From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 02:09:30 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 iB1A9Mag023849; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 02:09:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1A9J5Q023828; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 02:09:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 02:09:19 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412319758950@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: Parametric capacitance & The Electrical Double Layer Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:07:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404317f14f5e7190f557f2568a567f0fc0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.185 Resent-Message-ID: <6bj4c.A.N0F.PhZrBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56659 X-Loop: vortex-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 original intent was to see if thermal vibrations at the solid-liquid interface (Anode-Cathode-Electrolyte "Electrical Double Layers" ) would produce an electrical signal in proportion to the change in their capacitance, Seems that the voracious Vortex appetite for Free Energy got things off on a wild goose chase. http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/Chemistry/Electrochemis/Electrochemical/ElectricalDouble/ElectricalDouble.htm Obviously the minute thermal/acoustic vibrations of the Pd cathode are changing the capacitance of the double layer at some frequency, hence there should be a way to convert this energy to an electrical signal. http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/dielcapgen.htm The energy in the electrolysis cell "capacitor/s" = 1/2 CV^2 = Q^2/2C is changing due to CF/OU output. So why not get it as electrical energy before it degrades to warm water? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

The original intent was to see if thermal vibrations at the solid-liquid interface (Anode-Cathode-Electrolyte
"Electrical Double Layers" ) would produce an electrical signal in proportion to the change in their capacitance,
Seems that the voracious Vortex appetite for Free Energy got things off on a wild goose chase.
 
 
 
Obviously the minute thermal/acoustic  vibrations of the Pd cathode are changing the capacitance
of the double layer at some frequency, hence there should be a way to convert this energy to an
electrical signal.
 
 
The energy in the electrolysis cell "capacitor/s"  = 1/2 CV^2   = Q^2/2C is changing due to CF/OU output.
 
So why not get it as electrical energy before it degrades to warm  water?
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 03:27:47 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 iB1BReLq029352; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:27:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1BRbJi029323; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:27:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:27:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=tJ1AqHxoHLSEVlT0QiJlXLK40ITKcwCGj4beUb1SFGUOZhcYqmzrKM4V62vA4jYH0c3AT24qnna2tAV0cN5Hh9mTZxpfl/JDCSvpT+cXWWAvXKtfvTtJY3s1uQQV68iD5XYDlvoCAsrK0eWfBLyJ9t+Pz2m1xQ8CAlF5zLnSIyQ= ; Message-ID: <20041201112729.91325.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 03:27:29 -0800 (PST) From: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: Parametric capacitance 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/56660 X-Loop: vortex-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, Vari-caps? Parametric generators? Dig back through the R-chives, and take a gander at my experiments from 1999... http://www.theavalonfoundation.org/varicap2.htm http://www.theavalonfoundation.org/capshift.htm Neat way to pull some juice from "somewhere" but not real efficient for more than lighting LEDs or powering small circuits. Still... could be made bigger better I thnk. NR --- Horace Heffner wrote: > At 11:20 AM 11/30/4, Jones Beene wrote: > >>From the site mentioned by FS, what is wrong with > the > >suggestion? : > > > >http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/dielcapgen.htm > > > > I didn't look at this much because I noticed right > off there is a mistake > with regard to the fringe force on the edge of a > dielectric slab that is > well within the plates. The E field lines are not > vertical at the slab > edge as shown, but rather bend inwards toward the > dielectric and there is > thus a net force that draws that edge in a direction > so as to maximize the > amount of dielectric between the plates. There are > various electrostatic > motors based on this principle which have special > application to > nano-machines. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > __________________________________________________ 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 Dec 1 06:34:21 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 iB1EYHLq010465; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 06:34:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1EYGFw010458; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 06:34:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 06:34:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41ADD695.9080903@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 09:35:01 -0500 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: Manufacturing going to China..off topic References: <20.3944e165.2edeb15a@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <20.3944e165.2edeb15a@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <_8jteC.A.WjC.nZdrBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56661 X-Loop: vortex-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.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-11/29/content_395728.htm "The world's largest retailer, Wal-Mart Stores Inc, says its inventory of stock produced in China is expected to hit US$18 billion this year, keeping the annual growth rate of over 20 per cent consistent over two years." That's "billion" American, not British. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:03:30 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 iB1F3Kag002433; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:03:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1F3Eqn002370; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:03:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:03:14 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002b01c4d7b6$7e315b00$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041201112729.91325.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Keefe's engine Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:00:25 -0800 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: <-6-sCC.A.5k.x0drBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56662 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Speaking of "magneto-caloric" and/or "electro-kinetic" effects... which well-known effects are suggested as amenable to being translated into something completely different .... And the "lack of success" in getting others others to appreciate the precise focus of the issues ... ;-) This poor bloke has been pounding his head against the wall for a quarter century with a pretty good idea (related to the above) and no takers.... http://www.keefengine.com/ Mr Keefe might opine that it is no fun being "slightly ahead of his time..." especially in a society which doesn't afford lawyers much sympathy these days (wonder why?), even if they are physics-teacher-turned-lawyer. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:14:30 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 iB1FE7ag005321; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:14:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1FE4oP005288; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:14:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:14:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002f01c4d7b8$01aebe40$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041201112729.91325.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Parametric capacitance Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:11:16 -0800 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: <_6U1TD.A.kSB.7-drBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56663 X-Loop: vortex-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 Nick, Nice experiment. One wonders why you did not try to get the spacing down to a very minimum, since the ouptut is directly related? Couldn't the contacts be rearranged somehow such as on the circumference to get below the 3mm? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:16:40 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 iB1FGQag006939; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:16:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1FGMC5006909; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:16:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:16:22 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201101506.041e8310@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:15:57 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: DoE decision will be posted today 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/56664 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dave Nagel wrote to me: "I am told that the results of the review will be posted on a DoE web site this afternoon. I will let you know, when I know more." - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:37:57 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 iB1Fbiag018743; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:37:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1Fbgn9018731; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:37:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:37:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41ADE578.70007@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:38:32 -0500 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: DoE decision will be posted today References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201101506.041e8310@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201101506.041e8310@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56665 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Dave Nagel wrote to me: "I am told that the results of the review will > be posted on a DoE web site this afternoon. I will let you know, when > I know more." No hint as to the results, eh? Here's an interesting DOE press release (Nov. 30): <><><><><><><><><> DOE Researchers Demonstrate Feasibility of Efficient Hydrogen Production from Nuclear Energy WASHINGTON, DC – In a major step toward achieving President George W. Bush’s goal of ensuring America’s energy security through innovative technologies, researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) and Ceramatec, Inc. of Salt Lake City, Utah have demonstrated the feasibility of using nuclear energy to efficiently produce hydrogen from water. “With America’s growing demand for oil, also comes a host of environmental challenges. Because of the need to develop new energy sources in an environmentally sound way, the President and our Administration recognize that the benefits of hydrogen technologies are too great to ignore. This major breakthrough signals that we are systematically achieving our hydrogen goals,” Secretary Abraham said. Using hydrogen to fuel our economy can reduce dependence on imported petroleum, diversify energy resources, and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. To this end, the Department of Energy is actively exploring clean hydrogen production technologies using fossil, nuclear and renewable resources to revolutionize the way we power our Nation’s cars, homes and businesses. This achievement demonstrates high-temperature electrolysis which utilizes heat to decrease electricity needed for splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen. Instead of conventional electrolysis, which uses only electric current to separate hydrogen from water, high-temperature electrolysis enhances the efficiency of the process by adding substantial external heat – such as high-temperature steam from an advanced nuclear reactor system. Such a high-temperature system has the potential to achieve overall hydrogen production efficiencies in the 45 to 50 percent range, compared to approximately 30 percent for conventional electrolysis. Added benefits of the nuclear energy source include the avoidance of both greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants. The researchers have shown that hydrogen can be produced at temperatures and pressures suitable for integration with the new Generation IV nuclear reactor design being developed by the Department. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham stated, “The Generation IV nuclear technologies will take us to the next level in terms of efficiency, reliability, and safety. Coupling high temperature electrolyzer technology with the Gen IV reactors provides another pathway to produce hydrogen for powering future fuel cell vehicles.” Fuel cell vehicles running on hydrogen produce no pollutants or carbon emissions. Improvements in solid oxide electrolyzer design made by Ceramatec, Inc. will enable a 3-fold decrease in equipment size allowing greatly reduced capital costs. INEEL developed the system concept design and performed the feasibility testing. This demonstration follows Secretary Abraham’s recent announcement of a $2 million grant to Ceramatec who is teamed with INEEL, University of Washington, and Hoeganaes Corporation in Riverton, New Jersey. The team will continue to work remaining challenges to lower costs, increase materials durability and improve efficiency of the solid oxide electrolyzer technology. This development is a major step towards the hydrogen economy and realizing the President’s vision described in his 2003 State of the Union Address that “the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free.” From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 07:49:09 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 iB1Fn3Lq006029; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:49:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1FmwTO005998; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:48:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:48:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201104533.041e0020@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:48:44 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: DoE decision will be posted today In-Reply-To: <41ADE578.70007@rtpatlanta.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201101506.041e8310@pop.mindspring.com> <41ADE578.70007@rtpatlanta.com> 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/56666 X-Loop: vortex-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: >No hint as to the results, eh? I would not want to hazard a guess, but Dave Nagel is confident the decision will be positive. He is the closest CF person to the review, so he should know. >Here's an interesting DOE press release (Nov. 30): . . . >This achievement demonstrates high-temperature electrolysis which utilizes >heat to decrease electricity needed for splitting water into hydrogen and >oxygen. Instead of conventional electrolysis, which uses only electric >current to separate hydrogen from water, high-temperature electrolysis >enhances the efficiency of the process by adding substantial external heat >. . . They replicated Mizuno! I'll bet they did not tell him. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 08:03:53 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 iB1G3bag030472; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:03:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1G3YD5030453; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:03:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:03:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41ADEB86.3000304@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:04:22 -0500 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: DoE decision will be posted today References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201101506.041e8310@pop.mindspring.com> <41ADE578.70007@rtpatlanta.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041201104533.041e0020@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201104533.041e0020@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56667 X-Loop: vortex-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: > I would not want to hazard a guess, but Dave Nagel is confident the > decision will be positive. He is the closest CF person to the review, > so he should know. I hope this is true. I'm preparing a mass-emailing for http://bertc.com/three_crows.htm ;-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 08:40:27 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 iB1Ge0ag013224; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:40:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1Gdt2h013178; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:39:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:39:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201113645.041dfd60@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:39:02 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_3891937==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56668 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: --=====================_3891937==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Here is an ICCF11 paper describing an Ohomori-Mizuno replication: Cirillo, D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. Quote: "Once a stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can compare the input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; energy related to the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expanding gas and steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more energy than is being applied." That is astounding. Quite a robust result! The paper should be ready today or tomorrow. - Jed --=====================_3891937==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Here is an ICCF11 paper describing an Ohomori-Mizuno replication:

Cirillo, D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France.

Quote:

"Once a stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can compare the input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; energy related to the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expanding gas and steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more energy than is being applied."

That is astounding. Quite a robust result!

The paper should be ready today or tomorrow.

- Jed
--=====================_3891937==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 08:48:27 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 iB1GmILq027015; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:48:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1GmHqw027004; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:48:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:48:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: JNaudin509@aol.com Message-ID: <19b.2c7630da.2edf4fc8@aol.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:48:08 EST Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1101919688" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5001 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56669 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: -------------------------------1101919688 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cirillo, D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. Quote: "Once a stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can compare the input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; energy related to the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expanding gas and steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more energy than is being applied." That is astounding. Quite a robust result! The paper should be ready today or tomorrow. - Jed Dear All, This paper is already posted in my web site since Nov 6, 2004 at : _http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/files/Electroplasma-eng.pdf_ (http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/files/Electroplasma-eng.pdf) see also the full slides at : _http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index.htm_ (http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index.htm) Best Regards, Jean-Louis Naudin Email: JNaudin509@aol.com Web site : http://www.jlnlabs.org -------------------------------1101919688 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>Cirillo,=20 D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined pla= sma=20 in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter=20 Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France.

Quote:

"Once=20= a=20 stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can compare the= =20 input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy=20 necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this=20 calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; en= ergy=20 related to the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expan= ding=20 gas and steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic= =20 radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra= =20 energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more=20 energy than is being applied."

That is astounding. Quite a robust=20 result!

The paper should be ready today or tomorrow.

-=20 Jed
 
Dear All,
 
This paper is already posted in my web site since Nov 6,=20 2004 at :
http://jln= labs.imars.com/cfr/files/Electroplasma-eng.pdf
see also the full slides at :
http://jlnlabs.imars.c= om/cfr/lorio/index.htm

Best=20 Regards,
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: JNaudin509@aol.com
Web sit= e :=20 http://www.jlnlabs.org
-------------------------------1101919688-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 09:47:55 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 iB1H4lag024780; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:04:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1H4gbG024713; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:04:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:04:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201120246.041f0380@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:04:03 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio In-Reply-To: <19b.2c7630da.2edf4fc8@aol.com> References: <19b.2c7630da.2edf4fc8@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_5361390==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <2CkY3B.A.ACG.pmfrBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56670 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_5361390==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed JNaudin509@aol.com wrote: >This paper is already posted in my web site since Nov 6, 2004 at : >http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/files/Electroplasma-eng.pdf >see also the full slides at : >http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index.htm I suggest you replace it with the version I will upload, which has been edited by Ed Storms and by me. We have improved the English. - Jed --=====================_5361390==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" JNaudin509@aol.com wrote:
 
This paper is already posted in my web site since Nov 6, 2004 at :
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/files/Electroplasma-eng.pdf
see also the full slides at :
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index.htm

I suggest you replace it with the version I will upload, which has been edited by Ed Storms and by me. We have improved the English.

- Jed
--=====================_5361390==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 10:03:12 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 iB1I34Lq026466; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:03:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1I2v1e026436; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:02:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:02:57 -0800 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: Parametric capacitance Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:02:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <002f01c4d7b8$01aebe40$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56671 X-Loop: vortex-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 Nick & Jones. This is a field mill. http://www.precisionstrobe.com/jc/fieldmill/fieldmill.html It should look familiar. A parametric oscillator would involve an inductor in the circuit to resonate it at a multiple of the chopping frequency. What was the total change in capacitance of your large rotary system? K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 10:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Parametric capacitance Hey Nick, Nice experiment. One wonders why you did not try to get the spacing down to a very minimum, since the ouptut is directly related? Couldn't the contacts be rearranged somehow such as on the circumference to get below the 3mm? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 10:32:49 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 iB1IWbag027401; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:32:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1IV9Hp027025; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:31:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:31:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: JNaudin509@aol.com Message-ID: <1b9.7ca7181.2edf67df@aol.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:30:55 EST Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1101925855" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5001 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56672 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1101925855 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 Dans un e-mail dat=E9 du 01/12/2004 18:48:18 Paris, Madrid, =20 JedRothwell@mindspring.com a =E9crit : I suggest you replace it with the version I will upload, which has been=20 edited by Ed Storms and by me. We have improved the English. - Jed Ok Jed, I shall soon replace the "english-italian" version with your latest= =20 improved English version. Thanks for your suggestion.=20 =20 For your info, you will find also two videos of the Iorio-Cirillo's =20 experiment at the bottom of the page at :=20 _http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/lorio/index4.htm_ (http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cf= r/lorio/index4.htm)=20 Best Regards, Jean-Louis Naudin Email: JNaudin509@aol.com Web site : http://www.jlnlabs.org -------------------------------1101925855 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dans un e-mail dat=E9 du 01/12/2004 18:48:18 Paris, Madrid,=20 JedRothwell@mindspring.com a =E9crit :
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>
I=20 suggest you replace it with the version I will upload, which has been edit= ed=20 by Ed Storms and by me. We have improved the English.

-=20 Jed
Ok Jed, I shall soon replace the "english-italian" vers= ion=20 with your latest improved English version. Thanks for your suggestion.
 
For your info, you will find also two videos of the Iorio-Cirillo's=20 experiment at the bottom of the page at : http://jlnlabs.imars.= com/cfr/lorio/index4.htm

Best=20 Regards,
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: JNaudin509@aol.com
Web sit= e :=20 http://www.jlnlabs.org
-------------------------------1101925855-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 10:36:46 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 iB1IaeLq006670; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:36:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1IacGI006647; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:36:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:36:38 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=cccz0OBD1qHQYsJNgtOJSshC1qLXXbQ11LDJlq7NdBS7/nHRF59Cn1SAyOS+SDxswrWS3I9sJ8Doku3PZdTaMewImXzuYqDc19AE2n9kJKfcTvfOe1eZAITxnLehDDRiZKh0cexGPysP3DCAjdfdg0JhkQzd/VJUZoS8qkPZp6k= ; Message-ID: <20041201183630.33710.qmail@web60306.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:36:30 -0800 (PST) From: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: Parametric capacitance To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <002f01c4d7b8$01aebe40$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/56673 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Back to both Jones and Keith, The not so good minimum spacing for both the single and multi-disc versions of the machine was due to two factors - one, the difficulty in getting plastic CD discs to line up parallel and not be wobbly when they spin, and secondly, the coductive adhesive backed Chomerics ribbon I used for connections and buss bars would sometimes peel up at corners. To answer Keith's question, I think the delta-C for the larger multi-disc unit might have been like 100 pF or so. A decidedly non-sinusoidal 100pF I might add. In the months after I posted those reports, a number of helpful folk, from Scott Little to some of the old FreeNrG-L people showed me a variety of olde timey parametric generator and electrostatic machine designs. So it does fit into that spectrum I believe. The delta - C is pretty small compared to the output voltage, so in a sense it has more "character" of the charge mill than it does of say the one version that used the air-variables ganged and spun. NR --- Jones Beene wrote: > Hey Nick, > > Nice experiment. > > One wonders why you did not try to get the spacing > down to a > very minimum, since the ouptut is directly related? > Couldn't > the contacts be rearranged somehow such as on the > circumference to get below the 3mm? > > Jones > > > __________________________________________________ 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 Dec 1 11:40:41 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 iB1JeYLq026812; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:40:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1Jd7M3026190; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:39:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:39:07 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201143237.0420ea30@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:38:58 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: DoE recommendations are 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/56674 X-Loop: vortex-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 to get excited about. See: http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/ http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf Quotes with footnotes: Charge Element 3: Determine whether there is a scientific case for continued efforts in these studies and, if so, to identify the most promising areas to be pursued. December 1, 2004 The nearly unanimous opinion of the reviewers was that funding agencies should entertain individual, well-designed proposals for experiments that address specific scientific issues relevant to the question of whether or not there is anomalous energy production in Pd/D systems, or whether or not D-D fusion reactions occur at energies on the order of a few eV. These proposals should meet accepted scientific standards, and undergo the rigors of peer review. No reviewer recommended a focused federally funded program for low energy nuclear reactions. [1] Reviewers identified two areas where additional research could address specific issues. One is the investigation of the properties of deuterated metals including possible effects of alloying and dislocations. These studies should take advantage of the modern tools for material characterization. A second area of investigation is the use of state-of-the-art apparatus and techniques to search for fusion events in thin deuterated foils. Several reviewers specifically stated that more experiments similar in nature to those that have been carried out for the past fifteen years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area. [2] Conclusion While significant progress has been made in the sophistication of calorimeters since the review of this subject in 1989, the conclusions reached by the reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 review. [3] The current reviewers identified a number of basic science research areas that could be helpful in resolving some of the controversies in the field, two of which were: 1) material science aspects of deuterated metals using modern characterization techniques, and 2) the study of particles reportedly emitted from deuterated foils using state-of-the-art apparatus and methods. The reviewers believed that this field would benefit from the peer-review processes associated with proposal submission to agencies and paper submission to archival journals. Attachment 1: Review document submitted by requesters, "New Physical Effects in Metal Deuterides." Attachment 2: Charge letter to reviewers - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Comments by Jed: [1] This is nice pat on the head and dismissal. In plain English it means: "keep struggling without funding, and someday we may look at your work." [2] This indicates they do not understand the subject. [3] This indicates they are clueless idiots. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 11:49:31 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 iB1JnMag022573; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:49:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1JmOcQ021067; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:48:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:48:24 -0800 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: Parametric capacitance Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:47:54 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <20041201183630.33710.qmail@web60306.mail.yahoo.com> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <9DyWVD.A.HJF.IAirBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56675 X-Loop: vortex-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 Nick. You write: >To answer Keith's question, I think the delta-C for >the larger multi-disc unit might have been like 100 pF >or so. A decidedly non-sinusoidal 100pF I might add. Yes, it's a challenge to make rotary capacitive systems with high enough values of delta-C to make a useful parametric resonator at audio frequencies. One ends up with a field mill type circuit. I agree that the field mill does fit into the spectrum, as you say, but perhaps closer to the class D modulator end rather than the parametric oscillator end. You would do far better to return to your original design and drive the compression and expansion of the large capacitor with a motor rather than your hand. I haven't done the calcs but it looks far more promising than the rotating plate design. By the way, if you still have that rotary system set up, try biasing the plates with a few millivolts DC and see what sort of gain you're getting. It will make interpretation of your results much more meaningful. I'll bet you'll be amazed at how little bias voltage is required to see huge outputs ( like the several volts you're seeing ). K. --- Jones Beene wrote: > Hey Nick, > > Nice experiment. > > One wonders why you did not try to get the spacing > down to a > very minimum, since the ouptut is directly related? > Couldn't > the contacts be rearranged somehow such as on the > circumference to get below the 3mm? > > Jones > > > __________________________________________________ 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 Dec 1 12:21:05 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 iB1KKpag000743; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 12:20:51 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1KKn8M000726; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 12:20:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 12:20:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41AE19ED.42D660DE@ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:22:22 -0700 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: oomments on DOE report 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/56676 X-Loop: vortex-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 all, Now the wait is over and we are provided with an evaluation of the DOE, but not an evaluation of LENR. A cross section of experts used by the DOE to evaluate all proposals submitted to this agency have demonstrated for the world to see a profound lack of imagination and an indifference to a real need for new ideas in science. I'm not sure which is worse, the use of people having such a lack of imagination to evaluate proposals or the missed opportunity to develop a new scientific discovery. It would seem that incompetence has reached into many levels of the US government. Having gotten that off my chest, I do think the review will encourage imaginative people to support the field. The next test will come when individual proposals, as recommended, are submitted and evaluated. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 13:19:29 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 iB1LJOLq029258; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:19:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1LJMrl029234; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:19:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:19:22 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:19:12 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Cirillo paper uploaded 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/56677 X-Loop: vortex-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 Cirillo paper I mentioned earlier is now uploaded. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CirilloDtransmutat.pdf - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 13:23:11 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 iB1LN5Lq031183; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:23:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1LN3q7031154; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:23:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:23:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201162146.0420cb80@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:22:10 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: LENR-CANR official statement about DoE review Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_20886140==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56678 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_20886140==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed [From our News section] DoE publishes review of cold fusion The Department of Energy, Office of Science, has completed its review of cold fusion and published a report online. See: Report of the Review of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. See http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/ http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf Overall, the review is inconclusive. It says, for example: "Two-thirds of the reviewers commenting on Charge Element 1 did not feel the evidence was conclusive for low energy nuclear reactions, one found the evidence convincing, and the remainder indicated they were somewhat convinced. Many reviewers noted that poor experiment design, documentation, background control and other similar issues hampered the understanding and interpretation of the results presented." Many in the cold fusion field share this complaint. However, this is a strawman that was not part of the charge given the reviewers. The reviewers were asked whether the claims, taken in total, are real and whether further study should be encouraged using a level of funding required to overcome these handicaps. To this charge, the response was lukewarm. Nevertheless, like the ERAB Panel report, the reviewers recommended well designed proposals be submitted by individuals. This recommendation should be taken seriously, if for no other reason than to test the intent of the recommendation. The DOE now knows which of its reviewers will be fair in implementing such a recommendation and which will not. Therefore, DOE officials, who have the require imagination and who are concerned about developing the promise of this energy source, can now fund submitted proposals by using sympathetic reviewers. This is a big step forward. The review has been added to our Library, see: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DOEreportofth.pdf --=====================_20886140==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" [From our News section]

DoE publishes review of cold fusion

The Department of Energy, Office of Science, has completed its review of cold fusion and published a report online. See: Report of the Review of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. See

http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/

http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf

Overall, the review is inconclusive. It says, for example: "Two-thirds of the reviewers commenting on Charge Element 1 did not feel the evidence was conclusive for low energy nuclear reactions, one found the evidence convincing, and the remainder indicated they were somewhat convinced. Many reviewers noted that poor experiment design, documentation, background control and other similar issues hampered the understanding and interpretation of the results presented." Many in the cold fusion field share this complaint. However, this is a strawman that was not part of the charge given the reviewers.  The reviewers were asked whether the claims, taken in total, are real and whether further study should be encouraged using a level of funding required to overcome these handicaps.  To this charge, the response was lukewarm.
Nevertheless, like the ERAB Panel report, the reviewers recommended well designed proposals be submitted by individuals. This recommendation should be taken seriously, if for no other reason than to test the intent of the recommendation. The DOE now knows which of its reviewers will be fair in implementing such a recommendation and which will not. Therefore, DOE officials, who have the require imagination and who are concerned about developing the promise of this energy source, can now fund submitted proposals by using sympathetic reviewers. This is a big step forward.

