining carbon powder on paper B. Slide magnet under that paper. You can see locus of the magnet -- it shows the iron bits [!!!! - my comment, EFM] C. Take these [magnetically separated] materials and examine with a magnifying glass. You will find [among them] a brilliant alloy [!!!!, yes, I have photos of this alloy! - my comment, EFM] 6. Reappearance This experiment is very easy for young student, literary person, bank man, woman, etc. Kenjin Sasaki 942 Hikida, Akiruno-City Tokyo 197, Japan Phone: 81-425-59-5371 fax: 81-425-59-4927 ********************************** If I have the time in the next few weeks and wherewithal, I would like to try this myself, but I will likely not have the time. I am told by Chris Akbar in Boston (with the Kushi Foundation) that she has tried the experiment and it worked for her. She said it is important to keep the amperage between 8 and 10 amps. She used an automobile battery charger. I do not think it is really necessary to have a static tray of cooling water under a graphite plate or crucible. I imagine that doing the experiment on a thick graphite plate would work as well. Best wishes, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 14:52:51 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OLqmrH009322; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:52:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OLqS8t009102; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:52:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:52:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:58:16 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56243 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FTL by Down-converting It may be possible to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Bob. Bob uses a beam splitter to create two beams of light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. By "beam", here, we can mean a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors. This might (in thought experiment mode anyway!) be accomplished conveniently by having R1 and R2 in fiber channels that are flattened into narrow slits at the end, and which are placed in close proximity so as to create the famous two slit interference pattern. In any event, it suffices to say that Bob can create an interference pattern using the two beams. Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not put detectors in beams R1 and L1. If Alice does place detectors in both beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments. Now, since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob must be a possible result. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate faster than light communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as redirecting beams R1 and/or R1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be very useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 15:00:12 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9OM05rH011368; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:00:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9OM04Q2011352; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:00:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:00:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:05:53 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56244 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well, as usual, it didn't take long to find a typo, despite proof reading many times before sending the original. FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #2) It may be possible to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Bob. Bob uses a beam splitter to create two beams of light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. By "beam", here, we can mean a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors. This might (in thought experiment mode anyway!) be accomplished conveniently by having R2 and L2 in fiber channels that are flattened into narrow slits at the end, and which are placed in close proximity so as to create the famous two slit interference pattern. In any event, it suffices to say that Bob can create an interference pattern using the two beams. Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not put detectors in beams R1 and L1. If Alice does place detectors in both beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments. Now, since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob must be a possible result. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate faster than light communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as redirecting beams R1 and/or R1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be very useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 16:21:58 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ONLgAA031205; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:21:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ONLeZr031158; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:21:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:21:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:27:28 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #3) Resent-Message-ID: <5MbURB.A.omH.EkDfBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56245 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #3) It may be possible to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Bob. Bob uses a beam splitter to create two beams of light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. Beams R2 and L2 are normal path or "signal" photons through the down-converter, while beams R1 and L1 are called "idler" photons. By "beam", here, we can mean a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors. The signal photon beams R2 and L2 can create such an interference pattern because they are the two paths from a beam splitter. Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not put detectors in idler beams R1 and L1. If Alice does place detectors in both her beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments. Now, since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob must be a possible result. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate FTL communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as her redirecting beams R1 and/or L1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be very useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 16:30:09 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ONU2rL000406; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:30:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ONLr01030452; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:21:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:21:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: China Syndrome Cure? Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:21:39 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id i9ONLkrH030399 Resent-Message-ID: <1aZDmB.A.wbH.RkDfBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56246 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:50:24 -0800: Hi Horace, [snip] >If the bottom of the inside of a nuclear reactor containment building were >a mesh of boron carbide, or possibly even just a bunch of boron carbide >balls, then a hot glob melting out of the reactor core would flow down into >narrow channels between what are effectively control rods and automatically >go sub-critical. A passive cure to the China Syndrome? I had a similar idea a while back. I suggested suspending the fuel rods in a reactor with a plug of metal that has a very specific melting point, set to be several hundred degrees above the normal operating temperature of the reactor, but well below the danger point for the containment. Then if the whole thing got too hot, the plugs would melt, and the rods would fall into holes in a boron containing solid below the reactor. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 16:32:38 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ONWUAA002053; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:32:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ONWTc8002036; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:32:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:32:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:38:18 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #4) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56247 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #4) It may be possible to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Charlie. Charlie uses a beam splitter to create two beams of light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. Beams R2 and L2 are normal path or "signal" photons through the down-converter, while beams R1 and L1 are called "idler" photons. By "beam", here, we can mean a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors. The signal photon beams R2 and L2 can create such an interference pattern because they are the two paths from a beam splitter. Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not put detectors in idler beams R1 and L1. If Alice does place detectors in both her beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments. Now, since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob must be a possible result. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate FTL communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as her redirecting beams R1 and/or L1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be very useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 16:36:05 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ONZwrH002189; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:35:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ONZvGH002174; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:35:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:35:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:41:47 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: China Syndrome Cure? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56248 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:21 AM 10/25/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:50:24 -0800: >Hi Horace, >[snip] >>If the bottom of the inside of a nuclear reactor containment building were >>a mesh of boron carbide, or possibly even just a bunch of boron carbide >>balls, then a hot glob melting out of the reactor core would flow down into >>narrow channels between what are effectively control rods and automatically >>go sub-critical. A passive cure to the China Syndrome? > >I had a similar idea a while back. I suggested suspending the fuel rods in >a reactor with a plug of metal that has a very specific melting point, set >to be several hundred degrees above the normal operating temperature of >the reactor, but well below the danger point for the containment. Then if >the whole thing got too hot, the plugs would melt, and the rods would fall >into holes in a boron containing solid below the reactor. Pretty cool. If you posted that on vortex it might well be the origins of my thoughts on the subject. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 24 16:41:46 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ONffAA004399; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:41:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ONfd6a004377; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:41:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:41:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 15:47:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #4) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56249 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry for my usual bumbling, stumbling and fumbling. I think the FTL by down-converting idea, however worthy, is fairly well expressed now. BTW, I got the idea while reading "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Green, especially pages 194-197. It is a fabulous book. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 02:09:57 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9P99rAA028517; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:09:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9P99VJ5028422; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:09:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:09:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004101258831240@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium & Helium-Burning Stars Etc. Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 03:08:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409471b65a51bdbef32807d3cad2faad8f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.33 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56250 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII In an earlier thread Jones Beene wrote: Re: Fusion and proton/neutron ratio Sun, 5 Sep 2004 14:59:36 > > So this final thought, and admittedly it comes with > way too much spontaneity. You can look at potassium > vis-a- vis the other elements all day long and not > come up with a better fit than oxygen and sodium from > the perspective of biological ubiquity and more > importantly, in needing no change in proton/neutron > ration in the resultant nucleus... as well as the > reaction being rather close to energy-neutral. There > are reasons to suspect that it is definitely > energy-neutral when you consider all the variables. > Okay Jones, suppose that oxygen gets a few Electronium (*e-) particles and collapses into a neutral particle for an 8 oxygen-16- 11sodium-23---> 19 Potassium 39 reaction; Coulomb repulsive force F = 8 * 11* kq^2/r^2 -----> 0*11* kq^2/r^2 = 0.0 Walla! 19 Potassium 39 in biological processes. Could the (*e-) neutralized Oxygen atom be a WIMP? :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

In an earlier thread Jones Beene wrote:
 
Re: Fusion and proton/neutron ratio
Sun, 5 Sep 2004 14:59:36
>
> So this final thought, and admittedly it comes with
> way too much spontaneity. You can look at potassium
> vis-a- vis the other elements all day long and not
> come up with a better fit than oxygen and sodium from
> the perspective of biological ubiquity and more
> importantly, in needing no change in proton/neutron
> ration in the resultant nucleus... as well as the
> reaction being rather close to energy-neutral. There
> are reasons to suspect that it is definitely
> energy-neutral when you consider all the variables.
>
Okay Jones, suppose that oxygen gets a few Electronium (*e-) particles
and collapses into a neutral particle for an 8 oxygen-16- 11sodium-23---> 19 Potassium 39 reaction;
 
Coulomb repulsive force F = 8 * 11* kq^2/r^2 -----> 0*11* kq^2/r^2 = 0.0  
 
Walla! 19 Potassium 39 in biological processes.
 
Could the (*e-) neutralized Oxygen atom be a WIMP?   :-)
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 06:44:51 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PDiiAA006945; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:44:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9PDiZBt006913; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:44:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:44:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 05:50:24 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) Resent-Message-ID: <8j_ulC.A.8rB.CNQfBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56251 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nothing signifcantly new below, just improved form. There still seems to be something of substance to this idea. FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) A method is proposed here to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Charlie. Charlie uses a beam splitter to create two beams of laser light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. Beams R2 and L2 are normal path or "signal" photons through the down-converter, while beams R1 and L1 are called "idler" photons. "Beam"here means a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first, but just barely before Bob. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors arranged so it is feasible to rapidly and with high probability determine whether an interference pattern is present or not. The signal photon beams R2 and L2 can create such an interference pattern because they are the two paths from a beam splitter. Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not put detectors in idler beams R1 and L1.[1] If Alice does place detectors in both her beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments.[2] If Alice sees an idler she knows which path the corresponding signal photon took to Bob, and the interference wavefunction instantly collapses. Bob, when his photons arrive shortly after Alice's corresponding photons, knows the current state of Alice's detectors by whether he sees an interference pattern or not. Since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob is clearly a possible result. It might be said that the communication can not be verified for years, but such verification is in this case is not necessary. Bob does not require verification or comparison to Alice's results to know the immediate state of Alice's detectors, or to immediately detect a change of state of those detectors, with sufficient speed and reliability to establish a practical communication channel. Further, a similar channel can be established from Bob to Alice, thus permitting immediate error detection and correction or retransmission. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate FTL communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as her redirecting beams R1 and/or L1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending a data bit (actually only a change of 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. A fiber pair from Charlie to Bob and Charlie to Alice could be used, if desired, to create a single FTL communication channel. A similar set of fiber pairs would be used for the return channel. 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. Assuming a sample of 100 photons to be sufficient for determining interference, a photon transmission and detection rate of 1.5 million photons per second is required. However, it is not known what precisely constitutes an observation. It may be that individual photon detection is not even necessary, but rather mere beam intensity determination. References: [1] Kim et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol 84, no. 1, pp 1-5 [2] Brian Green, *The Fabric of the Cosmos*, (New York, Alfred A Knopf, 2004), pp 193-197 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 09:21:19 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PGLBcw014379; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:21:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9PGL96X014363; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:21:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:21:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002901c4baae$7ac197c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Cc: "vortex" References: <410-22004101258831240@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium & Helium-Burning Stars Etc. Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:20:00 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56252 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wites, > Could the (*e-) neutralized Oxygen atom be a WIMP? :-) Well, that's a shocker for sure, Fred. But I'll try to do you one better ;-) In neutron decay, your end up with a proton, electron, and (supposedly) an electron antineutrino, but here is the big surprise. The *rest mass* difference between the neutron and the (combined proton + electron) is 0.7823 MeV or thereabouts, depending on whose figures you trust. Just as with the lifetime of the neutron itself, many experts have deferring opinions on this precise number, despite it being so fundamental to our understanding of nature. Makes one wonder about their other pronouncements as well... don't it, Vern ? Now, it is usually said that the difference between the neutron and the (proton + electron) which is over one and a half times the mass of a single electron, is converted into the kinetic energy of the neutrino. There is absolutely NO firm evidence for this proposition, however, as the neutrino mass itself has not yet been quantified. Consequently one is free to ponder whether of not this *very significant* difference mentioned above of at least .78 MeV which exists between the neutron and the (proton + electron) which is over one and a half times the mass of an electron, is actually rest energy which is converted into the kinetic energy of the neutrino. Maybe not. Perhaps a neutron itself (which is three quarks in one perspective) is not (effectively) a proton, electron, and an electron antineutrino, but instead (effectively) a proton bound to an (*e-) with or without an electron antineutrino thrown in for good measure (and to balance out a few QM issues) !!! And you thought this was going to be a dull Monday... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 10:00:37 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PH0Uud030519; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9PH0S2K030493; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002201c4bab4$1bc966c0$da017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Never a dull Monday Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:00:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C4BA8A.327A8540"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56253 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C4BA8A.327A8540 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001F_01C4BA8A.327A8540" ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C4BA8A.327A8540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWith the quality of posting in Vortex, it can be exciting, thought = provoking , controversial.. but never DULL. You guys make my head hurt sometimes, trying to stretch my mind around = your ideas.. Talk about elastic in the mind.. you were all born with " bungee" cords = between the ears..!! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C4BA8A.327A8540 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
With the quality of posting in Vortex, it can be exciting, thought=20 provoking , controversial.. but never DULL.
You guys make my head hurt sometimes, trying to stretch my mind = around your=20 ideas..
 
Talk about elastic in the mind.. you were all born with " bungee" = cords=20 between the ears..!!
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C4BA8A.327A8540-- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C4BA8A.327A8540 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001d01c4bab4$1b4f06a0$da017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C4BA8A.327A8540-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 13:44:05 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PKhwgG003953; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:43:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9PKhtYp003927; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:43:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:43:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041025214346.006b852c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:43:46 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id i9PKhqgG003897 Resent-Message-ID: <8OBCf.A.Q9.LWWfBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56254 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Following on from my previous post, it can now be seen that mass is just a property of matter, a property like length or weight or viscosity. You cannot have a cup of length and you cannot have a cup of weight. Properties are what philosophers call accidents as distinct from substance. And accidents are optional not essential. A substance might have colour or it might not. A totally transparent substance like the kind of high quality glass they use in optical cables does not have colour but it is obviously substantial. The fact that mass is a property is clearly shown by projecting 1000 protons and neutrons at high speed in an accelerator. Unlike the loaves and fishes, the protons and neutrons do not multiply. Protons and neutrons do not breed like bunny rabbits. It is a dimensional property that increases, not a number. Essentially, this is no different from the temperature of Columbia increasing on re-entry - albeit an increase on a very different scale. To ease the pain your head, Richard , I should point out that you can think in terms of Inertia rather than Mass if you like. I've googled the following definitions for you. 8-) ======================================================== The unit of measure for Inertia is the same as for mass. Typically it is expressed in grams or kilograms. The equivalence of mass and inertia seems to hold true according to all empirical evidence. In theory at least they are sometimes regarded as being separate qualities. -------------------------------------------------------- PHYSICS. The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in straight line motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force. ======================================================== Now I feel it is easy to regard a "tendency" as a property even it is paradoxically "expressed in grams or kilograms." So we can see that Mass x Velocity = a constant really is a Boyle's type of law and essentially no different in system terms from: Pressure x Volume = a constant Pressure and Volume are three dimensional properties, Pressure internal, Volume external. Mass and velocity are one dimensional properties, Mass internal, Velocity external. It might help to write the mass term in the conservation of momentum equation as an inverse velocity. Mass x Velocity = a constant 1 x v --- --- = a constant v 1 One can now visualize the first v, which is the mass v, as below the surface, as hidden within the body, the v that only Superman with his X-ray vision can discern. In contrast, the second v, the velocity v, is in plain view above the surface and can be seen by every Lois Lane. But how is this all going to fit together numerically? Ah!!! That is were things really become interesting. What one has to realise is that we measure time globally but we measure length locally. Time is merely change. If we measured time locally then we could move time backwards. A room which is untidy can be tidied up - restored to its original state. As far as those changes are concerned, that "Local" time, that domometric time variable, time, local time that is, has gone backwards. One can widen the scope of these time reversals, these UNDO key presses as wide as the reach of our control. However, unless we control the whole Universe, what we can't do is to press the Universal UNDO key. We cannot go back in Global or Universal time. And even if we could it would be a futile exercise unless we were careful to make sure that our personal UNDO key was disabled. To sum up then. We can go back in lower case time but we cannot go back in UPPER CASE TIME. Now we normally regard time as UPPER CASE TIME. We only think about lower case time when we have a German prisoner of war, put him into a deep sleep, arrange things like papers, broadcasts, etc. to make him think that he has been a coma for 6 months, and then wake him up, tell him the war is over and inveigle him into revealing vital information. I suppose the reverse technique would be to arrange for someone who really has been in a ten year coma to think that he has only been asleep for 48 hours, say. So much for time. Now in the case of Length precisely the opposite condition holds. If I tell Dr. Macauley to walk a distance of 10 yards down the road then I am referring to local space, to local length. In global terms he has gone a distance of 10 yards plus or minus whatever distance the ground under his feet has gone in the same time. In solar system terms.....In galactic terms.....In groups of Galaxy terms ....In Universe terms. I'm sure you get the idea and can see that Mac can no more move backwards in UNIVERSAL SPACE than he can in UNIVERSAL TIME. Now the question arises: What space does the property of Mass relate to? Consider a simple example where two spaces are conveniently separated namely the sea below and the air above. A wind is blowing and a there is a strong offshore current in opposite directions. A yacht straddles the two spaces with its underwater sail (its keel)in the water and its above surface keel (its sail) in the air. If it lowers its sail the keel dominates and it moves with the current. If it raises its sail the wind dominates and it moves with the wind. Which mediums, which aethers (for they are legion) is the property of mass moving with - or rather, like the sailing boat, which set of aethers is a body with the property of mass,in equilibrium with. If I give body a velocity of 10 ft/sec I am merely giving it an offset velocity of 10. I don't know what the absolute velocity of that body is any more than someone raising the temperature of a gas from 0 to 100 degrees Celsius knew what the absolute temperature was in times of yore. Now, I believe that mass is a manifestation of some arbitrary movement through one of the many aethers. And because it is as arbitrary as the number of days in the year, say, that is why no one has yet understood what mass is - why the mass of the various bodies that make up tangible matter have the values they do. Furthermore, since momentum is a vector, a body can have energy (momentum squared) without having inertia (the algebraic sum of momentums) I think I've said quite enough. I'll now power up VISIO and prepare a simple illustration of momentum exchange between two bodies for the next post to Vortex. Cheers Grimer ====================================================== The reason, of course, is that scientists do not recognize the vacuum as a source of energy. They tell us that the vacuum is, in simple words, a mere ‘nothing’, but yet they teach by reference to textbooks which declare that the vacuum has a magnetic permeability expressed as µo of value 4p 10 -7 henries per metre and a permittivity 1/µoc 2 of 8.854187817x10 -12 farads per metre. How can the vacuum, as a medium devoid of matter, be said to have such curious properties if it is a mere nothing? - Aspden - ====================================================== From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 14:01:24 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PL1DP9004330; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:01:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9PL1BCR004319; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:01:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:01:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007901c4bad5$963e9260$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Helectronium Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:59:57 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0076_01C4BA9A.E9629B20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: <_s5mCB.A.bDB.WmWfBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56255 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0076_01C4BA9A.E9629B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable No, its not a gender anthropomorphism with the heavy electron ... But if nature has provided us with a fairly rare "heavy electron" triad, = which we are calling Electronium (*e-), and such a particle tends to = accumulate in those particular ions which just happen to be in a = position to capture them, because the element is fully ionized in a high = energy environment when it is formed... it will become the macho-stud of = the alternative energy field. ...such as when an alpha particle is emitted from a fusion, fission, or = radioactive decay reaction, and then subsequently that high speed alpha = captures two electrons from the heavy elements in which it is zipping = through as it is thermalizing to become helium.... then each (*e-) will = most probably go into a fractional orbit in the Helium, and the = resultant coulomb repulsive force (F) would likely drop appreciably: =20 F =3D Z1*Z2* kq^2/r^2 Hence the Helium (Z =3D 2) effective charge at picometer distance could = conceivably drop to zero if it has managed to capture two "low orbit" = (*e-) particles. In certain situations, particularly in the decay of = Uranium or thorium, this double enrichment might be a fairly common = occurrence. And consequently this would be an easy way to prove, or to = cast doubt, on this wild and crazy speculation ... This circumstance (double enriched helium), in cold fusion, could end up = being the methodology for much of the strange transmutation results = showing up in CF experiments, some from very competent experimenters. = Few others have dared an explanation for these oddball isotopes, because = essentially, in conventional physics, these isotopes simply cannot = happen...=20 ...pretty gross experimental error, I'd say (mocking that genius, Bob = Park). ERGO you have too camps separated by a gulf that transcends our = educational system. The Gulf of Credibility, shall we say, which = symbolically covers Dixie like the dew. There are those who trust the = *facts* i.e. the experimental evidence, and by far the more numerous in = the physics "establishment" who say that their time proven theories just = cannot be wrong, so the experiment itself must be in error. Now, for the first time, with electronium we have not only a plausible = explanation for some of these oddball isotopes, but a most elegant = explanation at that - one which covers so much more than just cathode = transmutation, but it also explains much of the Mills' hydrino results, = and many other anomalies where experiment has shown some glimmer of = excess energy. Few on this forum doubt that most of these transmutation results are = solid - so how else can you get some of these isotopes without Pd in the = cathodes taking on alphas (and quite a few at that)? Time will no doubt = supply most of the answers, and they will probably not be as simple as = only the heavy electron... but in the mean time, one wonders... is there = anything which can be done to advance the state of "alternative energy", = assuming the (*e-) theory has some merit. Yes. Because as mentioned, there is a ready and available resource of = what could become a most valuable commodity in the future, which = commodity is doubly (*e-) enriched helium, which for lack of a better = term, and because I like to coin words, will be called Helectronium = (**He), that is until some better moniker comes along. Where does one find this (**He) resource? Well, that part is easy, = assuming that this line of reasoning is correct. In fact our government = has been essentially giving away to private industry (forcing it on them = even) what could have been a national treasure - depleted uranium. You know, the stuff that was pushed by insistent Pentagon procurers onto = our arms manufacturers in order to be used in armor-piercing rounds, = especially for use in places like Bosnia and Iraq, which had almost no = good armor to begin with, but lots of children to pick up the spent = rounds. But that's another story. At one time we had literally millions of pounds of depleted uranium = stored in drums around a particular facility in Oak Ridge Tennessee. It = was giving off, probably pounds of (**He) per day for years... totally = wasted. What is the energy content and rough value of (**He)? A rough (high ball) guess of its potential energy content is astounding, = considering that it might be able to convert a common odd-z heavy metal = like Bismuth into a fissionable species... but let's don't go there... Let's just say, for now, that maybe DoE should step in and reconsider = its largess in giving depleted U away to almost any taker...=20 ...and, most importantly, hope that some lurker to this thread with = access to a good mass spec will start to look for (**He) in the gas = which is given off from uranium or thorium decay. Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0076_01C4BA9A.E9629B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
No, its not a gender anthropomorphism with the heavy electron = ...
 
But if nature has provided us with a fairly rare "heavy electron" = triad,=20 which we are calling  Electronium (*e-), and such a particle = tends to=20 accumulate in those particular ions which just happen to be in a = position=20 to capture them, because the element is fully ionized in a = high energy=20 environment when it is formed... it will become the macho-stud of = the=20 alternative energy field.
 