The review has been added to our Library, see: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DOEreportofth.pdf
--=====================_20886140==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 13:42:03 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 iB1Lfqag031052; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:41:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1LfpAx031043; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:41:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:41:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041231214113710@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@eskimo.com Subject: RE: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:41:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d861ad472c30907d5eaea7824e82452c5a3ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.54.167 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56679 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dec. 01, 2004 Vortex, Perhaps we could invoke "The Freedom of information Act" to see what the various selected reviewers wrote in their overviews of the state of CF results fifteen years after 1989. Their identities could be kept confidential. And it is not a top National Security issue. -ak- > [Original Message] > From: Jed Rothwell > To: > Date: 12/1/2004 11:40:38 AM > Subject: DoE recommendations are posted > > Nothing to get excited about. See: > > http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy / > > http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy /CF_Final_120104.pdf > > Quotes with footnotes: > > > Charge Element 3: Determine whether there is a scientific case for > continued efforts in these studies and, if so, to identify the most > promising areas to be pursued. > > December 1, 2004 > > The nearly unanimous opinion of the reviewers was that funding agencies > should entertain individual, well-designed proposals for experiments that > address specific scientific issues relevant to the question of whether or > not there is anomalous energy production in Pd/D systems, or whether or not > D-D fusion reactions occur at energies on the order of a few eV. These > proposals should meet accepted scientific standards, and undergo the rigors > of peer review. No reviewer recommended a focused federally funded > program for low energy nuclear reactions. [1] > > Reviewers identified two areas where additional research could address > specific issues. One is the investigation of the properties of deuterated > metals including possible effects of alloying and dislocations. These > studies should take advantage of the modern tools for material > characterization. A second area of investigation is the use of > state-of-the-art apparatus and techniques to search for fusion > events in thin deuterated foils. Several reviewers specifically stated that > more experiments similar in nature to those that have been carried out for > the past fifteen years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area. [2] > > Conclusion > > While significant progress has been made in the sophistication of > calorimeters since the review of this subject in 1989, the conclusions > reached by the reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 > review. [3] > > The current reviewers identified a number of basic science research areas > that could be helpful in resolving some of the controversies in the field, > two of which were: 1) material science aspects of deuterated metals using > modern characterization techniques, and 2) the study of particles > reportedly emitted from deuterated foils using state-of-the-art apparatus > and methods. The reviewers believed that > this field would benefit from the peer-review processes associated with > proposal submission to agencies and paper submission to archival journals. > > Attachment 1: Review document submitted by requesters, "New Physical > Effects in Metal Deuterides." > > Attachment 2: Charge letter to reviewers > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Comments by Jed: > > [1] This is nice pat on the head and dismissal. In plain English it means: > "keep struggling without funding, and someday we may look at your work." > > [2] This indicates they do not understand the subject. > > [3] This indicates they are clueless idiots. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 13:56:27 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 iB1LuDag002347; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:56:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1LuBeW002313; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:56:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:56:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201164931.04209890@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:52:49 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: DoE recommendations are posted In-Reply-To: <410-220041231214113710@ix.netcom.com> References: <410-220041231214113710@ix.netcom.com> 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/56680 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Perhaps we could invoke "The Freedom of information Act" to see what the >various selected reviewers wrote in their overviews of the state of CF >results fifteen years after 1989. Their identities could be kept >confidential. And it is not a top National Security issue. Bad idea! Robert Park is probably frantically doing the same thing right now, to find the turncoat who is convinced CF is real. Whoever it is is already in enough trouble. Let's not make it any worse. The report is what I expected. Nothing to get excited about, and nothing to get upset about either. At least it wasn't another rabid attack. It will be interesting to hear what Dave Nagel or Mike McKubre thinks. They put an awful lot of work into this. It seems like slim pickings to me, but perhaps they have some reason to celebrate. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 15:01:05 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 iB1N11Lq030766; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:01:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB1N0uV8030717; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:00:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:00:56 -0800 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: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:00:21 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201164931.04209890@pop.mindspring.com> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56681 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jed. You write: >Bad idea! Robert Park is probably frantically doing the same thing right >now, to find the turncoat who is convinced CF is real. Whoever it is is >already in enough trouble. Let's not make it any worse. Good point. Given the current political climate, the outcome was the best that could be expected. The fact remains that the USPTO still refuses to issue patents based on this technology, so until that changes no commercial activity will occur. It is the case that the log jam will break when a researcher 1) Develops a cheap, easily reproducible robust CF device ( not an experiment, an actual functioning device ). 2) Reveals that device without patent protection, effectively giving it away. I think 1) will occur soon enough, 2) however is going to keep the device out of public use for a long time to come. It could be worse. Prometheus had his liver pecked out for years before finally being rescued by Hercules. http://messagenet.com/myths/bios/promethe.html K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:07:15 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 iB2175Ai027290; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:07:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2173s7027266; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:07:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:07:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41AE6B11.5070406@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:08:33 -0500 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 Subject: Re: DoE recommendations are posted References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070304070308070401050908" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56682 X-Loop: vortex-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. --------------070304070308070401050908 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keith Nagel wrote: >Given the current political climate, the outcome was the >best that could be expected. > Are youse guys kiddin'? This is nothing short of phenomenal. "A similar line of investigation involved counting deuterium loaded foils to observe the products for the standard fusion reaction channels, proton + triton or neutron + 3He, with particle detectors and coincidence techniques. Indications of purported detection of proton-triton coincidences at a low level were presented. Even skeptical reviewers cited this work as one line of investigation that could be pursued to a clear conclusion." Even the SEPTICS!! What more could we possibly ask? "One is the investigation of the properties of deuterated metals including possible effects of alloying and dislocations. These studies should take advantage of the modern tools for material characterization. A second area of investigation is the use of state-of-the-art apparatus and techniques to search for fusion events in thin deuterated foils." This an admission of guilt! Big, 32 pt. headlines saying, "WE WERE WRONG!" will not happen. This comes damned close, IMO. Hell, it really doesn't matter what we do now. If LENR is a viable source of energy, the Chinese will be the first with marketable products. --------------070304070308070401050908 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Keith Nagel wrote: 
Given the current political climate, the outcome was the
best that could be expected.

Are youse guys kiddin'?  This is nothing short of phenomenal. 

"A similar line of investigation involved counting deuterium loaded foils to observe the products for the standard fusion reaction channels, proton + triton or neutron + 3He, with particle detectors and coincidence techniques. Indications of purported detection of proton-triton coincidences at a low level were presented. Even skeptical reviewers cited this work as one line of investigation that could be pursued to a clear conclusion."

Even the SEPTICS!!  What more could we possibly ask?

"One is the investigation of the properties of deuterated metals including possible effects of alloying and dislocations. These studies should take advantage of the modern tools for material characterization. A second area of investigation is the use of state-of-the-art apparatus and techniques to search for fusion events in thin deuterated foils."

This an admission of guilt!  Big, 32 pt. headlines saying, "WE WERE WRONG!" will not happen.  This comes damned close, IMO.

Hell, it really doesn't matter what we do now.  If LENR is a viable source of energy, the Chinese will be the first with marketable products.
 --------------070304070308070401050908-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:30:31 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 iB21UKmk001160; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:30:21 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB21UJpW001144; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:30:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:30:19 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:30:17 -0700 Message-Id: <200412011830.AA737346520@mail1.myexcel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Jeff and Dorothy Kooistra" Reply-To: X-Sender: To: vortex-l , Subject: Re: DoE recommendations are posted X-Mailer: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56683 X-Loop: vortex-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 said: >Are youse guys kiddin'? This is nothing short of phenomenal. I agree. In scientist speak, this is a recognition that there is, in fact, something, rather than nothing. The slogging ahead will be difficult, but, properly quoted, this NEW report does provide the needed respectability to get some at least to begin taking CF work seriously. We're about halfway along to Clarke's third position on the way to acceptance of a new idea. "I knew it all along." Terry is right--there will not be an admission of wrong doing. They will cite the original luke-warm "there might be something there" conclusion of the original ERAB report as evidence of their innate fairness from the outset, and conveniently forget absolutely all the shit they poured on everyone trying to do serious work since 1989. And so it goes. Jed is right in that this is nothing to start doing jumping jacks over--not if you were hoping for coffers of $$$ to open up--but it is a step or two in the right direction, rather than a step backward. Jeffery D. Kooistra PS Terry also wrote >Even the SEPTICS!! This is one of the most accurate typos I've seen in ages! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:51:14 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 iB21pAQG014345; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:51:10 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB21p1KF014290; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:51:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:51:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: Message-ID: <00ed01c4d811$59868bd0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <41AE6B11.5070406@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:32:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 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/56684 X-Loop: vortex-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: Keith Nagel wrote: Given the current political climate, the outcome was the best that could be expected. Are youse guys kiddin'? This is nothing short of phenomenal. "A similar line of investigation involved counting deuterium loaded foils to observe the products for the standard fusion reaction channels, proton + triton or neutron + 3He, with particle detectors and coincidence techniques. Indications of purported detection of proton-triton coincidences at a low level were presented. Even skeptical reviewers cited this work as one line of investigation that could be pursued to a clear conclusion." Even the SEPTICS!! What more could we possibly ask? "One is the investigation of the properties of deuterated metals including possible effects of alloying and dislocations. These studies should take advantage of the modern tools for material characterization. A second area of investigation is the use of state-of-the-art apparatus and techniques to search for fusion events in thin deuterated foils." This an admission of guilt! Big, 32 pt. headlines saying, "WE WERE WRONG!" will not happen. This comes damned close, IMO. Hell, it really doesn't matter what we do now. If LENR is a viable source of energy, the Chinese will be the first with marketable products. MC: I'm inclined to agree with Terry. Many would have wanted some kind of blessing and call to arms, vindicating years of struggle. MC: I recall that Einstein's letter to FDR about the potential of atomic bombs elicited a lukewarm $6000 initial funding, not much even in those days when $6000 was not pocket change. The Manhattan Project followed, spenind some $6 billion of real money. What we have here is a blessing for further well designed studies. What more could one ask? No money limit is suggested. No number of studies are limited. Get to work with the proposals. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:52:36 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 iB21qQQG014768; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB21qPEX014750; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1e2.2ff71908.2edfcf4b@aol.com> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:52:11 EST Subject: Re: oomments on DOE report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e2.2ff71908.2edfcf4b_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/56685 X-Loop: vortex-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_1e2.2ff71908.2edfcf4b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/1/2004 3:21:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, storms2@ix.netcom.com writes: > I'm not sure which is worse, > the use of people having such a lack of imagination to evaluate > proposals or the missed opportunity to develop a new scientific > discovery. It would seem that incompetence has reached into many levels > of the US government. > Yes, we have melting ice caps, global warming, an economy threatened by fuel prices, wars over fuel, and nowhere to turn. This is what we get. Frank Znidarsic --part1_1e2.2ff71908.2edfcf4b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/1/2004 3:21:2= 7 PM Eastern Standard Time, storms2@ix.netcom.com writes:

I'm not sure which is worse, the use of people having such a lack of imagination to evaluate
proposals or the missed opportunity to develop a new scientific
discovery.  It would seem that incompetence has reached into many level= s
of the US government.


Yes, we have melting ice caps, global warming, an economy threatened by fuel= prices,
wars over fuel, and nowhere to turn.

This is what we get.

Frank Znidarsic --part1_1e2.2ff71908.2edfcf4b_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 17:53:03 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 iB21quQG015139; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:56 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB21qsmV015111; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:52:54 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003101c4d811$a016a9e0$6b037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:52:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4D7DF.54D72040" 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/56686 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4D7DF.54D72040 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4D7DF.54D8A6E0" ------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4D7DF.54D8A6E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankWas anyone surprised ? Have the fruits of prosperity filtered back = to the University from the corporate world ? Is Enron the modern antithesis of Camelot ?=20 Combine the answer with the posts on manufacturing going to China and = the ancient Solomon's words ring true. Blessed is the land where your = kings ( leadership ) are of sons of noblemen ( men of = character,intregrity and morality). Ecc.10:17 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4D7DF.54D8A6E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Was anyone surprised ? Have the fruits of = prosperity=20 filtered back to the University from the corporate world ?
Is Enron the modern antithesis of Camelot ?=20
 
Combine the answer with the posts on = manufacturing going=20 to China and the ancient Solomon's words ring true. Blessed is the land = where=20 your kings ( leadership ) are of sons of noblemen ( men of=20 character,intregrity
and morality). Ecc.10:17
 