...such as when an alpha particle is emitted from a fusion, = fission, or=20 radioactive decay reaction, and then subsequently that high speed alpha = captures=20 two electrons from the heavy elements in which it is zipping through as = it is=20 thermalizing to become helium.... then each (*e-) will most = probably go=20 into a fractional orbit in the Helium, and the resultant coulomb = repulsive force=20 (F) would likely drop appreciably:
 
F =3D Z1*Z2* kq^2/r^2

Hence the Helium (Z =3D 2) effective = charge at=20 picometer distance could conceivably drop to zero if it has managed to = capture=20 two "low orbit" (*e-) particles. In certain situations, particularly in = the=20 decay of Uranium or thorium, this double enrichment might be a fairly = common=20 occurrence. And consequently this would be an easy way to prove, or to = cast=20 doubt, on this wild and crazy speculation ...
 
This circumstance (double enriched helium), in cold fusion, could = end up=20 being the methodology for much of the strange transmutation results = showing=20 up in CF experiments, some from very competent experimenters. Few others = have=20 dared an explanation for these oddball isotopes, because essentially, in = conventional physics, these isotopes simply cannot happen... =
 
...pretty gross experimental error, I'd say (mocking that genius, = Bob=20 Park).
 
ERGO you have too camps separated by a gulf that transcends our = educational=20 system. The Gulf of Credibility, shall we say, which symbolically covers = Dixie=20 like the dew. There are those who trust the *facts* i.e. the = experimental=20 evidence, and by far the more numerous in the physics "establishment" = who say=20 that their time proven theories just cannot be wrong, so the experiment = itself=20 must be in error.

Now, for the first time, with electronium we = have not=20 only a plausible explanation for some of these oddball isotopes, but a = most=20 elegant explanation at that - one which covers so much more than just = cathode=20 transmutation, but it also explains much of the Mills' hydrino results, = and many=20 other anomalies where experiment has shown some glimmer of excess=20 energy.

Few on this forum doubt that most of these transmutation = results=20 are solid - so how else can you get some of these isotopes without Pd in = the=20 cathodes taking on alphas (and quite a few at that)? Time will no doubt = supply=20 most of the answers, and they will probably not be as simple as only the = heavy=20 electron... but in the mean time, one wonders... is there anything which = can be=20 done to advance the state of "alternative energy", assuming the (*e-) = theory has=20 some merit.

Yes. Because as mentioned, there is a ready and available = resource of=20 what could become a most valuable commodity in the future, which = commodity is=20 doubly (*e-) enriched helium, which for lack of a better term, and = because I=20 like to coin words, will be called Helectronium (**He), that = is until some=20 better moniker comes along.
 
Where does one find this (**He) resource? Well, that part is easy, = assuming=20 that this line of reasoning is correct. In fact our government has been=20 essentially giving away to private industry (forcing it on them even) = what could=20 have been a national treasure - depleted uranium.
 
You know, the stuff that was pushed by insistent Pentagon procurers = onto=20 our arms manufacturers in order to be used in armor-piercing rounds, = especially=20 for use in places like Bosnia and Iraq, which had almost no good armor = to begin=20 with, but lots of children to pick up the spent rounds. But that's = another=20 story.
 
At one time we had literally millions of pounds of depleted uranium = stored=20 in drums around a particular facility in Oak Ridge Tennessee. It was = giving off,=20 probably pounds of (**He) per day for years... totally wasted. What = is the=20 energy content and rough value of (**He)?
 
A rough (high ball) guess of its potential energy content is = astounding,=20 considering that it might be able to convert a common odd-z heavy metal = like=20 Bismuth into a fissionable species... but let's don't go there...
 
Let's just say, for now, that maybe DoE should step in and = reconsider its=20 largess in giving depleted U away to almost any taker...
 
...and, most importantly, hope that some lurker to this thread = with=20 access to a good mass spec will start to look for (**He) in the gas = which is=20 given off from uranium or thorium decay.
 
Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0076_01C4BA9A.E9629B20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 25 18:21:06 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9Q1L3Rb026512; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:21:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9Q1L0dD026504; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:21:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:21:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001f01c4bafa$08cbf0b0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Dimensions of mass simplified Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:20:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001B_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56256 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001C_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0" ------=_NextPart_001_001C_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankSome years ago I wasted much time trying to explain the proper way = to measure liquid flow was by the use of a bucket...." but do not spill = any" because it introduces error. Along came mass flow meters and every = manufacturer advertized their's as a " true" mass flow meter. What that = means is they filled the bucket and then weighed the contents. =20 Of course, one must deal with evaporation ,spillage, residual remaining = in the bucket, etc. The only thing the industry could agree upon was = that errors of + - 2% of full range would be acceptable for standard = industrial flow measurement. The war continues to rage regarding mass = flow measurement. I can't help but giggle thinking about.. what it I introduced Grimer"s = explanation of mass to the petroleum industry? The reaction would = probably fall along lines like... lets not confuse what works with = science principles.=20 Conclusion...ideas for new forms of energy will come from individuals, = not the petroleum industry.. or should I say the commodities industry. = The petroleum industry, like the electric power industry is no more.. it = has all been reduced to commodities trading on the open market. Had a unit startup in a eastern state. The voltage imbalance on incoming = power was 17% ( part of the day) every morning at 3:30 a.m. the power = monitor would suffer a " ghost trip" Trying to explain that we must = begin living with dirty power is a lesson in futility. Like mass, there = are things we just don't talk about anymore. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001C_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Some years ago I wasted much time trying to explain the proper way = to=20 measure liquid flow was by the use of a bucket...." but do not spill = any"=20 because it introduces error. Along came mass flow meters and every = manufacturer=20 advertized their's as a " true" mass flow meter. What that means is they = filled=20 the bucket and then weighed the contents.
 
Of course, one must deal with evaporation ,spillage, residual = remaining in=20 the bucket, etc. The only thing the industry could agree upon was that = errors of=20 + - 2% of full range would be acceptable for standard industrial flow=20 measurement. The war continues to rage regarding mass flow = measurement.
 
I can't help but giggle thinking about.. what it I introduced = Grimer"s=20 explanation of mass to the petroleum industry? The reaction would = probably fall=20 along lines like... lets not confuse what works with science principles. =
 
Conclusion...ideas for new forms of energy will come from = individuals, not=20 the petroleum industry.. or should I say the commodities industry. The = petroleum=20 industry, like the electric power industry is no more.. it has all = been=20 reduced to commodities trading on the open market.
 
Had a unit startup in a eastern state. The voltage imbalance on = incoming=20 power was 17% ( part of the day) every morning at 3:30 a.m. = the power=20 monitor would suffer a " ghost trip" Trying to explain that we must = begin living=20 with dirty power is a lesson in futility. Like mass, there are things we = just=20 don't talk about anymore.
 
Richard
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_001C_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001a01c4baf9$f185fe50$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C4BAD0.08BDB1F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 26 07:59:31 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9QExOSZ026096; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 07:59:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9QExNgN025998; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 07:59:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 07:59:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041026155911.0068bd68@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:59:11 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56257 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In connection with a discussion on the Blaze Labs Yahoo site, I had reason to review some of my past departmental note - in particular, note N21/87. In it I referred to a paper by Hoyle and Narliker (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blazelabs/files/HOYLE%20Fred/). I was re-reading Hoyle's paper this morning when I came across this bit which is relevant to this thread. ========================================== "Plainly then, we cannot expect to arrive a conformally invariant system of dynamics so long as the mass of the particle is considered a fixed quantity belonging autonomously to the particle." ========================================== I have no idea what a "conformally invariant system of dynamics" is - but Fred seems to think it is a good thing. 8-) . So if he was still with us [d.2001] he would no doubt be pleased to find that mass is a property of substance which does not belong "autonomously to the particle". 8-) Another theme towards the end of his paper may be of interest to certain Vortexians. ============================================= In this representation...G...is proportional to T^-1. Such a variation would have a profound effect on astrophysics and geophysics. There are aspects of geophysics that seem as if they would be greatly helped by this kind of dependence. Steadily weakening gravity would gradually release the interior of the Earth from compression. It can be calculated that the radius of the Earth would be required to increase at about 10 km per 10^8 years. There is no possibility of this expansion being resisted by the crust, which must be cracked open repeatedly to make way for new surface material. At all times there would be an excess upward force on the crust at the limit of its strength. The possibility of large horizontal pressure differences, of order 10^9 dyne cm^2, also exists, provided in particular regions that excess pressure is conveyed to the immediate subsurface by fluid material. We are reminded in this connection of the old controversy concerning continental drift. Our impression is that, while modem evidence shows unequivocally that drift actually takes place, the early calculations demonstrating the need for exceedingly large forces, really remain valid. If this is so, we would be inclined to think that some such behaviour of G as is given by our model becomes essential for an understanding of the geophysical evidence. ============================================= Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 26 14:22:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9QLMYCV026072; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:22:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9QLMWbe026058; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:22:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:22:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.2.20041026231059.036b1ec0@212.77.101.166> X-Sender: blutransform@212.77.101.166 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.1.1 Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:21:07 +0200 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Horace Subject: Re: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A. X-WP-SPAM: NO AS1=NO(Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1) AS2=YES(1.000000) AS3=NO AS4=NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56258 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace, This paper might throw a monkey-wrench in your FTL Draft http://www.irims.org/quant-ph/030503/ Below is a presentation outlining the devastating blow that Ashfar experiments deal to some interpretations of QM. http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/PowerPoint/Boskone_0402.ppt Regards, Horace Smith At 15:50 2004.10.25, you wrote: >Nothing signifcantly new below, just improved form. There still seems to >be something of substance to this idea. > > > FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) > >A method is proposed here to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication >by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two >photons each having half the energy of the original photon. > >Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary >facilitator Charlie. Charlie uses a beam splitter to create two beams of >laser light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then >down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates >beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. Beams R2 and L2 are normal path or >"signal" photons through the down-converter, while beams R1 and L1 are >called "idler" photons. "Beam"here means a flow of individually detectable >photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of >communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and >L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at >nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first, but just >barely before Bob. > >Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference >pattern in a set of detectors arranged so it is feasible to rapidly and >with high probability determine whether an interference pattern is present >or not. The signal photon beams R2 and L2 can create such an interference >pattern because they are the two paths from a beam splitter. > >Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided Alice does not >put detectors in idler beams R1 and L1.[1] If Alice does place detectors >in both her beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of >Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference >pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of >numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments.[2] >If Alice sees an idler she knows which path the corresponding signal photon >took to Bob, and the interference wavefunction instantly collapses. Bob, >when his photons arrive shortly after Alice's corresponding photons, knows >the current state of Alice's detectors by whether he sees an interference >pattern or not. > >Since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since >Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to >make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light >communication from Alice to Bob is clearly a possible result. It might be >said that the communication can not be verified for years, but such >verification is in this case is not necessary. Bob does not require >verification or comparison to Alice's results to know the immediate state >of Alice's detectors, or to immediately detect a change of state of those >detectors, with sufficient speed and reliability to establish a practical >communication channel. Further, a similar channel can be established from >Bob to Alice, thus permitting immediate error detection and correction or >retransmission. > >Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and >the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data >rate FTL communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast >Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might >be as simple as her redirecting beams R1 and/or L1, or by switching on and >off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition >to achieving FTL communication, may be useful for determining exactly of >what an observation consists. > >An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending >a data bit (actually only a change of 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. A fiber pair from Charlie to Bob and Charlie to Alice could >be used, if desired, to create a single FTL communication channel. A >similar set of fiber pairs would be used for the return channel. 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. Assuming a sample of 100 photons to be >sufficient for determining interference, a photon transmission and >detection rate of 1.5 million photons per second is required. However, it >is not known what precisely constitutes an observation. It may be that >individual photon detection is not even necessary, but rather mere beam >intensity determination. > >References: > >[1] Kim et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol 84, no. 1, pp 1-5 >[2] Brian Green, *The Fabric of the Cosmos*, (New York, Alfred A Knopf, >2004), pp 193-197 > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 26 15:35:44 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9QMZenF004649; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:35:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9QMYw9t004331; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:34:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:34:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:40:50 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56259 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 PM 10/26/4, Horace wrote: >Horace, > >This paper might throw a monkey-wrench in your FTL Draft >http://www.irims.org/quant-ph/030503/ > >Below is a presentation outlining the devastating blow that Ashfar >experiments deal to some interpretations of QM. >http://f >aculty.washington.edu/jcramer/PowerPoint/Boskone_0402.ppt > > >Regards, >Horace Smith Thank you very much for the extremely relevant referances. It will take me a while to digest these, and I have already used up time I did not have just in order to develop the concept. I do have a couple immediate observations however, based on a quick glance at the Ashfar reference. First I note that Ashfar did not in fact tabulate individual photons, but rather he assumed the result would be the same if he did. This kind of distinction may in fact indicate a difficulty with converting the experiment I proposed into a very high baud rate implementation. On the other hand, it highlights a possible result I somewhat expected, and that is that a failure to account for the photons one at a time will lead to a blurring of the interference. It is thus of much scientific interest as to exactly how, experimentally and quantitatively, such blurring comes about as the data rate is increased. Second, I should point out that a complete benchtop analog of the experiment (i.e. of a single channel) that I suggested has indeed already been carried out, as referenced in [1] and [2], with the result that the interference pattern does indeed disappear when Alice uses her detectors, and reappears when the detectors are not in place. The results were accomplished one photon at a time however, not in a manner similar to Ashfar's experiments. >>[1] Kim et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol 84, no. 1, pp 1-5 >>[2] Brian Green, *The Fabric of the Cosmos*, (New York, Alfred A Knopf, >>2004), pp 193-197 What I have added to the experiment is merely a change in the relative relocation of three subsets of the components of the experiment to the distant locations Alice, Bob and Charlie. If merely changing the relative distance betweeen the components changes the results, then this would be a major experimental finding in itself. What I have suggested is a rearrangement of component locations that clealy results in FTL signaling unless the results themselves change. For experimental convenience additional mirrors may be required, and/or fiber related components, but there is no reason to expect the results to be changed by either of these additions, especailly if the benchtop results are not changed. If the benchtop results are changed by adding some mirrors, then I would expect that too would be a significant finding. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 07:48:29 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9REmOp4029417; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:48:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RElxhO029155; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:47:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:47:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410327134656320@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Chernobyl, Yusmar & Electronium Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:46:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9400c83c8ed340f969256506f6a2ef43070350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.24 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56260 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cogitating on the possibility of Electronium (*e-) production in Boiling water or "Swimming Pool" reactors and the peak of Over-Unity/ Cold Fusion Effects after the 1986 Chernobyl Disaster.......? http://www.ida.liu.se/~her/npp/demo.html Has your water tasted differently lately? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Cogitating on the possibility of Electronium (*e-) production in Boiling water or
"Swimming Pool" reactors and the peak of Over-Unity/ Cold Fusion Effects after
the 1986 Chernobyl Disaster.......?

http://www.ida.liu.se/~her/npp/demo.html

Has your water tasted differently lately?

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 08:14:34 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RFEQp4006020; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:14:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RFENZU005995; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:14:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:14:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003201c4bc37$7558e600$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Chicea Carbon Creation Counter-Commentary Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:13:03 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56261 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An extraordinary paper was presented at ICCF-10 entitled "Comment On Carbon Production In Deuterium-Metal Systems" by DAN CHICEA, Visiting Research Associate Professor at Portland State. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChiceaDcommentonc.pdf The experiment reveals that when titanium, palladium or a combination of them was loaded with deuterium, a considerable amount of carbon was found on the surface of the cathode after many days - merely as a result of high loading. These results suggest that there is a strong correlation between merely achieving a high loading ratio and the appearance of new elements, particularly carbon, on the cathode. How could this be? The author suggests that the appearance of carbon on palladium after being loaded with deuterium might be the result of the multi-body fusion of D, caused by a strong confinement inside the palladium or titanium lattice and in the presence of an increased "free" electron concentration. Of course he doesn't go into much detail about how SIX deuterium nuclei can all fit into a single cavity and fuse simultaneously. Despite the excellent experiment, he is almost certainly incorrect as to the explanation. I will suggest another possibility, involving a hypothetical chemical isomer of Helium which is being called Helectronium (**He) and which can be described as an alpha which is doubly enriched in the heavy electron electronium (*e-). The alpha particle which normally results from the cold fusion of 2 deuterium nuclei, in this hypothetical scenario, will have no kinetic vector and will thermalize where it is formed with the capture of two "heavy electrons" which we have been calling electronium (*e-), with the result being a highly compact helium atom/molecule which can act much like a neutron in certain situations, particularly when formed in triplicate. When D+D combines and fuses within a very confined matrix, instead of releasing a high energy gamma of 24 MeV, which it does in a plasma, the fusion reaction will result in *pair production* which is not at all atypical for high energy reactions, with most of the excess energy release going into the creation of up to two dozen electron-positron pairs, temporarily taking the form of short-lived positronium, which is the preferred transient form for electron-positron pair production. Some of these pairs, in the tight confines of the metal matrix will combine with valence electrons to form a stable electron-positron-electron disk "Triad". This is a most basic creation modality in string theory - the combination of triplet wave particles into stable mass. Everything in the observable universe was formed this way, and there is no reason to think that the modality cannot be ongoing. After this picosecond *implosion* type creation event, the rest of the excess energy, now downshifted considerably will outgas, forming the typical CF crater, which is seen in the SEMS images. The positron, for that brief instant of existence, will of course be rotating counter to two electrons, and the resultant entity will possess a net charge of (e-) just like a single electron, and a net spin of 1/2, but a mass of over twice, up to ~250 % of the mass of a single electron (figuring that the binding energy mass defect is given off as lower energy gammas). The excess mass which is normally found in all neutrons may be an indication that the (*e-) normally has a mass of about 1.28 MeV. IOW it is a heavy electron which has escaped detection previously because it is both rare and will seldom become a valence or conduction electron, so it cannot be "emitted" from a cathode. When an alpha picks up two of these to become (**He) , its resultant radius shrinks considerably and its effective charge is near zero but it will have a negative near-field. Now, it is suspected that the Helectronium itself, if three of them are formed simultaneously, may repeat this very same triplicate creation process, in situ. The result would be the extraordinarily high levels of Carbon, discovered by Chicea in this simple experiment. In effect, the three (**He) bosons will have formed in a two step process, a condensate which immediately takes on the wave function characteristics of carbon. In 1938, Kapitsa, Allen and Misener discovered that helium-4 became a new kind of matter, now known as a superfluid, at temperatures below 2.2 degrees Kelvin (K). Superfluid helium has many unusual properties, including the ability to flow upwards without dissipating energy (i.e. zero viscosity) and most importantly, the existence of quantized vortices . This low temperature is not seen in CF, that is true of course, but the extremely high effective pressure within a CF matrix, can give similar analogous results to low temperature. Both high pressure and cold temperatures have similar confinement and entropy reducing characteristics. At least that is the case which is being presented here for your consideration. In the case of the superfluid, it was quickly realized that the state was due to BEC-like condensation of the helium-4 atoms, which are bosons. In fact, many of the properties of superfluid helium also appear in the gaseous Bose-Einstein condensates created by Cornell and Wieman many years later. However, superfluid helium-4 is NOT referred to as a true BEC "Bose-Einstein condensate" because it is a liquid rather than a gas, which means that the interactions between the atoms are relatively strong. The original Bose-Einstein theory has to be heavily modified in order to describe it, and perhaps more modification is NOW needed. This is because the interaction when helectronium (**He) is substituted for helium as suggested in this situation of carbon creation, is now hypothesized to result in the appearance of a new solid, where one there was only deuterium - quite a feat of modern alchemy. There you have it... your Carbon Creation Counter-Commentary for the day. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 08:20:03 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RFJlp4007497; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:19:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RFJioo007470; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:19:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:19:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041027161922.0068c044@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:19:22 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Cc: info@blazelabs.com Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56262 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have often wondered why we can easily detect our angular motion with respect to the rest of the universe but not detect linear motion. Thanks to the dimensions of Mass being confirmed by Ing.Saviour's analysis, I now understand why. Say I am sitting in a closed room with no windows I have a bucket of water on a turntable. I rotate the turntable rapidly. As the water takes up the bucket's rotation I see the water surface curve as it goes down in the middle and up round the edges. I know that if I were in the bucket and rotating with the water then by knocking down the walls I would see the stars streaking across the night sky. Nothing could be much simpler than to detect absolute angular motion relative to the frame of reference of the fixed stars. In other words, relative to absolute space. Of course, stars are not completely fixed. They jiggle about a bit. So we have to think of the frame of reference for motion as the average position of all the heavenly bodies. Why then is it so difficult to detect the absolute linear motion relative to absolute space. If we use our imagination we can see that given a big enough space ship (the size of a billion galaxies say) which can travel at googleplex warp speeds then we could easily detect motion relative to the absolute frame of reference. ================================================ Captain James T. Kirk : What's all that banging and crashing on the nose of Enterprise MM, Spock? Science Officer Spock : That is the sound of galaxies bouncing off our materon enhanced force shields, captain. Mr Scott is testing out the new Googleplex warp drives." Captain James T. Kirk : Well I hope he soon packs it in. He's spilling my coffee. :-( ================================================ Let's go back to the bucket. Initially the surface of the water is flat. Well, that is to say, as far as I see or measure it's flat? But is it really flat? I mean, really REALLY flat? If I look up at the stars I know they are moving across the sky. I can't see the movement. It's so slow that it's below my threshold of perception for movement. However, the stars are further to the right now than they were an hour ago so I know that they MUST have moved. I know, therefore, that I am rotating. And I know the water in the bucket is rotating. So I know that the surface cannot be ABSOLUTELY 100.000000000000000000000000000000000000% flat. And if I was very clued up, like Horace, and knew about viscosity and drag and all that jazz, I could actually calculate just how non-flat the surface was. I also know that if I rotate the bucket clockwise at angular velocity omega-clockwise that the flatness of the surface will be a teeny-weeny bit different than if I rotate the bucket widdershins. This is because what I take to be omega-[no ang.vel.] is actually a very small rotation, omega-[teeny ang.vel.] with respect to the absolute frame of reference of the "fixed" stars. So the Absolute angular velocity is, omega-[no ang.vel.] minus omega-[teeny ang.vel.] for clockwise motion omega-[no ang.vel.] plus omega-[teeny ang.vel.] for widdershins. Of course, if you come from the land of Oz then it's the other way round coz Ozzies see everything upside-down, 8-) ======================================= In World War I, during a naval battle near the Falkland Islands (off the east coast of South America, about 52 degrees south latitude) between the German and British Navy, British gunners were surprised to see their salvos falling 100 yards to the left of the German ships. The engineers who designed the sighting mechanisms were well aware of the Coriolis deflection and had carefully considered it, however, they neglected the fact that not all sea battles occur in the Northern Hemisphere. Thus, during the engagement, the initial British shots fell at a distance from the targets equal to twice the Coriolis deflection. ======================================= The story is possibly a myth, but at least it's plausible, which is more than one can say for the "bath water" myth. Now the science of mechanics was developed at a time when people were only just getting their head round the idea that weight was merely property of substance and not a measure of substance. Mass was fine as a measure of substance until the last century when it was discovered that mass could be transmuted into velocity. At that moment mass ceased to become a measure of substance and became a property of substance. They should have listened to Leibniz. Motion can only come from motion. The dynamics of cannon balls was the same for all practical purposes whether the cannon was fired from a stationary cannon on land or a moving cannon at sea. Measurement was far too crude to detect any deviation from the classical "laws" governing momentum and energy. Whereas it is possible to make enormous changes in angular velocity with things like buckets relative to their intrinsic angular velocity (omega-intrinsic = omega-teeny) it is only possible to make teeny changes with things like buckets relative to their intrinsic linear velocity. "What is the intrinsic linear velocity of a bucket?" you ask. Good question. 8-) Well, the Silvertooth velocity of 378 kilometres per second towards Leo is a good starting point. Does this mean that if we tear down a french motorway at the speed limit of 110 km/h heading towards Leo, our car will be more massive than if we are parked? It does. And if we are heading away from Leo it will be less massive. Absolutely. What's more, if you are interested you, can calculate exactly how much less. Pointing towards Leo and parked it is moving at a local velocity of 0 km/s and a Absolute velocity of 378 km/s. Say your car has a mass of 1000 kg M.V = a constant where M = Mass = 1000 kg V = Absolute velocity = 378 km/s so our constant = 378,000 Now local speed of 110 km/h is (110/3600) = 0.031 km/s So Mass at speed limit towards Leo is, 1000(378.031/378) = 1000.082 kg And mass at speed limit away from Leo is, 1000(377.969/378) = 999.918 kg So if your head is hurting too much Mac, and you want to end it all by throwing yourself in front of a car on a French motorway, make sure you choose a car heading towards Leo rather than one heading away from Leo. ;-) To sum up then, We can detect absolute angular velocity easily at the engineering level because we can rotate a body at an angular velocity which is vastly greater than the body's intrinsic angular velocity. In contrast, we cannot detect absolute linear velocity at the engineering level because we can only translate a body at a linear velocity which is a small fraction of the body's intrinsic linear velocity. Cheers Grimer ================================ "Our fault, dear Brutus is in ourselves, not in our stars..." ================================ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 11:19:43 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RIJcaN029445; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:19:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RIJa08029426; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:19:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:19:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041027181929.5044.qmail@web54506.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:19:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041027161922.0068c044@pop.freeserve.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1058236797-1098901169=:4563" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56263 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-1058236797-1098901169=:4563 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii OK, Ive been kinda following along (and just went back and re-read some of this stuff) A few things that may have been overlooked. According to Relativity (which I have problems with, but thats another story) Mass increases with velocity. Thus for a given object, MV cannot equal a constant. It only equals a constant as a system. If Speed is equal to the magnitude of the summed Velocity vectors, then V in momentum and KE equations actually refers to Speed. If it is possible by dimensional analyses to come up with various different dimensional notations for Mass that are not identical (T/L, T^2/L^2, T^3/L^3) then perhaps each is actually referring to a different property of matter, said properties (M, M', M") being normally associated with each other, the way temperature and star color are associated. OTOH if MV does equal a constant, perhaps that explains why photons appear to be massless. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-1058236797-1098901169=:4563 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
OK, Ive been kinda following along (and just went back and re-read some of this stuff)
 
A few things that may have been overlooked.
 