Richard
 
------=_NextPart_001_002E_01C4D7DF.54D8A6E0-- ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4D7DF.54D72040 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002c01c4d811$9f6b75c0$6b037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C4D7DF.54D72040-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 18:04:17 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 iB224CQG018461; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:04:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB224AtP018446; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:04:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:04:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <6e23ed85-80f8-4207-be7e-e7610ef4fab7> Message-ID: <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201113645.041dfd60@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 21:02:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56687 X-Loop: vortex-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: Here is an ICCF11 paper describing an Ohomori-Mizuno replication: Cirillo, D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. Quote: "Once a stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can compare the input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; energy related to the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expanding gas and steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more energy than is being applied." That is astounding. Quite a robust result! ------------------------------------- MC: This is a very important paper, and should be studied *very* carefully. 1) Light water is used; 2) Potassium carbonate is the electrolyte; 3) Plasma is produced in a confined space; 4) Erosion of the tungsten cathode is observed; 5) Transmutation occurs and 6) Macroscopic excess heat is produced. Many on vortex studiously ignore the work of Mills and BlackLight Power, or try to demonstrated that Mills' results are "really LENR" and vice versa. I have maintained that they should be studies separately, although they may be connected at a deeper level. Postassium carbonate will be ionized uder the cell conditions, releasing K+ ions. There will also be H atoms in the plasma, and these can and do react to produce very exothermic reactions in which H atoms are reduced to a lower orbital state. Thus there is no mystery to production of excess heat with light water. Transmutation is a nuclear reaction and it is **also** occurring. The source of neutrons in this instance is a real puzzle. The authors are porperly and understandably puzzled by what they have observed. I have sent a message to Cirillo alerting him to Mills' work, and to Mills, alerting him to Cirillo's work. No significant response from either; Mills had the courtesy to acknowledge the email. I should note that a pivtoal experiment by Mills long ago involved an electrolytic cell with light water, potassium carbonate electrolyte, which showed instant turn-on and produced excess heat when peopel working with F&P cells were seeing long loading cycles. Among Mills' posted experiments is a gas phase cell with a tungsten heater, potassium carbonate and hydrogen, which produces intense plasmas. These elements are also present in the Cirillo cell. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 19:25:08 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 iB23P1AB004694; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:25:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB23OxS4004666; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:24:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:24:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:22:09 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio In-reply-to: <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56688 X-Loop: vortex-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 they saying the energy required to evaporate the water solution over a certain period time exceeds the electrical input energy over the same period time + the all the energy consumed by all the other processes in the same period of time? Harry on 12/1/04 9:02 PM, Mike Carrell at mikec@snip.net wrote: > Jed wrote: > > Here is an ICCF11 paper describing an Ohomori-Mizuno replication: > > Cirillo, D. and V. Iorio. Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined > plasma in water. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter > Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. > > Quote: > > "Once a stable plasma has been achieved for more than 500 sec., we can > compare the input energy, electrical power, with the quantity of energy > necessary to warm up and evaporate the solution water. Omitted from this > calculation is energy associated with chemical reactions; energy related to > the heating-up and fusion of the tungsten; energy used in expanding gas and > steam leaving the cell; energy lost by thermal and electromagnetic > radiation; and loss of heat through the insulation. Even though this extra > energy is omitted from the calculation, the cell is found to produce more > energy than is being applied." > > That is astounding. Quite a robust result! > ------------------------------------- > MC: This is a very important paper, and should be studied *very* carefully. > 1) Light water is used; 2) Potassium carbonate is the electrolyte; 3) Plasma > is produced in a confined space; 4) Erosion of the tungsten cathode is > observed; 5) Transmutation occurs and 6) Macroscopic excess heat is > produced. > > Many on vortex studiously ignore the work of Mills and BlackLight Power, or > try to demonstrated that Mills' results are "really LENR" and vice versa. I > have maintained that they should be studies separately, although they may be > connected at a deeper level. > > Postassium carbonate will be ionized uder the cell conditions, releasing K+ > ions. There will also be H atoms in the plasma, and these can and do react > to produce very exothermic reactions in which H atoms are reduced to a lower > orbital state. Thus there is no mystery to production of excess heat with > light water. Transmutation is a nuclear reaction and it is **also** > occurring. The source of neutrons in this instance is a real puzzle. The > authors are porperly and understandably puzzled by what they have observed. > I have sent a message to Cirillo alerting him to Mills' work, and to Mills, > alerting him to Cirillo's work. No significant response from either; Mills > had the courtesy to acknowledge the email. > > I should note that a pivtoal experiment by Mills long ago involved an > electrolytic cell with light water, potassium carbonate electrolyte, which > showed instant turn-on and produced excess heat when peopel working with F&P > cells were seeing long loading cycles. Among Mills' posted experiments is a > gas phase cell with a tungsten heater, potassium carbonate and hydrogen, > which produces intense plasmas. These elements are also present in the > Cirillo cell. > > Mike Carrell > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 19:55:40 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 iB23tWQ0008634; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:55:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB23tOsQ008586; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:55:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:55:24 -0800 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: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:55:16 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201113645.041dfd60@pop.mindspring.com> <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> In-Reply-To: <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> 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 iB23tLQ0008548 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56689 X-Loop: vortex-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 Mike Carrell's message of Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:02:45 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Many on vortex studiously ignore the work of Mills and BlackLight Power, or >try to demonstrated that Mills' results are "really LENR" and vice versa. I >have maintained that they should be studies separately, although they may be >connected at a deeper level. > >Postassium carbonate will be ionized uder the cell conditions, releasing K+ >ions. There will also be H atoms in the plasma, and these can and do react >to produce very exothermic reactions in which H atoms are reduced to a lower >orbital state. Thus there is no mystery to production of excess heat with >light water. Transmutation is a nuclear reaction and it is **also** >occurring. The source of neutrons in this instance is a real puzzle. The [snip] Not really. A well shrunken hydrino could easily pass for a neutron when it comes to nuclear reactions. The hydrino electron would be on average much closer to the nucleus than a normal atomic electron, thus one might expect that when the tunneling event occurs, the hydrino electron "goes along for the ride", leading to an almost immediate electron capture event. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 1 21:08:59 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 iB258jYT031325; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 21:08:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB258gPO031277; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 21:08:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 21:08:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:05:51 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Does DOE have a temperature? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56690 X-Loop: vortex-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 fact that the DOE panel once again diminishes the value of all the thermal observations and measurements is perplexing. Harry The DOE review concludes: > While significant progress has been made in the sophistication of > calorimeters since the review of this subject in 1989, the conclusions > reached by the reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 > review. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 01:43:38 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 iB29hTgw010785; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 01:43:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB29hRQS010757; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 01:43:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 01:43:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> From: "P.J van Noorden" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:43:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Resent-Message-ID: <6grEAC.A.BoC.-OurBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56691 X-Loop: vortex-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 few years ago I did some interesting experiments with a plasma discharge system send to me by Eugene Mallove. This system was equiped with a reaction vessel connected with a long vertical tube . The evaporated gasses could be condensed and where collected in a second vessel.I used a K2CO3 solution as a electrolyte. First I did experiments with carbon electrodes but later I used Tungsten as cathode. I noticed that when a strong glow discharge developed ,a strong EM signal disturbed my neutroncount readings ,which is in accordance with the results in the Cirillo paper. Because I was interested in transmutations, I used radioactive 201 Thallium ( chemically like K) and measured the counts before and after the plasma discharge. ( activity was 1 MBq) First I send a mild current through the electrodes and the 201Thallium was deposited on the cathode. After I raised the voltage and the plasma discharge developed, I saw a drop in gamma emission measured from the outside of the reactionvessel. Later I noticed that the 201Tl was removed from the kathode and could be found in debris on the bottom of the cell.The change in geometry had produced the measured drop in gamma emission! After correction for the change in geometry I could not find a significant change in activity before and after the plasma discharge. It was very interesting to see that during evaporation a significant amount ( 25%) of the radioactive Thallium could be found in the second vessel, where you only would expect destillated water. So I suspect that during violent boiling of the electrolyte a significant amount of small dropplets liquid water ( with radioactive Tl ) was transported through the condensor into the second vessel. This could lead to a significant overestimation of the produced heat by about 25 %. This effect must i.m.o be taken in account before one can conclude that there is excess heat produced. Peter van Noorden nuclear medicine department the Netherlands From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 04:28:47 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 iB2CSfgw019662; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 04:28:41 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2CSdOK019652; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 04:28:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 04:28:39 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 03:35:38 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56692 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:11 PM 11/27/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Hi, > >This is my first post. > >I was wondering if anyone in CF community has looked for evidence of a >correlation between the orientation of a CF cell and the amount of excess >heat produced. > >Perhaps the performance of a CF cell would change if the cell or some of its >parts were rotated 90 degrees or even spun. > >This questions are based on the speculation that the direction of gravity >(rather than the magnitude of gravity) may effect the performance of CF >cells. > >Harry Veeder In replying to your query earlier I should have noted that centrifugal force can be used to improve electrolysis in general. For example, the following is a post of mine from 2003: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ELECTROLYSER DESIGN The following is a proposed design and some design considerations for a high efficiency electrolyser, especially one where the cathode and anode gasses can be provided as a mixed product, or gas only evolves from one plate. Further, a means is provided to place ordinary hydrogen electrolysis in these categories by extracting the hydrogen directly through the cathode. It is well known that reducing plate separation, in order to reduce cell resistance, is required to increase existing cell efficiency. It is also known that slow bubble evolution limits the closeness of plates due to the reduction of plate area and effective current path area. Electrolysers currently rely on gravity to remove their bubbles using displacement forces, but reduce the bubble formation rate by operating at high pressure. One method suggested here to solve the bubble problem is to place the plates in a rotatable centrifugal tank as shown in Fig. 1. (Fixed proportion font like "courier" is required for viewing Fig. 1) The plates are thus in annular coaxial form with central circular holes with radial spokes connected to a central shaft, with insulating spacers and/or axial bolts included to hold the plate array together. This use of a centrifugal force on the rotating plates permits the effectiveness of removing bubbles to be increased by two or more orders of magnitude over the use of gravity. The process is made continuous by replenishing the electrolyte and retrieving the evolved gas through a central open space in the centrifuge and/or through piping in a hollow central rotor shaft. During rotation, the electrolyte is pinned to the outer walls of the cylindrical tank by centrifugal force. --------- I --------- KEY: | <- . I . -> | | ===== . I . ===== | -| - rotating electrolyser tank | ===== . I . ===== | .. - rotating electrolyte level | ===== . I . ===== | == - rotating electrolytic plates | ===== . I . ===== | I - central rotor shaft | ===== . I . ===== | -> - direction of electrolyte flow | ===== . I . ===== | | ===== . I . ===== | | <- . I . -> | -----------I----------- Fig. 1 - Centrifugal Electrolysis Device By placing the entire apparatus inside a pressure vessel, with appropriate plumbing and electrical connections, and temperature control, operation can occur at high temperatures and pressures currently in use with high efficiency electrolysers. The use of bubble scrubbing dielectric particles in the electrolyte is feasible in this configuration due the pumping action of the electrolyte through the plates due to the displacement force of the bubbles. The electrolyte flow between the plates is thus toward the central shaft, and the flow outside the plate region is axially away from the central rotor shaft as shown by arrows in Fig. 1. The largest dimension of such particles should be about one fourth the plate separation distance. Using the methods described here, plate separation can be made almost arbitrarily close, but plate thickness itself is increased due to the need for plate structural strength and diffusion requirements. When electrolysing hydrogen, use can be made of a diffuse or porous (essentially transparent to hydrogen) but structurally strong material as a supporting structure for a Pd surfaced cathode in the centrifuge. Such a material can be made by sintering metal or ceramic granules of the size required for the support of the Pd. A gradation of granularity can be made to occur, with the finest granularity located at the cathode surface, just below the palladium surface. The Pd coated cathode's interior would then either be hollow or very porous, so as to conduct the H2 gas away from the electrolyser directly through the plate interior and then through a hollow supporting structure (e.g. spokes) for the plate, and to a hollow central rotor. In this manner, only O2 would evolve between the plates. The hydrogen principally is driven into the cathode interior by the high operating pressure, but also by the electrolytic potential. The electrolytic plates in the suggested use act as cathode on one side and anode on the other. Therefore a sandwich style construction is suggested. The anode side might be stainless steal, possibly with an exterior platinum plating for longer anode life. A space between the anode side and cathode side of the electrode can be made by using conductive spacers that permit free flow of hydrogen through the electrode to the central shaft. A seal zone around the perimeter of the electrode, and between the anode and cathode portion, can seal out electrolyte and seal in the hydrogen. Bolts parallel to the main shaft that hold the electrode array together have to be insulated and their entry and exit points sealed from the interior hydrogen space. If momentary reverse emf pulses are used in order to disrupt the electrolyte interface, then a high enough pressure will have to be used to avoid significant out gassing of the hydrogen from the cathode during those brief periods. It is not known if this specific out gassing prevention method is workable. However, any out gassing at all can be expected to momentarily disrupt the interface, so may assist in providing the intended effect. Operating at high temperatures and nearly boiling conditions further places the interface under disruptive stresses, thus reducing the electrical energy required to achieve electrolysis. It is not known what percentage of the hydrogen can be adsorbed, because a film of water between the hydrogen bubble and the electrode could prevent adsorption. Even though full adsorption may not take place, it would be very useful if enough could be adsorbed that the remaining mixed gas is difficult to ignite or explode. H2 flows easily through thin Pd foil at a moderate pressure and the high g force of a centrifuge certainly provides sufficient pressure. It may be that a porous cathode surface provides the best alternative for removing hydrogen directly at the cathode surface, or a combination of adsorption and porous extraction can be used. In this mode, a negative pressure must be applied to the interior of the cathode via the spokes via the central shaft. This negative pressure then sucks both hydrogen and to some degree electrolyte and water vapor or steam through the pores and out the spokes and out the central shaft. Appropriate bearings and fittings are then needed on the shaft to send the hydrogen-electrolyte mixture sucked through the cathode interior to an external separator. Alternatively, separation can occur centrifugally in a separator included on a segment of the shaft, and the electrolyte returned to the main electrolyte level via siphoning. In any event, appropriate bearings and fillings are required to continually deliver hydrogen from the shaft to atmospheric pressure. The negative pressure applied to the interior of the shaft can be simply the ambient pressure of one atmosphere, thus the negative pressure inside the electrodes is really supplied by operation of the centrifuge at high pressure. This technique limits the centrifugal force that can be obtained, because the negative pressure must be sufficient to extract the hydrogen against the centrifugal force. It may be that gas-electrolyte separation can be achieved in the interior of the cathode if there is a break in the seal provided on the outermost tip of the electrode for the electrolyte to escape. Operation is then dependent upon a good balance of centrifugal force and operating pressure. A similar technique of sucking the evolved oxygen into the interior of the anode might be used as well. A barrier between the O2 and H sides of the interior them must be supplied as well as separate paths and liquid-gas separators within or upon the central shaft, and delivery means from the rotating shaft to ambient conditions. If gasses are directly extracted by both cathode and anode surfaces, then no scrubber particles are necessary, and very limited centrifugal force is useful for the gas-liquid separation. Perhaps a useful version requiring no centrifugal force at the plates at all can be implemented! One way to get power to the electrolytic plates for the electrolysis is to make a segment, or a segment of the interior, of the central shaft of the centrifuge a (rotating) transformer core, with linkage to it being magnetic from an external stationary "C" core that has a primary coil on it. The linkage between core segments can be achieved by utilizing a small gap between the core containing segment of the shaft and holes in the C core of a size to accept the shaft. A secondary coil can then be wrapped about the segment of the core that rotates, i.e. about the outside of the segment of the central centrifuge shaft containing the rotating piece of core. The secondary coil output can then be fed to rectifiers and then to the plates. As an example, assume a stack of 50 plates and a secondary voltage of 100 V, which gives about 2 V per plate for electrolysis current. There need be no wiring to the individual plates, only to the outermost two. If it is desired to superimpose a HF signal on the high current electrolytic current, then a circuit to do so can be powered by the secondary coil or by another secondary coil in the same location. The rectifiers, circuitry and wiring can all be located inside the rotating centrifuge shaft. Thus no brushes are necessary. It may, however, be cheaper and easier to simply use brushes. Such brushes would not be located in the electrolyte, but would be located within an outer pressure vessel, so should work in a normal fashion. If an explodable hydrogen/oxygen mixture evolves from the plates, then brushes are highly undesirable. If it is desired to create hydrogen from rotational kinetic energy, as from a windmill, then it may be preferable to make a portion of the shaft into a generator armature. No transformer is then required. No brushes are required to or from the armature as the energy is delivered to the shaft itself, though rectification is still required. A good electrolyte for hydrogen evolution is easily made by making a saturated lye solution and then diluting 1 part of that with two parts distilled water. If the hollow or porous cathode technique described here proves viable in practice, as combined with high g electrolysis or not, it could have some significance on worldwide energy supplies and the building of a hydrogen infrastructure in particular by providing a low technology means of converting sporadic kinetic energy sources, like wind power, into storable form. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 05:15:47 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 iB2DFYBZ027933; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:15:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2DFW2r027909; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:15:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:15:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <84c6dc17-b1a7-4ef1-8526-ec9cc5225c62> Message-ID: <011201c4d870$f6fba440$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201113645.041dfd60@pop.mindspring.com> <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:01:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56693 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > In reply to Mike Carrell's message of Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:02:45 -0500: > Hi, >> Transmutation is a nuclear reaction and it is **also** > >occurring. The source of neutrons in this instance is a real puzzle. The > [snip] > Not really. A well shrunken hydrino could easily pass for a neutron when it comes to nuclear reactions. The hydrino electron would be on average much closer to the nucleus than a normal atomic electron, thus one might expect that when the tunneling event occurs, the hydrino electron "goes along for the ride", leading to an almost immediate electron capture event. Qutie so, and this speculation has surfaced in vortex. I'm not denying this at all, and when I say that the LENR and BLP worlds may be linked at a "deeper level" I allow for such. The "Critic's Circle" on HSG have concluded that Mills' orbitsphere model itself is fatally flawed, and a private trusted source who has looked at it agrees. The trusted source indicates that the "sub-ground" state of the H atom, Mills' hydrino, is well supported in standard literature when correctly interpreted. Thus when Mills postulates a limit to hydrino shrinkage based on his model, this may in fact not exist. Thus the Cirillo paper should be looked at most carefully. The cell produces excess heat -- which could come from BLP reactions. It operates at atmospheric pressure and very intensly. The calorimetry is not good enough to determine whether the energy release is in the BLP or nucelar range. If neutron-like entities are being produced by the BLP process, then the energy release will be very high. The cell may also be producing particle condensates as postulated by Takahashi. We may be looking at a very interesting rabbit hole. Regards, Mike From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 05:25:15 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 iB2DP2gw032735; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:10 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2DP1dp032724; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:01 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 04:32:12 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56694 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:11 PM 11/27/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Hi, > >This is my first post. > >I was wondering if anyone in CF community has looked for evidence of a >correlation between the orientation of a CF cell and the amount of excess >heat produced. > >Perhaps the performance of a CF cell would change if the cell or some of its >parts were rotated 90 degrees or even spun. > >This questions are based on the speculation that the direction of gravity >(rather than the magnitude of gravity) may effect the performance of CF >cells. > >Harry Veeder In replying to your query earlier I should have also noted that centrifugal force can be used to advantage in chemical processes, and may have energy generation prospects as well. I will post separately a summary of 2003 posts of mine on the subject of Gravi-chem. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 05:25:51 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 iB2DPfBZ031665; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:41 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2DPc9r031644; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:25:38 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 04:32:15 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravi-chem Resent-Message-ID: <0UOY8C.A.YuH.RfxrBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56695 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gravi-chemistry DEFINITIONS Gravi-chemistry (gravi-chem) is chemistry involving a large environmental acceleration. Gravi-chem is essentially chemistry in a centrifuge. Some important variables are defined below, along with some initial computations that are essential to discuss gravi-chem. Variables: r = radius in meters rpm = revolutions per minute of the centrifuge g = acceleration due to gravity = 9.80665 m/s^2 Mg = acceleration of 1 million g's = 9.80665x10^6 m/s^2 Pi = 3.14159 r_1 = radius of top (innermost) surface of electrolyte in meters r_2 = radius of bottom (outermost) surface of electrolyte in meters E_ion1 = anion balanced E_ion for given g, in (V/m)/Mg E_ion2 = cation balanced E_ion for given g, in (V/m)/Mg a = acceleration in Mg U = total voltage drop sustainable in volts Note: both E_ion1 and E_ion2 were taken from Gravi-chem table below. >From the given: a = 10^-6 * r/g * (2 * Pi * rpm / 60)^2 So the incremental potential dU sustained for small radial increment dr is: dU = [(E_ion1 + E_ion2)/g * 10^-6 * (2 * Pi * rpm / 60)^2] r dr And integrating for r = r_1 to r_2: U = [(E_ion1 + E_ion2)/g * 2x10^-6 * (Pi * rpm / 60)^2] [(r_2)^2 - (r_1)^2] where U is given in volts. Note: if U is negative then hydroxils (OH-) are concentrated at the bottom of the cell. If U is positive, then hydronium (H3O+) is concentrated at the bottom of the cell. THE GRAVI-CHEM TABLE Gravi-chem Table for Selected Ions R-ion Vol_ion rho_ion F_b E_ion Atomic Ionic Ion Ion Bouyancy Balanced E vs g Atomic Ion Weight Radius Volume Density in water H2O @ 100 C Number Name q (g/mol) (ang.) (cm^3/mol)(g/cm^3) (g/cm^3) (V/m/mega-g) 3 Li 1 6.941 0.76 1.11 6.27 -5.31 -0.59761 4 Be 2 9.012 0.45 0.23 39.21 -38.25 -0.44680 5 * B 3 10.810 0.30 0.07 158.72 -157.76 -0.36403 6 * C 4 12.011 0.35 0.11 111.05 -110.10 -0.30256 7 * N 5 14.007 0.12 0.00 3213.31 -3212.35 -0.28464 8 O -2 15.999 1.40 6.92 2.31 -1.35 0.47595 9 F -1 18.998 1.33 5.93 3.20 -2.24 1.35288 11 Na 1 22.990 1.02 2.68 8.59 -7.63 -2.07589 12 Mg 2 24.305 0.72 0.94 25.81 -24.86 -1.18931 13 Al 3 26.982 0.54 0.40 67.93 -66.97 -0.90123 14 Si 4 28.086 0.26 0.04 633.47 -632.51 -0.71256 15 P 5 30.974 0.17 0.01 2499.24 -2498.28 -0.62939 16 S -2 32.060 1.84 15.71 2.04 -1.08 0.86390 17 Cl -1 35.453 1.81 14.96 2.37 -1.41 2.14633 19 K 1 39.098 1.51 8.69 4.50 -3.54 -3.12789 20 Ca 2 40.080 1.00 2.52 15.89 -14.93 -1.91398 21 Sc 3 44.956 0.75 1.06 42.24 -41.29 -1.48853 22 Ti 4 47.900 0.61 0.57 83.66 -82.70 -1.20318 23 V 5 50.942 0.54 0.40 128.25 -127.29 -1.02779 24 Cr 3 51.996 0.62 0.60 86.49 -85.53 -1.74208 25 Mn 2 54.938 0.67 0.76 72.41 -71.45 -2.75496 26 Fe 3 55.847 0.55 0.42 133.07 -132.11 -1.87845 27 Co 2 58.933 0.65 0.69 85.07 -84.11 -2.96121 28 Ni 2 58.700 0.69 0.83 70.84 -69.88 -2.94274 29 Cu 2 63.546 0.73 0.98 64.76 -63.80 -3.18158 20 Zn 2 65.380 0.74 1.02 63.96 -63.00 -3.27279 31 Ga 3 69.720 0.62 0.60 115.97 -115.01 -2.34257 32 Ge 4 72.590 0.53 0.38 193.29 -192.33 -1.83534 33 As 3 74.922 0.58 0.49 152.22 -151.27 -2.52233 34 Se -2 78.960 1.98 19.58 4.03 -3.07 3.05900 35 Br -1 79.904 1.96 18.99 4.21 -3.25 6.27117 37 Rb 1 85.468 1.61 10.53 8.12 -7.16 -7.66138 38 SR 2 87.620 1.26 5.05 17.36 -16.41 -4.20703 39 Y 3 88.906 1.02 2.68 33.21 -32.25 -2.92518 40 Zr 4 91.220 0.84 1.50 61.01 -60.05 -2.28146 41 Nb 5 92.906 0.64 0.66 140.50 -139.54 -1.87570 42 Mo 6 95.940 0.59 0.52 185.18 -184.23 -1.61679 44 Ru 3 101.070 0.68 0.79 127.43 -126.47 -3.39846 45 Rh 3 102.906 0.67 0.76 135.64 -134.68 -3.46176 46 Pd 2 106.400 0.64 0.66 160.90 -159.94 -5.37498 47 Ag 1 107.868 1.15 3.84 28.12 -27.16 -10.58986 48 Cd 2 112.410 0.95 2.16 51.98 -51.02 -5.60727 49 In 3 114.820 0.80 1.29 88.90 -87.94 -3.84812 50 Sn 4 118.890 0.45 0.23 517.21 -516.25 -3.01536 51 Sb 3 121.750 0.76 1.11 109.95 -108.99 -4.08889 52 Te -2 127.600 1.07 3.09 41.29 -40.33 6.33405 53 I -1 126.905 2.20 26.86 4.72 -3.77 10.28197 55 Cs 1 132.905 1.74 13.29 10.00 -9.04 -12.21387 56 Ba 2 137.330 1.42 7.22 19.01 -18.06 -6.62724 73 Ta 5 180.948 0.64 0.66 273.64 -272.68 -3.66538 74 W 6 183.850 0.60 0.54 337.42 -336.46 -3.10554 78 Pt 4 195.090 0.63 0.63 309.30 -308.34 -4.94182 79 Au 3 196.967 0.85 1.55 127.14 -126.19 -6.62285 80 Hg 2 200.590 1.02 2.68 74.93 -73.97 -10.06348 82 Pb 2 207.200 1.19 4.25 48.74 -47.78 -10.32274 83 Bi 3 208.980 1.03 2.76 75.81 -74.86 -6.99067 90 Th 4 232.038 1.05 2.92 79.46 -78.50 -5.82491 92 U 6 238.029 0.81 1.34 177.56 -176.60 -4.01040 Notes: * - means estimated ion radius. (Wildly guessed based on proportions) 1. In equilibrium , the force of acceleration equals the electrostatic force: Fg = m*a = Fe = q * E Thus we can compute the field strength corresponding to an acceleration: E = m*a/q 2. Acceleration is normalized to 10^6 g's in the table, or 9.80665x10^6 m/s^2, a "mega-g" or Mg. However, m in this case is M_b, bouyant mass: M_b = F_b * Vol_ion / Na where Na is Avogadro's number, so we see how the units work out by: M_b (g/ion) = F_b (in g/cm^3) * Vol_ion (cm^3/mol) /(6.0221367x10^23 ions/mol) 3. The density of water used in computing bouyancy, 0.9584, is the value for water at 100 C at 1 Bar. 4. Warning: There may be typos and other errors! Also, there may be significant errors in the source data, especially for ionic radius. Posting of corrections is encouraged! SAMPLE COMPUTATION Now that the gravi-chem computation method is available, lets compute what might actually be a feasible test of principle. Assume cesium chloride as the electrolyte, a rotation of 20,000 rpm. Assume r_1 (radius at top of electrolyte) is 30 percent of r_2 (radius at bottom of electrolyte.) We want r_1 and r_2 so that we obtain -1.6 volts. Looking at the Gravi-chem table we see: 17 Cl -1 35.453 1.81 14.96 2.37 -1.41 2.14633 55 Cs 1 132.905 1.74 13.29 10.00 -9.04 -12.21387 ========= -10.06754 V/m/Mg Now, using the Gravi-chem formula: U = [(E_ion1 + E_ion2)/g * 2x10^-6 * (Pi * rpm / 60)^2] [(r_2)^2 - (r_1)^2] or with variables in unitless values: U = [(E_ion1 + E_ion2) * 5.591x10^-10 * (rpm)^2] [(r_2)^2 - (r_1)^2] we have: U = [(-10.06754) * 5.591x10^-10 * (20,000)^2] [(r_2)^2 - (0.3*r_2)^2] U = -2.252 * (1-.09) (r_2)^2 but we want U = -1.6 volts so: -1.6 = -2.052 (r_2)^2 (r_2)^2 = 0.7797 r_2 = .883 m r_1 = 0.3 r_2 = .265 m and we have the answer of r_2 = 88.3 cm and r_1 = 26.5 cm. If the above is correct, then this is pretty tough to pull off. Bumping to 30,000 rpm we have: -1.6 = -5.0658 r^2 (r_2)^2 = .3158 r_2 = .562 m r_1 = 0.3 r_2 = .169 m which is still very difficult. GENERAL DISCUSSION There is a lot of information still needed to do any serious gravi-chemistry. Most important is to develop an experimental understanding of how hydronium and protons in particular react in a gravi-electrolytic environment. Similarly, information needs to be developed for the hydroxil and other radicals. One thing it seems to me is clear. High g force, well under 1 Mg (a "mega-g") can significantly and selectively change ion concentrations in inner and outer volumes of the centrifuge. This means that reaction equilibriums can be shifted and manipulated by the addition of ions or molecules of differing densities and charge. There could be very significant breakthroughs of a practical kind just waiting for discovery. Gravichemistry also provides an opportunity for pure science and engineering to grind forth in its usual lumbering manner. Precipitation rates can be enhanced significantly for selected compounds, though removing precipitates in a continuous process could require significant engineering. By selectively increasing ion pair concentrations, reactions can be catalyzed even without a catalyst. Crystal growing might be accelerated. The proton is interesting because its density is practically infinite. However, it ionically binds to the negative end of the water molecule to form the hydronium ion, H3O+. It does not seem possible to break the hydronium bond with any high-g field. The excess proton can tunnel between water molecules, but the relative orientation must be right to do so. The proton's migration rate is slowed down due to the need for the water molecules to rotate relative to each other. However, even though the proton only moves at few percent of a cm per second in typical electrolytes, that rate is significantly faster than other radicals. It is important to measure that rate over a range of electrolyte accelerations. High-g forces should affect the tunneling ability of the proton. An electrolyte is a conductor. The huge electrostatic fields that result from even a tiny charge imbalance will overwhelm the small electrostatic fields generated by gravitational means. We thus can expect the electrolyte to remain neutral. The potential generated at the electrodes will be due to ion concentration differences at the anode and cathode, and can in fact determine which is the anode and cathode. Consider an NaF electrolyte. The Gravi-chem table entries are: 9 F -1 18.998 1.33 5.93 3.20 -2.24 1.35288 11 Na 1 22.990 1.02 2.68 8.59 -7.63 -2.07589 We thus see that as Na+ and F- ions are pushed to the periphery of the centrifuge, they will create a gradient of 1.35288 V/m/Mg - 2.07589 V/m/Mg = -0.723 V/m/Mg. (Note that the 5 digit accuracy implied in the table is way overstated. I should have cut down the field size on the spread sheet.) Does this mean that the periphery of the electrolyte will be negative? This does not seem to make sense. This gradient will likely be neutralized by hydronium ions, which should have nearly zero buoyancy. As to which electrode is anode or cathode, and which ions are oxidized or reduced, that is decided by the electronegativites of the ions and the electrodes. Looking at the entry for bromine: 35 Br -1 79.904 1.96 18.99 4.21 -3.25 6.27117 We see that NaBr electrolyte will produce a positive gradient toward the outer regions of the centrifuge: 6.27117 V/m/Mg - 2.07589 V/m/Mg = 4.2 V/m/Mg. This gradient should be neutralized by hydroxil radicals, which should also have nearly neutral buoyancy. This makes one think that possibly multiple or stacked centrifuge rotors might be electrically connected in series to generate a battery of sorts. Well, all that is musing and somewhat speculative, but I think it establishes a basis for thinking that gravi-chemistry has a genuine future. CONSERVATION OF ENERGY The most remarkable thing about gravi-chem is that it seems to violate conservation of energy. More thinking is required in this area. The following seems to be a reasonable proposition. Proposition 1: Mass flow outward in a centrifuge requires energy, in the form of torque times radius, in order to accelerate the mass in a tangential fashion, i.e to bring it up to speed at the radius occupied. Similarly, mass flow inward supplies torque to the centrifuge shaft. If the *net* mass flow at every radius is maintained at zero, the centrifuge requires no energy other than that required to overcome friction of rotation. If this is correct, then we next have to examine: Proposition 2: Centrifuges can change chemical equilibrium, and thus energy balances. Proposition 3. Differing chemical balances in the vicinity of two identical electrodes can result in current flow and thus useful energy production. Proposition 4. Chemical processes can be sustained in a centrifuge while maintaining the condition that net mass flow at every radius is zero. Proposition 5: Chemical energy obtained from centrifuge modified chemical balances is free energy. Of the 5 propositions, it looks like 3 is the most suspicious, or at least 2 and 3 combined. It is interesting that a series of isolated cells could be arranged around a rotor, or organized in stacked rotors, and electrodes placed in series, so as to accomplish complex chemical processes. Gravi-chem is most interesting because, if the effect is real, it is highly engineerable. A normal slow process of technology development should bring it to fruition. The source of free energy, assuming there is such, is basically understood and formalized, quantified. If an experimental proof of principle works as already quantified, then things do not require any miracle to proceed. Further, many applications exist that have nothing to do with energy production, only shifting chemical energy balances. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 06:54:58 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 iB2Esrgw030833; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:54:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2Espqu030817; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:54:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:54:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002a01c4d87e$7a9858e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:51:59 -0800 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/56696 X-Loop: vortex-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: "P.J van Noorden" > It was very interesting to see that during evaporation a significant amount > (25%) of the radioactive Thallium could be found in the second vessel, > where you only would expect destillated water. So I suspect that during > violent boiling of the electrolyte a significant amount of small dropplets > liquid water ( with radioactive Tl ) was transported through the condensor > into the second vessel. This could lead to a significant overestimation of > the produced heat by about 25 % Well, first a caveat - it should be mentioned for the benefit of any younger readers contemplating CF experiments, that it takes a knowledgeable researcher to experiment with thallium (a.k.a. rat poison), which some chemists believe to be among the most toxic in the periodic table... and that is the less-radioactive variety. Thallium does occurs in the environment naturally in trace amounts; and is responsible for many more deaths than is commonly known because the human body absorbs thallium very effectively, especially through the skin, lungs and the digestive tract. Just touching it can be dangerous. .... but as to the unusual "transport mechanism" (if it did indeed cross a metal boundary) this anomaly seems to be similar to what has been witnessed over the years with Bismuth, which is a similar heavy metal in many ways and which was the subject of messages last month (below)... it would be enlightening to understand the dynamics of this transport mechanism, and whether or not it is somehow related to gravity, but there appears to be little reliable information available. Nick Reiter wrote: > It [bismuth] also was or is one of > the most promising stars in the odd half integer spin > nucleon kinemassic gravity claims of Wallace, RC Macaulay wrote: > Once knew a man that spent his days during WW2 on > the Manhattan project that remained puzzled by bismuth. Such an > oddity that he considered the element unexplainable. (which may have been mentioned in the Rhodes book on the Manhattan project), I remember hearing about some definite "peculiarities" concerning bismuth during the LMBR and MSR (liquid metal and salt cooled reactors) days at Oak Ridge in the 60s... the problem was "containment" of the molten bismuth. It seem that you can have a bismuth alloy or eutectic in a *sealed* circuit - completely encased in SS tubing... but miraculously it will somehow "seep" through metal and appear in the adjoining circuit - Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 06:56:09 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 iB2Eu0gw031254; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:56:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2EtvKX031222; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:55:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:55:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:55:42 EST Subject: Re: oomments on DOE report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fc.7920fc8.2ee086ee_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/56697 X-Loop: vortex-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_fc.7920fc8.2ee086ee_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The researchers in cold fusion should publish there papers in peer reviewed journals. Journals reject cold fusion papers, "cold fusion is unworkable!" How much unpaid time do we have? It's a catch 22. They have got us. We should all cut our looses and run. Frank Z --part1_fc.7920fc8.2ee086ee_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The researchers in cold fusion shou= ld publish there papers in peer reviewed journals.
Journals reject cold fusion papers, "cold fusion is unworkable!"