According to Relativity (which I have problems with, but thats another story) Mass increases with velocity.  Thus for a given object, MV cannot equal a constant.  It only equals a constant as a system.
 
If Speed is equal to the magnitude of the summed Velocity vectors, then V in momentum and KE equations actually refers to Speed.
 
If it is possible by dimensional analyses to come up with various different dimensional notations for Mass that are not identical (T/L, T^2/L^2, T^3/L^3) then perhaps each is actually referring to a different property of matter, said properties (M, M', M") being normally associated with each other, the way temperature and star color are associated.
 
OTOH if MV does equal a constant, perhaps that explains why photons appear to be massless.


Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-1058236797-1098901169=:4563-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 12:23:19 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RJN4p4002393; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:23:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RJN2Xh002376; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:23:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:23:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041027202238.006885fc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:22:38 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: <7qIRkC.A.Al.VW_fBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56264 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------------------------------------------------------ Uncertainty in the Universal Gravitational Constant G. ------------------------------------------------------ I remember once reading a book or paper, I forget which, where the chap was pondering on why the universal gravitational constant, G, was one of the most poorly defined fundamental constants. In my 1968 coy if Kaye and Laby's Tables of physical and chemical constants the value is given as 6.670_10^-8_cm^3_g^-1_s^-2 In the margin of K&L I have a pencilled note that the value of G in the 1973 edition is 6.673. When I looked up G on the internet I got a value of 6.672. Now I wonder....Could it just be the lack of precision in G is because G isn't actually a constant at all, but is really a variable? Possibly variation in inertial mass with change in velocity -> Leo gives rise to a second order perturbation in gravitational mass. Perhaps we ought to couple the word "allegedly", to the word "constant". Still, it shouldn't be too difficult to sort it out one way or the other since G should vary with the seasons. Trouble is, any variation like that would have been in great danger of being seen as an artifact. Indeed as a blasphemy on the divine Newton. Still, it would be very interesting to examine the history of G measurement to find what it reveals. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 12:34:52 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RJYhaN030474; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:34:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RJYf1R030459; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:34:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:34:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041027203428.0067af78@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:34:28 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56265 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------------------------------------------------------ Uncertainty in the Universal Gravitational Constant G. ------------------------------------------------------ Mmm....First thing I came across was this. =================================================== http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant A recent review (Gillies, 1997) shows that published values of G have varied rather broadly, and some recent measurements of high precision are, in fact, mutually exclusive. =================================================== There doesn't seem to be any uncertainty about G's uncertainty then, does there! Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 13:17:47 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RKHbp4024231; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:17:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RKHa68024217; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:17:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:17:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041027211724.006b3660@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:17:24 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: <1hsKy.A.V6F.gJAgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56266 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:19 am 27-10-04 -0700, you wrote: >OK, I've been kinda following along (and just went back and re-read some of this stuff) > >A few things that may have been overlooked. It seems to me that many things have been overlooked ========================================================= What is disastrous is not the rejection of classical science but the way it has been rejected. It is wrongly believed it could progress indefinitely and it ran into a dead end about the year 1900; but scientists failed to stop at the same time in order to contemplate and reflect upon the barrier, they did not try to describe it and define it and, having taken it into account, to draw some general conclusion from it; instead they rushed violently past it, leaving classical science behind them. And why should we be surprised at this? For are they not paid to forge continually ahead? Nobody advances in his career, or reputation, or gets a Nobel prize, by standing still. To cease voluntarily from forging ahead, any brilliantly gifted scientist would need to be a saint or a hero, and why should he be a saint or a hero? With rare exceptions there are none to be found among the members of other professions. So the scientists forged ahead without revising anything, because any revision would have seemed a retrogression; they merely made an addition. --------------------------------------------------------- "La Science et nous" Simone Weil ========================================================= >According to Relativity (which I have problems with, but that's another story) Mass increases with velocity. Thus for a given object, MV cannot equal a constant. It only equals a constant as a system. Confusing, isn't it. :-) But that is only to be expected at this stage. Hang in there Merlyn. >If Speed is equal to the magnitude of the summed Velocity vectors, then V in momentum and KE equations actually refers to Speed. > >If it is possible by dimensional analyses to come up with various different dimensional notations for Mass that are not identical (T/L, T^2/L^2, T^3/L^3) then perhaps each is actually referring to a different property of matter, Mmm....And one can be increasing while the others are decreasing say. said properties (M, M', M") being normally associated with each other, the way temperature and star color are associated. Very good. You are getting the general hang of things :-) >OTOH if MV does equal a constant, perhaps that explains why photons appear to be massless. And materons - and no doubt a host of other massless particles too > > >Merlyn >Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist oComplete - You start. We finish. Well, I've started - and you seem to be picking things up fast so you will probably "finish" at the winning post well before me, Merlyn. You've certainly got the right trade description for this stuff. ;-) Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 14:05:24 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RL5GaN010844; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:05:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RL5Dx2010806; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:05:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:05:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041027220500.0068b620@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:05:00 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56267 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------------------------------------------------------ Uncertainty in the Universal Gravitational Constant G. ------------------------------------------------------ How's about this then? 8-) At least they admit it - especially the Russkies. ====================================================== http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/gconst.html ------------------------------------------------------ Recently the value of G has been called into question by new measurements from respected research teams in Germany, New Zealand, and Russia. The new values disagree wildly. For example, a team from the German Institute of Standards led by W. Michaelis obtained a value for G that is 0.6% larger than the accepted value; a group from the University of Wuppertal in Germany led by Hinrich Meyer found a value that is 0.06% lower, and Mark Fitzgerald and collaborators at Measurement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand measured a value that is 0.1% lower. The Russian group found a curious space and time variation of G of up to 0.7% The collection of these new results suggests that the uncertainty in G could be much larger than originally thought. This controversy has spurred several efforts to make a more reliable measure of G. ====================================================== Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 15:08:31 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RM8Np4001864; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:08:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RM8LWn001853; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:08:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:08:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:14:09 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: <4iWT_D.A.0c.UxBgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56268 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A major blunder repaired. FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #6) A method is proposed here to achieve faster than light (FTL) communication by the use of down-converters. A down-converter splits a photon into two photons each having half the energy of the original photon. Suppose we have a sender Alice, a receiver Bob, and an intermediary facilitator Charlie. Charlie uses a beam splitter to create two beams of laser light: L the left beam and R, the right beam. Charlie then down-converts the L beam to create beams L1 and L2, and similarly creates beams R1 and R2 from the beam R. Beams R2 and L2 are normal path or "signal" photons through the down-converter, while beams R1 and L1 are called "idler" photons. "Beam" here means a flow of individually detectable photons sent in very short intervals so as to provide a useful rate of communication. Charlie directs beams L1 and R1 to Alice and beams R2 and L2 to Bob. The corresponding photons arrive at both Bob and Alice at nearly the same time, but here assume Alice receives hers first, but just barely before Bob. Bob directs beams R2 and L2 such that they can create an interference pattern in a set of detectors arranged so it is feasible to rapidly and with high probability determine whether an interference pattern is present or not. The signal photon beams R2 and L2 can create such an interference pattern because they are the two paths from a beam splitter. Alice can direct her idler beams L1 and R1 at will, in a co-linear fashion, to opposing sides of a half silvered mirror, but at an angle of 45 degrees. Fig.1, which requires fixed font (e.g courrier) to view, shows this configuration. Half of L1 and half of R1 then goes to a detector DL. Similarly, half of L1 and half of R1 then goes to a detector DR. The beams emerging from both sides of the mirror are thus fully mixed, and the which-path information for all photons is lost. In this case Bob must see an interference pattern. If Alice then diverts her beams directly to detectors, the which-way information is then restored to 100 percent available, and Bob must see a bimodal distribution. Full Mirror R1--->-------------\ | | Half Mirror L1---->------------\----------------------DL | | DR Fig. 1 - Alice's which-path scrambler Bob will in fact see such an interference pattern provided the which-path information is lost for idler beams R1 and L1.[1] If Alice does place detectors directly in both her idler beams, then this is equivalent to knowing which path each of Bob's photons have traveled, and thus Bob can observe no interference pattern. This known-path-no-interference result has been characteristic of numerous versions of the two slit or two path interference experiments.[2] If Alice detects directly and sees an idler she knows which path the corresponding signal photon took to Bob, and the interference wavefunction instantly collapses. Bob, when his photons arrive shortly after Alice's corresponding photons, knows the current state of Alice's detectors by whether he sees an interference pattern or not. Since Alice and Bob could be light years away from each other, and since Alice thus might have years from the time Charlie released the photons to make the choice to detect or not detect her photons, faster than light communication from Alice to Bob is clearly a possible result. It might be said that the communication can not be verified for years, but such verification is in this case not necessary. Bob does not require verification or comparison to Alice's results to know the immediate state of Alice's detectors, or to immediately detect a change of state of those detectors, with sufficient speed and reliability to establish a practical communication channel. Further, a similar channel can be established from Bob to Alice, thus permitting immediate error detection and correction or retransmission. Assuming that beams adequate for fast communication can be generated and the resulting interference detected sufficiently fast, achieving high data rate FTL communication at short range then primarily boils down to how fast Alice can switch from a detecting mode to a non-detecting mode. This might be as simple as her redirecting beams R1 and/or L1, or by switching on and off the information from her detectors. This experiment then, in addition to achieving FTL communication, may be useful for determining exactly of what an observation consists. An experiment requiring the simplest possible message would involve sending a data bit (actually only a change of 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. A fiber pair from Charlie to Bob and Charlie to Alice could be used, if desired, to create a single FTL communication channel. A similar set of fiber pairs would be used for the return channel. 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. Assuming a sample of 100 photons to be sufficient for determining interference, a photon transmission and detection rate of 1.5 million photons per second is required. However, it is not known what precisely constitutes an observation. It may be that individual photon detection is not even necessary, but rather mere beam intensity determination is sufficient. References: [1] Kim et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol 84, no. 1, pp 1-5 [2] Brian Green, *The Fabric of the Cosmos*, (New York, Alfred A Knopf, 2004), pp 193-197 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 16:01:16 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9RN1Adx025920; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:01:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9RN19dr025915; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:01:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:01:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.2.20041028003946.043f21b0@212.77.101.166> X-Sender: blutransform@212.77.101.166 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.1.1 Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:59:40 +0200 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Horace Subject: Alt interpretation of mass increase In-Reply-To: <20041027181929.5044.qmail@web54506.mail.yahoo.com> References: <2.2.32.20041027161922.0068c044@pop.freeserve.net> <20041027181929.5044.qmail@web54506.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A. X-WP-SPAM: NO AS1=NO(Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1) AS2=YES(0.999998) AS3=NO AS4=NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56271 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Adam, Before Einstein Newton ruled and acceleration used to be equal to F/m Then it was noticed that acceleration of massive particles in cyclotrons decreased as their velocity increased. There were three logical interpretations of this experimental evidence: 1) Force decreases as velocity increases 2) Mass increases as velocity increases 3) Both of the above Einstein arbitrarily chose interpretation #2, although there was no direct evidence of mass increase. Additionally all the experiments accelerating massive particles to high velocities used the electric or magnetic forces to accomplish this feat. It is conceivable that the interpretation #1 or #3 is correct too, and the effect of decreasing force with increasing velocity is only the property of EM interactions, which vanish at the speed of light. There is no experimental evidence that shows decreasing acceleration of mass with increasing velocity for non-EM type of forces. (e.g. caused by chemical explosions in a rocket) This is why I have a problem with the Special Theory of relativity, too. Regards, Horace Smith At 20:19 2004.10.27, Adam Cox wrote: > >According to Relativity (which I have problems with, but thats another story) Mass increases with velocity. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 17:03:45 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9S03Zdx018799; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:03:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9S03XcK018771; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:03:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:03:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: e2/h was RE: Dimensions of mass Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:33:11 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041027161922.0068c044@pop.freeserve.net> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56272 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Frank. That all was a rather convoluted way of saying that a constant angular velocity gives rise to a ponderable force where a constant linear velocity does not. We'll not make any further headway until we bring together Michelson, Morley AND Gale. You write: >Well, the Silvertooth velocity of 378 kilometres per second >towards Leo is a good starting point. Yes, this is the Great Attractor. All mass in the visible sky is streaming towards that point in Leo. Bonus points for anyone with an explanation of how this is possible with Hubble expansion? Does one really preclude the other? As Adam, our Magickal Engineer knows, "as above, so below". That macroscopic streaming velocity of our local part of the universe is within' spittin' distance of the microscopic velocity e^2/h = 348 km/s I'm using CGS units here, don't try this at home with your SI units (grin). If we can squeeze 8 percent out of silvertooths measurement ( or the astrophysicists ) then we might have something here. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 17:23:49 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9S0Ngdx028266; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:23:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9S0NfrO028250; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:23:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:23:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:29:36 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #5) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56273 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 PM 10/26/4, Horace [Smith] wrote: >Horace, > >This paper might throw a monkey-wrench in your FTL Draft >http://www.irims.org/quant-ph/030503/ A brief treatise by Unruh which discounts the conclusion reached by Afshar: I am still way behind on my reading. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 19:02:12 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9S222fB025315; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:02:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9S221mh025284; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:02:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:02:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <015e01c4bc91$efa58b20$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: Subject: Re: e2/h was RE: Dimensions of mass Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:58:36 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56274 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Keith Nagel writes > Yes, this is the Great Attractor. All mass in the visible > sky is streaming towards that point in Leo. Bonus points for anyone with > an explanation of how this is possible with Hubble expansion? > Does one really preclude the other? Not really "all mass" in the visible sky, unless you mean "visible to the naked eye" - only the mass which is blue-shifted wrt to our solar system is moving towards the great attractor. Or else, Keith is subtly telling us that he is a "house of mirrors" proponent... This (blue-shifted wrt to our solar system) is our "local group" and a few thousand other galaxies in the Virgo supercluster. No galaxy, according to the experts, which is red-shifted, which is "supposedly" over 99% of the universe, is moving towards the great attractor. All those other superclusters have their own attractors. But all those red-shifted galaxies are MUCH more distant and we can state with some certainty that they are not really in our 3-space. We (Earth) are arguable only 'connected' in 3-space to every object in the universe whose light is blue-shifted. Outside of that, all bets are really off. That blue-shifted 3-space would consist of not only what is known as our "local group" of galaxies but everything in a roughly oval oblong pod, AKA the Virgo supercluster, which is blue shifted and also attracted to the aforementioned "Great Attractor," located in the night sky at about Sagittarius, 14 degrees and two minutes. For those who don't have a generalized picture of this four-layered model consider this hierarchy. The Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are the dominant structures in a cluster called the Local Group which is, in turn, an outlying member of the Virgo supercluster which is "supposedly" one of about 10,000 other superclusters which make up the universe. That is, if you buy into the most accepted cosmological model which has emerged in the last 5-6 years. Andromeda itself is almost a mirror image of the Milky Way about 2.2 million light-years away - and is speeding toward us at 200,000 miles per hour (unless its light also is being somehow "reflected"... and we are really looking at ourselves... ;-) But on top of that, our entire Local Group is hurtling toward the center of the Virgo cluster at one million miles per hour. If that was "all there is" then the universe would be closed. It is quite possible, of course, that everything which is not blue-shifted is in reality a "mirror image" of objects which are in our supercluster, and that the Universe is actually much smaller and younger than we have imagined. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 27 23:48:48 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9S6lufB021874; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:48:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9S6lmPm021800; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:47:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:47:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041028074720.00691430@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:47:20 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Alt interpretation of mass increase Resent-Message-ID: <4JanMB.A.PUF.QYJgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56275 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:59 am 28-10-04 +0200, you wrote: >Adam, > >Before Einstein Newton ruled and acceleration used to be equal to F/m >Then it was noticed that acceleration of massive particles in cyclotrons decreased as their velocity increased. > >There were three logical interpretations of this experimental evidence: >1) Force decreases as velocity increases >2) Mass increases as velocity increases >3) Both of the above > >Einstein arbitrarily chose interpretation #2, although there was no direct evidence of mass increase. > >Additionally all the experiments accelerating massive particles to high velocities used the electric or magnetic forces to accomplish this feat. > >It is conceivable that the interpretation #1 or #3 is correct too, and the effect of decreasing force with increasing velocity is only the property of EM interactions, which vanish at the speed of light. > >There is no experimental evidence that shows decreasing acceleration of mass with increasing velocity for non-EM type of forces. (e.g. caused by chemical explosions in a rocket) > >This is why I have a problem with the Special Theory of relativity, too. > > >Regards, >Horace Smith That's a very clear cut statement of the situation Horace. Even I understood it, so it must have been. 8-). I had vaguely appreciated that, --------------------------------------------------- "all the experiments accelerating massive particles to high velocities used the electric or magnetic forces to accomplish this feat." --------------------------------------------------- But I certainly didn't know that, -------------------------------------------------------- "There is no experimental evidence that shows decreasing acceleration of mass with increasing velocity for non-EM type of forces. (e.g. caused by chemical explosions in a rocket)" -------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for that. Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 00:20:37 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9S7KQfB029405; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:20:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9S7KPfV029396; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:20:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:20:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041028082009.0069583c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:20:09 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: e2/h was RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56276 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:33 pm 27-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Frank. > >That all was a rather convoluted way of saying that a constant angular >velocity gives rise to a ponderable force where a constant >linear velocity does not. We'll not make any further headway until >we bring together Michelson, Morley AND Gale. > >You write: >>Well, the Silvertooth velocity of 378 kilometres per second >>towards Leo is a good starting point. > >Yes, this is the Great Attractor. All mass in the visible >sky is streaming towards that point in Leo. Bonus points for anyone with >an explanation of how this is possible with Hubble expansion? >Does one really preclude the other? > >As Adam, our Magickal Engineer knows, "as above, so below". That >macroscopic streaming velocity of our local part of the universe >is within' spittin' distance of the microscopic velocity > > e^2/h = 348 km/s > >I'm using CGS units here, don't try this at home with your SI units (grin). > >If we can squeeze 8 percent out of Silvertooth's measurement >( or the astrophysicists ) then we might have something here. > > >K. In the circumstances I would think "8 percent" is bugger all. For me, the fact that it is the right order of magnitude is good enough. But you will have to explain to me - in Physics for Dummies terms - exactly what, e^2/h = 348 km/s means. Or a intelligible reference would do. I certainly like the hierarchical sound of "as above, so below". It reminds me of my ...upon the clouds of heaven... thread, though I suppose that would be more a case of *as below, so above* ;-) Cheers Frank Incidently, I owe you an apology about OCR_ing. I tried to OCR one of my jpeg pages and it came out all gobbledegook. I now realise that cutting the original scan file size down to a point where it was still reasonably readable on screen had crippled it for OCR. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 05:59:46 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SCxefB003488; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:59:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SCxcSD003481; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:59:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 05:59:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <8340e843-ab9c-4943-a09a-21356999bd86> Message-ID: <000a01c4bced$f4ae6f40$335accd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <2.2.32.20041028074720.00691430@pop.freeserve.net> Subject: Re: Alt interpretation of mass increase Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:35:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: <8ejsPD.A.V2.50OgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56277 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer, quoting Horace Smith, wrote: > > But I certainly didn't know that, > -------------------------------------------------------- > "There is no experimental evidence that shows decreasing > acceleration of mass with increasing velocity for non-EM > type of forces. (e.g. caused by chemical explosions in > a rocket)" > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for that. But that does not prove (test) the proposition that the apparent mass increase at high velocities is caused by EM effects and not just the increase in velocity. The problem is that AFAIK no chemical reaction has propelled a mass to the velocities necessary for the mass increase to be detected. Thus the stuatement is true --- no experimental evidence --- but because the necessary experiment probably cannot be performed on Earth. Mike Carrell > > Cheers > > Grimer > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 06:39:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SDdLdx027259; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 06:39:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SDdJkn027237; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 06:39:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 06:39:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net Message-ID: <4180F4ED.3E06532E@centurytel.net> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 13:32:29 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" 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: Dimensions of mass References: <2.2.32.20041027161922.0068c044@pop.freeserve.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xa" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xa" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56278 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk wrote: I have often wondered why we can easily detect our angular motion with respect to the rest of the universe but not detect linear motion. Thanks to the dimensions of Mass being confirmed by Ing.Saviour's analysis, I now understand why. Say I am sitting in a closed room with no windows I have a bucket of water on a turntable. I rotate the turntable rapidly. As the water takes up the bucket's rotation I see the water surface curve as it goes down in the middle and up round the edges ... Why then is it so difficult to detect the absolute linear motion relative to absolute space. If we use our imagination we can see that given a big enough space ship (the size of a billion galaxies say) which can travel at googleplex warp speeds then we could easily detect motion relative to the absolute frame of reference. f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk quoted: ``In World War I, during a naval battle near the Falkland Islands (off the east coast of South America, about 52 degrees south latitude) between the German and British Navy, British gunners were surprised to see their salvos falling 100 yards to the left of the German ships. The engineers who designed the sighting mechanisms were well aware of the Coriolis deflection and had carefully considered it, however, they neglected the fact that not all sea battles occur in the Northern Hemisphere. Thus, during the engagement, the initial British shots fell at a distance from the targets equal to twice the Coriolis deflection.'' Hi All, The above is part of a fascinating post. But there is an alternative (mentioned below) to ``motion relative to the absolute frame of reference'' which demonstrates that the centrifugal and Coriolis forces are not "virtual", and also which produces excellent design equations. Jack Smith Quoting from "Relational Mechanics" by Andre K. T. Assis, 1999 (This book can be purchased at Amazon.com.) p. 66 "Newton's Bucket Experiment ... What is important to stress here and in the previous examples of the circular orbit of the planets and of the two globes, is that this centrifugal force has no physical origin in Newtonian mechanics ... p. 217 "... relational mechanics predicts the appearance of a real gravitational centrifugal force exerted by the distant universe spinning around the bucket. We can then say that this centrifugal force presses the water against the wall of the bucket making the water rise on this wall until the centrifugal force is balanced by the gradient of pressure." p.259 "... the main lines ... have already been laid down: NO ABSOLUTE SPACE OR TIME [my caps]; only relational quantities should be involved; all forces should come from interactions between material bodies; for point particles the force should be directed along the line joining them and should obey the principle of action and reaction; ..." p. 261 "... We have been able to eplain the coincidence of Newtonian mechanics that the universe as a whole does not rotate relative to absolute space or to any inertial frame of reference. In other words, we have explained why the kinematical rotation of the earth is identical to its dynamical rotation ... We have derived the fact that all inertial forces of Newtonian mechanics, like the centrifugal force or Coriolis forces, are real forces ... This also explains the concavity in Newton's bucket as due to a relative rotation between the water and the distant universe ..." p. 219 "Foucault's Pendulum ... What should be emphasized again is that relational mechanics offers a physical explanation of the Coriolis force. It is now seen as a real gravitational force due to a relative rotation between the earth and the frame of distant galaxies," From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 08:52:00 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SFppfB003698; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:51:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SFpnJJ003687; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:51:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:51:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041028155141.24427.qmail@web54508.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:51:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: Re: Dimensions of mass To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <4180F4ED.3E06532E@centurytel.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1713904955-1098978701=:21229" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56279 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-1713904955-1098978701=:21229 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii But can a constantly accelerating frame of reference be used? If it were possible to base a frame of reference on the rotating bucket, then the distant galaxies would be traveling around that bucket at greater than the speed of light. "Taylor J. Smith" wrote:[snip] Jack Smith Quoting from "Relational Mechanics" by Andre K. T. Assis, 1999 (This book can be purchased at Amazon.com.) p. 66 "Newton's Bucket Experiment ... What is important to stress here and in the previous examples of the circular orbit of the planets and of the two globes, is that this centrifugal force has no physical origin in Newtonian mechanics ... p. 217 "... relational mechanics predicts the appearance of a real gravitational centrifugal force exerted by the distant universe spinning around the bucket. We can then say that this centrifugal force presses the water against the wall of the bucket making the water rise on this wall until the centrifugal force is balanced by the gradient of pressure." p.259 "... the main lines ... have already been laid down: NO ABSOLUTE SPACE OR TIME [my caps]; only relational quantities should be involved; all forces should come from interactions between material bodies; for point particles the force should be directed along the line joining them and should obey the principle of action and reaction; ..." p. 261 "... We have been able to eplain the coincidence of Newtonian mechanics that the universe as a whole does not rotate relative to absolute space or to any inertial frame of reference. In other words, we have explained why the kinematical rotation of the earth is identical to its dynamical rotation ... We have derived the fact that all inertial forces of Newtonian mechanics, like the centrifugal force or Coriolis forces, are real forces ... This also explains the concavity in Newton's bucket as due to a relative rotation between the water and the distant universe ..." p. 219 "Foucault's Pendulum ... What should be emphasized again is that relational mechanics offers a physical explanation of the Coriolis force. It is now seen as a real gravitational force due to a relative rotation between the earth and the frame of distant galaxies," [snip] Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-1713904955-1098978701=:21229 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
But can a constantly accelerating frame of reference be used?  If it were possible to base a frame of reference on the rotating bucket, then the distant galaxies would be traveling around that bucket at greater than the speed of light.

"Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11@centurytel.net> wrote:
[snip]
Jack Smith

Quoting from "Relational Mechanics" by Andre K. T. Assis,
1999 (This book can be purchased at Amazon.com.)

p. 66

"Newton's Bucket Experiment

... What is important to stress here and in the previous
examples of the circular orbit of the planets and of the
two globes, is that this centrifugal force has no physical
origin in Newtonian mechanics ...

p. 217

"... relational mechanics predicts the appearance of a
real gravitational centrifugal force exerted by the distant
universe spinning around the bucket. We can then say that
this centrifugal force presses the water against the wall
of the bucket making the water rise on this wall until the
centrifugal force is balanced by the gradient of pressure."

p.259

"... the main lines ... have already been laid down:

NO ABSOLUTE SPACE OR TIME [my caps];

only relational quantities should be involved;

all forces should come from interactions between material
bodies;

for point particles the force should be directed along the
line joining them and should obey the principle of action
and reaction; ..."

p. 261

"... We have been able to eplain the coincidence of
Newtonian mechanics that the universe as a whole does
not rotate relative to absolute space or to any inertial
frame of reference. In other words, we have explained why
the kinematical rotation of the earth is identical to its
dynamical rotation ...

We have derived the fact that all inertial forces
of Newtonian mechanics, like the centrifugal force or
Coriolis forces, are real forces ... This also explains
the concavity in Newton's bucket as due to a relative
rotation between the water and the distant universe ..."

p. 219

"Foucault's Pendulum

... What should be emphasized again is that relational
mechanics offers a physical explanation of the Coriolis
force. It is now seen as a real gravitational force due
to a relative rotation between the earth and the frame of
distant galaxies,"

[snip]


Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-1713904955-1098978701=:21229-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 09:00:54 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SG0mdx022520; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:00:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SG0kY6022509; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:00:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:00:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041028160039.97692.qmail@web54504.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:00:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: Gravity and Light To: Vortex MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1974984764-1098979239=:97638" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56280 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-1974984764-1098979239=:97638 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? Not so. I propose that "gravitational lensing" is nothing of the sort, merely a change in the optical density of the vacuum. The vacuum of space is actually composed of a thin "atmosphere" of particles. It stands to reason that the vacuum atmosphere would be thicker as it neared a gravitational source, thus implying a thickening of the optical density of the vacuum. Then we simply have standard diffraction. Now, IANAP (I am not a physicist) so I can't off the top of my head determine what the cosequences of this would be, but I am certain that there would most definitely be consequences. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --0-1974984764-1098979239=:97638 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Now, suppose photons have no mass at all.  How can they be affected by gravity lensing?  This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist.  To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct?
 
Not so.  I propose that "gravitational lensing" is nothing of the sort, merely a change in the optical density of the vacuum.  The vacuum of space is actually composed of a thin "atmosphere" of particles.  It stands to reason that the vacuum atmosphere would be thicker as it neared a gravitational source, thus implying a thickening of the optical density of the vacuum.  Then we simply have standard diffraction.
 
Now, IANAP (I am not a physicist) so I can't off the top of my head determine what the cosequences of this would be, but I am certain that there would most definitely be consequences.


Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com --0-1974984764-1098979239=:97638-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 09:07:27 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SG7IfB007586; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:07:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SG7H43007553; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:07:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:07:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:07:07 EDT Subject: Re: Gravity and Light To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56281 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes: > Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by > gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be > affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? > good question. I have looked at that problem myself. Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. Chapter 7 Frank Z --part1_74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01= :04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes:

Now, suppose photons have no ma= ss at all.  How can they be affected by gravity lensing?  This eff= ect has been demonstrated, so it must exist.  To be affected by gravity= the photons must have mass, correct?


good question.  I have looked at that problem myself.  Analysis is= towards the end of the chapter. 

Chapter 7=

Frank Z --part1_74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 09:25:14 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SGP2fB013971; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:25:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SGP01u013931; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:25:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:25:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410428152358470@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Potassium-40, CF Cells & Electronium Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:23:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404bc0b80a90caa0cd83c73f6ae716360c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.73 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56282 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII There might be enough Electronium (*e-) loaded into most potassium compounds to effect the yield in Pd CF cells or OU experiments. OTOH, Potassium-40 enrichment by neutron addition to potassium-39 compounds (KOH, K2CO3 or KHCO3) may be required. "Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring nucleid. It was formed together with the other elements during the creation of the earth. Due to its long halflife of 1.28 billion years it is still present on earth. K-40 is the only radioactive isotope of potassium and is present in an amount of 0.0119% in this natural element. Further potassium include isotopes K-39 and K-41 with frequencies of respectively 93% and 6.9%. One gram of natural potassium contains 31.6 Bq K-40 (SEELMANN-EGGEBERT et al, 1981). Hence the activity of K-40 can be used to quantitatively determine total potassium. K-40 decays emitting ß-rays to stable Calcium-40 with a disintegration probability of 89% and to stable Argon-40 emitting gamma rays at a rate of 11% (LEDERER et al, 1967). K-40 activity is determined by gamma ray decay at an energy of 1.461 keV. Potassium as well as K-40 are present in most terrestrial and biological substances, for ex. it is a macronutrient for plants. The body of a 70 kg person contains ca. 140 g of potassium and thus an activity of 4000 Bq K-40. Due to its pesence in almost all foods this nucleid accounts for the greatest proportion of the naturally occurring radiation load through ingestion among people." Potassium-40 is also connected to heating of the earth: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7/5/4/1 Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

There might be enough Electronium (*e-) loaded into most potassium compounds to effect
the yield in Pd CF cells or OU  experiments.
 
OTOH, Potassium-40 enrichment by neutron addition to potassium-39 compounds
(KOH, K2CO3 or KHCO3) may be required.
 
"Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring nucleid. It was formed together with the other elements during the creation of the earth. Due to its long halflife of 1.28 billion years it is still present on earth. K-40 is the only radioactive isotope of potassium and is present in an amount of 0.0119% in this natural element.  Further potassium include isotopes K-39 and K-41 with frequencies of respectively  93% and 6.9%. One gram of natural potassium contains 31.6 Bq K-40 (SEELMANN-EGGEBERT et al, 1981). Hence the activity of K-40 can be used to quantitatively determine total potassium. K-40 decays emitting ß-rays to stable Calcium-40 with a disintegration probability of 89%  and to stable Argon-40 emitting gamma rays at a rate of 11% (LEDERER et al, 1967). K-40 activity is determined by gamma ray decay at an energy of 1.461 keV. Potassium as well as K-40 are present in most terrestrial and biological substances, for ex. it is a macronutrient for plants. The body of a 70 kg person contains ca. 140 g of potassium and thus an activity of 4000 Bq K-40.  Due to its pesence in almost all foods this nucleid accounts for the greatest proportion of the naturally occurring radiation load through ingestion among people."
 
Potassium-40 is also connected to heating of the earth:
 
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 09:40:34 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SGeUdx002376; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:40:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SGeTes002364; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:40:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:40:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410428153927430@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Potassium-40, CF Cells, Electronium & Chicken Soup Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:39:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9406090fa22cb906b03ac6a75674ef98dc2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.67 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56283 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW. One might boil up one of Kervran's Chickens and use the broth in CF cells and the Yusmar. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

BTW.
 
One might boil up one of Kervran's Chickens and use the broth
in CF cells and the Yusmar.
 
Frederick
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 10:30:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SHU6dx021201; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:30:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SHU4jZ021194; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:30:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:30:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004104281629320@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Alt interpretation of mass increase Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:29:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94076b70c5518bd4d8a664f92226c176c53350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.120.7 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56284 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Mike Carrell wrote: > > But that does not prove (test) the proposition that the apparent mass > increase at high velocities is caused by EM effects and not just the > increase in velocity. The problem is that AFAIK no chemical reaction has > propelled a mass to the velocities necessary for the mass increase to be > detected. Thus the statement is true --- no experimental evidence --- but > because the necessary experiment probably cannot be performed on Earth. > Right Mike The relativistic gamma factor for a moving mass (m) is determined by (1/2 mv^2/mc^2) + 1 or 1/[ 1 - (v^2/c^2)] ^1/2 or (0.5 v^2/c^2) + 1 hence a 1.0 kg mass moving at the (1.1e4 meter per second escape velocity of earth would increase in mass to 0.5 (1.1e4)^2/9e16) + 1 kg = 1.0000000006.722 kg. Hence, it doesn't matter whether it's a BB or the Space Shuttle. However,the rule-of-thumb (0.5 v^2/c^2) + 1 falls apart: when v^2 equals c^2: 0.5 + 1 = 1.5 :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Mike Carrell wrote:
>
> But that does not prove (test) the proposition that the apparent mass
> increase at high velocities is caused by EM effects and not just the
> increase in velocity. The problem is that AFAIK no chemical reaction has
> propelled a mass to the velocities necessary for the mass increase to be
> detected. Thus the statement is true --- no experimental evidence --- but
> because the necessary experiment probably cannot be performed on Earth.
>
Right Mike
 
The relativistic gamma factor  for a moving mass (m) is determined by (1/2 mv^2/mc^2)  + 1
or 1/[ 1 - (v^2/c^2)] ^1/2
 
or  (0.5 v^2/c^2)  + 1 hence a 1.0 kg mass moving at the (1.1e4 meter per second escape
velocity of earth would increase in mass to  0.5 (1.1e4)^2/9e16) + 1 kg  = 1.0000000006.722 kg.
 
Hence, it doesn't matter whether it's a BB or the Space Shuttle.
 
However,the rule-of-thumb  (0.5 v^2/c^2)  + 1 falls apart: when  v^2 equals c^2:  
 
0.5 + 1  = 1.5     :-)
 
Frederick

 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 10:47:40 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SHlRdx026730; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:47:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SHlGAb026629; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:47:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:47:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041028184700.0069c98c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:47:00 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56285 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well, one couldn't ask for a better testimonial, even if one had written it oneself. :-) ====================================================== http://tinyurl.com/43v9r ------------------------------------------------------ Mikhail Gershteyn, a visiting scientist at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Centre and his colleagues have successfully and experimentally demonstrated that the well-known force of gravitation between two test bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. ... Newton's gravitational constant G changes with the orientation of test masses by at least 0.054 per cent, according to Gershteyn's experiments, a remarkable and unprecedented finding that has landed his paper on the subject in the journal Gravitation and Cosmology. ====================================================== And as as you will see from the below extract taken from the Blaze Labs Yahoo website, Ing.Saviour is definitely up to speed.8-) =================================================================== > Now, we know that G is always measured indirectly, with the false > assumption that the masses (both of the equipment and that of earth) > are constant. But we know that this is not true. It CANNOT be. The > value of the MEASURED G will thus vary with the time of year in which > the experiment is done, but not because REAL G is varying, but > because the mass property is varying with the relative velocity of > earth to the whole universe. > > Measuring G with such a false assumption would be better defined as > science horoscopy and no matter how accurate the experiment is, will > always give different readings at different times. As a matter of > fact, G is not the only measured unit that suffers such variations. > > The consequences of this finding, which is a direct consequence of > the ST conversion clean-up, are quite ground shaking, considering > that quite a lot of parameters have to be accepted as varying with > star positions, and these include all those SI units having the Kg > unit in their definition, which are: > > Refer to : http://blazelabs.com/f-u-suconv.asp > > Force, surface tension, energy, power, density, mass, momentum, > impulse, moment, torque, angular momentum, inertia, pressure, stress, > resistance, impedance, conductance, capacitance, inductance, magnetic > flux, magnetic flux density, magnetic reluctance, electric flux > density, electric field strength, voltage, MMF, permittivity, > permittivity, permeability, resistivity, enthalpy, conductivity, > thermal conductivity, energy density, ion mobility, dynamic > viscosity, fluidity, effective radiated power, radiant flux, > gravitational constant, planck constant, young modulus, electron > volt, hubble constant, boltzmann constant, molar gas constant and > entropy. > > The consequences of such a variation are just overwhelming! Just > think about how ridiculous is that 1kg prototype sitting at the > International Bureau of weights and measures, which is cycling it's > own mass in sinusoidal fashion whilst encapsulated and 'stationary' > under that glass jar! NIST has now to define the 1Kg something > like: "This prototype shall henceforth be considered to be the unit > of mass measured when Leo, earth and the sun line up once every year". =================================================================== Cheers Grimer At 10:05 pm 27-10-04 +0000, you wrote: >------------------------------------------------------ >Uncertainty in the Universal Gravitational Constant G. >------------------------------------------------------ > >How's about this then? 8-) > >At least they admit it - especially the Russkies. > >====================================================== >http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/gconst.html >------------------------------------------------------ >Recently the value of G has been called into question >by new measurements from respected research teams in >Germany, New Zealand, and Russia. The new values >disagree wildly. For example, a team from the German >Institute of Standards led by W. Michaelis obtained a >value for G that is 0.6% larger than the accepted >value; a group from the University of Wuppertal in >Germany led by Hinrich Meyer found a value that is >0.06% lower, and Mark Fitzgerald and collaborators at >Measurement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand >measured a value that is 0.1% lower. The Russian group >found a curious space and time variation of G of up to >0.7% The collection of these new results suggests that >the uncertainty in G could be much larger than >originally thought. This controversy has spurred >several efforts to make a more reliable measure of G. >====================================================== > >Cheers > >Grimer > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 11:04:22 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SI4CfB017604; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:04:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SI4BiE017583; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:04:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:04:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001001c4bd18$5503e580$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Hobbits found; Yeti next? Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:02:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4BCDD.960DD620" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56286 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4BCDD.960DD620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable And you thought Helectronium was hard to swallow.... ;-) A species of tiny human has been discovered. http://www.nature.com/news/specials/flores/index.html It sounds too incredible to be true, but this is not a hoax.=20 http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041025/full/041025-2.html ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4BCDD.960DD620 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
And you thought Helectronium was hard to swallow....  = ;-)
 
 
A species of tiny human has been discovered.
 
http://www= .nature.com/news/specials/flores/index.html
 
It sounds too incredible to be true, but this is not a hoax.
 
http:/= /www.nature.com/news/2004/041025/full/041025-2.html
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4BCDD.960DD620-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 11:21:46 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SILPdx006227; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:21:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SILEaE006119; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:21:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:21:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: e2/h was RE: Dimensions of mass Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:50:52 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041028082009.0069583c@pop.freeserve.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56287 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Frank. This isn't anything complex, except for the units. e is the charge on the electron. h is planks constant. Here are those values. http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constants.html e 4.8032068(14) 10^-10 esu h 6.6260755(40) 10^-27 erg s e^2/h = 348 km/sec This quantity has the dimensions of time in the SI system, about 40 microseconds. More constants need to be corralled to get us to the streaming velocity as measured by Silvertooth in the SI system. Horace is perhaps underestimating the differences between the systems, it's not just conversion factors. Although I do agree that with enough shoehorning you can get the same results from all of them. It remains to be seen if the streaming velocity is really determining atomic "constants". There's plenty of references on the web for e^2/h, this one caught my eye http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1985/press.html K. "For a political candidate to jump to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander-in-chief" -George W Bush- Couldn't have said it better myself, George. -----Original Message----- From: Grimer [mailto:f.grimer@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 4:20 AM To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: e2/h was RE: Dimensions of mass At 08:33 pm 27-10-04 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Frank. > >That all was a rather convoluted way of saying that a constant angular >velocity gives rise to a ponderable force where a constant >linear velocity does not. We'll not make any further headway until >we bring together Michelson, Morley AND Gale. > >You write: >>Well, the Silvertooth velocity of 378 kilometres per second >>towards Leo is a good starting point. > >Yes, this is the Great Attractor. All mass in the visible >sky is streaming towards that point in Leo. Bonus points for anyone with >an explanation of how this is possible with Hubble expansion? >Does one really preclude the other? > >As Adam, our Magickal Engineer knows, "as above, so below". That >macroscopic streaming velocity of our local part of the universe >is within' spittin' distance of the microscopic velocity > > e^2/h = 348 km/s > >I'm using CGS units here, don't try this at home with your SI units (grin). > >If we can squeeze 8 percent out of Silvertooth's measurement >( or the astrophysicists ) then we might have something here. > > >K. In the circumstances I would think "8 percent" is bugger all. For me, the fact that it is the right order of magnitude is good enough. But you will have to explain to me - in Physics for Dummies terms - exactly what, e^2/h = 348 km/s means. Or a intelligible reference would do. I certainly like the hierarchical sound of "as above, so below". It reminds me of my ...upon the clouds of heaven... thread, though I suppose that would be more a case of *as below, so above* ;-) Cheers Frank Incidently, I owe you an apology about OCR_ing. I tried to OCR one of my jpeg pages and it came out all gobbledegook. I now realise that cutting the original scan file size down to a point where it was still reasonably readable on screen had crippled it for OCR. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 11:27:22 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SIRDfB026068; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:27:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SIRAXp026041; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:27:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:27:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041028192650.006a7d2c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:26:50 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id i9SIR3fB025993 Resent-Message-ID: <_TLtID.A.vWG.-nTgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56288 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Can hear the distant roar of cognitive dissonance? ;-) Cheers Frank =============================================================== NEWTON'S CHERISHED CONSTANT MAY NOT BE --------------------------------------------------------------- >From the Science & Technology Desk Published 5/6/2002 1:15 PM CAMBRIDGE, Mass., May 6 (UPI) -- A Russian physicist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology has announced experimental data that may topple one of science's most cherished dogmas -- that Newton's gravitational constant, famously symbolized by a large "G," remains constant wherever, whenever and however it is measured. "My colleagues and I have successfully experimentally demonstrated that the force of gravitation between two test bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars," Mikhail Gershteyn, a visiting scientist at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, told United Press International from Cambridge, Mass.. Isaac Newton first described G in 1687 as a fundamental component of his universal law of gravity. Two masses, Newton wrote, attract each other with a force proportional to their mass that falls off rapidly as the bodies move farther and farther apart. Albert Einstein later used G in his own field equations that fine-tuned Newton's original laws. In Einstein's universe, gravity is the effect on bodies moving through space that is curved or warped by the presence of matter. The constant G describes gravity's attractive force precisely and appears in equations for any gravitational field, whether the field is between planets, stars, galaxies, microscopic particles or rays of light. Centuries of measurement have firmly fixed the value of G as the complex formula 6.673 times 10 to the minus 11th power, times meters traveled per second times the number of kilograms, squared. Gravity is a relatively very weak force, yet it is strong enough to hold planets in orbit and to mash great gobs of matter into incredibly dense, infinitesimally small black holes. If G varies under any circumstances, scientists would have to rewrite virtually every physical law, including a long-accepted feature of the universe -- isotropy, or the condition that a body's physical properties are independent of its orientation in space. The idea that forces on bodies may vary relative to the orientation of distant stars has a powerful historical precedent in "Mach's Principle," a term Einstein coined in 1918 for the theory that eventually led him to his biggest breakthrough -- general relativity. Swing a bucket of water at the end of rope and centrifugal forces pull it up and away. These forces result from the combined gravitational pull of all the distant stars and planets, Austrian physicist Ernst Mach wrote. Therefore any change in the orientation of heavenly bodies would affect forces on matter everywhere, so powerful is their combined effect. The idea that Newton's G may change relative to the rest of the universe is an example of Mach's adage -- matter out there affects forces right here. Gershteyn said his experiments show Newton's G "changes with the orientation of test masses by at least 0.054 percent." This remarkable and unprecedented finding has landed his paper on the subject in the June issue of the international journal Gravitation and Cosmology. "The fact that G varies depending on orientation of the two gravitating bodies relative to a system of fixed stars is a direct challenge to Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation," Gershteyn told UPI. "The existence of such an effect requires a radically new theory of gravitation, because the magnitude of this effect dwarfs any of Einstein's corrections to Newtonian gravity." "Gershteyn and his coworkers lay an extraordinary and very interesting claim which -- if proven true -- would change our view of the universe," Lev Tsimring, a research physicist with the Institute for Nonlinear Science at the University of California San Diego, told UPI. "In a well-controlled experiment, the authors proposed to measure the gravitational force between two bodies with respect to the orientation of the experimental setup to distant stars," Tsimring explained. The experiment, he said, would seek to detect gravitational anisotropy -- the condition that the attractive force between bodies would vary with respect to their spatial orientation, not their separating distance. "The latest paper by the authors -- in collaboration with an experimentalist who is a well-respected specialist in precisely that kind of measurement -- provides strong evidence in favor of the validity of the author's original claim," Tsimring said. Gravitation and Cosmology Editor Kirill Bronnikov agreed. "The evident merit of the paper by Mikhail Gershteyn et. al. is the information of a possible new effect, discovered experimentally -- the effect of anisotropy related to Newton's constant G," Bronnikov told UPI from Moscow. "So far the possibility of such an effect has only been discussed theoretically." "The authors of this paper make some extraordinary claims in a legitimate journal," George Spagna, chairman of the physics department at Randolph-Macon College, told UPI from Ashland, Va. "But they do not provide enough of their data or theoretical justification. They must provide much more information to be convincing." Other scientists will need to provide "more detailed and independent experiments to confirm and elaborate the experimental results obtained in Gershteyn's paper," Lev Tsimring told UPI. "I cannot exclude that there might be other ways of explaining this anisotropy within conventional theory, but I believe that Gershteyn's results are convincing." (Reported by UPI Science Correspondent Mike Martin in Columbia, Mo.) Copyright © 2002 United Press International =============================================================== From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 14:35:53 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SLZk1x010490; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:35:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SLZemj010450; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:35:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:35:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000c01c4bd36$0efc5cc0$84017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Grimer's Hobbits Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:35:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4BD0C.2585F610" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: <64mWfC.A.OjC.sYWgBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56289 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4BD0C.2585F610 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4BD0C.258C1090" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4BD0C.258C1090 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWhen I read thje account of the Hobbits discovery, why did I think = .. surely we will hear from Grimer on this.. just too good to pass up = for a chuckle. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4BD0C.258C1090 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
When I  read thje account of the Hobbits discovery, why did I = think=20

.. surely we will hear from Grimer on this.. just too good to pass up = for a=20 chuckle.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4BD0C.258C1090-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4BD0C.2585F610 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c4bd36$0e4b0e20$84017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4BD0C.2585F610-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 15:57:25 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9SMvM1x001057; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:57:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9SMv5SF000963; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:57:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:57:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:03:02 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Photons Under Control Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56290 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An amazing post on sci.physics: In article <602d73d9.0410281338.3ad25c97@posting.google.com>, neutron_p@lycos.com (Neutron) wrote: > "Researchers at the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics (MPQ) in > Garching, Germany have achieved unprecedented control over the > creation of single photons (Nature, October 28, 2004). By using a > tightly trapped single calcium ion, localized between two ultra-high > reflectivity mirrors, and subjecting it to an external laser pulse, > the scientists could emit photons one by one. The emission time and > the pulse shape of each photon were completely user-controlled. > Remarkably, the device was operated without interruption over a period > limited only by the trapping time of the ion, typically many hours. > The achievement has important applications in quantum information > processing. A controlled quantum interface between atoms and photons > has become feasible. In this way, local ion-based operations on > quantum states can be combined with long distance quantum information > exchange, a key requirement for the implementation of a secure quantum > Internet." > > Full story: http://www.physorg.com/news1755.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 17:59:36 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9T0xPDk030591; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:59:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9T0xJi6030442; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:59:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:59:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:59:06 EDT Subject: Fwd: Gravity and Light To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <_rpqFC.A.mbH.nXZgBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56291 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_boundary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_alt_boundary" --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:07:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, FZNIDARSIC writes: > >> Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by >> gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be >> affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? >> > > good question. I have looked at that problem myself. Analysis is towards > the end of the chapter. > > Chapter 7 > > Frank Z I want to add a little more. The sun bends light. The momentum of the light is changed. Momentum is always conserved. The light must then have pulled back on the sun by an equivalent amount. How could it do this? Bending light must have a gravitational field associated with it. Light coming from distant reaches of the universe shows no tendency to agglomerate. Two photons traveling side by side for millions of years to not attract each other. It they did this would be a decrease in entropy. This cannot be. Light traveling is straight lines has no gravity. The conclusion that I reached is that a changing momentum is the source of all gravity. I have shown this to be true in matter, light. It is the source of the deBroglie wavelength and special relativity. This is all in chapter 7. by for now Frank Znidarsic --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:07= :07 PM Eastern Standard Time, FZNIDARSIC writes:

Now, suppose photons have no mass at all.  How can they= be affected by gravity lensing?  This effect has been demonstrated, so= it must exist.  To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass,=20= correct?


good question.  I have looked at that problem myself.  Analysis is= towards the end of the chapter. 

Chapter 7=20=

Frank Z


I want to add a little more.  The sun bends light.  The momentum o= f the light is changed.  Momentum is always conserved.  The light=20= must then have pulled back on the sun by an equivalent amount.  How cou= ld it do this?  Bending light must have a gravitational field associate= d with it.

Light coming from distant reaches of the universe shows no tendency to agglo= merate.  Two photons traveling side by side for millions of years to no= t attract each other.  It they did this would be a decrease in entropy.=   This cannot be.  Light traveling is straight lines has no gravit= y.

The conclusion that I reached is that a changing momentum is the source of a= ll gravity.  I have shown this to be true in matter, light.  It is= the source of the deBroglie wavelength and special relativity.  This i= s all in chapter 7.

by for now

Frank Znidarsic --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_alt_boundary-- --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <74.4534f1ca.2eb2732b@aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:07:07 EDT Subject: Re: Gravity and Light To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2732b_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 --part2_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2732b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes: > Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by > gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be > affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? > good question. I have looked at that problem myself. Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. Chapter 7 Frank Z --part2_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2732b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01= :04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes:

Now, suppose photons have no ma= ss at all.  How can they be affected by gravity lensing?  This eff= ect has been demonstrated, so it must exist.  To be affected by gravity= the photons must have mass, correct?


good question.  I have looked at that problem myself.  Analysis is= towards the end of the chapter. 

Chapter 7=

Frank Z --part2_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2732b_boundary-- --part1_d4.19ab2d85.2eb2efda_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 28 20:50:46 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9T3ocDk029012; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:50:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9T3obmL028998; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:50:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:50:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041029045019.006a3e58@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 04:50:19 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Grimer's Hobbits Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56292 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:35 pm 28-10-04 -0500, you wrote: >When I read the account of the Hobbits discovery, >why did I think .. surely we will hear from Grimer >on this.. just too good to pass up for a chuckle. > >Richard I'm never one to refuse a challenge, Richard. 8-) Here are some of the hobbits Homo Grimericus to be found scampering among the ruins of Verulamium. http://www.grimer2.freeserve.co.uk/pge20.htm Trouble is - they will keep growing. 8-( Cheers Grimer ============================== Verumtamen quaerite regnum Dei et haec omnia adicientur vobis ============================== From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 02:55:12 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9T9t91x021993; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:55:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9T9t1WM021947; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:55:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:55:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:00:53 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: FTL by Down-converting (DRAFT #6) Resent-Message-ID: <3u2_hB.A.3WF.1NhgBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56293 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following discussion of the subject FTL by down-converting method is intended to shed some light on the design assumptions and places where I may have flawed thinking. A 1-1 photon-idler coincidence counting is vital to the Kim et al [1] experiment, on which the FTL by down-converting method is based, because that experiment is set up so that the paths of only about 50 percent of the idlers is known. Bob can not see an interference pattern at all, but when the photons are considered on an individual basis, the signal photons corresponding to the idlers (via recorded data) which are "observed" do not make an interference pattern, while those whose histories are "erased" by the configuration in Fig. 1 do make an interference pattern. My hope is that by knowing or not knowing the histories of 100 percent of the particles Bob must clearly see either a bimodal or interference pattern accordingly, without knowledge of the timing or the need for coincidence counting. If Bob dutifully records his distributions, and 100 percent of the photons are affected by a quantum wavefunction that generates interference, then he must be able to see that interference pattern because there are no photons left to mask it out. The significance of the Kim et al experiment is that *individual idler photon histories can be wiped out* by scrambling the idler's history with other histories by injecting the idler into the *beam* from the opposed path. (There doesn't even have to be a particle-particle interaction, it is merely the fact that the origin of the mother photon becomes uncertain that does the trick. Truly incredible!) Fig. 1 shows how an idler from one beam can be (was) mixed into another idler beam, scrambled, so as to lose its history. Full Mirror R1--->-------------\ | | Half Mirror L1---->------------\----------------------DL | | DR Fig. 1 - Alice's which-path scrambler Note that ascii figures require a fixed font, like courrier, and Microsoft Outlook users may need to select "fixed" in the "textsize" submenu of the "view" menu. The fact that detector DR and DL can not determine whether an idler came from R1 or L1 in Fig. 1 *erases its history* and permits the corresponding signal photon to experience the quantum wavefunction for interference. DL detects half its particles from R1 and half from L1, as does detector DR. When the corresponding signal photon pattern is tallied for all the photons detected by DL and DR, an interference pattern is observed. The history of *every* photon passing through the scrambler thus must be erased, even those which pass straight through the half-mirror. The scrambler in Fig. 1 can be repeated if necessary to compensate for imperfect half-mirrors, beam overlap, and other problems. My logic on this is a bit unusual, because, to achieve FTL, I am essentially suggesting not just an instantaneous wavefunction collapse, but rather an instantaneous wavefunction *resurrection.* By erasing the history that destroys the wavefunction, the wavefunction is instantly resurrected, and thus the interference is projected at faster than the speed of light to Bob's location. Figure 2 and the following discussion sums up the critical issue for the proposed experiment design in a nutshell: DL | | Alice in | "erase history" ^ mode R1 | /------------->----------//----->------->DR | | ^ ^ L1 | | ... to Alice ... to Alice | | | | R1 | laser | | | | Legend: ^ v ^ | | | / - mirror | R | | // - splitter /----X----<----// Charlie | X - down-shifter | | | o - pattern detectors | v L | DL,DR - photon detectors v | L1 | R2 | X------>--------/ | | ...to Bob ... to Bob | | | | v v o| | L2 o | o------<------/ o Bob's Pattern Fig. 2 - Experiment with Alice in 100 % "erase history" mode. The issue of whether the experiment works or not boils down to whether Bob sees an interference pattern in the arrangement diagramed in Fig. 2 or not (assuming path lengths are all adjusted properly). If he does, then the experiment must in fact be capable of transmitting information FTL, because it is well known that eliminating Alice's splitter, and thus directing R1 to DR and L1 to DL, eliminates Bob's interference pattern. Alice thus has numerous physical means available to switch from interference mode to bimodal mode. The (experimental) reason Bob should see the interference pattern is that every "history erased" photon entering Bob's detectors in the Kim et al experiment contributed to the interference pattern. Since 100 percent of the photons are "history erased" by Alice in Fig. 2, Bob should clearly see the interference pattern. This is the fundamental assumption of the design and the most likely conceptual error. References: [1] Kim et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol 84, no. 1, pp 1-5 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 05:30:54 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TCUp1x005544; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 05:30:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TCUig1005460; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 05:30:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 05:30:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200410529112942220@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium (*e-) vs Muon Catalyzed Cold Fusion Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:29:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b5f4e14fc2ffe2e3cbbe87da35811846350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.97 Resent-Message-ID: <8PMkrC.A.LVB.0fjgBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56294 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII With a mass about 1/100th that of the muon, but, with an indefinite lifetime and possible availability the (*e-) would seem to be more promising. http://www.powerfrontiers.com/coldfusion.html "The muon is part of the same family of particles as the electron but is 207 times heavier and is typically created in a nuclear accelerator. A negative muon has similar properties as an electron and can also orbit an atom. The muon only lasts about 2.2 microseconds before decaying and becoming an electron. When a negative muon is fired at hydrogen (regular or heavy), the muon will knock the electron out of a hydrogen atom and take its place, but since the muon is heavier it orbits much closer to the nucleus than the electron and cancels some of the positive charge of the nucleus. This muonic hydrogen atom can combine with another hydrogen atom, forming a molecule where the two atoms are bound closely enough by the muon to counteract the repulsion of the nuclei and fuse them. There are many ways fusion can occur, producing atoms of deuterium, tritium, 3-helium, and normal helium. One of the ways the fusion can occur is with deuterium and tritium atoms where the muon binds a deuterium-tritium molecule tightly enough to fuse them into a helium atom and an extra neutron (see below). The muon then leaves the new helium atom and continues on to fuse more hydrogen. Since the muon is not consumed in the fusion reaction, it acts as a catalyst. Muons have catalyzed up to 150 fusion reactions in some experiments before they decay. The main problem with this approach is that the muon tends to stick around the new helium nucleus, wasting part of its life before leaving to catalyze more reactions. In order to be a viable energy source, the energy released in the fusion reactions must be much more than the energy used in the accelerator to create the negative muons and fire them at the hydrogen. The main stumbling block has been reducing the stickiness of the muons further to enable many more reactions to occur. Finding less energy intensive ways of producing muons is also being researched. Scientists reached energy break-even in the 1980s and are continuing to try to harness this tantalizing method of fusion." Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

With a mass about 1/100th that of the muon, but, with an indefinite lifetime and possible
availability the (*e-) would seem to be more promising.
 
 
 
"The muon is part of the same family of particles as the electron but is 207 times heavier and is typically created in a nuclear accelerator. A negative muon has similar properties as an electron and can also orbit an atom. The muon only lasts about 2.2 microseconds before decaying and becoming an electron. When a negative muon is fired at hydrogen (regular or heavy), the muon will knock the electron out of a hydrogen atom and take its place, but since the muon is heavier it orbits much closer to the nucleus than the electron and cancels some of the positive charge of the nucleus. This muonic hydrogen atom can combine with another hydrogen atom, forming a molecule where the two atoms are bound closely enough by the muon to counteract the repulsion of the nuclei and fuse them. There are many ways fusion can occur, producing atoms of deuterium, tritium, 3-helium, and normal helium. One of the ways the fusion can occur is with deuterium and tritium atoms where the muon binds a deuterium-tritium molecule tightly enough to fuse them into a helium atom and an extra neutron (see below). The muon then leaves the new helium atom and continues on to fuse more hydrogen. Since the muon is not consumed in the fusion reaction, it acts as a catalyst. Muons have catalyzed up to 150 fusion reactions in some experiments before they decay. The main problem with this approach is that the muon tends to stick around the new helium nucleus, wasting part of its life before leaving to catalyze more reactions. In order to be a viable energy source, the energy released in the fusion reactions must be much more than the energy used in the accelerator to create the negative muons and fire them at the hydrogen. The main stumbling block has been reducing the stickiness of the muons further to enable many more reactions to occur. Finding less energy intensive ways of producing muons is also being researched. Scientists reached energy break-even in the 1980s and are continuing to try to harness this tantalizing method of fusion."
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 06:30:07 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TDU0Dk005099; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:30:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TDTs8N005066; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:29:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:29:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041029132947.45721.qmail@web54502.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:29:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Cox Subject: Re: Fwd: Gravity and Light To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-781111572-1099056587=:45051" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56295 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-781111572-1099056587=:45051 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Ah, but without mass photons have no momentum. I am attempting to postulate a theory that accounts for the behavior of photons without requiring them to have mass. Note that refraction is a function of wavelengths, when light is NOT acting as a particle, and is best analyzed as interference of components of the wave-front. FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:07:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, FZNIDARSIC writes: Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? good question. I have looked at that problem myself. Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. Chapter 7 Frank Z I want to add a little more. The sun bends light. The momentum of the light is changed. Momentum is always conserved. The light must then have pulled back on the sun by an equivalent amount. How could it do this? Bending light must have a gravitational field associated with it. Light coming from distant reaches of the universe shows no tendency to agglomerate. Two photons traveling side by side for millions of years to not attract each other. It they did this would be a decrease in entropy. This cannot be. Light traveling is straight lines has no gravity. The conclusion that I reached is that a changing momentum is the source of all gravity. I have shown this to be true in matter, light. It is the source of the deBroglie wavelength and special relativity. This is all in chapter 7. by for now Frank Znidarsic > ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822 From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:07:07 EDT Subject: Re: Gravity and Light To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes: Now, suppose photons have no mass at all. How can they be affected by gravity lensing? This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist. To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct? good question. I have looked at that problem myself. Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. Chapter 7 Frank Z Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-781111572-1099056587=:45051 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Ah, but without mass photons have no momentum.
 
I am attempting to postulate a theory that accounts for the behavior of photons without requiring them to have mass.  Note that refraction is a function of wavelengths, when light is NOT acting as a particle, and is best analyzed as interference of components of the wave-front.

FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:07:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, FZNIDARSIC writes:

Now, suppose photons have no mass at all.  How can they be affected by gravity lensing?  This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist.  To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct?


good question.  I have looked at that problem myself.  Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. 

Chapter 7

Frank Z


I want to add a little more.  The sun bends light.  The momentum of the light is changed.  Momentum is always conserved.  The light must then have pulled back on the sun by an equivalent amount.  How could it do this?  Bending light must have a gravitational field associated with it.

Light coming from distant reaches of the universe shows no tendency to agglomerate.  Two photons traveling side by side for millions of years to not attract each other.  It they did this would be a decrease in entropy.  This cannot be.  Light traveling is straight lines has no gravity.

The conclusion that I reached is that a changing momentum is the source of all gravity.  I have shown this to be true in matter, light.  It is the source of the deBroglie wavelength and special relativity.  This is all in chapter 7.

by for now

Frank Znidarsic

> ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822
From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:07:07 EDT
Subject: Re: Gravity and Light
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

In a message dated 10/28/2004 12:01:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, merlyn_3k@yahoo.com writes:

Now, suppose photons have no mass at all.  How can they be affected by gravity lensing?  This effect has been demonstrated, so it must exist.  To be affected by gravity the photons must have mass, correct?


good question.  I have looked at that problem myself.  Analysis is towards the end of the chapter. 

Chapter 7

Frank Z


Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --0-781111572-1099056587=:45051-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 08:00:27 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TF0927019741; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:00:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TEvVGs018003; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 07:57:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 07:57:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041029145539.41029.qmail@web81106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 07:55:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Grimer's Hobbits To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20041029045019.006a3e58@pop.freeserve.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <-DIX8D.A.kYE.ZplgBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56296 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > http://www.grimer2.freeserve.co.uk/pge20.htm Frank definitely wins the prize for the most grandkids, and a very handsome lot, one must add... demonstrating once again that one version of "free energy" has been around for a very long time.... Jones or as Vergil might have opined, "tantae molis erat Grimericus condere gentem" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 08:50:37 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TFoXDk026323; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:50:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TFoLXI026243; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:50:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:50:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041029165002.0069c488@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:50:02 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Grimer's Hobbits Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56297 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:55 am 29-10-04 -0700, you wrote: > > >> http://www.grimer2.freeserve.co.uk/pge20.htm > >Frank definitely wins the prize for the most >grandkids, and a very handsome lot, one must add... >demonstrating once again that one version of "free >energy" has been around for a very long time.... > >Jones > >or as Vergil might have opined, > "tantae molis erat Grimericus condere gentem" LOL 8-) Which as all you Vortexian scholars will recognise is a variation on a line taken from the Aeneid: Book 1, Line 33 "So massive was the effort to found the Roman nation." Funnily enough, that particular tribe of grandchildren do actually all live in the city of St Albans, which is founded on the site of Roman Verulamium - a tourist spot much frequented by Yanks on their culture vulture tours. ;-) Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 09:50:35 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TGoS1x020130; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:50:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TGoRp3020109; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:50:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:50:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <155.42537bef.2eb3cec2@aol.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:50:10 EDT Subject: October is up, where is the DOE report? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_155.42537bef.2eb3cec2_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56298 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_155.42537bef.2eb3cec2_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps it's lost. Frank Z --part1_155.42537bef.2eb3cec2_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Perhaps it's lost.