How much unpaid time do we have?

It's a catch 22.  They have got us.

We should all cut our looses and run. 

Frank Z --part1_fc.7920fc8.2ee086ee_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 07:15:00 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 iB2FEsgw005864; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:14:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2FEr32005852; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:14:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:14:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002501c4d881$ad65d790$657ba8c0@peter> From: "P.J van Noorden" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> <002a01c4d87e$7a9858e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:14:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56698 X-Loop: vortex-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 We used 201 Thallium in our nuclear medicine department to study the perfusion of the heart.The energy emission of radioactive thallium is about 80 eV. Now we have a technetium based radiopharmacon which gives a better image quality.( 140eV) The amounts of thallium we used was about a few nanograms. Therefore you can inject it in a patient beacuse in this concentration it is not toxic.The amount I used for this experiment is 1% of the amount we inject into a patient. Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 3:51 PM Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "P.J van Noorden" > > > It was very interesting to see that during evaporation a > significant amount > > (25%) of the radioactive Thallium could be found in the > second vessel, > > where you only would expect destillated water. So I > suspect that during > > violent boiling of the electrolyte a significant amount of > small dropplets > > liquid water ( with radioactive Tl ) was transported > through the condensor > > into the second vessel. This could lead to a significant > overestimation of > > the produced heat by about 25 % > > Well, first a caveat - it should be mentioned for the > benefit of any younger readers contemplating CF experiments, > that it takes a knowledgeable researcher to experiment with > thallium (a.k.a. rat poison), which some chemists believe to > be among the most toxic in the periodic table... and that is > the less-radioactive variety. Thallium does occurs in the > environment naturally in trace amounts; and is responsible > for many more deaths than is commonly known because the > human body absorbs thallium very effectively, especially > through the skin, lungs and the digestive tract. Just > touching it can be dangerous. > > .... but as to the unusual "transport mechanism" (if it did > indeed cross a metal boundary) this anomaly seems to be > similar to what has been witnessed over the years with > Bismuth, which is a similar heavy metal in many ways and > which was the subject of messages last month (below)... it > would be enlightening to understand the dynamics of this > transport mechanism, and whether or not it is somehow > related to gravity, but there appears to be little reliable > information available. > > Nick Reiter wrote: > > > It [bismuth] also was or is one of > > the most promising stars in the odd half integer spin > > nucleon kinemassic gravity claims of Wallace, > > RC Macaulay wrote: > > > Once knew a man that spent his days during WW2 on > > the Manhattan project that remained puzzled by bismuth. > Such an > > oddity that he considered the element unexplainable. > > (which may have been mentioned in the Rhodes book on the > Manhattan project), I remember hearing about some definite > "peculiarities" concerning bismuth during the LMBR and MSR > (liquid metal and salt cooled reactors) days at Oak Ridge in > the > 60s... the problem was "containment" of the molten bismuth. > It seem that you can have a bismuth alloy or eutectic in a > *sealed* > circuit - completely encased in SS tubing... but > miraculously > it will somehow "seep" through metal and appear in the > adjoining circuit - > > Jones > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 07:42:07 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 iB2Ffwgw017154; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:41:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2FfuSV017128; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:41:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:41:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003401c4d885$4a004c40$f42efea9@default> From: "Emeka Okafor" To: Subject: NY Times article on Cold fusion review Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:40:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4D85B.60687AE0" 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: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56699 X-Loop: vortex-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_0030_01C4D85B.60687AE0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0031_01C4D85B.60687AE0" ------=_NextPart_001_0031_01C4D85B.60687AE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Evidence on Cold Fusion Remains Inconclusive, New Review Finds By KENNETH CHANG=20 =20 n a new review of cold fusion - the claim that energy can be generated = by running electrical current through water - the Department of Energy = released a report yesterday that says the evidence remains inconclusive, = echoing a similar report 15 years ago. Over the past several months, 18 scientists reviewed research in cold = fusion, and two-thirds of them did not find the evidence for nuclear = reactions in the experiments convincing. Almost all of them, however, = said that aspects of cold fusion merited consideration for further = research. "I think the new review has shed some light on the status of research = that has been done over the last 15 years," said Dr. James F. Decker, = deputy director of the science office in the Energy Department who = agreed to the review at the request of several scientists involved with = cold fusion research. Dr. Decker said the department was open to proposals for cold fusion = research, but added that was not new. "We have always been open to = proposals that have scientific merit as determined by peer review," he = said. "We have never closed the door to cold fusion proposals." Cold fusion briefly appeared to promise an unlimited energy source in = 1989 when Drs. B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann of the University = of Utah announced that they had generated fusion - the same process that = powers the sun - in a tabletop experiment using a jar of water = containing deuterium, a heavier version of hydrogen. They claimed that an electrical current running through the water pulled = deuterium atoms into two palladium electrodes, generating heat. The = speculation was that the heat was coming from the fusion of the = deuterium atoms. Other scientists, however, had trouble reproducing the findings, and at = the end of 1989, a review by the Energy Department recommended against a = specific cold fusion research program, although it did support further = investigation into some aspects. After that, most scientists regarded cold fusion as a discredited farce, = but a small group of scientists continued work in the field. = Measurements have become better, but cold fusion experiments still = produce heat at best half of the time. At the end of last year, several = cold fusion scientists approached Dr. Decker, asking for a review. Dr. = Decker agreed. In the review, nine scientists chosen by the Energy Department = considered a paper submitted by the cold fusion scientists. Another nine = listened to oral presentations by cold fusion scientists in August. "This was a very, very scientific, very level-headed, review by = everybody," said Dr. Kirby W. Kemper, vice president for research at = Florida State University and one of the reviewers of the oral = presentations. But Dr. Kemper said, "I don't think we've made much = progress since '89 in really nailing down the parameters that make it = reproducible." He said there were interesting scientific questions on the behavior of = hydrogen within metals that merited research, and he said his comments = tried to offer a future research path.=20 Dr. Michael McKubre, a scientist at SRI International, one of the = scientists who approached Dr. Decker last year, said the conclusions = were at least "mildly positive" in endorsing consideration of further = research. "All we set out to demonstrate was there were serious issues of science = that had to be developed further," Dr. McKubre said. "If you look = through the materials, the majority, if not the entirety, agree on that = point." www.timbuktuchronicles.blogspot.com ------=_NextPart_001_0031_01C4D85B.60687AE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 

Evidence on Cold Fusion Remains Inconclusive, New Review=20 Finds

By KENNETH=20 CHANG

3DIn a new review of cold fusion - the = claim that=20 energy can be generated by running electrical current through water - = the=20 Department of Energy released a report yesterday that says the evidence = remains=20 inconclusive, echoing a similar report 15 years ago.

Over the past several months, 18 scientists reviewed research in cold = fusion,=20 and two-thirds of them did not find the evidence for nuclear reactions = in the=20 experiments convincing. Almost all of them, however, said that aspects = of cold=20 fusion merited consideration for further research.

"I think the new review has shed some light on the status of research = that=20 has been done over the last 15 years," said Dr. James F. Decker, deputy = director=20 of the science office in the Energy Department who agreed to the review = at the=20 request of several scientists involved with cold fusion research.

Dr. Decker said the department was open to proposals for cold fusion=20 research, but added that was not new. "We have always been open to = proposals=20 that have scientific merit as determined by peer review," he said. "We = have=20 never closed the door to cold fusion proposals."

Cold fusion briefly appeared to promise an unlimited energy source in = 1989=20 when Drs. B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann of the University of = Utah=20 announced that they had generated fusion - the same process that powers = the sun=20 - in a tabletop experiment using a jar of water containing deuterium, a = heavier=20 version of hydrogen.

They claimed that an electrical current running through the water = pulled=20 deuterium atoms into two palladium electrodes, generating heat. The = speculation=20 was that the heat was coming from the fusion of the deuterium atoms.

Other scientists, however, had trouble reproducing the findings, and = at the=20 end of 1989, a review by the Energy Department recommended against a = specific=20 cold fusion research program, although it did support further = investigation into=20 some aspects.

After that, most scientists regarded cold fusion as a discredited = farce, but=20 a small group of scientists continued work in the field. Measurements = have=20 become better, but cold fusion experiments still produce heat at best = half of=20 the time. At the end of last year, several cold fusion scientists = approached Dr.=20 Decker, asking for a review. Dr. Decker agreed.

In the review, nine scientists chosen by the Energy Department = considered a=20 paper submitted by the cold fusion scientists. Another nine listened to = oral=20 presentations by cold fusion scientists in August.

"This was a very, very scientific, very level-headed, review by = everybody,"=20 said Dr. Kirby W. Kemper, vice president for research at Florida State=20 University and one of the reviewers of the oral presentations. But Dr. = Kemper=20 said, "I don't think we've made much progress since '89 in really = nailing down=20 the parameters that make it reproducible."

He said there were interesting scientific questions on the behavior = of=20 hydrogen within metals that merited research, and he said his comments = tried to=20 offer a future research path.

Dr. Michael McKubre, a scientist at SRI International, one of the = scientists=20 who approached Dr. Decker last year, said the conclusions were at least = "mildly=20 positive" in endorsing consideration of further research.

"All we set out to demonstrate was there were serious issues of = science that=20 had to be developed further," Dr. McKubre said. "If you look through the = materials, the majority, if not the entirety, agree on that=20 point."