Frank Z --part1_155.42537bef.2eb3cec2_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 10:46:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9THkW1x032634; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9THkU8g032614; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Sender: hheffner@mail.mtaonline.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:52:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: October is up, where is the DOE report? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56299 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:50 PM 10/29/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: >Perhaps it's lost. > >Frank Z You don't actually expect a report before the election do you? If we are not going to hear deatails on major controversial issues like the Russian special forces removing WMD material from Iraq right before the war, it seems unlikely we are to hear a minor DOE decision that could create a controversy of the CF magnitude. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 11:55:33 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TItQDk031488; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:55:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TIt949031392; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:55:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:55:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41829221.1020300@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:55:29 -0400 From: "Terry Blanton" 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: October is up, where is the DOE report? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56300 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: >At 12:50 PM 10/29/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > > >>Perhaps it's lost. >> >>Frank Z >> >> > >You don't actually expect a report before the election do you? > :-) It wouldn't surprise me if Hagelstein had something to report at ICCF11. Did you see this abstract? "As a result of the successful last conference in Cambridge and the emerging understanding and solidity of the cold fusion field, input was directed to the U.S. DoE by Peter Hagelstein and Randy Hekman encouraging the department to reevaluate the field. As a result of these initiatives, the four authors were invited to DoE in early November 2003 to recommend a review of the topic and determine a course of action, exactly 14 years after the last formal action by DoE [1]. We will describe the procedure of the review, the ground rules, our rationale in choosing a particular course of action, and summarize the material delivered to DoE in written report [2], oral and electronic forms. We sought to focus on material that we could best defend and make a case that could stand up to a determined attack. It was always our objective to have a transparent review, and we use the opportunity of this conference to fully disclose our view of the process. At time of writing this abstract, the concluding statement of DoE’s position has not been released to the public; possibly it has not yet been formulated. Whatever the result of this review, however, the opportunity to open this topic, to discuss and disclose materials freely, has brought significant advantage to the cold fusion community. Now that the experiments are somewhat under control and theory is beginning to shed useful light, the greatest challenges we face are ignorance and apathy in the scientific and policy arenas. The process of the review, although very demanding of effort and time, has provided ample reward in promoting an elevated discussion. The four of us appreciate the serious attention given to this review by personnel within the DoE and their reviewers. Dr. James Decker agreed to have the review. Dr. Patricia Dehmer and Dr. Dennis Kovar designed and conducted the review with help from Dr. James Horwitz and Dr. Gene Henry. We salute these individuals and the external reviewers for their concerned interest and participation." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 16:08:42 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9TN8ZDk031438; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:08:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9TN8TQA031409; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:08:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:08:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041029230821.24329.qmail@web81108.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:08:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: October is up, where is the DOE report? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <155.42537bef.2eb3cec2@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-638299542-1099091301=:23757" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56301 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-638299542-1099091301=:23757 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Id: Content-Disposition: inline > Perhaps it's lost. ...hot potato?...pass the buck?...not my job? ... roadkill ?... ... will votex take this image? --0-638299542-1099091301=:23757 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=notmyjob Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: notmyjob Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=notmyjob /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEASABIAAD//gAMQXBwbGVNYXJrCv/bAIQAIRcZHRkV IR0bHSUjIScxUTUxLS0xY0dLO1F1Z3t5c2dxb4GRuZ2Bia+Lb3Gh26Ovv8XP 0c99m+Pz4cnxucvPxwEjJSUxKzFfNTVfx4VxhcfHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fH x8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fHx8fH/8QBogAAAQUBAQEB AQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoLAQADAQEBAQEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAQIDBAUG BwgJCgsQAAIBAwMCBAMFBQQEAAABfQECAwAEEQUSITFBBhNRYQcicRQygZGh CCNCscEVUtHwJDNicoIJChYXGBkaJSYnKCkqNDU2Nzg5OkNERUZHSElKU1RV VldYWVpjZGVmZ2hpanN0dXZ3eHl6g4SFhoeIiYqSk5SVlpeYmZqio6Slpqeo qaqys7S1tre4ubrCw8TFxsfIycrS09TV1tfY2drh4uPk5ebn6Onq8fLz9PX2 9/j5+hEAAgECBAQDBAcFBAQAAQJ3AAECAxEEBSExBhJBUQdhcRMiMoEIFEKR obHBCSMzUvAVYnLRChYkNOEl8RcYGRomJygpKjU2Nzg5OkNERUZHSElKU1RV VldYWVpjZGVmZ2hpanN0dXZ3eHl6goOEhYaHiImKkpOUlZaXmJmaoqOkpaan qKmqsrO0tba3uLm6wsPExcbHyMnK0tPU1dbX2Nna4uPk5ebn6Onq8vP09fb3 +Pn6/8AAEQgCiAHUAwEiAAIRAQMRAf/aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A36KKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKAMfVnC3OGHHldfxNZyybXABOCe54Bq5 rZIvUGcAxjP5msxsFiCufwoHYvecyltpB5456VIk24GQKODgkHqfes0En+LB HtUmchfkAYdxjFVzCsi755HICopHIk6E+gx0qvcOquNuNwxtB69f17809mYZ aUrKgwTnAzTpoUaFgm0LtyrKvcUai2KUy4BZTmNZCAc+vP8An6U2U/d+XGUA P4d6Dk28mMMuVYnPIJFNc7gCTgHAyfakUSIR5jPyobIGRnHFOJdAy+g2/Xmo xjLbckqQBtH60rt83XcMk59fagCQfKQq8Hpwc4o2AAZ44796bgFTt7nIHant KuFBXgAnA7UAPbKugGck5OasqDgF13YxgdvxqrE4BJZPm46HpUxkG7KoQDn6 UIl3LiHnjle3FT/gfrVSJwAQeCOB6mrIPcVSYmh3cZ/DFL/IdaTNGffjNG4W FAo6dRSfj+FLQAuaOPSk4P17UdjTELnB60Y/Sj88UUAIR2HpSkdccfWlAPf6 Ckxzn0oAXvUaHMakHOc0/PYd6Acd+BQBXv8A5dPuDySVAJ/EVaPAA9BVXUT/ AMS6QD+IqP1q05w59qW7GIDzRwQOaTPamv060AKXAIOc0xZAyZJAPcVEGUbd wOQfmFNUEPsIxnLZAouFh7yMGwDyBwDR5hYEjBxjJ/pVWWZVcJv5B4wOlQ+f sDDb1Oen9aTHYtR5MrBjwpO0DjrT94BDDIBIXHoaoiY7mAJyTnrQ0xCAAjJP Tr3ouOzL0cnUqDtJY9O3rUygqgAHI9e9QQnPBJ2qAT7+lTZOchgQKaJGgqry 54y+cZz2p8ZZlDdjVC9l2mZVAJZwODwBgVatHY20bOVBI4A6CkmNo1Lf/Ur+ P86kqK2/1CfSpaljCiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooA5 /XsG9TnB8v8AqazVbJHUnHbtWnrz7bxMYyIxyfqay8HOO+aBjmONvb0BHUUu 8rhwe/TPIpAcBGIyozjNRnB6UAX/ADFT5Wy6kcZPH40KZIACclRyFIqkGOBw Tj8aeHyOD06U7isJkAyquNr56/mKbncsakk4bp9cUrH94SvHOaaOGBHGKQyx lVupuOMsAM1BjAbIOQfSjJyD155oznr0J5pgO5Q9QcihSMZJNITn0GM/jQBw R+lICzbSYJBbAxk+9PkmUnoMjoQaqDj6d6cOuSD1ph1LsMgJUucBegXvVyKR WHy9sVnRFQmDjB5AParFtNuwMkDOST0p3FYvflRk96jjk3k45AGSe1Sf5zTI Fz+NGfbB70nFLng+lACg8c9aARkehpO/NL7n86ADPTn8aTPzgA8Fcilxn05p u0CQEKBlD0+tNgPzj39qO2BzSDk5ycUdcA9xSAXOTnoD0ozzxxScD/AUe3pT AragQbQAn70qD9auNyzZ55qpfHMcA7mdKtOfnP1NJIY08KT1x2qKZsRkgZY9 qkBDKR07UxgQSAoPHFO4DZCpTzFwPl6g9ahVwXfcwDbRkHjHqabGCSylscfK B3qvcStAwZTtkZNmfoam47EUsi+cWjPBHOcEGif5SvJ2kcGopOGbOD3yOMUS Pvx2A4AHQCkUgBz06U8dUOclsnI6jFRKeKkBBaNVHRSMnuTSAvWshCk4Hzd2 71NcSBYXYJtbGRniqqSiOQbx8qjp2qS7bdZsSxAOG4/SquTYzJJWdtxON/LY 4BrQsG3L5atuKjLtjgDsBWYWBGAMetWbSSXYwEgiiXDN2J/H1qRs6e3GIF6d +n1qWq2nuJLNHGcEtjPXGTirNABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABR RRQAUUUUAYGvYN6gPeMZ/M1mHAYEAgFcnIrR19tt/H6eWOPxNZfIOOfpQMXo Bn8qTt1xQRhR6kd6TOaAFJwMgd6M98HPrSA5FKG5H9aQCk7kyOopD/M0cDHJ 96fGP4h24FMBRBJgHbgH1OKUQvgZKfiwpvljPUUvljAOevbFOwrjvKfAG+L6 76URMBxJGP8AgVNEYI49OlKYl564x6UWC4oibAG6PA9Wpxic5wU/77pnk+tN MYHHegLk6RyEYEec9MHNBZkAXaVz2I602AbXwzEKwK7vSpoC5P2aYZJfaeeV bsRRYd2TBpFAQcMxDNnGcegq4hOPmGMYwO4rKSRo8GPgqSCe9X4C7RiRm2jO AByWoTJaLAx3pc00HbnLZ5744p3Q85qthBn35pSRzxSfjS57D8aLiA4B29+t J/y1AySCh4P1pD94HOeDRk+dzg4Tt9aAHjjBNIM96M859OlAPJJpgLxR0IBp AcUUgIbrlrMHvOD+lSuwVsHo2efQ1BcMGuLMAg4diefanTt8gfGR3o2GEcp2 gDGB1Y0wuxYbXwwyeRx9KjLhEHHAGTnjGaqG5KSMpYOoPDDqKTY7FmRyrLJ/ CDg+1Ub5ke6cozEejDGDU8k4ZHZCfmzn5etUTjOT1pN9BpDi5OSxznqaTJ2k 449aaTnrzSg57CkAo5/KnKSJh905OOT0qMHgcHPanEYIB9R070DLJ6bvf5S3 f6CoLmQyP82dwGDxjHtUlwcEr3A6nqarMxJJPJNNsQh/GnEgnLksR05pmTnB 6UobjkCkB1elNv06JiAM54H1NXKo6N/yC4f+Bf8AoRq9QAUUUUAFFFFABRRR QAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAHO+If+P1Mdox/M1l961dfGb1B/0yH8zW ZtJbHANA7DWwDgEEDpikzUjxMgBOMHpzTSuFDZHJ6ZoAaMZ9KDhRxSZ7npT0 jeRgEUsR1wKQE72ZS3MvnRnC7tozmkQYjHbihbSbgkY+lTGGTsnH4VS7ktkJ IzyR+dG9QBllBA9ad9lYdI1/IUeQw5KL+Qp6gICAaDImCN65I9aeIJFYEAHp 0YYpBA+R8i5PqBQA0SIf4h+dKxycj86Ps8g/5ZD/AL5FL5MijO0qAcYx/Si4 WQcemAO9Sykl4pBgGQbSf9tf8io1R2bCrz/u9BTpSEt1jIJJJdWPQHpSGS3F rIHllUKYx8xGeRSJPhFRAV54yagkWVYwXlkZSQCGPWot2e9CY7F+O6ZflRc+ /f3NX1OeM5Hr71k25RQHcKevB5Bq7BcK5CfKvBz6U077ktFrPqcUZ79eKbni hjj2B60xACNykddvJxRkebz02f1oHVSD/DUFwwSTD4AZOCTgZzQBa5zSZHQk D61npeGBmWXc4P3RnGKSa5862EighlOCo7Gi/UNS81xEv8YJz25pjSCUfIe+ GUis2B8SKG5Un8qlLKDvXoeOvpSvcdrD4jtuoMEkDI9adO2VaJd24DIx1FV4 W82RSPlHIAz0zU9yu1CSTlepYdfpR0DqVpmBjTzGZSQMAc54quxGOPSnyBBj DEt+lR/jUlIUnB4J/Omsewo7U0k5oACemQB6Uo464pqBm+6pbHXFTJayHrtH tuFAiP09QacCQwIyMcin/ZyessYz2zTjAOomjOKB2I5WyoB5zjmoenc1O0Eg GQQfYEVCQy8MCD70BZiZzntmjv1oHJHNJkdjQI6vRv8AkFw/8C/9CNXqo6L/ AMgqH/gX/oRq9QAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAHPe IDi+TJ/5Zj+ZrLJ+br7Yrc1iVo7tcJG37v8AjQN3NZ5mY/eigP1j6UhlPJI6 59jQxyef5VaJRjloIyfYkf1prKhxmNeOnJoC5VzjBwO9TQsfLYB5FwfupgA0 phj9CPYGlQJG7gZZSoPJx3oTAGAyA5nJ9CwoEcR52T/99rT5d4RdykFuQT8w /WmlXX/lkD06Qim2FhPLiH8E2P8AfWgxIDwkvbq60fP/AM8P/IA/xpYyAcyW jOPaPGKBaieTHnHlzZ56utHlR/3Jf++lp7kZ/d2hQAn70W6mjfz+4/8AJf8A +vQAeUn9yf2wVoVQoG1phnPAIoCu2R5IGPWCnxjBxsO4HjHyYouMY0jqBiaU c4O/pj8Ksi5gJU4aTYcBsVVuSNv3Su31Oaaj4EcQUYIJY45JzTuLQsSTJJC6 CNvYkjjHSoAjcN1FSYPmoh/jJyO+AKkEa4zgn6mluPYiCEcdTj+GnxjswbPT GOnNS/d4/QUbieMn6UagWop2eVkdVVAPlbPXFILqMuwJ2hTjOQc1DGBtc4z2 GRVVrYMWPmHLEmnzC5SzcXEnmoYiQqAAHGQaindpmZmHJ6DjFSJwirnoMZFB RGxxyfSi4WRUlxwe5ApqltjAH5TjI9atGIDocfXmmmNhggA469qkCEMwIwOc dQOlCLu+XcFB6k1Y/eKB8ijPcc0wMA2ZSQBzwuadx2GR/u0Vjhgr59jzTpZG ZGZmZsnJGeBS7oiuMueckYFLuXJwCAfQ80NvYNCLyXfe3yJsAypBpkke3kHc pPHFWWlZmO55MH0PWojs24Ic/jSBakDDbnOc9qjA3MFXkk4Aq55IkARWIJPp SMIgojQthDnJHU0JjsTpGkChAAzA8luct/8AWpskqCIpHjIGM4qIFBhlViB1 JPApm5fuhcd+DVX0BRbYojTpsUnFL5ceVIQEd6PNPl7cjGc5xz+dN3gHk8/S i6DlaARp3QcUjqB0H0HXFKGBGQc9qUtnq36UgUWQsSDjAx9BRuIUc/pQwyzE cgnNDZ4HtSFY6fRjnTIT/vf+hGr1UdG/5BcP/Av/AEI1epiCiiigAooooAKK KKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAwddOLxOcDyx/M1mb+fvCtnVsi7Ugn/ AFY47dTVPdzyBg9xSsOxT3c9RRuHXNW9y9lAP0pN464z+FFhlXePWpgkRAdb yMMVwysh/KnEg8bR+VQyxlmyicY5HpQl3EyTyxt2m9hK+mG/wpvkR4x9otT9 d/8AhVTzFPY0bh6H8qoVi39niyP39mf++6aYYf8Antafk9Vtw9KeHjPJYg+m 3NICfyYSc+fadfR6X7PCf+W1n+b1XLx7fvkn02//AF6b5ik8CgZb+zw84uLU f9904RoMYvLdec8bqpbl9KN4zkg0wLvlI7KGvYMA5yASeKruf9OXDcdiBj8a iEig5x+lEw5U85K5pASwkvcxsOmCefSrQ+lQWoBQNjkZUHPapxyR2pALSjJP NIDnHNO4CnnApgToABBnJDOePrxULqQxXGMHFS3X7vyBn7oBpboYmYgHDcio T1G9iv8AhS/4dKMYpPoPwqrk2HKxByOOPSgdu/1puexFL345pjsOAUr97DY6 EcUme+P0puSaM/hQArBXGGGQD64pvkp05B/OnbuOgpCSB70AMMAI4cgn2oEL f381MNjdJAD6OMfrSMjgE+WSvqvI/SiwXKs6OIif4SRzURbPcGrM5DRMFBz2 FVoki2EztIrZ4AWkA3cVkPXHHGaM4bOR34pJtmcxuXB7ng0BSVB86MHHQk5p juO3e6/gaUPgY4/BqjdGVFPmI2eynJH1qRLaV0VtyDd2brSC9wJy2ePzpDnH T6c02WKWIAuBgnAIwadBF5u4noMdBTHclAGB2z6UuPc0nlyDADce46UfOP7r fXipJOi0r/kHxfj/ADNXKp6Tn+zotwween1NXKoQUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUU AFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAGLrJIul/3B/M1Qz3zV/Wcfal5/5Zj+ZqisbuRs R2z6KTQOw3I6/lRn2pzRuhwygH0Lc0z58c4WgBck+3vSbhnkigoT1OfxppBx xigCkRhiPQ06NQ5IZiABnippICzbs4z1pogdc4YD8KAsBijB++3vxTHVONpx jrnvT/Ic/wAXWgWzHHzDmgLEYYKMbFY56mgvkEbE/AVKLU/3v0pRa88txQFi vS49zU/2X/apTbDJyxoCxW71MV8xU56DnAqT7MueSfwNPWEKABQA2JdikBu+ ee9Sgn1NAUdqeFGQaNgGjI7mpEBZlUdyKAOOuamtlBuB3CjNTJ2VxpXEvj+8 ABzhetSTfNBG/cAZ9+KivRmYjvirEQ8y1AGfu4rN6JMrd2KfPB6UZ9TTiPXr SEZNaogbz3NGfxoxmincBcijJpOlA+n40wF4oz+dJnOaCaQCikAAOQMH2oye nejn0oAXof8AGgqv90UmfU9KPqaQDTBE55jFNNrDx8n5GpOnOcUAn2wKLBch +yw/3Tx70v2aMdC6/Rqm3f5NHtinYCJrdWADO5UH1pY4vLXap4zn61Jgc9aM c/4UAJg9+c0m0ehp2T68UZ4zQBt6bgWMeOnP8zVqq2nf8eUf4/zNWaBBRRRQ AUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAZWqTNHcqFCZ2feK5PU1nPN LJ9+R2+p4/Krms/8fac87Bx+JqhQFgHAwBS5PSm5FGfwoGL25o4PvRj3o/XF ACYPpS45pfwNGSfX60AJtGKU4/8A1UZ56Z+tHb3pAJjij60ufpmjmgA6ij+W KOnNKQfWgBBjpS46mj9KMdhxQAvuBS4HXP8A9egd+lKM8n9KYCjtVizGS7Dv wPeq/bt9Kt2q/ucY+8elZVH7tioor3YzcEnjpxUtiw8vHGRzUNyoEjYVQMml stqyBScZyKGvcGnqLOm2VhjGeRUZGTVq6TcqtgEjINVcH604SuiZKzGnJ5x0 pM8fhTu2M9etJj8asQ2lo/pSAD1oAXvwOOwozk8g0ntS4/8A1UwDgD/Ck7dT 6Ufzx0oOAcg4oAOR6H9KTPqCB+dLzz6ijnrQAm5fX8xSjqOlB5HXnvSYHsKA Fzkcc0uaZxnr09aUeoIoAdnjpRkdAOabnv6Uuc9qAHZ96PXim57AUue3WgDc 07ixj/H+Zq1VXTTmxj/H+Zq1QIKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKK KKACiiigDF1n/j7QD/nmP5ms/Pc1oayP9KTv8g/maofhxQMKQDilAPpwe+aX nrSAOc5yTR+FHQnijPIHegAAPp0o9Pyo7e3ejPX2oADRnPFH1NIOfTFMA7U7 BBwaTOKAPrQAvPv04oA5HoKB1HpR26ZpAHtS/TijApwGMdPpQAdTzSjoMjFA 7c9KB2oAXB9SDV9FCqqc4AqlEN0qrnqe1X+Bz0xWFV62LiupnzEliTz7Ulqc SpjjB5onPsM+tMiOHySB9a1tpYRoyDKNjkjmqR4+taGcnkdaoyrtf1wazpPo OS6jMdhTcdMUpAzyeDmjtWxA0jPOKQ5weO1OJpOnc++KdwEP6fyoxR+PNGBj pikAZ9fbmk+h6daXv1pDgfSmAufXtR39vWjOevU0gOeuc+9ABj8vWl5yemaO g7UDGc880gE9OAKMc9OKMfSl7igBMUgx6Cnds8ik/EUBcTjv3o/pRyOtAwDz QBvab/x4x/j/ADNWqq6ZzYRfj/M1apiCiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKK KKACiiigAooooAxtY/4+k5x8g/maodR3xjtV/WP+PpBnnYOPxNZ/8qBhwAeK M/jntR0yO35UvQ/SkAd+KQYGOOaO3I5NBwO1MAz780HoCe9HOPrS+o6D+dIA 6Gg8EijuB79aMEe3rTAO2R0PpS8Ck/CjgZ75ouAo7HNHejBNKMnnrigA5/Ol xQBnHelHJ+tIBRzS8jHUUnbIGfWg9/rTAntV/eZOGwDg1ZbhGIJAAqC0+45P cgZNTyZMbdMEVyz+I0SsihPyccAY7UxCQ+cA80+TvgZH061Eudw5HHTPaugg 04iGiQj064qK5XJJA6gH8adbMTFgkcH8afKMpnupBz7Vzr3ZF7oonnJ7UmDg U48E8ZpuPp9a6TMQDp09jSY6YpetGBjgYzQA3tk8d6G6kdT7UpxyDxmjvnHI oAQjHakPA46UuM45JpMfLzgAelAACf1zxQO3NHOcY/CkB49hTAUZ4o60fXP4 UdeaADPftSng8Cm8/Wlz3FIBMg9uPWjPHpS9fmHNJxxnnigBcdB2Pak6UvTn qKTrnvQBvab/AMeMeff+Zq1VXTcfYY8e/wDM1apiCiiigAooooAKKKKACiii gAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAxtY5ukHH3B/M1n9+K0NY/4+0/3B/M1nc+nJpA KP50ZP0zRycH34NJ/PtTGKKB065oIxkdx3pe55xikAn0ox+NGRn2peB1OMd6 YAOuD35zRnjjofQ0m4Z4YcEdDS5H+TQADr1FKM8H8jSEjpuHTnmjegwN6gd/ moAXueMDjmlx6k03zEHIyevQGlEik/Krt+GP50AP4796B0Bz+NRiRtv+qkIP tTvMYHmFh9TSAk7dTn60nUnoOKjEpI/1Lfn1pfNYc+UwHv2ouPU0YUCQJ0Bw D+NLOP3bYI4oE3pDJjtjpUc848ndsfg9Mc1yK7Zp0Kkx+Y/SmL97+We9OkkL Nwh6d6iGR0Utj36V1IzNC0bO7npg/hVjAOQe4qjaOROcoQGGO2auhj12N681 z1PiLjsU2BGDnODg1Hjj3qa4YrIwELlTyD61XMh5AjbjvW8XoQ0LjPc5FJ2J x+FJ5g7o459M0b065A6nniruKzFIPB688U3+lOypHBX8CKCvXIOKQCFWHPUD H3TmkAHNLyORkeuDjFJyTnP14oAQD0PI70UHtz+GKM8A0AIBx07dqXP4HikB AwcYFA6Ee1AB9T+dHUds0bvr6UH6547UAL0b15oyMeh7+1NJGO34UufmAyMj 1oAO3rR15yaMgZB/OlP1oA3dN/48Y/x/matVV03/AI8Y/wAf5mrVMQUUUUAF FFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAGLrIBvEzn/V9jjuaztoxznsO taOs/wDH2g6/IP5mqHA9eO1AxuB1xz7Uu0ehye+aXPA5Bzn8qPwPI9aQCEDJ 69u9G1QchR37Upz17cUp59+etOwDdoxggdqXauOVH5Ue+cAUoPTP50AGAccD j2owoIyowPajjoMe1L7ClYBAoH8I/KnDqMdu2MUnBx75pe54wTRYLjgSepJ9 aXnnnI96TgHr69KAPWmA7k5PYjpR074BzgZoznuKMkHjqKADPHbHf2pyrnaM dTjFN4wBknPSpoF3zg/MQoHINTJ2Q0r6FsZGOMDsc1HOx8r05HANSDlf4gfr Udwfu471yx1kaN6FGTO8jH0NRg46Z6elSyH5uvQc+lQnJAHr6cZrqM0SRu+R yFIOfrWmRnOGwevAxWWCNxIGT371pqwbB45HUVjV6MqJFcIrxAsGOD0zVN0C MTjHpzWkw3BhyM9DVJwWHHHSnSfQJIhAGR8tL04JOPrTj0zyBSYPPArcgYUT GGQdOmOKb5UfTYOB64qQ9M5PPSkbrgfrSAZ5cYB+QDjjBo8tfQ/99Gnkc5I6 9xTcDnHr60wuIFAGAWA7cmkwAQMsf604fT69qQdBjt0xSAbjH8RwPajBHRhn 6U7HyjjnFHBPH4CgBvzDHIyD6daTa2QPMA/4DTx05Hvmkxx3yfWgBMH++f0p NvfzGHPTind+D9MUHJ5x+FMBoBBJLE9fSlwegYj6AUeuD7UE4J6/XFAG9pgx YRc568/iat1V0z/jwi/H+Zq1QIKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKK KKACiiigDF1n/j6Tr9wfzNZ46A8Y9q0NZ/4+0H+wP5ms8DOMdMdKAFJ46dBS 457Dim4HXuKXg55oGHGMgGlwe449aMe3ToAaBggYHPsKADpnpkd6COvXnPNH ODhjxRgZwOcd6QC4OQMDPoKUcdeMUgwMemKX8eAKADpywNL3zj6igZznB4oX GAcDP86AFGOABwAaOACRwO1AHGMfjThkkfXvQAd/mGBR69CRigdPb0IoySAQ OeefSgBQpZuhOKtWwB3NwDkDpVQANhiO/Ge1XLUDycjjJ9Kzqv3SorUm9Mfj UFx2wM45qc8g8ZwOB0qCfkjj261hD4i3sUpmJcgc8DJIpuPu9xzxRLlZTjpn imhvmGR+BrqIJB1yMcjoOavQNuhTjPUHmqPTHQEHpnpVmzYHcM+/NRVWlwi9 S2OCBnI9KqOoVio9as5XdtDLu9M80yYDaGAB7GsYOzLaKY7Y4PNBHqPpinMM N1xmmdOe1dSMgxnnPJNIOmc80vBA6gYpCAOv/wCumAmOc/zFJxxjmlye/HH5 0fxdfxpAN9AcDHQUY6jt/Ol6j2xSdBx1z0zTAMex9vekweD6Udfqe4o6gYzj 0pAGMAH35I6UDge3rR0GOc5pOMZOMUAHT86TkZzx9aU8HByO2KD05AFABn3x QM8ew5pAeOxoPHXj60Ab+mf8eEX4/wAzVqqum/8AHjH+P8zVqmIKKKKACiii gAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigDF1ji8Q9/L/AKmqH69qv6xgXa5/ uDn8TVDtz0xQAnbpmlPJz2zxRnJySMZoB+XPIFIYDGcDjtxSke1AyOrdO9IM Ejp+dMBR14H/ANalA5xgZ/lSYyOmc+lLgk8kgE8+1IA7cZz0BpTjnP8A+ukJ PPp0+tOx1APoeaADGAePfFLnPPINIc54xz7Udc84xQAox2xxxilx27AdBS55 BI/CkA57j696AFYkZyO/Sk4AxzjigZzycfQUZyR6ntQA5RubgA89hWgi7Iwo 5wD+dUrZQ0o+YjGfer27qSR07Cueq9bGiXUD7frVa4OX2joB69ask8jB/Cqj nMrd8k5qaa1CRWkAYnPP0qLtweBjNSSMckEAimZwPp610kJDlPfdzn86uWww zjnJGemBVNMdMnnscc1atuHTarYIxkjipnrFjWjLYHOcAH6c02QAwngcdDin rj6etIBxg/lXItNTTcpSD5emce1RnOcZ5NTFSMjPNR5JPHHBya7IvQyaG44J zzik4zkY70vTkZx7UhOM9cdsVVxCclemM9fahhjnB54pfy+tJjoRnnqaYCYG c9/WkHpu6/rTuSOQcEfWjOGOcj29aQDT6dOaQ4wT09Pal9QecUhHGAc+vFAA fXrn0oOcjJHr1oIz0549KDnGfQ9M0AIfzGPSjkNjHf0peO/Umm4wudo9xmgA PTGD1oz1zn/Ck6YAzjPBpe2cZx60Ab+mf8eEX4/zNWqq6bj7BFj3/matUxBR RRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAYus/wDH0p7eX/U1n9wO K0NZ/wCPpTj/AJZ/1NUMZOO3cnvQMAc9T+JoznrjrnmgcjsPp2o9gPr+VIAA 9DSjJAwevYGkHPtkdKd16EdaAE6Djn69aUfQHBI96AVbO3PbnGKXBxwPTgUw EXgjB5Hb1pw6EcYz3NNz36/1px4J7H37UgD1zntjFKPXmkPAxt4p2CegJx6d qYBg8jv1peAe/wBD0pO3Xk0vPvjsKQCAdOOfSlXuM+3NABxnjJH0xRkZB4z6 k0DLFsP3oOQOMmrYx1557VWtUAUnJPQdcCrH3VPHGeDXJUd5FpWQvt3xVSUj zDjnJ4q0CCcdveqZbLk47mnTWoSK0gBBwSOvGMVHk7MnuOPepJEyDkc88ZzU fTJGfpiukhDkPJDA/nmrMTbXXI2gHn2qon3+pB+nSp1Y4CnBOcnIpNXQGiPr kZ9KOfbnmmg5TIz+IPNO+7kY9OM1yG25DcKQ5I4BHHFV3HzcEAE1cmXMffK8 8d6qyDjjqPat6bujKSsRbfbqetJjI4z6UvQgYBz0wetIMdj0xkVsSHXO3jkd KD1x+pFBGCcDnj8aOecZ9uaAEPP3s8/hSduoz60HhfXqPpSnnIHTI60ANJ5z nPJ6ijvx6U7BJwOM03jjkd/xoAbwRjAHsDmlx3wenX1o6MOM8dxRz2BPH6Uw Ak4yeOO2KQjLfLkgH86XABxj24PNJ25AOf1pDE4x6dgMdaPck47cUY4575o5 H0x+dAjf03/jwi/H+Zq1VXTf+PCL8f5mrVMQUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFF FABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAGLrIJu09Nn9TVDrjrn09av6z/x8qe2wZP4mqAAII6A jNAxPvAHaad9OOvNJjORwfXBpTjJI68UgDIPIP4AUDgrggHHJ9DQD06H0yKO 3Oen50AHH4e1O4zjOSc9KTOfrxjJo68c9OcGgBRyucDPqKXODwcDgfSk5z16 96UdOOn60AL0OD+tHUjv1zzQB8vTjil/AH60AKTnOSOB+NI3B9Pxo6Lz2Hel 4JOOv5UADD5sN+OTQDuzwR9DQCc5HIx+IpQRwSfqaGMvxALGAvPT1zTh/Dj9 aRMhF6kEClzk8H6Vw9TVCDByBx7dqpnII4yQeR0q6CQcZx6VUkyJG7jPStKb 1sTIqtkZAZR3NRjJxjp6Zp8gOGGPlGe9R9D0xiuklAcZAJA78/41ZRiG6ZA5 xVYdByefbpU6EMcZ5zQIvRktECp3AetSdR90Z9B2qC0ICFOdw5OR1qwD29K5 JqzNU7oTByRzj1JqtIMOR0GT2qzkbgO+M4qO4XgNyRTg7MT1KZBUjJ5HTmmk YI9TUsg5zySe4qPI9wMdQK6k7ozaDBH4/hmkwABnPB6igntxx0I7UEYzgdRz 6VQhMZAJwfY0pJyN2SevrmkYjqRz9aMYOPTnk0gE7c5ApMYAA60uOflBz7DN L7ZHPNADSOSuB04PSggdRzzz70dgexJAzSE+1MBOBwOc+9KueTnpig5wBkjn mkHTAwOozmgYEgdsg9SKQnuR70uSCQMYNIMYHHP0pCN/Tf8Ajxj/AB/matVV 03/jxj/H+Zq1TEFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQBiaz zdpxkBAf1NUCM8Yyc9K0NZGbtP8AcH8zWeM8cHNAx3IJOOOPqKMAKdxOc8DH X8aRT359+9KPUDA+lIBeV6574xSHkjkgDpzSKeOlKc8k4yB6dKAA8gjdnvzz TuoIJAzzzSd8AHpnkUccEcY6ehoAXkHGcZ9uaUDkYxik28DI69umaUgZz0Ho MnFACnrjHzfz+lL6kcDPFIoBAAI4H40o+6cD6gUAKQV5HFJ/Ievejt0B74He kY5GMfhmgEABx1xketSRrufaG6kY96aGOTtBAyPrVq1UKAxzu54x0qJySRSV 2TeXgcZ4HXvS4Az1/Gl9B+tG4cVyXNBqoVOMkj3PSqrEb8jByeO9WZGKpnkE 5AqooORzkeorWmnuTJlSTkEdQOM03AwcZx2z0qR8dCeOcYqMZx2GO2MV0MlC r94Z654xViM5YYbnmq5B4weT/jVgcsMjk9BTEy1bja/cADvU+5d+ATk5xx1F QQKAQQuBzj0FWBnpz2rkqfEaR2EOCDj8KbL80fQ1IT+ppkvCEgZFStxtlQrg ZJ6egqPB25GeMc9qlz1x2xzURGCMjBzXXG7MmIRnAH4UhPQhQD2xRwRkcg5w cUqkk4yCKoQcZGccdzSDoPlO768UoB25xx0BxTWAHuD+FACE5x70EjqW4HU0 HAzxn3J6UZBHfFMYmeOnUc+nWjjPUDnscZoJODnBx1pCCDn9KQgGcZ7j0FIS TnGD9eKPUfoaX0DEDB+lADeoGAPbA6Uo6k+uKDx0xj2/nSHqc88jOaAN/TRi wjHPfr9TVqqum/8AHjHgY6/zNWqYgooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiig AooooAKKKKAMXWP+PpeM/ux+HJqgAOwII9utX9Y5u0z0CDr9TVDtjvjoKQxQ Mt29qAee3TijGSQ3Ge/pQDgn8s0wAehwD65o4x3B70Z4zS5z3HIyf8+tIAzy TnPSjGPTAHpSnO7PfPp0pBzweP1oGO2jAHv1NGeM8EH0HNKeh5689OtJnueT +HNAhcgMBycdRjFGM9uTnmjORjjtSdd3HU8cdKAFB4HTOBxzxRjOMknnrSk/ 3mOQPrSKRubgcY6UASQqGbcSOnPFXcgjOePU1FaJtVmz9P604SomQ7liT6cV y1HeRrFWQ9TkKQcj1HSnAEAgAkgVDNc4xsJB75qobyTAXce31NEabkrg5WLV ySeD8mBnHU/jUPOe+PbvVcyyyyE+Yc8jGO1IBJJnazMuMjsDW0Y2ViGwkLBm G0A9OnNR7cH5ieDkHjmpApAxuwue9Ea7xtLYbng+taAhqgblzgD19KmRmyAM Er3xTGU/KVbHNBedcKXAweSBmkLcvwuwBUpUq53EZbaMcbf61Xt2Izv6H+Jf X6VMJIyOZMYPY4rmmveZpF3RIrZGTx7U2UfIR61FLeRRcHcSc8AUz7Ykscio xRgARuHXmpUZbg2IRz2P+FMPODxgU4MWGQrjjjjih+QdwrpvYhohYH8efpSE ZB6nB7U7BI4HXvTW78847CrJEY57YzyPelJ9CMkdsig8gYBH0HtSZySfbkHv QADOAA3Xg5o4x65PUmg4UcfXrQx5w3bqeKAExzz296TnoSck80eqnJ45obtu 9uaAEPse3J9aQjAY5OOlKQA2OM+hpOVwc5BzxmmMX5d3PAx07HimjOM8HH40 7nODkcdKbnjOeRyKAN/TP+PCPBz1/matVV03mxj/AB/matUEhRRRQAUUUUAF FFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAY2sf8faZyP3fX8TWeTnGT0Hcdav6z /wAfa/8AXMfzNUD1IJyfyoGLnjjdzxgc0pBI5Xnuc4poOSTke5oGR1wcDpik FhzZ3DPf1NGOwOQe/akHJHYelKM98+/vQMBkgdcZ44oA6noMcGgDCjkdeQO9 KOQcdTQIU84ORk8UDg8HrxSnrjcPbtQOcggYA/OmAdU9ew70nHOOMdyaX+LJ Pp9KQZwOucZpXAcc4IXqehxSqzZC7sAHoelNQGTgAseuKlGyNlVtrOOvfFRK SRSTZImTGUzhfpjP40rhgRhRwp5/z3p4XCnjIxxx2qB2wGO0jjjniua92alZ 2x3JHoRSxRnDOy4YkbS3HFJvdjsOTj7oPQ1HvyuQcY7Y6fSupLQybuSl4lG4 nnkcduaUyj52Vjt7EcH8qiaVVBBQ7s9cdaaSrcjv2H6UwsTeYD1ABznkU7cu 5WCjg8EVEWG8ZyR3NAPJHGOv0oCxMMHHb15oRTE52H5MZGTk1EpGcdj+dKpG Dnr9M0AXEbcy45VucZ6VMBkrwv5c1QDlWyBjPUf1q6k2SG2nnrmsKq6lRXQZ cxBwrfxLnrVRrfeVIwMd89a0MgrjPX0quyspABDAg4NOnLowkupWFu8ZyjHq cDPSmm6njVc7GXOORVhnA+8ARio2QSqCpIB7+lbPUhCJPHKV4KMeCAvFOKlT yuCfXt+PeomtZI2LxSkHuacisHY5YsTzg8Z+lMLIcCDjjHc80DqMqAcc80uT njBOOvSmj6c9d3+fpQIXIwD6+hzSEkjOP8+tL0+nekYbFB3c9f1oGDdD7d8c UmMe3GfXmlwM5zxz+NGD94fkB+lAhuBuCjj2B6UDgDGB1xkUp5XGeO4HSmk9 TzgccdKBhg85/wD10mOB0wffrS9RjHPtSMuDxnn1FMDf0z/jwi/H+Zq1VXTP +PCL8f5mrVBIUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAGLrP8A x9rnp5Y/maoknBUDGSD0Bq9rAJu0x/cH8zVAc8gdO3SgYZHPQ8Z56U4HDZbD cdxTeeh/DrilPGMDj0pDDgepJ4IIpx5OOMY/GkHOAAee3ahfu4A+vvTEKB05 yPSjgjH3cc9aVcbjjIx3z0o/hOOSR1PakAuDkjkUh6g8ZBx6UduO4pSQCQCQ D0+vpRsAmSCBz9Sf0pNwQjdnJ6bRSkZ46854pG+7kMVxySCaBiI6yqWUqvqC 2P8A69TW6+Su8FQWX7m3jH/16bFCkhI8tQM809tPTAAkfA96wm0tGaJtoeZM Kd0gAzwMdKhllWbcVYjr908Nj2py6eAOZpMY6U2SxRVxGzA478ipXKuoyqTk EqhB9SaTcFbkjH1p8sMkIbcdy9c1BsGOTj+VdCaZm1Yerk4PGaUsgXAyWB6j jH4d6aeQScce9R7xu557ZBoAnZwAAAevPGMUKWB45yPXpURYuRuPbBz2ApwZ snj5s8GgCVjyQew4x0pc54BxULO2ShHPsetCyddooAsoxL+v1HNWI2zGMEYB x9TVFZMnGcdO9XLaQEMWGRnIFZ1FoVHctJjoSB9KV/mjK9scY6/hUSMvygjB HBNSc4z2+vNc5ZRYkFg33ccjFBYqpYdqdejY2/g7u471XLbiOgUD8664yurm TVibzgpGQSCelP8AkwCJEGc4HQ1W8hmzk9R0FN+zNuwr4780xFvyzjAKnHQZ oCE9Bjn1HpVbypt3Mo5PXbSBZif9b82eoFMCz5TgYO0KPVqRiicyTL9B1quI pCOZG6Z4py24DZIHXHXmi4Cif52EaLt4wzDmkRNzhnOWzkEf4VKqfXPYijJx nHHHTtQFxvHXgYHYfrQwOeCcdge9Lx+VJgFcHgH9aAE44PYn1xTl6D5yBnoR nBpMkHjG7OMYpMkAfWgRvab/AMeMePf+Zq1VTTBiwi/H+Zq3TEFFFFABRRRQ AUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQBi6xxeRk/wBwfzNUMADaR37dK0NY YrdoQR9zn8zVAYPGOMdzxQMByCBwPSkPQnknPajnAwRnB4oU46ADA4xzSGKQ C3XJ5I9KVT0we+M+tIAWwAuSaXOOfUfhQADIHJH1xTtvUDB6c96QA8A/qKUA Z+8CevvQIN3AwMj0pc8AA4PbIzmkwRgqM8ccUHGSMYHvzTGA+YY4YEjGOuaX DqRkDI9+tLtyMcHIyQOMU0bDt6g/yNIC1ZgYLZ9ARU5AHJ9ugzUFmwOcHGec djVnPX/Irkn8TNI7CY7Y5z0pNoJHbNKR82Mc9h6UhGOhx7VBRnTv9oIBBjVW xjrk+v0qox3PiMEgdc96ufZp/MO0kDJO4nPNWJUCAAY4GMV0qSWiIa7matuf 4yTg/d7CpDCB91RntirLI2W5GO1IVx7/AIVV2LQqeUAORxjFMIYqApB9hU7j q2CPUmmDg5PO3sc1WwiHaWPIOM8n+dClQPm79T1qULwM8AZoGDkZJ44PTFAE akMSFXA9WqdY33K5O09gvApETkb84z3qdYZ0VW37lBHRhnipkxoYpcZZJI2O PuhhxUv2qQHLBSRzjNRi3cAyIGQ5znAJ4phV2BB8tyDklhU2TGmT3M0bwbCP n+8Bj+tUlfGfl/xqVkkG7KAZGNy/SozFOw5IJqopJWQnqWIDFsAWReOeeDUr qN4JA9/as5lkRssn1q1HJHINis+D0UnIH9aduwtyQhQMgHPsaMjPA5/lSNkZ GMYAHXjNIfmH3eemM1QheFGc8deKMA+/Pc8UmWBz3A9aGJ5zkexFAC5x7D9e 9GcEcZI6n1pCMjjOOaAT97ABx06UCA4A4xzngdqCu5eAT60pzu9Pr6UwgEZx 6igBXyTu9eOvQetGV55BB46UZBAPvkZoJBxlvzFPUZu6aCLGME56/wAzVqqu mjFjGPr/ADNWqCQooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKAMXW Bm7Xn+Ae/c1QXuR1x27Vf1jH2pc5/wBWM/mao9G46igYcswHTvyelGCVBHTr kcZoGMgqc+vFAxke/Y0gFxyTkZ9zz+FKc/dAAzgHpSZIwCxIz0zx9RQi5PU5 b9fxoAXBAzntyBSjhs4Xp9TQmCBhgSOpHakOTg/hTAB26d+lKRtOCdwJHK88 0rHGQN20+hppG0g7uTjPY0hi8c9/Qf1ozuGeBgcYGKMn7wPzZ9eaQLuHJHTO CelDAsQSL5hPyj2q22cgAE+vWqUJXzl9c85q8OT0yOtctVWZpF6AB2wMA0hA JGc+wpemM/pSkfKckH8etZ7FDT9361BcDDBgpJPHBFTkkKSByOxqCc54xzj0 4FVD4iXsQMu4YOMZyCO9DtgEnggAnnoKXqSAOD14prDCjgZxye9dRBCxAI3c A+2ajzz0yD1A7UpBGATg9sUgPUsMjPUVVhJik8sD0HftSMDjB54/ChY1ByF5 HHzHNKv3sDBzwRSGPUj056VfhO5SD+ZqiFYbWQ9zjPapoWeJ1H317ZGCaior ocXqW1QIflyB2pxGRggfXFNZn3gBeecY/wAaEz0Y9Oowa5nc0EaGOTORgjHQ 4xUD27xtlTuXPftVraSwHAGfTmjbkHJwSOx6U1NoVkykF7YxmkCggEoox3wD xUsqFGxknHHOKaoJwMZGfXrXQmmZkTH5iGwvP5U3HGRgZHXFSkAkMSvoe9MP IJIxjpxwatCGgHgHJAoAwM/XvzRjknGM9sZpeMEjGec5GaYCHoMHtx349KCC M4PyjjgUhwwwcYHBxz+NLwWy3TocDOKYBzxuIPHTPSkwAB8xz3B4xQFBAwo6 dOmaATyVBznPvSEHBUkH65H8qTcc4HccginHBPqc85700HP8J4/umiwG7pn/ AB4Rfj/M1bqrpmfsMeeTz/M1apiCiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKAC iiigAooooAxtY/4+VyTjYOAcdzVBThgWAIzlhnBI9Kvaz/x9LnONg/Dk1n7c ZoGXL+FY2RouIpFyMn/JpZLYrYRShSCSSw68Hp/L9aliQXlkkYPzxMBnGTtP f/PpUrSrc3E9nxs2YXnGCPb/AD0pAVbKCOQSPKAyRrkhT1/zg1GGg8hwyES5 yvfA9OtT3JNtYxwj70g3OOn4f59KI0jOmTOApZWADdT270WAp5zjCnAGeKQH cFxgZ5HNaMzRwQWziGNmZRncPYZptzCkeoRIoIRyp2jp1/zxQFykBu4UH5s8 Uin5emSTjnitX919vNuLePaepxz0qC1tUM8xflIWOA3Q9ev5UwuUMjPLkDoS TTsjGeMgcADrWjshkVhK1on914mwQaitEjSwkkaJXKvxux7f40guQwuBL83Q DOR0HrVwYJ4PUdqqxnzZiwATbjIRQBV9AixeYVDEnArnmrs0TsiIEjHTP61O vyW6lOrHk0mBLGxChWX24p2/FuhwDzjpUxVrsG7lZixxtIH1FOki8qeHjJLD kdBzQDg5xmpbph9ogTH8QOfxoprqDbKl9/x9Pxn8fYVXcgAEAbVPKnpWi7I1 8YTCG3DlsdOKght42km3cpCeAx4J9/yro6kGUW4Yg4IOfpTVK8ADn1HWtYxQ TKyztZp/daFuQay8AE7c5PUVT0BGvBYwOIC8eS0OWyTyfl/xqnZ2guoplztd QCh9M5qNb6cFSrn5F2gbRwP8gVPYgfY70kZzHz+RoDoVzlJTGylGXqKuXEUc MEDIMFlBJJ+lNg23kAV8/aYh8rcHePT/AD9fWpb1SLa2RhgbMHP0HFJiBWLR Ag8jqM08c+uOeo6VKEW3jVFQM2MkkZokVNqSgEAnpiuVw1NeYa8flkbjzj1p v5k1NcnkcDoDnFRKu5gvIBqZK0rIabtcZeRAKrleoHX1qK1i8xZXwWCKRj1O Ku3AMkciZwV5BH0pIz9naG2AXcwy+Pp/9b9K6Yqxm2ZQY4AAwR1y1M64YMAc 4ORmrVuiRXDRTqrLkrkj8j/n1qSK1EDzyzoJFj6Ajqf84/P2q0JlHBGOpHoK safDHNOUkTonTv1FV2yRuAByT0PvV3S/+PpwMFdp6fUUwZQznsCDjBz0pQSu 4gtgDru6VbtoVWGW5lAlCkBFxjP1p8Oy8V42gSOZQSpXgZ96YhIv+QTNyfv8 EfhVLILHgZHPHFaFqwj0yR2VXAfO3t2pq+Xd2sxKJHLGCcoOPX+lICWKygcQ Bo87oizcnk/LWUTk5GQT396sLeTrszJgKu1cAcDjvj2qsSwwASD2AoBG/ppL WMZOc89fqatVV0ziwi/H+Zq1TEFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFF FFABRRRQBjayf9JUZ5CA4/E1nAcdWz+hrQ1ni6U5/wCWYGMe5qhxzkZAHHak Ms2Vx9mZjwMocdeT2+vT9ahhdopFlGTtOTjj8KZlcgdj2zSEBgVIOAOlMZYu p/NuHcnIztGPTtUkc6JZSQMGLMwIxjHb/Cqo9Sevr2NBGDgHIyefWkFi3cXE csEUakgxrjnucClubqOW7imG8KhGQcZyDmqp6HhRnGKQ9CDksRjnnNDEXftC /wBoG42t5fpjnpimR3XlXEzbQ0cjHcrcZqsQM5IYMOOOKbwemARQOxcE1tGX 8iN/MYceZjCg9cUiTqllJCVbczAg447f4VB8yA5UHBxz60gZjhTgKueDxzSu Fi1ajCZ55PariSfLsZcg+h5FV4htjCknPUjFSjP+FcrlZ3RrZNDy+1Qkank8 knnFKXHlIgJBU56VGeR744HrQDxnvU8zFypidqS6lH2hJNuQoBxnnrTunODV ac/vMHnjiqpvWwSRILiP7YZ8HaevHPTFRveeTI7FA6SE5QjqM/8A16i9ccEn jHWoLhc45/D0rpuQybzrSLcbaFzI4wDJghR7VUxhVJBI9aQZyDnpyTTsYG7g kc5BxTbYkheDgntzgVPbXCQwXCOCWlTaCoHHB/xquQAxJH4U3uvUZyfegZMD tKk7kcdCOtWprrz449+SyfexxnpiqQJOSWOAefap4VDkc4Izz2NNkl6G4WUB ZkYOoA3D+KnyzccLtRe2OtVIUCN8zDaM/TmrDKMfebHtXNUeppFXJpZBI3HT A69aSMgMrN0BqFN2ApHTPSnEEHgfXNZtu9yrKxMsmJt+eCf0qo0hF4Jjwd3c du4/KpRu5zgHtg1HMvXjHHpVwk72E0RzYkuG8sYDnhT1JqXUpWxHCG3bB83u ccf596jhkMTmRVBYcAE9Peo33OcnBzk7gOldGxnYjwRtYqSMjAB5q0J4YN5g WTe3GWx8o61SIHHBI45IxTipOc8EHHB/zxVCJra48pWjkj3xP2zz9QKf9ogt 42FurbmGC7HlfpiqvynoeQRgjvQBzlQWx156Uxlm3uoltHhmVsu3JXjHTkfl Q1xFHA0NsrfP95mx+XFVM/L8yqcn8aOCeecevekKwg+71IAOeR0pQRk5J64o U+rNj64pCRtDe5ycc0DN7TTmxjI9/wCZq1VXTP8Ajwi/H+Zq1TJCiiigAooo oAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAxdZz9rQg/8s8Y/E1njbngdePYV oaz/AMfacE/J2+prPZhksQAQOmKBiqAeh7HOKN3AUD8qXg8E89wD0po+uAfS gY5emMZ2nkCl5YAnIA4ApuScZHXPXmnqu4Drzg4/rSEIONo4wfelOSp4IA6n qKbjaSVHy+uc5pwAwM8d/wDIp3ARWAyRxnjpSEgKOR6cD9KGY4BGc9MU+MgA qGx9BnmkxjflB9eMAGrcNoz2jSjruyo65A6/59qgjQysETliflLVqhpFvFRY m8lF2Ajp060PYCBeg7emDSlueCDUmwJcsHJK54Hp+NPWDdIykcDnP8q4+Rmv MV1YMCy55buKf6n6U9VCxs8g6cAH1pSqxIpkAZm6AHFHILmRH2PWqs5/eNnC 44zV6RU8gOgxk+ufWo51hiRHMZcuvTdx0FXCNmKUroohgTwQecH2qW6RP7Li kUKG3nkDr1qUxwwwLJKu9pOQoJAA/wA4ovSh0yMquFL5wecda6EiGzIxtw2M setKTwCMZPTnrSuMd+44FEaNIxVFLkDJAGf5UDEUnoOMckDvQqjzSDle59aQ xurGNwVPAIYHgU5AFlO7G09jQBIg8x1A27jgDA71burQW8yDJ2svUccjr/j+ NP09T5kk4Qny1+UZ6n0/z61MiyzWLpLGyyISwJGMnOePXvTJuRWMPmI8kr5K cjb+NWlWOThGO49mFQ2RxBcN6rnOPrSqfmBHLZBrCpo0XEdtIYKRg57CnsiJ 99iT6DtU2F+0gkc7c/jVVtxLEn5ieaza5RptkhQMpZG3Ac4PamLHHKRG5bf7 YqS2z5ox05zSRgfaQF6AkCmujB32Ks6wqdqb1YNjJxjioCuQF2nn9KluP+Pi Tg9Tj3NQhRgHjbnr/StybEbYxyCTnuetBHA64PTmnEZ+YYyDnkZphGSTjH4c 4qriEIyvT3B6UhO0gn1x9RTmbceuTz/+qkJOe31HB+lUAg9GySPfrSjBJHXs cHmkDZIO35cdKOrgcADrjgmkAnCqCSG6jB7UEMpOSQOw6UdiCKM5U54JOMnr QI3dM/48I/x/mat1V0zmwi/H+Zq1TEFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUU UAFFFFABRRRQBi6yM3SYG4lAAO+cmqHIwenbmt+6sYrpw0hcEDHynFQ/2Rb4 Hzy8e4/woGYx6lQM9OTxSnkHJ4x3rZ/sqDk7pM+uRx+lH9k2/GWkP1I/wpBc xlbJ4VenpTlIHBOFbvjOTWwdKgP3mkP1I/wpP7KhyP3kpx2yP8KAMYkDAOcc GlycnuScda2RpcCkFXkUjpgj/Ck/si3xgNIB9R/hQBjjG0cfTtinAYQAk5Ge p6+1a39kW+MbpB+I/wAKBpMAOd8p+pH+FDC5Ss5IrcNIT8+35FK/5/n606GW ViN0rdP7x5q4NKgH8ch+pH+FPj0+GPoX/Eipkm1oNNdSN2EkSk/fAxyOopTM fLAGMgjP0qb7JH6t+dKbWM55bn3rHkne5V4leWQO/HQL/OnB1dFVjtZTwcZz Uv2SPGMtR9kj9W/Ojkn1C8SF2TyVVTnB9KrXcqukSowLKpB456VoG1Q92qL+ zYd2d0mfrVxjK+om0VfNinhSORzHJH3AJ4qO6mt2s0gSUsVbnj6/41eGnQjG Hk446j/Co30i3c5LyA+xH+FaokwzJhSFAGe4/wAaSOUpJkSFT0ypIrc/sa3x jfL+Y/wpTo9uVA8yXj3HP6UDuYbMWbcxJY9y2aRfl6jPr3rd/se3/vy9c9R/ hSf2Nbd3lP4j/CiwXKU1wsdtHb2zkEZZ3TK8/wCf6U2K6milV2d3VTyNxOR+ fWtEaTAP45eueo/wpRpVuO7/AJj/AAoEQxSW6NOFfEcgG0gHjrxxUkYgjG5T vI46YqUafCO7/nT1s41UKC3HfNROLexUWupW8xi/mZBOc4FPYxuSSdh7jrmp jaRkDJY496X7Knq351l7OY7ogDoilY8knjdSRMFkBY8Dv+FT/ZEyTuf8xS/Z U9W/Ojkne4XjYzbjHmMc/KxP481B8oONuCeuB1rWexickkuM+hpBp8WCN8hB 9SP8K1SdtSW0ZJBwwwP931phA+UnO79RxWz/AGdD6v09aj/sqD+/L/31/wDW q0JsyGOCCQePemuc85ypwM5ra/suDJO6Tntkf4Un9k2+c5kyOnI4/SgLmMxG enyilADqcKGGOeeBWx/ZNv8A3pPzH+FIdHtycl5T+I/wosO5j84ByCewoOG2 kjHPBHvWyNIt16NIPxH+FB0qAgDfJgdsj/CmK5Lpv/HjHxjr39zVqo4IVgiW NM7VzjNSUCCiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigA ooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACi iigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKK KACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigAoooo AKKKKACiiigD/9k= --0-638299542-1099091301=:23757-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 29 19:21:46 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9U2Ld1x021060; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:21:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9U2Lb5E020960; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:21:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:21:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001701c4be27$2bcfb0d0$d5017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Grimer's Hobbitts Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:21:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4BDFD.426CF930" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=4.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56302 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4BDFD.426CF930 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4BDFD.426CF930" ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4BDFD.426CF930 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank Grimer's Gran-chillins Thanks for sharing the pic of God's blessings.. in descending order. On a " related" note, most of which are classified as JRR's Hobbitt = stories came to me in original form back in the 1930's via my Granny ( = a Townley) with the 'Gift". Ancient tales for children handed down by = generation. I was certain my ancestors were highwaymen and brigands, = (stagecoach robbers and horse thieves to Texans). Later , reading the = account of Jesse James left me with a sadness for his utter lack of = style. Alas !! Where are the story tellers of today ? Those with the gift for = storytelling to make the imagination come alive with hope and ambition. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4BDFD.426CF930 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 Grimer's Gran-chillins
 
Thanks for sharing the pic of God's blessings.. in descending = order.
 
On a " related" note,     most of which are = classified=20 as JRR's Hobbitt stories came to me in = original form back in=20 the 1930's via my  Granny ( a Townley) with the 'Gift".  = Ancient=20 tales for children handed down by generation. I  was certain my = ancestors=20 were highwaymen and brigands, (stagecoach robbers and horse thieves to = Texans).=20 Later , reading the account of Jesse James left me with a sadness = for his=20 utter lack of style.
 
Alas !! Where are the story tellers of today ? Those with the gift = for=20 storytelling to make the imagination come alive with hope and = ambition.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C4BDFD.426CF930-- ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4BDFD.426CF930 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001201c4be27$2b260350$d5017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C4BDFD.426CF930-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 30 02:05:38 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9U95T1x013901; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 02:05:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9U95R02013884; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 02:05:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 02:05:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041030100504.00682fbc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:05:04 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: <0syNDD.A.4YD.Xl1gBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56303 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks to one of Keith's posts I got to thinking about Planck's constant. I started off with a nice easy page meant for school kids and noted that Planck's constant was given as 6.626 - Mmm....Haven't I seen that number before recently? What was that gravitational constant? - 6.670 - Mmm....not the same, but not a million miles from each other numerically - I wonder why that it. And then something else occurred to me. The precision with which Planck's constant is defined is not much better than that with which the allegedly UNIVERSAL CONSTANT OF GRAVITATION is defined. In short, because h involves Mass, it too varies with the seasons. What a laugh! What a joke! When I came up before my supposedly "Expert Panel" on trial for my heretical Note - see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blazelabs/files/I.H.M./ one idiot, a Fellow of the Royal Society no less, was chuntering on about how wonderfully precise physics was - I think he must have been referring to the Lamb-Retherford shift - let's google it - yes here it is - ========================================== whereas the most recent experimental value is 1.001159652193 (with a possible error of about 10 in the last two digits). ========================================== Now that's what you call precision, man! But of course, you can't get that precision for G or h coz the summertime value ain't the same as the value in the winter. Mark Twain once needed to point out that "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." Well, I'm afraid that the constancy of Planck's constant has been greatly exaggerated as well. I wonder if Savvy included Planck's constant in his list. Ah, yes, there it is. I've singled it out with three plus signs on either side. ================================================================== The consequences of this finding, which is a direct consequence of the ST conversion clean-up, are quite ground shaking, considering that quite a lot of parameters have to be accepted as varying with star positions, and these include all those SI units having the Kg unit in their definition, which are: Refer to : http://blazelabs.com/f-u-suconv.asp Force, surface tension, energy, power, density, mass, momentum, impulse, moment, torque, angular momentum, inertia, pressure, stress, resistance, impedance, conductance, capacitance, inductance, magnetic flux, magnetic flux density, magnetic reluctance, electric flux density, electric field strength, voltage, MMF, permittivity, permittivity, permeability, resistivity, enthalpy, conductivity, thermal conductivity, energy density, ion mobility, dynamic viscosity, fluidity, effective radiated power, radiant flux, gravitational constant, +++ planck's constant +++ , young modulus, electron volt, hubble constant, boltzmann constant, molar gas constant and entropy. The consequences of such a variation are just overwhelming! Just think about how ridiculous is that 1kg prototype sitting at the International Bureau of weights and measures, which is cycling it's own mass in sinusoidal fashion whilst encapsulated and 'stationary' under that glass jar! NIST has now to define the 1Kg something like: "This prototype shall henceforth be considered to be the unit of mass measured when Leo, earth and the sun line up once every year". ========================================================================= No wonder Savvy blew his top. These things take longer to sink in with me. Maybe anno domini is catching up, eh! :-( This situation is really getting beyond a joke. I can see that I shall have to scan some of my expert panel documents and put them on Blaze Labs Yahoo website. That should frighten the horses. :-) The Official Secrets Act will just have to go hang. I can't imagine that Tony Blair would be stupid enough to prosecute me - especially after that recent foul up involving a government scientist who topped himself. And if he does - well that will bring everything out into the open, wont it. 8-] Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 30 14:47:52 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9ULlj1x028245; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:47:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9ULlhIo028226; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:47:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:47:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041030224721.00695608@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:47:21 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Dimensions of mass Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56304 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:05 am 30-10-04 +0000, I wrote: >This situation is really getting beyond a joke. I can see that I shall have to >scan some of my expert panel documents and put them on Blaze Labs Yahoo website. > >That should frighten the horses. :-) > >The Official Secrets Act will just have to go hang. I can't imagine that Tony >Blair would be stupid enough to prosecute me - especially after that recent >foul up involving a government scientist who topped himself. And if he does >- well that will bring everything out into the open, wont it. 8-] > >Cheers > >Grimer I have now uploaded a memo addressed to the Deputy Director (later Director) of my establishment. The URL is, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blazelabs/files/memo/ The memo is reasonably self explanatory but if anyone has any questions I will be happy to answer them. Cheers Grimer ---------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 31 15:27:15 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9VNR7NV014702; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:27:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i9VNQu10014592; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:26:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:26:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041031232649.65482.qmail@web81110.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:26:49 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Trick or Treat? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56305 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Are heavy electrons the “trick or the treat” of LENR? All matter is composed of leptons and hadrons. By looking at the two basic “form” characteristics which are involved in each category, it is hoped that some direction (and perhaps a plan of action) can be derived to aid in the search for robust LENR, the new energy source for the new millennium. The word “lepton” is Greek for "light", as opposed to the hadrons, which are comparatively heavy subatomic particles (and which experience the strong nuclear force and so will fuse, releasing a lot of energy, which is our goal). In current string theory models, hadrons are composed of basic units called quarks (bound by “glue-like” bosons, called what else? Gluons). The gluons mediate the force that binds the quarks together, and one question which should be asked now is this: “what is the corresponding “glue” particle for the other class of fermions, the leptons? Most subatomic particles, the ones which have been “discovered” in our new temples (i.e. the national labs) and studied by our new evangelists (the physics mainstream), are actually NOT encountered naturally, and in some ways can be said to be either imaginary or virtual (remind you of some religions?); but unlike angels they can be produced only with expensive gadgets by a cadre of jealous keepers of the new knowledge, and have negligible lifetimes. At any rate, it is clear that these "particles" are manufactured - not real, and equally clear that physics “wants” to be humanity’s new theology, and anyone who gets in the way will be demonized. (end of Halloween rant) But at least quarks and leptons are thought to be normally indivisible (except perhaps in even larger accelerators). These are the two basic families of spin-1/2 fermions. Composite objects made up of quarks, notably protons and neutrons are hadrons; but until recently, NO stable combination of fermions has yet been seriously proposed to exist AFAIK. Neutrinos are believed to oscillate between various classifications, but that is different than a stable combination of three leptons (but maybe has one similarity). There are 12 known types of leptons. But are there any good reasons why there should be any limit to the number of leptons? Maybe so. Some outcast mathematicians have worked out fairly convincing equations that find that four massive leptons accompanied by four massless neutrinos are “allowed.” Among the allowed set of leptons heavy electron are the electron, muon, tauon and the 3 varieties of neutrinos, plus their antimatter partners. There is a missing heavy electron, undiscovered so far by our new theologians (apparently even they are not perfect). If the outcast theorists are correct, then the fourth class remains undiscovered. As mentioned, there has heretofore in the history of science been no evidence of combinations of leptons, such as in quark-like triads, which is the NORM with hadrons, but with the other variety of fermions, where is the combination? Therefore, in addition to the two (four) missing classes of leptons, we may also be missing MANY lepton combinations… for any number of reasons… who says that “physics is complete”? BTW, for historical reasons muons are sometimes referred to as mu mesons, even though they are not mesons. Muons have a mass that is 207 times greater than the electron (105.6 MeV) and a very short lifetime. Because of this, a muon can be thought of as an extremely heavy electron and the tauon even more so. But there exists the other types of missing leptons, mentioned above, which can be also called “heavy electrons” and which like the muon, could conceivably catalyze fusion at FAR different parameters than are normal. In addition, of course, are the missing combinations of leptons. BTW a tau neutrino, which is potentially quite heavy, is created when a tauon decays to a lighter lepton (muon or electron) and – it should be remembered that the tauon is actually heavier than many hadrons. Except for its high mass and its instability, a tauon otherwise resembles a muon and an electron – and its mass may offer a mathematical clue (using alpha, the fine structure constant) as to the identity of the missing particles. The Tauon is seldom mentioned in free energy discussions, unlike the muon (which has been shown to catalyze fusion) but with a high mass of 1777 MeV it would be relevant except that decays way faster than a muon. The tau neutrino doesn't decay and like other leptons has spin 1/2 and BUT with no charge and probably significant mass, it could be a LENR factor, but it feels neither the strong nor the electromagnetic force and only interacts through the weak force and gravitation; ergo it will not be very helpful in catalyzing cold fusion, except to the degree that the weak force enters into the picture... which it always "can" so long as neutrons are present. All known charged leptons have a single negative or positive electric charge (depending on whether they are particles or antiparticles) and all of the neutrinos and antineutrinos supposedly have neutral electric charge. Electrons have a charge, by convention, of exactly -1. Protons similarly have a charge of +1. Quarks have a charge of -1/3 or +2/3. The antiparticle equivalents of these have the opposite charge. The positron is also called the Antielectron, as it is the antiparticle of the electron. It is antimatter, and has an electric charge of +1, a spin of 1/2, and the same mass as an electron. Because of the Dirac theory, however, in which the positron figures very prominently, it may have far more relevance to physics, and to LENR, than any other antiparticle. When a positron annihilates with an electron, their mass is converted into energy in the form of two gamma ray photons of a very characteristic energy .511 MeV. However, it is very possible that annihilation is a very rare event with Ps (positronium which is a short lived atom). A positron may be generated by positron emission from a neutron (radioactive decay), or the interaction of photons of energy greater than 1.022 MeV with matter. This process is called pair production, as it generates both an electron and a positron from the energy of the photon. However, pair production in the vicinity of a free electron can also possibly result in a previously undescribed triad particle, electronium (*e-). One point that you will never see answered satisfactorily in mainstream physics is how a positron can be emitted from a neutron in radioactive decay, when supposedly there was not a positron there to begin with. Best available (non-mainstream) answer (soon to be demonized) - perhaps a neutron itself (which is three quarks in one perspective) is not (effectively) a proton, electron, and an electron antineutrino, but instead (effectively) is a proton bound to an (*e-) with or without an electron antineutrino of a few eV thrown-in for good measure (and to balance out a few QM issues). The *rest mass* difference between the neutron and the (combined proton + electron) is 0.7823 MeV or thereabouts. Consequently one is free to ponder whether of not this *very significant difference mentioned above which is over one and a half times the mass of an electron, is actually rest energy which is converted into the kinetic energy of the neutrino, or instead is another (compostie) particle of about 1.29 MeV. At any rate, today on Sci.physics.particle an interesting message has appeared, Subject: equation that predicts the masses of quarks and leptons. Gist: “It is interesting to note that there seems to be a lepton that has escaped detection in particle accelerators” For those interested in this as well as some other juicy tidbits the cite is: http://tinyurl.com/52rjl Trick or treat? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 31 18:03:39 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA123ZNV032075; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:03:35 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iA123UYP032039; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:03:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:03:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c4bfb6$f4ddb4a0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Holloween treats Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 20:02:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4BF84.90D409A0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp (2004-01-11) on mailadmin X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: <9_PT2B.A.j0H.ylZhBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56307 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4BF84.90D409A0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4BF84.90D409A0" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4BF84.90D409A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankDuring halloween, various costumes are worn as " masquerades". Life and religion are full of accounts of " sleigh of hand tricks". = Magicians use them as stock in trade.=20 Perhaps atomic science mirrors life experiences ... certain = appearances may only be an imposter in masquerade. Or perhaps even more = complex in that appearances are mirror images of the mask. Sometimes the most foolish sounding comment stirs the imagination. = During WW2 at a Boeing palnt in Wichita Kansas .. a late night = conference continued regarding a solution to the structural failure of = bomber wings at the fusilage joint. Finally the janitor listened until his patience wore thin suggested = the engineers perforate the metal at the joint... why so they asked?.. = the reply was that his experience with toilet paper demonstrated the = paper never " tore" at the perforation.. Perhaps Grimer is seeing the mask and not the face behind. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4BF84.90D409A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
During halloween, various costumes are worn  as " = masquerades".
 
Life and religion are full of accounts of  " sleigh of = hand=20 tricks". Magicians use them as stock in trade.
 
Perhaps  atomic science mirrors life experiences =20 ... certain appearances may only be an imposter in masquerade. = Or=20 perhaps even more complex in that appearances are mirror images of the=20 mask.
 
Sometimes the most foolish sounding comment stirs the imagination. = During=20 WW2 at a Boeing palnt in Wichita Kansas .. a late night conference = continued=20 regarding a solution to the  structural failure of bomber = wings at the=20 fusilage joint.
Finally the janitor  listened until his patience wore = thin =20 suggested the engineers perforate the metal at the joint... why so they = asked?..=20 the reply was that his experience with toilet paper demonstrated the = paper never=20 " tore" at the perforation..
 
Perhaps Grimer is seeing the mask and not the face = behind.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4BF84.90D409A0-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4BF84.90D409A0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c4bfb6$db63cb40$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4BF84.90D409A0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 31 21:12:38 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA15CUfq020726; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:12:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iA15CSMT020709; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:12:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:12:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1f5.1dfdbe5.2eb71fad@aol.com> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 00:12:13 EST Subject: Want an LED flashlight want to view Mars 3d pictures To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1f5.1dfdbe5.2eb71fad_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56308 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_1f5.1dfdbe5.2eb71fad_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I bought a LED 2 D cell flashlight at Wall Mart. It comes with red and blue color caps. The flashlight is OK. The red and blue color caps have enable me to view the Mars rover 3d images. The blue goes on the right eye and the red goes on the left. Frank Z --part1_1f5.1dfdbe5.2eb71fad_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I bought a LED 2 D cell flashlight=20= at Wall Mart.  It comes with red and blue color caps.

The flashlight is OK.  The red and blue color caps have enable me to vi= ew the Mars rover 3d images.  The blue goes on the right eye and the re= d goes on the left.


Frank Z --part1_1f5.1dfdbe5.2eb71fad_boundary--