www.timbuktuchronicle= s.blogspot.com
------=_NextPart_001_0031_01C4D85B.60687AE0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4D85B.60687AE0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="i.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/i.gif R0lGODlhCwAhAMQAAP/////v7++9va0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEA AAAALAAAAAALACEAQAU2oCCOYwAMaJoKp6qy7tvGA0zXc2zTu567PeBPdsMVg8QbcjVkHpuoZRRq VFKlVd51++xavdoQADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4D85B.60687AE0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 07:44:11 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 iB2FhoBZ019294; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:43:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2Fhlb3019207; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:43:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:43:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005501c4d885$51e48fc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> <002a01c4d87e$7a9858e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <002501c4d881$ad65d790$657ba8c0@peter> Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 07:40:57 -0800 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/56700 X-Loop: vortex-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: "P.J van Noorden" > We used 201 Thallium in our nuclear medicine department > to study the perfusion of the heart.The energy emission of radioactive > thallium is about 80 eV.... > The amounts of thallium we used was about a few nanograms. Therefore you can > inject it in a patient beacuse in this concentration it is not toxic.The > amount I used for this experiment is 1% of the amount we inject into a > patient. Hello Peter, Since this tiny amount of thallium works out to only a few one-hundredths of a nanogram, one must suspect that this cannot be measured reliably (by mass) on any kind of a precision scale, so one must further suspect that you measured it by assuming that any radioactive emission was due to the thallium... ...but, that raises another problem. What if the species which you measured "in the second vessel, where you only would expect distillated water" was NOT the Thallium? That is, it was not the thallium which had migrated through the walls of the condenser, but instead was Tritium, which was the ash of the adjoining CF reaction? Tritium of course, easily is transported through most metals, such as your condenser. I can find no reference on the web to thallium crossing a metal boundary. Also the 80 KeV is characteristic of tritium as well as thallium, but tritium would have a broader spread (did you do spectrometry ?) Although it is somewhat of an affront to Occam, you could conceivably have witnessed both radioactive remediation (of the thallium) and at the same time the LENR cold-fusion (ala Claytor) of the tritium-ash variety, in this cell. But since the total radioactive reading on your meter of the combined two sources added up to nearly what you were expecting from just the thallium, you assumed the simplest underlying situation? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 08:15:10 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 iB2GEsBZ003026; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:14:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2GEqLY002996; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:14:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:14:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202111059.04212eb0@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:14:20 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Let us make a list of the mistakes in the DoE report Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <3nzhmB.A.su.79zrBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56701 X-Loop: vortex-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 DoE report really is inept and sloppy. The "reviewers" rejected the data based on the first notions that popped into their heads. They made the same kinds of silly mistakes that people have repeated year after year over in sci.physics.fusion. I think we should make a list of some of the major blunders, and uploaded into LENR-CANR.org as part of our News report. Two mistakes struck me the moment I glanced at the report. They are: The DoE report includes objections made by skeptics that have no technical merit. For example, the skeptics claimed: "Contamination of apparatus or samples by air containing 4He was cited as one possible cause for false positive results in some measurements." This is not in evidence. With most experiments the helium is far below atmospheric concentration, so if air had leaked into the cell, the amount of helium would probably have increased by a huge factor, and the helium levels would have been random instead of correlated with excess heat production. With McKubre's experiment, which is described in the document submitted to the DoE panel, helium climbed above atmospheric concentration. An air leak would have reduced the amount of helium, but no reduction was observed. The report says that the skeptics, "who did not find the production of excess power convincing cite a number of issues including: excess power in the short term is not the same as net energy production over the entire of time of an experiment; all possible chemical and solid state causes of excess heat have not been investigated and eliminated as an explanation; and production of power over a period of time is a few percent of the external power applied and hence calibration and systematic effects could account for the purported net effect." These objections are all without merit, because they all miss the fundamental point, which is that no chemical process can store up or produce more than a few eV per atom. Suppose at time A the cell begins producing significant excess heat, and it continues to be exothermic to time B, never dropping to zero or below zero (it is never endothermic, so it never stores energy). Suppose the total integrated energy for that burst is 100 to 1000 eV per atom. Bursts on this scale have often been recorded, some of them lasting for weeks. The energy release during the burst is far above the limits of chemistry. That proves the issue. What happened previous to that event makes no difference, because there is no mechanism that can store that much chemical energy in the cathode. Also, the only input to output ratio that matters is the one measured during the burst. During a burst, the input to output ratio is usually high, sometimes 1:3 or more, and the effect is easy to measure. The overall ratio for the entire run is irrelivant. Even if the overall input to output ratio is only, let us say, 1:1.02, that has no bearing on the ratio or performance during the heat burst. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 08:29:31 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 iB2GTKBZ012602; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:29:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2GTIvV012571; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:29:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:29:18 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005101c4d88c$148f4050$657ba8c0@peter> From: "P.J van Noorden" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> <002a01c4d87e$7a9858e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <002501c4d881$ad65d790$657ba8c0@peter> <005501c4d885$51e48fc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:29:22 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56702 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones We analysed the reactionproduct with a multi channel analyser and we where convinced that it was 201 Tl. Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:40 PM Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "P.J van Noorden" > > > We used 201 Thallium in our nuclear medicine department > > to study the perfusion of the heart.The energy emission of > radioactive > > thallium is about 80 eV.... > > The amounts of thallium we used was about a few nanograms. > Therefore you can > > inject it in a patient beacuse in this concentration it is > not toxic.The > > amount I used for this experiment is 1% of the amount we > inject into a > > patient. > > Hello Peter, > > Since this tiny amount of thallium works out to only a few > one-hundredths of a nanogram, one must suspect that this > cannot be measured reliably (by mass) on any kind of a > precision scale, so one must further suspect that you > measured it by assuming that any radioactive emission was > due to the thallium... > > ...but, that raises another problem. > > What if the species which you measured "in the second > vessel, where you only would expect distillated water" was > NOT the Thallium? That is, it was not the thallium which had > migrated through the walls of the condenser, but instead was > Tritium, which was the ash of the adjoining CF reaction? > > Tritium of course, easily is transported through most > metals, such as your condenser. I can find no reference on > the web to thallium crossing a metal boundary. Also the 80 > KeV is characteristic of tritium as well as thallium, but > tritium would have a broader spread (did you do spectrometry > ?) > > Although it is somewhat of an affront to Occam, you could > conceivably have witnessed both radioactive remediation (of > the thallium) and at the same time the LENR cold-fusion (ala > Claytor) of the tritium-ash variety, in this cell. But since > the total radioactive reading on your meter of the combined > two sources added up to nearly what you were expecting from > just the thallium, you assumed the simplest underlying > situation? > > Jones > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 08:32:32 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 iB2GWIBZ013637; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:32:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2GWF0h013611; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:32:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:32:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202112226.04209570@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:31:59 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: The DoE response is pure politics, and it has not changed since 1989 In-Reply-To: References: 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/56703 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harry Veeder wrote: >The fact that the DOE panel once again diminishes the >value of all the thermal observations and measurements >is perplexing. No, it is no perplexing, it is politics. This is the work of Steve Jones or one his allies. He denies all calorimetry and says there has never been any excess heat. Jones and DoE want to redirect all cold fusion research back to the search for neutrons and other hot fusion particles, and away from excess heat. Excess heat threatens their paradigm and their funding -- whereas the hot fusion crowd welcomes Jones' results. That is why the report says the experiments of the last 15 years have been a waste of time. I think their plan is simple and obvious, and it is exactly the same plan they have had all along: 1. They redirect all cold fusion research back to particles. 2. The particles are not found. 3. They declare the field never existed in the first place. Even if particles are found in a Jones experiment, they can probably be explained by hot fusion mechanisms, according to Storms. The section of the report that Keith Nagel quoted is about Jones: "A similar line of investigation involved counting deuterium loaded foils to observe the products for the standard fusion reaction channels, proton + triton or neutron + 3He, with particle detectors and coincidence techniques. Indications of purported detection of proton-triton coincidences at a low level were presented. Even skeptical reviewers cited this work as one line of investigation that could be pursued to a clear conclusion." This is the only kind of cold fusion the DoE has ever countenanced. Their interests and their policies have not changed one iota since April 1989. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:02:02 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 iB2H1qgw018889; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:01:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2H1n3D018872; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:01:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:01:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:58:47 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: <06u9gD.A.smE.9p0rBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56704 X-Loop: vortex-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 12/2/04 8:32 AM, Horace Heffner at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 11:11 PM 11/27/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is my first post. >> >> I was wondering if anyone in CF community has looked for evidence of a >> correlation between the orientation of a CF cell and the amount of excess >> heat produced. >> >> Perhaps the performance of a CF cell would change if the cell or some of its >> parts were rotated 90 degrees or even spun. >> >> This questions are based on the speculation that the direction of gravity >> (rather than the magnitude of gravity) may effect the performance of CF >> cells. >> >> Harry Veeder > > In replying to your query earlier I should have also noted that centrifugal > force can be used to advantage in chemical processes, and may have energy > generation prospects as well. I will post separately a summary of 2003 > posts of mine on the subject of Gravi-chem. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > That is interesting innovation. I looked at your other posts where you describe the concept in more detail. It is not quite what I mean, BUT it does suggest away of testing my hunch. My hunch is that earth's gravity plays a essential role in the generation excess heat in a CF cell. If I am correct, then rotating the same apparatus will change the amount of excess heat generated. ( I am not sure if the change will be positive or negative.) Of course, to properly test my hunch, the CF cell would have to be designed in such a way that the electrolytic performance is not appreciably improved or worsened when undergoing rotation. Would it be possible build such an 'indifferent electrolytic cell'? Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:16:13 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 iB2HG7gw024532; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:16:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2HG6sH024523; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:16:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:16:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008101c4d892$3744d820$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201161821.04208e30@pop.mindspring.com> <003b01c4d853$6251cdf0$657ba8c0@peter> <002a01c4d87e$7a9858e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <002501c4d881$ad65d790$657ba8c0@peter> <005501c4d885$51e48fc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <005101c4d88c$148f4050$657ba8c0@peter> Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:13:16 -0800 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: <3ZyGpC.A.G_F.W30rBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56705 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Peter, Thank you for having carefully considered this. > We analysed the reaction product with a multi channel analyser and we where > convinced that it was 201 Tl. However... in order that others can dispose of any lingering questions, especially about the ability of thallium to migrate across a heat exchanger, is any of your data and/or instrumentation info (Beckman LS ? etc) from this experiment available online? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:26:22 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 iB2HQ8BZ001205; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:26:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2HQ6ex001185; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:26:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:26:06 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 08:33:10 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56706 X-Loop: vortex-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 6:51 AM 12/2/4, Jones Beene wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "P.J van Noorden" > >> It was very interesting to see that during evaporation a >significant amount >> (25%) of the radioactive Thallium could be found in the >second vessel, >> where you only would expect destillated water. So I >suspect that during >> violent boiling of the electrolyte a significant amount of >small dropplets >> liquid water ( with radioactive Tl ) was transported >through the condensor [snip] >.... but as to the unusual "transport mechanism" (if it did >indeed cross a metal boundary) [snip] Jones, there is no metal boundary indicated. The suggestion is that water droplets (carrying thallium) were entrained with the steam by violent boiling. When the steam was condensed in a condenser the water droplets, like fog into dew, condensed out too. This is a very important comment. It means that boiloff calorimetry can be very suspect without proper controls. The water droplets constitute missing water which was not boiled, i.e. vaporized. If the heat of vaporization is applied to the total water missing in the reactor vessel (and/or condensed into the second vessel) then an over unity condition might be indicated where none exists. Proper controls might mean placing a tracer in the electrolyte and condensing out the vapor, doing dual calorimetry, and including a barrier to water droplets. A radioactive tracer would be good in labs equipped to handle them. Measuring the conductivity of the condensate, as compared to distilled water, would be a minimum level of required check. An accurate pH check might be useful too. Some kind of non-volatile tracer in the elecrolyte should be looked for in the condensate. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:28:36 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 iB2HSQBZ002061; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:28:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2HSNfM002032; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:28:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:28:23 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 08:35:30 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: <5cJfe.A.sf.3C1rBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56707 X-Loop: vortex-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 9:13 AM 12/2/4, Jones Beene wrote: >Peter, > >Thank you for having carefully considered this. > >> We analysed the reaction product with a multi channel >analyser and we where >> convinced that it was 201 Tl. > >However... in order that others can dispose of any >lingering questions, especially about the ability of >thallium to migrate across a heat exchanger, That should be "through a condenser" not "across a heat exchanger". >is any of your >data and/or instrumentation info (Beckman LS ? etc) from >this experiment available online? > >Jones Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:33:13 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 iB2HX7gw030108; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:33:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2HX5sC030098; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:33:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:33:05 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 08:40:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56708 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:58 AM 12/2/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >My hunch is that earth's gravity plays a essential role in the generation >excess heat in a CF cell. If I am correct, then rotating the same apparatus >will change the amount of excess heat generated. ( I am not sure if the >change will be positive or negative.) > >Of course, to properly test my hunch, the CF cell would have to be designed >in such a way that the electrolytic performance is not appreciably improved >or worsened when undergoing rotation. Would it be possible build such an >'indifferent electrolytic cell'? So you hope to do an experiment? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:41:18 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 iB2Hf4BZ006658; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:41:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2Hf2NP006623; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:41:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:41:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041202121738.020cf058@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:29:14 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: DOE Report, NYTimes article, and Dr. Mallove links 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/56709 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Latest links to, and excerpt information from, the just-issued DOE Report, to today's New York Times article about it, (and to info re: Dr. Mallove's cold case) have been updated. Links are also present to references in cold fusion which are uncensored (unlike the 'LENR' site), and to robust cold fusion systems, including the JTP Phusor. URL COLD FUSION TIMES http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 09:51:08 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 iB2Hp0gw002480; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:51:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2HowRd002464; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:50:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:50:58 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 08:58:05 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Let us make a list of the mistakes in the DoE report Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56710 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:14 AM 12/2/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I think we should make a list of some of the major blunders, and uploaded >into LENR-CANR.org as part of our News report. Two mistakes struck me the >moment I glanced at the report. They are: This may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but what will it achieve? Another 15 years of bickering? The glass is half empty, but also half full. The main problem is getting qualified research proposals on the table. If qualified proposals are rejected it then seems reasonable to mount a hostile response. The problem at this time is getting qualified PhD's to make the proposals and do the work. The stigma is obviously still there. Another line of attack may be to propose establishment of a politically independent foundation to explore controversial energy related physics and innovations. Energy related physics would include both energy generation and conservation issues. Based on recent developments in global warming, such a foundation might be permanently fundable by private endowment enhanced by matching government grants and DOE and other agency cooperative efforts. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 10:31:30 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 iB2IVCBZ027825; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:31:16 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2IVAVF027759; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:31:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:31:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202131610.04209570@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:30:54 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Let us make a list of the mistakes in the DoE report In-Reply-To: References: 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/56711 X-Loop: vortex-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: >This may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but what will it achieve? >Another 15 years of bickering? The purpose is to keep the readers at LENR-CANR informed. We would not want the public to think that we are satisfied with the quality of the DoE report. The document is mostly written already. I was thinking of adding the text I just wrote here to the News report. It does not matter much, because most readers skip the news section and the other HTML screens. They go directly to the Acrobat documents. So it does not matter much what we say. I just glanced at the DoE report yesterday, and those two mistakes caught my eye. There are probably more. Anyway, the report has nothing to do with science, and no real technical content. The so-called objections are all transparent handwaving. All of the points they raised are addressed in the literature. Heck, they are all addressed by me, in a paper written for the non-expert general public: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJintroducti.pdf. This is babyfood. These "expert" reviewers made stupid mistakes that would earn a failing grade in high school chemistry. Obviously, they did not bother to read the papers, or stop and think. As I said, the purpose of the report is to arrange another assassination of cold fusion by proving that it does not produce neutrons. They probably plan to fund a few more experiments by Jones and others who despise excess heat, and then announce either: 1. CF does not exist. Case closed. OR -- 2. CF does exist, it produces neutrons, and it is an unimportant type of hot fusion. When they say: "Several reviewers specifically stated that more experiments similar in nature to those that have been carried out for the past fifteen years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area." Translated into plain English that means: Stop telling us what we do not want to know! No more excess heat! - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 12:09:23 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 iB2K9JuG012364; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:09:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2K93dQ012226; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:09:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:09:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00c801c4d8aa$5d9b1120$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:06:09 -0800 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/56712 X-Loop: vortex-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, you seem to be saying that the condenser was air-cooled instead of water-cooled. Of course this would introduce major errors, and it still doesn't address the issue of tritium. Only if it had been water cooled could all the heat be accounted for, and that is why I assumed it was water cooled and that the thallium was turning up in the second circuit. > This is a very important comment. It means that boiloff calorimetry can be very suspect without proper controls. Yes, proper controls like a second circuit with dual calorimetry. > A radioactive tracer would be good in labs equipped to handle them. Not unless the possibility of tritium can be eliminated, or unless your tracer has a far more energetic signature than tritium. Thallium is just too close IMHO. After all, your are doing cold fusion. Cold fusion often produces tritium. Isn't the cross-connection obvious? BTW even though tritium "normally" has a significant spread of energy, can we be sure that tritium produced via CF is not closer to being mono-energetic? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 12:57:48 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 iB2KvhKC003101; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:57:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2KvHT3003009; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:57:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:57:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041242205640600@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: RE: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:56:40 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d88022532b4fc9bab674495af80d51f8397c7233ee4b332ceb350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.3.121 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56713 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dec. 02, 2004 Vortex, Earlier, Jed missed my suggestion on the DoE report. Fortunately Steven Krivit (of New Energy Times) has foreseen the need and has gone ahead and posted the various (anonymous) DoE requested reviews for our study and independent evaluation to see how DoE reached its 'final' report. Many thanks for a fast and efficient job! -ak- > [Original Message] > From: Steven Krivit > To: > Date: 12/2/2004 8:33:47 AM > Subject: RE: DoE recommendations are posted > > Your wish is granted. > I have them now on my website > > > > At 01:41 PM 12/1/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >Dec. 01, 2004 > > > >Vortex, > > > >Perhaps we could invoke "The Freedom of information Act" to see what the > >various selected reviewers wrote in their overviews of the state of CF > >results fifteen years after 1989. Their identities could be kept > >confidential. And it is not a top National Security issue. > > > >-ak- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:05:37 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 iB2L5QuG027283; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:05:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2L5O4g027254; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:05:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:05:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:02:15 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56714 X-Loop: vortex-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 12/2/04 12:40 PM, Horace Heffner at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 11:58 AM 12/2/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >> My hunch is that earth's gravity plays a essential role in the generation >> excess heat in a CF cell. If I am correct, then rotating the same apparatus >> will change the amount of excess heat generated. ( I am not sure if the >> change will be positive or negative.) >> >> Of course, to properly test my hunch, the CF cell would have to be designed >> in such a way that the electrolytic performance is not appreciably improved >> or worsened when undergoing rotation. Would it be possible build such an >> 'indifferent electrolytic cell'? > > So you hope to do an experiment? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > Of some kind. I hope. I misunderstood the focus of your 'gravi-chem' research. I thought your focus was D+D fusion. Is it fair to say the primary focus of your research is the critique of the conservation laws by physical means? Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:07:57 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 iB2L7muG027994; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:07:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2L7kwx027968; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:07:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:07:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202160548.04208350@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:07:27 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: DoE recommendations are posted In-Reply-To: <410-220041242205640600@ix.netcom.com> References: <410-220041242205640600@ix.netcom.com> 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/56715 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Earlier, Jed missed my suggestion on the DoE report. I didn't exactly miss it, I thought it might be counterproductive. >Fortunately Steven Krivit (of New Energy Times) has foreseen the need and >has gone ahead and posted the various (anonymous) DoE requested reviews for >our study and independent evaluation to see how DoE reached its 'final' >report. Whoa! You mean here, right? On this page: http://www.newenergytimes.com/DOE/DOE.htm Where did he get all that stuff?!? That is remarkable. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:12:55 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 iB2LCdKC007408; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:12:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2LCb6t007393; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:12:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:12:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: CF in everyday life Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:11:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4D881.3E13EAD0" 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/56716 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4D881.3E13EAD0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4D881.3E13EAD0" ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4D881.3E13EAD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankPerhaps it's time to demonstrate CF in everyday life in order there = be no great mystery about some secret know only to the few that advise = the king. For centuries the people in desert areas have used water " ollas" to = cool water. These clay vessels are fixed in a woven sling and suspended = under a shady overhang. Consider the daytime temperature can reach 110 = degrees F and nightime temp of 70 degrees F. The water temperature = inside the olla will fall to 70 degrees F as it "surrenders " heat to = the clay wall of the olla. Comparing the differential potential for = giving up heat to atmospheric conditions external to the olla is usually = explained via evaporation due to the breeze. There is NO breeze in the = desert. The lowering of the olla water temperature must be caused by = what? The indians dont worry about it.. they just enjoy the fact. Now consider a 12" X 12" X 1" Mexican Saltillo tile , red clay with = small amounts of volcanic and flint rock. After firing the tile, it is = extremely dry. Keep the tile dry but allow it to completely cool and = sprinkle a small amout of water on the tile and watch it " boil" as it = is absorbed into the porous tile. Why does the water momentarily boil? Another example is to pour liquid propane on the ground. The propane = goes from liquid to solid phase as you watch and finally evaporates as = off gas. A canny observer will notice the liquid " boil" as it goes from = liquid to solid phase and the solid phase expands before it goes to a = gas phase. This is a demonstration of cold fusion in everyday life. Grimer has an = excellent paper on diphase concept of material behavior that would = surely be appreciated by the olla water crowd should they ever decide to = investigate...=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4D881.3E13EAD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Perhaps it's time to demonstrate CF in = everyday life in=20 order there be no great mystery about some secret know only to the few = that=20 advise the king.
 
For centuries the people in desert areas have = used water=20 " ollas" to cool water. These clay vessels are fixed in a woven sling = and=20 suspended under a shady overhang. Consider the daytime  temperature = can=20 reach 110 degrees F and nightime temp of 70 degrees F. The water = temperature=20 inside the olla will fall to 70 degrees F as it "surrenders " heat to = the clay=20 wall of the olla. Comparing the differential potential for giving up = heat to=20 atmospheric conditions external to the olla is usually explained via = evaporation=20 due to the breeze. There is NO breeze in the desert. The lowering of the = olla=20 water temperature must be caused by what? The indians dont worry about = it.. they=20 just enjoy the fact.
 
Now consider a 12" X 12" X 1" Mexican Saltillo = tile , red clay with small amounts of volcanic and flint rock. = After firing=20 the tile, it is extremely dry. Keep the tile dry but allow it to = completely cool=20 and sprinkle a small amout of water on the tile and watch it " boil" as = it is=20 absorbed into the porous tile. Why does the water momentarily = boil?
 
Another example is to pour liquid propane on = the ground.=20 The propane goes from liquid to solid phase as you watch and finally = evaporates=20 as off gas. A canny observer will notice the liquid " boil" as it goes = from=20 liquid to solid phase and the solid phase expands before it goes to a = gas=20 phase.
 
This is a demonstration of cold fusion in = everyday life.=20 Grimer has an excellent paper on diphase concept of material behavior = that would=20 surely be appreciated by the olla water crowd should they ever decide to = investigate...
 
Richard
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_001B_01C4D881.3E13EAD0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4D881.3E13EAD0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001901c4d8b3$88a3ac70$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C4D881.3E13EAD0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:34:40 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 iB2LYauG002198; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:34:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2LYVnB002156; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:34:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:34:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41AF8A5F.2070509@haikolietz.de> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:34:23 +0100 From: Haiko Lietz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030718 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Introduction References: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> In-Reply-To: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <5NELd.A.oh.np4rBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56717 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Greeting people, let me introduce myself, I'm new on this list. My name is Haiko Lietz, I am a science, political, media journalist from Cologne, Germany. I'm writing a series about cold fusion for a German online magazine (Telepolis). I've also recently written about an (antigravity) field propulsion concept based on Heim's unified field theory. I've got quite a few contacts to the German (speaking) free energy and UFO research networks. Don't worry, I'm not gonna quote from what is being said here ;) Special hello to all that already know me. Haiko -- Haiko Lietz Science Reporter Germany PS: Jed made me aware of this list, thanks! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:47:43 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 iB2LlbuG006187; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:47:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2LlZlI006164; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:47:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:47:35 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.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: DoE recommendations are posted Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:47:24 -0600 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: 2004.12.2.4 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56718 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>Akira Kawasaki wrote: > Jed Rothwell wroge >> Fortunately Steven Krivit (of New Energy Times) has foreseen the >> need and has gone ahead and posted the various (anonymous) DoE >> requested reviews for our study and independent evaluation to see >> how DoE reached its 'final' report. > >Whoa! You mean here, right? On this page: > >http://www.newenergytimes.com/DOE/DOE.htm > >Where did he get all that stuff?!? That is remarkable. > >- Jed Indeed it is. I found Reviewer #8 concluding paragraph most enlightening. Charles Beaudette in his book "Excess Heat & Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed" has already eluded to this problem: Reviewer #8 concluding statement: "...But with all the above said... these experiments are frustrating and difficult, and require expertise that cross-cuts physics, materials science, electrochemistry, as well as analytical chemistry of breathtaking difficulty. The two most difficult things any scientist can be asked to do are trace analysis/mass balance and calorimetry. Most scientist simply aren't good enough to do extremely demanding experiments in every aspect of the research - and highly deuterided palladium seems unwilling to cut us a break at any stage." Maybe he read Beaudette's book. ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 13:52:20 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 iB2LqDuG007482; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:52:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2LqCpt007464; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:52:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:52:12 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202165050.042080b0@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:51:38 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: A typical reviewer comment, about Iwamura 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/56719 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Look at this, from: http://www.newenergytimes.com/DOE/2004-DOE-ReviewerComments.pdf Quote: "16 (a) The paper by Iwamura et al. presented at ICCF10 (Ref. 47 in DOE31) does an exhaustive job of using a variety of modern analytical chemistry methods to identify elements produced on the surface of coated Pd cold-fusion foils. There are two very unusual aspects of this work: (i) The energy source is gas pressure, permeation of D2 gas through the foils into vacuum. (ii) The claim is made that if Cs is coated on the metal surface, it is converted into Pr; if Sr is coated on the metal surface, it is converted into Mo. The analytical results, from a variety of techniques, such as mass spectroscopy and electron spectroscopy, are very nice. It seems difficult at first glance to dispute the results. However, the Japanese workers conclude, not that the elements in question are constituents from the interior of the Pd that migrated to the surface, but that they are the products of sequential nuclear reactions, in which changes of atomic number and atomic mass of 4 and 8 are preferred. From a nuclear physics perspective, such conclusions are not to be believed. The energetics of merging two deuterons in a fusion reaction are tough enough. Merging four deuterons with a heavy nucleus such as Pd is not to be believed, especially when no evidence is presented for any nuclear products such as Y, Zr, and Nb that are between Sr and Mo. Yet people in the cold-fusion community are citing this paper as further evidence for exotic new nuclear phenomena." It is "not to be believed"! But we are supposed to believe, with no questions asked, that the "constituents from the interior of the Pd that migrated to the surface" even though: 1. The gas was flowing the other way. 2. Bulk mass spectroscopy showed there are no such constituents. 3. The isotopes are not natural. This is handwaving. Theory says it cannot happen, so damn the facts. And these people call themselves scientists! - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 14:19:10 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 iB2MJ2KC028964; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:19:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2MIwMb028939; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:18:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:18:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202171713.04211070@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:18:05 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: A typical reviewer comment, about Iwamura In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202165050.042080b0@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202165050.042080b0@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <7G8Gh.A.HEH.ST5rBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56720 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Give this five more minutes of thought, and it is even worse. Here is a revised version: . . . The reviewer rejects the results based on nuclear theory; it is "not to be believed," but then proposes an alternative explanation that would violates even more fundamental chemical and physical theories. Constituents from the interior of the Pd could not have migrated to the surface because: 1. The gas was flowing the other way. 2. Bulk mass spectroscopy showed there are no such constituents. 3. The material that was originally on the surface disappears at the same rate the new material reappears. 5. The isotopes of the new material are unnatural, and the isotope shifts are exactly what you would expect when the missing material transmutes into the new material. 6. Since the old material disappears, if migration is the cause of the change, we have to postulate that starting material on the surface migrates downward, while the (non-existent) material migrates up. Such explanations are mere handwaving, and they violate many more fundamental theories than cold fusion does. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 14:29:38 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 iB2MTHKC031165; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:29:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2MTDK4031098; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:29:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:29:13 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 13:36:16 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56721 X-Loop: vortex-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 4:02 PM 12/2/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >I misunderstood the focus of your 'gravi-chem' research. >I thought your focus was D+D fusion. >Is it fair to say the primary focus of your research is the critique of the >conservation laws by physical means? Actually, if you look at the vortex archives at around June or July 2003, you will see that the gravi-chem stuff was merely comments I posted here on vortex as a result of what I considered some bad math written by folks who apparently had no concept of bouyancy. It did seem to take a life of its own though because it is so general in nature and so unexplored. The immediate energy application is probably in the mundane field of hydrogen generation I would guess. If there is indeed free energy to be had from the theory (I doubt it) then it is likely to be had in chemical form. The only clear relation of gravi-chem to CF is the fact that electrolysis is one mode of CF and a more efficient electrolysis merely results in a better COP (coefficient of power) for a CF device. However, extremely high g forces change the location of the nucleus to a point away from the center of charge of the electron cloud. The electron cloud can thus be compressed, and electron shielding can potentially be increased. The distance between deuterons in D2, D2O, and D3O+ molecules can be decreased under extreme pressure, thereby increasing the potential for fusion. As evidenced by neutron stars, *some* degree of gravitational force or compressive force will ultimately cause nuclear reactions. The problem is how best to make use of such a force in a practically achievable domain. My main focus, if I have such, being a rank amateur and irreverant member of the free energy lunatic finge, is collaboration in search of a solution to the energy problem. There is also the joy of seeing various anomalies and puzzles posted here on occasion. When you subscribe to vortex you never know for sure when you wake up exactly what you might possess your thinking by evening. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 14:41:58 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 iB2MflKC002754; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:41:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2Mfki3002733; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:41:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:41:46 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 13:48:58 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: A typical reviewer comment, about Iwamura Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56722 X-Loop: vortex-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 4:51 PM 12/2/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Look at this, from: > >http://www.newenergytimes.com/DOE/2004-DOE-ReviewerComments.pdf > >Quote: > >"16 (a) The paper by Iwamura et al. presented at ICCF10 (Ref. 47 in DOE31) >does an exhaustive job of using a variety of modern analytical chemistry >methods to identify elements produced on the surface of coated Pd >cold-fusion foils. There are two very unusual aspects of this work: (i) The >energy source is gas pressure, permeation of D2 gas through the foils into >vacuum. (ii) The claim is made that if Cs is coated on the metal surface, >it is converted into Pr; if Sr is coated on the metal surface, it is >converted into Mo. The analytical results, from a variety of techniques, >such as mass spectroscopy and electron spectroscopy, are very nice. [snip theory arguments] The reviewer somehow overlooks the main point. The data justifies further study. The proposed theories, regardless the source, including the reviewer, are irrelevant to the DOE review. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 15:33:56 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 iB2NXnuG003981; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:33:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB2NXlk4003962; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:33:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:33:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041202153630.04363478@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:36:38 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: Introduction In-Reply-To: <41AF8A5F.2070509@haikolietz.de> References: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> 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/56723 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Welcome Haiko! Steve From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 16:17:00 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 iB30GruG023831; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:16:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB30Gp3S023819; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:16:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:16:51 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 15:23:56 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56724 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:06 PM 12/2/4, Jones Beene wrote: >Horace, you seem to be saying that the condenser was >air-cooled instead of water-cooled. Of course this would >introduce major errors, and it still doesn't address the >issue of tritium. Actually, there is no mention of a condenser in the Cirillio paper. The standard method of doing boiloff calorimetry is to measure the weight of water boiled off (that disappears) and then multply by the energy required to boil that water (which explicitly *is* the method used by Cirillo.) It appears the plastic cylinder with pyrex lid located above the cell does the condensing. There is apparently no intent to use the condensation heat (i.e. mass flow calorimetry on the secondary coil) as a secondary calorimetric means. Cirillo's method is definitely susceptable to entrained water droplets. I would assume P.J van Noorden (he can clue us in) used an ordinary laboratory condenser. Such condensers are typically made of glass and used in either straight through mode or reflux mode. In straight through mode the steam comes in through one (elevated) end and water comes out the other. In reflux mode the condenser is usually vertical and steam is admitted in at the bottom and water comes out the bottom into an attached flask. Unless you are trying to do dual calorimetry, it doesn't matter how the condenser is cooled, by gas, by water, or by ice. The heat measurment is via the mass of water lost in the reactor. Boiloff calorimeters are typically calibrated using boil-off runs using calibration resistors for heat and cool-off runs to determine the calorimeter constant for ambient losses. P.J van Noorden certianly makes it clear that such calibration runs may be invalid becuase ultrasound or other turbulence creates entraind droplets, and tthe calibration resistor will not cause droplet entrainment like a source of ultrasound does. One solution to this problem is to include an ultrasound device in at least one clibration run to test whatever water drop barrier is used. It would not be possible to calibrate the drop formation rate itself, so some kind of drop barrier would have to be utilized. These principles have ramifications *way* beyond the Cirillo paper. They are fundamental to all boiloff calorimetry. > >Only if it had been water cooled could all the heat be >accounted for, and that is why I assumed it was water cooled >and that the thallium was turning up in the second circuit. > >> This is a very important comment. It means that boiloff >calorimetry can be very suspect without proper controls. > >Yes, proper controls like a second circuit with dual >calorimetry. You need to account for more than just the enthalpy of condensation. > >> A radioactive tracer would be good in labs equipped to >handle them. > >Not unless the possibility of tritium can be eliminated, I have done plenty of tritium counting using liquid scintillation counting. I think it is more difficult to count water borne tritium by other means. Scintillation couters can reliably and automatically discriminate between tritium and say carbon 14. There is almost no penetrating power for 20 keV beta particles, so counting 201 Tl without interference from tritium is easy. Technetium counting and even imaging is readily done using 180 degrees opposed scintillation couters to track positron annihilation photon pairs. I had this procedure done to image my heart. I was signifcantly radioactive for a day. It was a bit scary to turn on my geiger counter and hear it go wild near me. >or >unless your tracer has a far more energetic signature than >tritium. Thallium is just too close IMHO. > >After all, your are doing cold fusion. Cold fusion often >produces tritium. Isn't the cross-connection obvious? BTW >even though tritium "normally" has a significant spread of >energy, can we be sure that tritium produced via CF is not >closer to being mono-energetic? What do you mean significant spread? The peak is fairly confined. BTW, my handbook shows 201 Tl decaying by electron capture (1.36 MeV) with Hg and K shell x-rays of 135.28 keV and 167.40 keV. This stuff should stand out like the sun on a clear day. At 4:14 PM 12/2/4, P.J van Noorden wrote: >Hello >We used 201 Thallium in our nuclear medicine department >to study the perfusion of the heart.The energy emission of radioactive >thallium is about 80 eV. >Now we have a technetium based radiopharmacon which gives a better image >quality.( 140eV) I don't see how 80 keV enters into the picture. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 16:36:36 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 iB30aPKC013003; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:36:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB30aNlR012985; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:36:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:36:23 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 15:43:26 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56725 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Typo! I wrote: "The standard method of doing boiloff calorimetry is to measure the weight of water boiled off (that disappears) and then multply by the energy required to boil that water (which explicitly *is* the method used by Cirillo.)" I that should have said: "The standard method of doing boiloff calorimetry is to measure the weight of water boiled off (that disappears) and then multply by the energy per gram required to boil that water (which explicitly *is* the method used by Cirillo.)" Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 17:28:00 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 iB31RquG015622; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:27:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB31RoEa015599; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:27:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:27:50 -0800 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: CF in everyday life Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:27:42 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> In-Reply-To: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@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 ultra6.eskimo.com id iB31RluG015560 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56726 X-Loop: vortex-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 RC Macaulay's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:11:47 -0600: Hi, [snip] >nightime temp of 70 degrees F. The water temperature inside the olla will fall to 70 degrees F as it "surrenders " heat to the clay wall of the olla. Comparing the differential potential for giving up heat to atmospheric conditions external to the olla is usually explained via evaporation due to the breeze. There is NO breeze in the desert. The lowering of the olla water temperature must be caused by what? It is caused by evaporation. Even without wind, the thin layer of air against the wall of the vessel will be saturated with water vapour, which makes it lighter than the surrounding air. That makes it rise up, and it gets replaced by heavier dryer air, which in turn absorbs more moisture from the vessel. So this works, even in the complete absence of wind. However even on so called wind still days, there are usually occasional small air movements, which help out with the process. >The indians dont worry about it.. they just enjoy the fact. > >Now consider a 12" X 12" X 1" Mexican Saltillo tile , red clay with small amounts of volcanic and flint rock. After firing the tile, it is extremely dry. Keep the tile dry but allow it to completely cool and sprinkle a small amout of water on the tile and watch it " boil" as it is absorbed into the porous tile. Why does the water momentarily boil? This "boiling" is more likely to be air bubbling up through the water, as the water soaks into the porous tile, and replaces the internal air. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 17:49:44 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 iB31nBKC004567; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:49:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB31nAqd004553; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:49:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:49:10 -0800 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: Let us make a list of the mistakes in the DoE report Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:49:02 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202131610.04209570@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041202131610.04209570@pop.mindspring.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 iB31n6KC004500 Resent-Message-ID: <0EmGp.A.EHB.WY8rBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56727 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:30:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] >When they say: "Several reviewers specifically stated that more experiments >similar in nature to those that have been carried out for the past fifteen >years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area." Translated into >plain English that means: > >Stop telling us what we do not want to know! No more excess heat! Actually, they are probably correct in that regard. What is really needed is more variety in the experiments. I think Pd has pretty much been exhausted. Had I been the one presenting the experiments, I would not have put so much emphasis on the Pd experiments, which generally speaking tend to yield just a few % excess. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 18:25:07 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 iB32OxuG003972; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:25:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB32OwDa003955; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:24:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:24:58 -0800 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: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:24:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041201113645.041dfd60@pop.mindspring.com> <00f201c4d813$102d9ee0$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <011201c4d870$f6fba440$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> In-Reply-To: <011201c4d870$f6fba440$7156ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> 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 iB32OtuG003903 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56728 X-Loop: vortex-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 Mike Carrell's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:01:06 -0500: Hi, [snip] >"deeper level" I allow for such. The "Critic's Circle" on HSG have concluded >that Mills' orbitsphere model itself is fatally flawed, and a private >trusted source who has looked at it agrees. The trusted source indicates >that the "sub-ground" state of the H atom, Mills' hydrino, is well supported >in standard literature when correctly interpreted. Thus when Mills >postulates a limit to hydrino shrinkage based on his model, this may in fact >not exist. Thus the Cirillo paper should be looked at most carefully. The The model on my web page allows for radii shrinking as the square of the quantum number. Mills' limit of the inverse fine structure constant for the maximum level of shrinkage is correct, in as much as by that time the "orbital" velocity of the electron would need to equal the speed of light. According to my model, however that limit is never reached, because increasing kinetic energy is paid for by decreasing rest mass of the electron, and a point is reached where the decrease in rest mass would not be enough to supply the increase in kinetic energy required. This happens at about n=1/120. At that level of n, the radius would be 1/120^2 x a0 = 3.675 F, which is approximately nuclear dimensions. IOW long before it reached it's practical shrinkage limit, the hydrino would be small enough to get close enough for nuclear reactions to occur in "very reasonable" times. In fact it should be possible at that size to fuse it with almost any element from the periodic table. Considering that muon catalyzed fusion occurs at a distance of a0/207 = 255.6 F in times possibly as short as 1E-23 seconds, fusion reactions with hydrinos should be possible in roughly the same time frame when n=sqrt(1/207) ~= 1/14. In short, don't expect to find many hydrino compounds where n << 1/14. :) >cell produces excess heat -- which could come from BLP reactions. It >operates at atmospheric pressure and very intensly. The calorimetry is not >good enough to determine whether the energy release is in the BLP or nucelar >range. If neutron-like entities are being produced by the BLP process, then >the energy release will be very high. The thing that bothers me most about this is that if hydrinos are producing nuclear reactions, then I would expect to see at least the occasional gamma ray. (Though there may be possible particle reactions that are far more probable than gamma ray production). > >The cell may also be producing particle condensates as postulated by >Takahashi. We may be looking at a very interesting rabbit hole. Indeed. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 20:06:33 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 iB346IKC015821; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:06:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3460AG015634; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:06:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 20:06:00 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 19:12:56 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56729 X-Loop: vortex-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 1:24 PM 12/3/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >The thing that bothers me most about this is that if hydrinos are >producing nuclear reactions, then I would expect to see at least the >occasional gamma ray. >(Though there may be possible particle reactions that are far more >probable than gamma ray production). Maybe we can expect no gammas, at least when it comes to D + D reactions. Consider the ordinary branching ratios: D + D -> T (1.01 MeV) + p (3.02 MeV) (50%) -> He3 (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (50%) <- most abundant fuel -> He4 + about 20 MeV of gamma rays (about 0.0001%; depends somewhat on temperature.) One argument against the possiblity of CF is "We know what the branching ratios of He* is, so CF can't be real because" there is no signature radiation. This argument is bous. In electron catalysed fusion, or hydrino fusion, there is an electron present in the reaction which does not necessarily gain any momentum from the fusion which it catalyses. The CF reaction is thus: D + D + e -> ? + e That catalysing electron does not "fall into the Coulomb well" and thus the resulting excited fused nucleus is not the conventional He* at all. There is much less excitement! How much less depends on four things: (1) the size of the electron wavefunction at the moment of fusion, (2) the amount of energy supplied to the catalytic electron from the ZPE sea to expand its wavefuntion out of the nucleus, (3) the amount of energy the electron radiates while captured by the nucleus and (4) whether or not an electron capture occurs. I feel it might be argued that at the moment of fusion the wavefunction of the electron, or the entire fused body for that matter, exists at a point. The energy of the combined wavefunctions is momentarily returned to the vacuum. The quantum wavefuntions of the participating bodies collapse into a single point. The ensuing wavefunction inflation depends upon energy exchanged with the vacuum. There is no convenient formulation to determine exactly what signature energy will be available! The potential energy U of an electron and nucleus pair depends upon the separation of that pair. If that separation is momentarily zero, then, by definition, a singularity exists. It is entirely possible the electron could require the entire 20 MeV to escape. It is further even likely that the branching ratios for D + D + e differ entirely from those for D + D. It makes sense that the most likely branch might look like: D + D + e + energy -> He + e - 13.59844 eV In other words, as I posted in "THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS" thread here some years ago, the catalysing electron may only be able to dig itself out of the hole by borrowing (back) from the vacuum enough energy to reach equilibrium, i.e. to become a ground state orbital electron. To that extent, this concept is compatible with Puthoff's theory that orbital stability, i.e. the failure of the orbit to collapse, depends on the orbital electron reaching equilibriumn with the zero point field. If the electron radiates during its catalysis, or the expanding orbital radiates during its expansion, or dislocates neighboring orbitals that radiate or produce phonons, then that accounts for the modicum of free energy observed. Increasing the free energy then amounts to additional confinement of the expanding orbitals. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 21:06:10 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 iB3562uG011969; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:06:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB355u0B011933; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:05:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:05:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <128.51413f8d.2ee14e2c@aol.com> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:05:48 EST Subject: Sweed want to promote cold fusion in Sweeden To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_128.51413f8d.2ee14e2c_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/56730 X-Loop: vortex-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_128.51413f8d.2ee14e2c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_128.51413f8d.2ee14e2c_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-ya06.mx.aol.com (rly-ya06.mail.aol.com [172.18.141.38]) by air-ya04.mail.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILINYA41-76f41af8c7610e; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:43:32 -0500 Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com (mxfep01.bredband.com [195.54.107.70]) by rly-ya06.mx.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYA65-76f41af8c7610e; Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:43:19 -0500 Received: from [213.114.200.82] ([213.114.200.82] [213.114.200.82]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with ESMTP id <20041202214318.DSOS18879.mxfep01.bredband.com@[213.114.200.82]> for ; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:43:18 +0100 Message-ID: <41AF8C75.6050806@djk.se> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:43:17 +0100 From: David Jonsson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041020 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Subject: Re: Results of Dept. of Energy review of cold fusion References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AOL-IP: 195.54.107.70 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/2/2004 4:08:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, > david@djk.se writes: > >> Can you support me in suggesting a similar process in Sweden? I am >> member in a political party and I have thought about suggesting cold >> fusion. Could you give me an idea on how? Actually I sent an email to >> the Swedish government in 1994 regarding this and I got a polite answer >> back that they could not participate. > > > > I don't know how to do this. I could send your request on to the > vortex list. > Perhaps someone there has an idea. Yes, do. I am off that list since 2002 when they erased my email account. And the traffic is too high on that list. Sweden and USA has different attitudes towards nuclear proliferation. Actually what we need is a change in the law since it prohibits us from doing applied research and development on nuclear technology. Good argument. I will probably write the suggestion in English so we might get an EU suggestion instead. Is vortex-l publicly archived? Do you have any famous people on vortex-l nowadays? David --part1_128.51413f8d.2ee14e2c_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 2 22:23:01 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 iB36MluG000970; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:22:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB36MjS2000953; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:22:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:22:45 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 01:19:07 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56731 X-Loop: vortex-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 12/2/04 5:36 PM, Horace Heffner at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 4:02 PM 12/2/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >> I misunderstood the focus of your 'gravi-chem' research. >> I thought your focus was D+D fusion. >> Is it fair to say the primary focus of your research is the critique of the >> conservation laws by physical means? > > Actually, if you look at the vortex archives at > > > > around June or July 2003, you will see that the gravi-chem stuff was merely > comments I posted here on vortex as a result of what I considered some bad > math written by folks who apparently had no concept of bouyancy. It did > seem to take a life of its own though because it is so general in nature > and so unexplored. The immediate energy application is probably in the > mundane field of hydrogen generation I would guess. If there is indeed > free energy to be had from the theory (I doubt it) then it is likely to be > had in chemical form. The only clear relation of gravi-chem to CF is the > fact that electrolysis is one mode of CF and a more efficient electrolysis > merely results in a better COP (coefficient of power) for a CF device. > > However, extremely high g forces change the location of the nucleus to a > point away from the center of charge of the electron cloud. The electron > cloud can thus be compressed, and electron shielding can potentially be > increased. The distance between deuterons in D2, D2O, and D3O+ molecules > can be decreased under extreme pressure, thereby increasing the potential > for fusion. As evidenced by neutron stars, *some* degree of gravitational > force or compressive force will ultimately cause nuclear reactions. The > problem is how best to make use of such a force in a practically achievable > domain. > > My main focus, if I have such, being a rank amateur and irreverant member > of the free energy lunatic finge, is collaboration in search of a solution > to the energy problem. There is also the joy of seeing various anomalies > and puzzles posted here on occasion. When you subscribe to vortex you > never know for sure when you wake up exactly what you might possess your > thinking by evening. 8^) After reading some more, it seems to me a more accurate name for this field is non-inertial-chemistry. Gravi-chemistry is misleading unless you are endorsing the general theory of relativity which assumes that an accelerating or non-inertial frame of reference and a gravitational field are indistinguishable. Harry Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 00:03:16 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 iB382uuG024998; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:03:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB382nwH024955; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:02:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 00:02:49 -0800 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, 2 Dec 2004 23:09:52 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56732 X-Loop: vortex-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 1:19 AM 12/3/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >After reading some more, it seems to me a more accurate name for this field >is non-inertial-chemistry. Gravi-chemistry is misleading unless you are >endorsing the general theory of relativity which assumes that an >accelerating or non-inertial frame of reference and a gravitational field >are indistinguishable. Gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable *at a point*, not a complete inertial frame. Unless one is in a uniform gravitational field, gravity and linear acceleration are distinguishable by tidal effects. In the famous elevator, it is possible to tell if the elevator is in free-fall in a gravitional field or floating in space. It is possible to tell if it is resting on a gravitational body, being spun about (gravity due to centrifugal force), or being accelerated by a rocket. All assumes you have sufficiently fine equipment to detect the tidal forces. Gravi-chem should work fine in a high gravity field, it's just the machine design that changes. The fundamental principle is still bouyancy, at least for the electrolyte environment. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 05:54:17 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 iB3Ds3KC008043; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 05:54:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3DrpoP007873; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 05:53:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 05:53:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004001c4d93f$58c3a3c0$f42efea9@default> From: "Emeka Okafor" To: Subject: US review rekindles cold fusion debate : Nature Magazine Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:52:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003D_01C4D915.6F6754C0" 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: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56733 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_003D_01C4D915.6F6754C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable According to the report, the panel was "split approximately evenly" on = the question of whether cold experiments were actually producing power = in the form of heat. But members agreed that there is not enough = evidence to prove that cold fusion has occurred, and they complained = that much of the published work was poorly documented.=20 http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041129/full/041129-11.html Emeka www.timbuktuchronicles.blogspot.com ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C4D915.6F6754C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 According to=20 the report, the panel was "split approximately evenly" on the question = of=20 whether cold experiments were actually producing power in the form of = heat. But=20 members agreed that there is not enough evidence to prove that cold = fusion has=20 occurred, and they complained that much of the published work was poorly = documented.
 
http:= //www.nature.com/news/2004/041129/full/041129-11.html
 
 
Emeka
www.timbuktuchronicle= s.blogspot.com
------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C4D915.6F6754C0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 07:32:24 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 iB3FVwKC001897; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:31:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3FVrtq001868; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:31:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:31:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203102845.04200d90@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:31:35 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Recent message from Physics Today 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/56734 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: Here is a hysterical message about Physics Today. Frankly I am surprised Physics Today responded at all. Maybe they are feeling the heat? - Jed Below is the information submitted on Dec-2-104 17:5 EST ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- realname: Guy Richards username: guycrich@aol.com Telephone: 815-963-6340 message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. Since I found this hurdle to be artificially high I wrote a letter to the editor asking him the following question: "How many hot fusion experiments, trials or prototypes in the last 55 years after spending hundreds of billions of dollars and using the best minds in the scientific community had even claimed to have an energy ratio of even 1/1?" The reply I received from the editor is as follows:"The editors and staff of Physics Today do not have time to answer questions like these. Thank you for your interest in Physics Today." This just seemed to sum up the attitude of the physics community and I thought it worth sharing. Closed minds, bad for science. Regards, Guy Richards From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 08:24:32 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 iB3GOHuG024430; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:24:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3GOEQl024402; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:24:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:24:14 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000a01c4d954$7dcacee0$ac037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: References: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> Subject: Re: CF in everyday life Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:23:57 -0600 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/56735 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: Robin, The tile is 1" representing a potential of 1 " water column pressure against the surface of the tile. As the water touches the tile an audible sucking sound occurs indicating a vacuum forms at the surface. A pressure greater than 1" w.c. psid is required to produce an audible sound...... Regarding the water olla temperature, the differential temperature cannot be reconciled using the math I learned in school.. of course, in Texas, there have been cases of finger and toe counting where paper was in short supply. Regards Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:27 PM Subject: Re: CF in everyday life > In reply to RC Macaulay's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:11:47 -0600: > Hi, > [snip] >>nightime temp of 70 degrees F. The water temperature inside the olla will >>fall to 70 degrees F as it "surrenders " heat to the clay wall of the >>olla. Comparing the differential potential for giving up heat to >>atmospheric conditions external to the olla is usually explained via >>evaporation due to the breeze. There is NO breeze in the desert. The >>lowering of the olla water temperature must be caused by what? > > It is caused by evaporation. Even without wind, the thin layer of air > against the wall of the vessel will be saturated with water vapour, which > makes it lighter than the surrounding air. That makes it rise up, and it > gets replaced by heavier dryer air, which in turn absorbs more moisture > from the vessel. > So this works, even in the complete absence of wind. However even on so > called wind still days, there are usually occasional small air movements, > which help out with the process. > >>The indians dont worry about it.. they just enjoy the fact. >> >>Now consider a 12" X 12" X 1" Mexican Saltillo tile , red clay with small >>amounts of volcanic and flint rock. After firing the tile, it is extremely >>dry. Keep the tile dry but allow it to completely cool and sprinkle a >>small amout of water on the tile and watch it " boil" as it is absorbed >>into the porous tile. Why does the water momentarily boil? > > This "boiling" is more likely to be air bubbling up through the water, as > the water soaks into the porous tile, and replaces the internal air. > [snip] > > Regards, > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > All SPAM goes in the trash unread. > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 08:42:29 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 iB3GfxKC021854; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:42:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3Gfqdf021775; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:41:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:41:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 07:46:56 -0700 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: Recent message from Physics Today References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203102845.04200d90@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56736 X-Loop: vortex-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 form letter that is sent in response to any such question. If the physicist who was interviewed responded, that would be important. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > Here is a hysterical message about Physics Today. Frankly I am surprised > Physics Today responded at all. Maybe they are feeling the heat? > > - Jed > > Below is the information submitted on Dec-2-104 17:5 EST > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > realname: Guy Richards > username: guycrich@aol.com > Telephone: 815-963-6340 > message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the > editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he > would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. > > Since I found this hurdle to be artificially high I wrote a letter to the > editor asking him the following question: "How many hot fusion experiments, > trials or prototypes in the last 55 years after spending hundreds of > billions of dollars and using the best minds in the scientific community > had even claimed to have an energy ratio of even 1/1?" > > The reply I received from the editor is as follows:"The editors and staff > of Physics Today do not have time to answer questions like these. Thank > you for your interest in Physics Today." > > This just seemed to sum up the attitude of the physics community and I > thought it worth sharing. Closed minds, bad for science. > > Regards, > > Guy Richards From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 09:20:16 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 iB3HJiKC032355; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:19:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3HJcFT032328; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:19:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:19:38 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002f01c4d95b$d988f7a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:16:37 -0800 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: <3bBoDC.A.C5H.oAKsBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56737 X-Loop: vortex-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 writes > I have done plenty of tritium counting using liquid scintillation counting. > I think it is more difficult to count water borne tritium by other means. > Scintillation couters can reliably and automatically discriminate between > tritium and say carbon 14. There is almost no penetrating power for 20 keV > beta particles, so counting 201 Tl without interference from tritium is > easy. Despite your expertise, your conclusion is debatable, depending on the sophistication of the detector... and perhaps depending on an operator with less extenisive background ;-) . See below. > BTW, my handbook shows 201 Tl decaying by electron capture (1.36 MeV) with > Hg and K shell x-rays of 135.28 keV and 167.40 keV. This stuff should > stand out like the sun on a clear day. Let me direct your attention to "Thallium online" http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/thallium.htm You will see that over 95% of the gammas in this situation would have a mean energy between 68-80 KeV but are coming from the transitory mercury isotope as the Tl life is so short. After an extended run, and with such a small amount used, and with a starting half-life of only 70+ hours, there is almost no Tl left to measure at the end of the run. As you say, the end point for tritium betas is around 20 KeV and nearly all would be absorbed in the water. The Radiation Yield (Y) from bremsstrahlung can be calculated using the following Y=(6x10^-4(ZT))/(1+6x10^-4(ZT)) Where Z is the atomic #; T is the Kinetic E. of the beta in MeV. for an average energy of 6keV you get: Y=(6x10^-4(4*.006)/(1+6x10^-4(4*.006)) =1.44x10^-5 Which is the fraction of the 6 keV converted to photons as the Beta particle slows down. ...or, the standard approximation is ZE/3000 where E is the maximum beta energy i.e. 0.0186 MeV. From Evan's "The Atomic Nucleus" ... This gives (for Be) 4 x 0.0186/3000 or 2.5 E-5, roughly twice the value above. Anyway if lots of tritium was being produced, a fair amount of the bremsstrahlung gamma photons of about 3-6 keV would be seen. This "should be" easily discriminated from the Tl emission, but not necessarily so - depending on the detector used and how the results were interpreted. That is why I asked the question. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 10:24:58 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 iB3IOguG001141; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:24:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3IOZd6001080; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:24:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:24:35 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:24:17 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Latest from Iwamura Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <8v9dmD.A.wQ.j9KsBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56738 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://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 10:59:45 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 iB3IxDKC030701; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:59:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3IxAtD030664; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:59:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:59:10 -0800 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: Recent message from Physics Today Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:58:19 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56739 X-Loop: vortex-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. It is written: message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the > editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he > would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected response. I would agree with Jed's position IF my point 2 was not in effect, but it is, the USPTO will not issue patents on this technology. If that were not so, this physicist would probably have his demonstrator already. It's interesting that Mike Carrell brings up Randy Mills, who perhaps will go down as one of the few people politically astute enough to fund a serious commercial research effort in this field. It's also instructive to see how he was torpedoed when things were really getting interesting, with a mad dash to the patent office to prevent the USPTO from giving him protection from the one easily commercialized byproduct of his research, the chemical "waste" from the reaction. It didn't seem to matter that he was willing to provide actual samples of the new chemicals to labs for testing; as was broadly demonstrated in the last general election reality has no relevance or bearing on the affairs of men. Jed writes: > Since I found this hurdle to be artificially high I wrote a letter to the > editor asking him the following question: "How many hot fusion experiments, > trials or prototypes in the last 55 years after spending hundreds of > billions of dollars and using the best minds in the scientific community > had even claimed to have an energy ratio of even 1/1?" Just to play devils advocate, I would answer this question in the same fashion as Wilbur and Orville Wright. I would point at the sky. See that white feathery thing zooming around up there? That's a bird, a functioning prototype of an airplane. See that big yellow thing next to it? That's a functioning prototype of a hot fusion reactor. Every once and a while a few of us here start banging away on possible natural CF reactions, such as the famous Kevran chicken experiment. There is a method to our madness, notwithstanding the infrared lunar radiation so beloved by Fred (grin). If the phenomena is real it's quite likely it will show up somewhere in nature. The famous natural fission pile in South Africa (?) is a good example. A nice natural example of CF would be a good stick for whomping the critics. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 11:10:06 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 iB3J9iKC002324; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:09:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3J9elr002296; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:09:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:09:40 -0800 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: CF in everyday life Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:09:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <000a01c4d954$7dcacee0$ac037841@xptower> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56740 X-Loop: vortex-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 RC, Here's some better possibilities for natural CF. http://www.rexresearch.com/goldfein/goldfein.htm http://www.rexresearch.com/kervran/kervran.htm No doubt others can add other resources to this short list. K. -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay [mailto:walhalla@cvtv.net] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CF in everyday life Robin, The tile is 1" representing a potential of 1 " water column pressure against the surface of the tile. As the water touches the tile an audible sucking sound occurs indicating a vacuum forms at the surface. A pressure greater than 1" w.c. psid is required to produce an audible sound...... Regarding the water olla temperature, the differential temperature cannot be reconciled using the math I learned in school.. of course, in Texas, there have been cases of finger and toe counting where paper was in short supply. Regards Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:27 PM Subject: Re: CF in everyday life > In reply to RC Macaulay's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:11:47 -0600: > Hi, > [snip] >>nightime temp of 70 degrees F. The water temperature inside the olla will >>fall to 70 degrees F as it "surrenders " heat to the clay wall of the >>olla. Comparing the differential potential for giving up heat to >>atmospheric conditions external to the olla is usually explained via >>evaporation due to the breeze. There is NO breeze in the desert. The >>lowering of the olla water temperature must be caused by what? > > It is caused by evaporation. Even without wind, the thin layer of air > against the wall of the vessel will be saturated with water vapour, which > makes it lighter than the surrounding air. That makes it rise up, and it > gets replaced by heavier dryer air, which in turn absorbs more moisture > from the vessel. > So this works, even in the complete absence of wind. However even on so > called wind still days, there are usually occasional small air movements, > which help out with the process. > >>The indians dont worry about it.. they just enjoy the fact. >> >>Now consider a 12" X 12" X 1" Mexican Saltillo tile , red clay with small >>amounts of volcanic and flint rock. After firing the tile, it is extremely >>dry. Keep the tile dry but allow it to completely cool and sprinkle a >>small amout of water on the tile and watch it " boil" as it is absorbed >>into the porous tile. Why does the water momentarily boil? > > This "boiling" is more likely to be air bubbling up through the water, as > the water soaks into the porous tile, and replaces the internal air. > [snip] > > Regards, > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > All SPAM goes in the trash unread. > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 11:51:23 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 iB3Jp8uG027741; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:51:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3Jp17c027651; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:51:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:51:01 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 10:57:47 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56741 X-Loop: vortex-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 9:16 AM 12/3/4, Jones Beene wrote: [snip] >Let me direct your attention to "Thallium online" >http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/thallium.htm > >You will see that over 95% of the gammas in this situation >would have a mean energy between 68-80 KeV but are coming >from the transitory mercury isotope as the Tl life is so >short. After an extended run, and with such a small amount >used, and with a starting half-life of only 70+ hours, there >is almost no Tl left to measure at the end of the run. OK, I see you were referring to the Hg gammas at 80 keV. Yes, these too have a good penetraing power and are readily discriminated from tritium betas. They too can be counted by ordinary geiger counters. Also, a 70 hour half-life is plenty good for a tracer for water drops. A test of whether a cell is vulnerable to water drop entrainment shouldn't take more than an hour. BTW, I see the referenced medical web site uses "KeV". The prefix "k" (small k) is the standard prefix for kilo-, even though "M" is the standard prefix for mega-. [snip] >...Anyway if lots of tritium was being >produced, a fair amount of the bremsstrahlung gamma photons >of about 3-6 keV would be seen. These gamms have almost no pentrating power in water. This is why organic solvents are used for liquid scintillation counting. The water is kept to a few percent in the counting vials. > >This "should be" easily discriminated from the Tl emission, >but not necessarily so - depending on the detector used and >how the results were interpreted. That is why I asked the >question. I think it would be nearly impossible to confuse tritium with either 201Tl or 201Hg. You don't even need a multi channel analyser. I think the important thing here is not to lose sight of the fact that Cirillo's and various other boil-off enthalpy data may be suspect due to the problem which P.J van Noorden so kindly pointed out. This is an important fact to consider when designing future boil-off experiments. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 11:52:28 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 iB3Jq9uG028457; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:52:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3Jq6jH028421; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:52:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:52:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:51:24 -0500 From: George Holz Subject: Re: Latest from Iwamura To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <00af01c4d971$785a1d40$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=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56742 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jed, > See: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf > > - Jed The results described in these papers show that the impurity migration idea is even more ridiculous (if that's possible) than before. The isotope of the starting element controls the isotope of the transmuted element. Explain that by contamination! Is there any way we can have this information forwarded to the DOE reviewers. Perhaps they may find that it is time to save their reputations by admitting the obvious. Duplicating the Iwamura experiment with additional starting elements seems like a reasonable suggestion to the DOE as a proposed experiment to improve our understanding of LENR. Perhaps some of the national labs have appropriate equipment that could be used by LENR researchers to speed further work. How can anyone deny the overwhelming theoretical and practical significance of this work! Thank you Jed for obtaining and posting this material. George Holz Varitronics Systems > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:00:37 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 iB3K0FKC018802; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:00:16 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3K04IN018725; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:00:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:00:04 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 11:06:54 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Dual electron catalysed fusion Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56743 X-Loop: vortex-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 a pair of deuterium hydrinos fuse, or if two electrons are involved in D + D catalysis, without the electrons "falling into the Coulomb well" and thus gaining kinetic energy, the resulting highly *de-energized* neutral nucleus resulting from multiple quantum wavefunction collapse would be momentarily free to migrate into heavy nucleii. Thus is obtained heavy nucleus LENR without any characteristic gamma or particle signatures. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:06:48 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 iB3K6SKC021396; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:06:28 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3K6OHN021364; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:06:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:06:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001901c4d973$8d0dba10$657ba8c0@peter> From: "P.J van Noorden" To: References: Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:06:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56744 X-Loop: vortex-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 Horace The condenser was made out of glass and had a length of 1.5 meter and was positioned vertically. It was cooled by water which flowed around the glass condenser. Best Regards Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" To: Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:23 AM Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper > At 12:06 PM 12/2/4, Jones Beene wrote: > >Horace, you seem to be saying that the condenser was > >air-cooled instead of water-cooled. Of course this would > >introduce major errors, and it still doesn't address the > >issue of tritium. > > Actually, there is no mention of a condenser in the Cirillio paper. The > standard method of doing boiloff calorimetry is to measure the weight of > water boiled off (that disappears) and then multply by the energy required > to boil that water (which explicitly *is* the method used by Cirillo.) It > appears the plastic cylinder with pyrex lid located above the cell does the > condensing. There is apparently no intent to use the condensation heat > (i.e. mass flow calorimetry on the secondary coil) as a secondary > calorimetric means. Cirillo's method is definitely susceptable to > entrained water droplets. > > I would assume P.J van Noorden (he can clue us in) used an ordinary > laboratory condenser. Such condensers are typically made of glass and used > in either straight through mode or reflux mode. In straight through mode > the steam comes in through one (elevated) end and water comes out the > other. In reflux mode the condenser is usually vertical and steam is > admitted in at the bottom and water comes out the bottom into an attached > flask. Unless you are trying to do dual calorimetry, it doesn't matter how > the condenser is cooled, by gas, by water, or by ice. The heat measurment > is via the mass of water lost in the reactor. > > Boiloff calorimeters are typically calibrated using boil-off runs using > calibration resistors for heat and cool-off runs to determine the > calorimeter constant for ambient losses. P.J van Noorden certianly makes > it clear that such calibration runs may be invalid becuase ultrasound or > other turbulence creates entraind droplets, and tthe calibration resistor > will not cause droplet entrainment like a source of ultrasound does. One > solution to this problem is to include an ultrasound device in at least one > clibration run to test whatever water drop barrier is used. It would not > be possible to calibrate the drop formation rate itself, so some kind of > drop barrier would have to be utilized. > > These principles have ramifications *way* beyond the Cirillo paper. They > are fundamental to all boiloff calorimetry. > > > > > >Only if it had been water cooled could all the heat be > >accounted for, and that is why I assumed it was water cooled > >and that the thallium was turning up in the second circuit. > > > >> This is a very important comment. It means that boiloff > >calorimetry can be very suspect without proper controls. > > > >Yes, proper controls like a second circuit with dual > >calorimetry. > > > You need to account for more than just the enthalpy of condensation. > > > > > >> A radioactive tracer would be good in labs equipped to > >handle them. > > > >Not unless the possibility of tritium can be eliminated, > > > I have done plenty of tritium counting using liquid scintillation counting. > I think it is more difficult to count water borne tritium by other means. > Scintillation couters can reliably and automatically discriminate between > tritium and say carbon 14. There is almost no penetrating power for 20 keV > beta particles, so counting 201 Tl without interference from tritium is > easy. > > Technetium counting and even imaging is readily done using 180 degrees > opposed scintillation couters to track positron annihilation photon pairs. > I had this procedure done to image my heart. I was signifcantly > radioactive for a day. It was a bit scary to turn on my geiger counter and > hear it go wild near me. > > > >or > >unless your tracer has a far more energetic signature than > >tritium. Thallium is just too close IMHO. > > > >After all, your are doing cold fusion. Cold fusion often > >produces tritium. Isn't the cross-connection obvious? BTW > >even though tritium "normally" has a significant spread of > >energy, can we be sure that tritium produced via CF is not > >closer to being mono-energetic? > > > What do you mean significant spread? The peak is fairly confined. > > BTW, my handbook shows 201 Tl decaying by electron capture (1.36 MeV) with > Hg and K shell x-rays of 135.28 keV and 167.40 keV. This stuff should > stand out like the sun on a clear day. > > > At 4:14 PM 12/2/4, P.J van Noorden wrote: > >Hello > >We used 201 Thallium in our nuclear medicine department > >to study the perfusion of the heart.The energy emission of radioactive > >thallium is about 80 eV. > >Now we have a technetium based radiopharmacon which gives a better image > >quality.( 140eV) > > > I don't see how 80 keV enters into the picture. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:11:19 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 iB3KB0uG001929; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:11:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KAxSJ001922; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:10:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:10:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B0BA98.6AA3A2E3@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 11:57:24 -0700 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: Latest from Iwamura References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> <00af01c4d971$785a1d40$6401a8c0@geh> 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/56745 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: NRL is now attempting to duplicate this work. This program was undertaken well before the DoE review and apparently was unknown to the reviewers. If, as expected, they replicate the Iwamura claims, the ball game will be over. Ed George Holz wrote: > Hi Jed, > > > See: > > > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf > > > > - Jed > > The results described in these papers show that the > impurity migration idea is even more ridiculous (if that's possible) > than before. The isotope of the starting element controls the > isotope of the transmuted element. Explain that by contamination! > > Is there any way we can have this information forwarded to the > DOE reviewers. Perhaps they may find that it is time to save > their reputations by admitting the obvious. > Duplicating the Iwamura experiment with additional starting elements > seems like a reasonable suggestion to the DOE as a proposed > experiment to improve our understanding of LENR. Perhaps some of the > national labs have appropriate equipment that could be used > by LENR researchers to speed further work. How can anyone deny the > overwhelming theoretical and practical significance of this work! > > Thank you Jed for obtaining and posting this material. > > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:17:21 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 iB3KH4uG003941; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:17:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KH31Q003917; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:17:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:17:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041253201627610@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, December 03, 2004 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:16:27 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d85113af02d9f1ea36d6a08fb95b5e178b9072ae4777b98cc8350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.54.88 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56746 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: 12/3/2004 12:11:50 PM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, December 03, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 3 Dec 04 Washington, DC 1. COLD, COLD FUSION: SO AFTER 15 YEARS, WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED? We've learned that DOE should stop playing games with the Federal Advisory Committee Act while shrouding its review in secrecy http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn091704.cfm. Beyond that, we haven't learned much. The report released this week is an attempt to summarize individual comments from 18 unidentified reviewers. The conclusions at the end of the report were: 1) "significant progress has been made in sophistication of calorimeters," and 2)"conclusions reached by reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 review." That's it? After 15 years we've got better calorimeters? The 1989 review called for no more cold fusion research. Good advice. Proponents now prefer "low energy nuclear reactions," but "no more" is still good advice. 2. PROLIFERATION: IRAN IS STILL MAKING NUCLEAR-WEAPONS HEADLINES. The question is: is Iran making nuclear weapons? Nobody seems to know. Last week, WN reported that Iran said it would continue to operate 20 uranium enrichment centrifuges for peaceful research, violating a deal it had just made with European nations. The next day Iran flip-flopped again agreeing to give up the civilian centrifuges. Citing new intelligence, the International Atomic Energy Agency is now seeking access to two military locations to look for evidence of nuclear weapons development, leading to speculation that the civilian flip-flops had been a diversion. 3. PRAYER STUDY: COLUMBIA PROFESSOR REMOVES HIS NAME FROM PAPER. We have been tracking the sordid story of the Columbia prayer study for three years http://www.aps.org/WN/WN01/wn100501.cfm . It claimed that women for whom total strangers prayed were twice as likely to become pregnant from in-vitro fertilization as others; it was published in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine. At the time we were unaware of the background of the study, but knew it had to be wrong; the first assumption of science is that events result from natural causes. The lead author, Rugerio Lobo, who at the time was Chair of Obstetrics, now says he had no role in the study. The author who set up the study is doing five years for fraud in a separate case, and his partner hanged himself in jail. Another author left Columbia and isn't talking. The Journal has never acknowledged any responsibility, and after withdrawing the paper for "scrutiny," has put it back on the web. Nor has the Journal published letters critical of the study. Columbia has never acknowledged any responsibility. All of this has come out due to the persistence of Bruce Flamm, MD. The science community should flatly refuse all proposals or papers that invoke any supernatural explanation for physical phenomena. 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 Dec 3 12:19:55 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 iB3KJNKC025145; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:19:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KJJZU025084; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:19:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:19:19 -0800 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: Latest from Iwamura Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:19:05 -0600 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: 2004.12.3.2 Resent-Message-ID: <5rUM1.A.yHG.FpMsBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56747 X-Loop: vortex-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: Edmund Storms > NRL is now attempting to duplicate this work. This program was > undertaken well before the DoE review and apparently was unknown > to the reviewers. If, as expected, they replicate the Iwamura > claims, the ball game will be over. > >Ed Hello Ed, Best guestamate as to when NRL will complete & publish their findings? Assuming the findings are confirmed and the "ball game" IS over, what is likely to happen next? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com George Holz wrote: > Hi Jed, > > > See: > > > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf > > > > - Jed > > The results described in these papers show that the > impurity migration idea is even more ridiculous (if that's possible) > than before. The isotope of the starting element controls the > isotope of the transmuted element. Explain that by contamination! > > Is there any way we can have this information forwarded to the > DOE reviewers. Perhaps they may find that it is time to save > their reputations by admitting the obvious. > Duplicating the Iwamura experiment with additional starting elements > seems like a reasonable suggestion to the DOE as a proposed > experiment to improve our understanding of LENR. Perhaps some of the > national labs have appropriate equipment that could be used > by LENR researchers to speed further work. How can anyone deny the > overwhelming theoretical and practical significance of this work! > > Thank you Jed for obtaining and posting this material. > > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:34:44 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 iB3KYOKC030568; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:34:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KYI97030533; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:34:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:34:18 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006101c4d977$0d23c480$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:31:20 -0800 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: <5DunAD.A.9cH.J3MsBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56748 X-Loop: vortex-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, > >...Anyway if lots of tritium was being > >produced, a fair amount of the bremsstrahlung gamma photons > >of about 3-6 keV would be seen. > These gamms have almost no pentrating power in water. This is why organic > solvents are used for liquid scintillation counting. The water is kept to > a few percent in the counting vials. First, I understand the point about boil-off calorimetry, but this is hardly news. People have been issuing similar warnings for some time. However, once again I think you may be missing the obvious. IF (big if) tritium were being produced, then you would not necessarily be comparing Tl 80 keV gammas against almost undetectable tritium gammas. This is because some of the tritium begins to outgas immediately and then can shed 20 keV radiation directly into the monitor, whereas all of the Tl (which is still immobilized in the water) would have its gamma output attenuated. So you see, to really get down to brass tacks one needs to know how these reading were taken and what the raw data showed, or else assume (as I will now do) that the experimenter knew that tritium "could" possibly be present and took all the necessary precautions to eliminate any possibility of a tritium signal. I see from the post just now from Peter that his condenser was water cooled, but I must assume that the Tl did not cross the pyrex glass boundary or else he would have mentioned it specifically. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:42:51 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 iB3KgQuG013362; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KgOHv013341; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041203152951.02339d18@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:32:29 -0500 To: aki@ix.netcom.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, December 03, 2004 In-Reply-To: <410-220041253201627610@ix.netcom.com> References: <410-220041253201627610@ix.netcom.com> 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/56749 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 03:16 PM 12/3/2004, you wrote: > [Original Message] > From: What's New > > To: Akira Kawasaki > Date: 12/3/2004 12:11:50 PM > Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, December 03, 2004 > > WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 3 Dec 04 Washington, DC > > 1. COLD, COLD FUSION: SO AFTER 15 YEARS, WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED? > We've learned that DOE should stop playing games with the Federal > Advisory Committee Act while shrouding its review in secrecy > http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn091704.cfm. Beyond that, we haven't > learned much. The report released this week is an attempt to > summarize individual comments from 18 unidentified reviewers. > The conclusions at the end of the report were: 1) "significant > progress has been made in sophistication of calorimeters," and > 2)"conclusions reached by reviewers today are similar to those > found in the 1989 review." That's it? After 15 years we've got > better calorimeters? The 1989 review called for no more cold > fusion research. Good advice. Proponents now prefer "low energy > nuclear reactions," but "no more" is still good advice. Thanks, Akira. Not much a summary. Better excerpts and summary at the COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Latest links to, and information from, the just-issued DOE Report, and to this week's Nature, Salt Lake City, and New York Times articles about it. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:42:51 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 iB3KgTuG013455; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KgRxJ013423; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:42:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:31:48 -0500 To: knagel@gis.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: RE: Recent message from Physics Today In-Reply-To: References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> 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/56750 X-Loop: vortex-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 01:58 PM 12/3/2004, you wrote: >Hi. > >It is written: > message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the > > editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he > > would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research > > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. > >This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. >Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected >response. So true. Note that this was achieved at, and written up for, ICCF-10. The JET Thermal Demonstration with the phusor showed more than 270% excess heat over a week. JET Thermal Products URL for Public Open-House Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) Demonstration at MIT http://world.std.com/~mica/jeticcf10demo.html BTW, this ICCF10 paper, and other associated with it, are not even listed at the censored LENR/cold fusion site. [The reason(s) that the usual suspects censor cold fusion news has occasionally in the past, and no doubt again soon will, become clearer.] Dr. Mitchell Swartz ================================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Latest links to, and excerpt information from, the just-issued DOE Report, to this week's Nature, Salt Lake City, and New York Times articles about it, (and to info re: Dr. Mallove's cold case) have been updated. Links are also present to references in cold fusion which are uncensored (unlike the 'CF/LENR' site), and to robust cold fusion systems, including the JTP Phusor. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 12:59:47 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 iB3KxJuG020704; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:59:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3KxH7e020682; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:59:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:59:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B0C5EE.35EFCF50@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 12:45:45 -0700 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: Latest from Iwamura References: 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/56751 X-Loop: vortex-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: > >From: Edmund Storms > > > NRL is now attempting to duplicate this work. This program was > > undertaken well before the DoE review and apparently was unknown > > to the reviewers. If, as expected, they replicate the Iwamura > > claims, the ball game will be over. > > > >Ed > > Hello Ed, > > Best guestamate as to when NRL will complete & publish their findings? I have no way of knowing this. I guess we are looking at about 6 months. They want to be very sure of the results. > > > Assuming the findings are confirmed and the "ball game" IS over, what is > likely to happen next? The flood gates open and people in the CF field become heroes and are asked to help develop the field. Park becomes a "believer" and criticizes the DoE for being so slow. Hell might even freeze over. Ed > > > Regards, > > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > > George Holz wrote: > > > Hi Jed, > > > > > See: > > > > > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf > > > > > > - Jed > > > > The results described in these papers show that the > > impurity migration idea is even more ridiculous (if that's possible) > > than before. The isotope of the starting element controls the > > isotope of the transmuted element. Explain that by contamination! > > > > Is there any way we can have this information forwarded to the > > DOE reviewers. Perhaps they may find that it is time to save > > their reputations by admitting the obvious. > > Duplicating the Iwamura experiment with additional starting elements > > seems like a reasonable suggestion to the DOE as a proposed > > experiment to improve our understanding of LENR. Perhaps some of the > > national labs have appropriate equipment that could be used > > by LENR researchers to speed further work. How can anyone deny the > > overwhelming theoretical and practical significance of this work! > > > > Thank you Jed for obtaining and posting this material. > > > > George Holz > > Varitronics Systems > > > > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:18:14 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 iB3LHaKC013123; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:17:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3LHXeV013105; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:17:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:17:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:04:06 -0700 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: Recent message from Physics Today References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> 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/56752 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > At 01:58 PM 12/3/2004, you wrote: > >Hi. > > > >It is written: > > message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the > > > editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he > > > would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research > > > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > > > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > > > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. > > > >This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. > >Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected > >response. > > So true. Note that this was achieved at, and written up for, ICCF-10. > The JET Thermal Demonstration with the phusor showed more than 270% excess > heat over a week. > JET Thermal Products URL for Public Open-House Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) > Demonstration at MIT http://world.std.com/~mica/jeticcf10demo.html > > BTW, this ICCF10 paper, and other associated with it, are not even > listed at the censored LENR/cold fusion site. > [The reason(s) that the usual suspects censor cold fusion news > has occasionally in the past, and no doubt again soon will, become clearer.] For the general reader, Dr Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to submit his paper in a form that Jed can read. He has failed to do this, preferring instead to complain about censorship. As any one who reads LENR can plainly see, we are very open to publishing papers from all sources. Ed > > > Dr. Mitchell Swartz > > ================================================================== > > The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site > http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html > > Latest links to, and excerpt information from, the just-issued DOE Report, > to this week's Nature, Salt Lake City, and New York Times articles > about it, > (and to info re: Dr. Mallove's cold case) have been updated. > Links are also present to references in cold fusion which are uncensored > (unlike the 'CF/LENR' site), > and to robust cold fusion systems, including the JTP Phusor. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 13:54:41 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 iB3LsDuG025406; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:54:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3Lrx5n025118; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:53:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:53:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041203162952.02230d00@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:45:32 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Recent message from Physics Today In-Reply-To: <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> 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/56754 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > > >For the general reader, Dr Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to >submit >his paper in a form that Jed can read. He has failed to do this, preferring >instead to complain about censorship. As any one who reads LENR can >plainly see, >we are very open to publishing papers from all sources. > >Ed Dear Edmund [and to any reader of Ed Storms disingenuous comments]: Let's address your statements. First, the titles to our three papers were removed by you because you personally desired that (as is your right, as has been stated before). We have been informed by two people to whom you stated that you did this censorship of papers titles because of reasons that will be addressed in the proper forum. And so, the titles, Edmund, the titles were removed by you (as were others who presented at ICCF10) because you wanted to -- as is your right. Corroborating that, Ed, you were not even mentioned in the thread, so you must be feeling guilty. It is a little late for you to fabricate a new reason, or for you to whine about an accurate description made so by your precise actions. BTW, after the last time your censored site was brought up here in this forum, two people contacted me supporting what is now our developing mutual observation of the cf/lenr censorship (which again is entirely your right). Second, regarding the papers and your inaccurate missive-prose, the papers involved were given many times, including in hand to Jed, and in more than one format. Dr. Mitchell Swartz ================================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Latest links to, and excerpt information from, the just-issued DOE Report, to this week's Nature, Salt Lake City, and New York Times articles about it, (and to info re: Dr. Mallove's cold case) have been updated. Links are also present to references in cold fusion which are uncensored (unlike the 'CF/LENR' site), and to robust cold fusion systems, including the JTP Phusor. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:01:09 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 iB3M0quG031114; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:01:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3M0oVh031067; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:00:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:00:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203165411.0420cc20@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:00:30 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Papers by M. Swartz In-Reply-To: <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> 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/56755 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >For the general reader, Dr Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to >submit >his paper in a form that Jed can read. He has failed to do this, preferring >instead to complain about censorship. Specifically, Swartz should upload his paper to his own web site and then give me the URL. I will copy it. Easy-peasy! Also, Swartz should respond to my form letter asking permission to upload his ICCF-9 paper. I cannot upload any of the ICCF-9 papers without the author's permission, per my agreement with Tsinghua U. Nowadays, PowerPoint presentations and manuscripts in Microsoft Word format are often too large to be sent as e-mail attachments. For the last several months I have successfully been sending them back and forth to authors by uploading them to web pages. It is a convenient technique. I store all of the chapters of the book I am writing online, so that my Dragon Lady editor can view them any time, and sharpen her claws on my prose. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 14:28:01 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 iB3MRluG012345; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:27:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3MRkTj012325; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:27:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:27:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203171315.04211150@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:27:36 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Recent message from Physics Today In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041203162952.02230d00@pop.theworld.com> References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203162952.02230d00@pop.theworld.com> 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/56756 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Let's address your statements. > First, the titles to our three papers were removed by you because you > personally desired that >(as is your right, as has been stated before). I haven't the SLIGHTEST idea what this is all about, or which titles Swartz thinks were removed, or where he thinks they were removed from. I do all of the clerical maintenance of the LENR-CANR EndNote database. I did not remove any ICCF-10 papers. Not by Swartz, and not by anyone else, period. I have never removed any other real paper, for that matter. I have occasional removed duplicate entries, and accidental, incomplete, and mistaken entries (with the wrong author, etc). A few times I deleted papers that authors told me were never finished or published, yet somehow ended up being listed in the database. I am sure there are many papers missing from the database, because I am not omniscient. Many authors have been upset to find their papers are not included. Apparently they think I have ESP. Whatever the heck Swartz is talking about here, and whatever imaginary slight he suffers from, he should let bygones be bygones. He should give us the information for the EndNote database and/or the URL to the papers in his web page that he wants us to copy and upload. If he will do that, we will add these papers to our library, unless they have nothing remotely to do with cold fusion. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 16:07:15 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 iB406qKC004780; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:06:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB406n7W004755; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:06:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:06:49 -0800 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: Recent message from Physics Today Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:06:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203165030.04200030@pop.mindspring.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56757 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jed. Yes, I presumed you agreed with the author, sorry if that was not the case. My mistake. So do you think it is an unreasonable request for a functioning commercial prototype? K. -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:JedRothwell@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 4:53 PM To: knagel@gis.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Recent message from Physics Today Keith Nagel wrote: > > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. > >This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. >Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected >response. What did I say is unreasonable? I was just forwarding the message. I did not write it. It was from Guy Richards. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 16:30:40 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 iB3N06Lw011508; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 15:08:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB3LrF0s027151; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:53:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:53:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203165030.04200030@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:52:36 -0500 To: , From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: Recent message from Physics Today In-Reply-To: References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <7kKykD.A.EoG.IBOsBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56753 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion > > community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% > > repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. > >This is exactly my point 1 from my last post. Jed says it is unreasonable. >Yet with 15 years and 1000's of papers it's hardly an unexpected >response. What did I say is unreasonable? I was just forwarding the message. I did not write it. It was from Guy Richards. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 18:33:55 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 iB42XYKC019329; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:33:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB42XVCI019302; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:33:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:33:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00bf01c4d9a9$3b4b2f60$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Latest from Iwamura Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 18:30:33 -0800 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/56758 X-Loop: vortex-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 most amazing "starting point" about this paper to me, and maybe it is the ending point for Iwarmura since he emphasizes it so often but refuses the temptation to go further (even at ground "Zero" it's called job-security)... is the nuclear transmutations of Ba into Sm.... but some of us (who have less job security to worry about) can go much further out on a limb. "When mass-137-enriched Ba (monoisotopic Ba) was applied, the mass distribution of Sm that we obtained depended on the starting isotopic distribution of Ba." ... and the unsaid thread of this work... and the "potential" generalization which appears here and elsewhere is perhaps not simply an anomalous "transmutation" but that these high Z transmutations occur at ridiculously low energy and not simply as a small step-wise change, such as a beta decay for instance. Instead we have a MASSIVE and apparent one-step change of 12 nucleons !!!... (excuse the typo-hyperbole, but can we emphasize the importance of this finding enough?) IOW *carbon* again appears... like the "smile of the Cheshire cat"... peering through from another dimension. And, going even further, perhaps the waiting-to-be-discovered 'sine qua non' of this work and others similar to it... is not just the recurrence of the "carbon unit" but instead it is the more generic *triad accumulation of operative units*. Which is to say that the operative methodology is not just adding deuterons, or adding carbon but... just as with quarks (at the next lower scale), the nucleons here are following suit, becoming a step-up in the mirrored self-symmetry of quantum reality. ERGO it is the "triad of operative units" which could be the ultimate secret to high Z transmutaion, not to mention other peculiarities of LENR. Jones BTW is there a Kanji equivalent to "we've gotta protect our phoney-baloney jobs" and wouldn't Mel Brooks be a hoot running the Zero lab with Cleavon Little in charge of the "Kan" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 19:44:08 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 iB43hvCe009243; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:43:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB43htCp009227; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:43:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 19:43:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 22:40:45 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Bursts of power. In-reply-to: <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56759 X-Loop: vortex-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 of the criticisms of the DOE panel was that the cells did not provide continuous excess power over the entire time span of an experiment. I think this is natural trait of CF systems, but it is not without value as the DOE panel implies. If one can learn to predict when a cell will produce bursts of power, the cell is potentially a useful source of power. Harry Veeder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 20:40:36 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 iB44eICe021798; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:40:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB44eGO5021792; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:40:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:40:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B13204.8ECA4D4@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:34:03 -0700 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: Bursts of power. References: 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/56760 X-Loop: vortex-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 one of many statements made by the reviewers that is incomplete and based on confusion. The fact is that when solid palladium is used as the cathode, time is required for it to acquire the required high D/Pd ratio and time is required for the active material to plate on the surface. If this active surface is plated before it is put in the calorimeter and Pt or another inert metal is used as the substrate, the required time is much shorter. Cathodes once activated continue to produce energy until the surface has been covered by material dissolved from the anode. An electrolytic system is dynamic and can not be expected to perform immediately and for a long time. The method used by Arata is much more stable and long-lived, as are the ion bombardment methods. Ed Harry Veeder wrote: > One of the criticisms of the DOE panel was that the cells did > not provide continuous excess power over the entire time span > of an experiment. > > I think this is natural trait of CF systems, but it is not > without value as the DOE panel implies. > > If one can learn to predict when a cell will produce > bursts of power, the cell is potentially a useful source > of power. > > Harry Veeder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 21:43:54 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 iB45hiWv010697; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB45hgp8010682; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:42 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 20:50:57 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56761 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:31 PM 12/3/4, Jones Beene wrote: >I see from the post just now from Peter that his condenser >was water cooled, but I must assume that the Tl did not >cross the pyrex glass boundary or else he would have >mentioned it specifically. The was no mention of the Tl showng up in the cooling water, ie. secondary coil. I have assumed the Tl showed up in the distillate, since any other possibility seems to me to be unlikely in the extreme. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 21:44:04 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 iB45htPV003261; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:55 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB45hpHl003227; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:43:51 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 20:51:00 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Latest from Iwamura Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56762 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:45 PM 12/3/4, Edmund Storms wrote: >The flood gates open and people in the CF field become heroes and are asked >to help develop the field. Park becomes a "believer" and criticizes the >DoE for being so slow. If that ever happens I'll send Park a painting of a pig flying over a dancing tortus. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 3 23:45:08 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 iB47j4oR032180; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 23:45:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB47j2uk032161; Fri, 3 Dec 2004 23:45:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 23:45:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:41:40 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Recent message from Physics Today In-reply-to: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56763 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Does anyone know which issue of Physics Today is being quoted? Harry on 12/3/04 9:46 AM, Edmund Storms at storms2@ix.netcom.com wrote: > This is a form letter that is sent in response to any such question. If the > physicist who > was interviewed responded, that would be important. > > Ed > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> Here is a hysterical message about Physics Today. Frankly I am surprised >> Physics Today responded at all. Maybe they are feeling the heat? >> >> - Jed >> >> Below is the information submitted on Dec-2-104 17:5 EST >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ----------- >> >> realname: Guy Richards >> username: guycrich@aol.com >> Telephone: 815-963-6340 >> message: I read a recent editorial in "Physics Today" journal where the >> editor was interviewing a physicist of some repute on what criteria he >> would accept the LENR/cold fusion phenomenon as worthy of further research >> and DOE funding. The physicist replied that if the LENR/cold fusion >> community could demonstrate an input/output energy ratio of 1/10, 100% >> repeatability and economic feasibility he would recommend going ahead. >> >> Since I found this hurdle to be artificially high I wrote a letter to the >> editor asking him the following question: "How many hot fusion experiments, >> trials or prototypes in the last 55 years after spending hundreds of >> billions of dollars and using the best minds in the scientific community >> had even claimed to have an energy ratio of even 1/1?" >> >> The reply I received from the editor is as follows:"The editors and staff >> of Physics Today do not have time to answer questions like these. Thank >> you for your interest in Physics Today." >> >> This just seemed to sum up the attitude of the physics community and I >> thought it worth sharing. Closed minds, bad for science. >> >> Regards, >> >> Guy Richards > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 00:09:03 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 iB4890jX013730; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:09:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB488tk6013701; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:08:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:08:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:05:14 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Is charge always conserved? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56764 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: Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not conserved in all contexts. Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'. Harry Veeder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 00:29:27 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 iB48TH4k009465; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:29:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB48TFH4009428; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:29:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:29:15 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 23:36:03 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: <5MS1K.A.NTC.aVXsBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56765 X-Loop: vortex-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 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, >perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not >conserved in all contexts. > >Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'. There are various concepts in which charge might not be conserved. Here is an example I posted here a while back that indicates apparent charge moving in a circle may vary depending the angle of observation. Planar Circular Currents BACKGROUND AND ASSUMPTIONS It is well known that special relativity predicts changes in the observed field of a particle due to the flattening of the field in the direction of motion. This flattening is due to application of the Lorentz contraction due to relative motion. This relativistic effect of flattening the apparent field is called the "pancaking" of the Coulombic field. It is the intent here to discuss the effects of pancaking with respect to planar circular direct currents. On p.492 of *The Electromagnetic Field*, Albert Shadowitz provides the equation for relativistic (Coulombic) field pancaking as: E = Q/(4 Pi e0 r^2) (1 - (v^2/c^2))/(1 - (v^2/c^2) sin^2 theta)^(3/2) If we let b = v^2/c^2 then we can interpret apparent charge Q' to be: Q' = Q (1 - b)/(1 - b sin^2 theta)^(3/2) which can be interpreted to mean apparent charge is reduced to observers in line with the charge velocity vector and increased as the viewing angle is increased. NOTE - it is not standard physics to interpret pancaking as a change in apparent charge (standard relativity assumes charge is invariant with velocity) but rather a change in observed field strength, but we should be able to interpret the pancaking equation for Q' either way. Consider the Bohr model of the atom where the electrons whiz around a nucleus. Specific electrons present some degree of pancaking from any angle viewed. In some directions apparent charge is increased and some directions decreased. In a non-magnetic medium, the polar orientation of atom orbitals is mixed in a uniform way due to the orientation of atoms being mixed in a uniform way. Upon integration over 3D polar coordinates, one finds that the average net charge change, according to the pancaking equation, for randomly oriented atoms and orbitals, is zero. However, the conditions examined here differ from those of an atom not in the presence of ambient electronmagnetic fields, as do the resulting forces. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIVISTIC PANCAKING EFFECT If some set of orbitals are aligned, say by a magnetic field, or if we have the case of a planar circular current in a conductor, a neutral medium, then the average apparent charge (as viewed from a long enough distance to make the circle diameter insignificant) does not net out to zero, except at a specific viewing angle. As viewed within the plane, pancaking reduces the apparent charge of charges in motion, and increases the apparent charge of charges in circular motion as viewed from the poles of the circular motion. The net apparent charge of a charge moving in a small circle relative to the distance of the viewer comes from integrating to find the average value of: k(theta,v) = (1 - b)/(1 - b sin^2 theta)^(3/2) for theta = 0 to 2Pi, where b = v^2/c^2, and then subtracting the average value from one to obtain the net charge change factor K(v), because if v = 0 then the observed (apparent) charge Q' is the same as the charge Q: Q' = Q * 1 If the average value of k(theta,v) is non-zero, when integrated over all angles theta, for v not 0, then an average apparent net charge exists when v not 0. The average value f_avg of any function f(x) is given by: f_avg(x) = 1/(b - a) [integral from a to b][ f(x) dx ] so the value of net charge change factor K(v) = 1 - [average over theta of k(theta,v)] is given by: K(v) = 1 - 1/(2 Pi - 0) [integral from 0 to 2 Pi][ k(theta) d theta ] which requires solving an elliptic integral of the second kind, and yields a net charge: Q_net = K(v) Q where K(v) can be approximately based on the average speed of the electrons. Note that in the 3D situation the averaging integral equivalent to the above would be [Integral from 0 to Pi] [k(theta) sin(theta) d theta] because it is necessary to average over theta with a weight of sin(theta) to account for the surface area involved. This integral evaluates to one, thus K(v) evaluates to zero. However, in the planar version, K(v) does not average to zero. NUMERICAL APPROXIMATION OF THE PANCAKING EFFECT The average values k_avg(v) of k(theta,v) for random planar orientations as viewed from the plane were directly calculated by computer program, thus producing the incremental force factor: K(v) = 1 - k_avg(v) over a complete circle, for theta = 0 to 2 Pi. Results for various values of v/c are shown in Table 1: v/c K(v) .999999 0.363371045179493 .5 6.57845423323069D-02 .1 2.50470713873419D-03 .01 2.5000468772296D-05 .001 2.50000048662713D-07 .0001 2.50000153911856D-09 Table 1 - Direct numerical estimation of K(v) These factors indicate the possibility of huge apparent net charges, especially from electrons moving at the speed of k shell electrons (if such could be made to move in a planar orbit.). The innermost electrons of Fe have an ionization potential of 9277.69 eV, and Ni has 10775.40 eV. Using half the ionization potential of Ni as electron kinetic energy we obtain: 1/2 m_e v^2 = (10775.4 eV)/2 = 8.63 J v = 4.35x10^7 m/s v = 0.145 c so more than 0.25 percent of the total charge for such electrons would appear as net apparent positive charge in the atom, if a sufficiently strong magnetic field could be applied so as to make K shell orbitals nearly flat (an astronomical magnitude magnetic field to be sure!) ANALYTICAL SOLUTION USING MATHEMATICA In order to obtain an exact form of the integral, Mathematica was used to integrate the pancake function obtaining a finite integral. Unfortunately a complete elliptic integral of the second kind appears in the solution. The average value f_avg of any function f(x) is given by: f_avg = 1/(b - a) [integral from a to b][ f(x) dx ] so the value of net charge change factor K_incr(v) = 1 - k_avg is given by: K_incr(v) = 1 - 1/(2 Pi - 0) [integral from 0 to 2 Pi][ k(theta) d theta ] Mathematica says: [integral from 0 to 2 Pi] [ (1 - b sin^2 theta)^(-3/2) d theta] is given by: -(EllipticE[x, b]/(-1 + b)) + (b*Sin[2*x])/(Sqrt[2]*(-1 + b)* Sqrt[2 - b + b*Cos[2*x]]) which, when evaluated from 0 to 2 Pi, is -4(EllipticE[b])/(b-1) where EllipticE[b] is a complete elliptic integral of the second kind. So: K(v) = 1 - 1/(2 Pi - 0) [integral from 0 to 2 Pi][ k(theta) d theta ] = 1 - 1/(2 Pi) (1-b) [integral from 0 to 2 Pi] [ (1 - b sin^2 theta)^(-3/2) d theta] = 1 - 1/(2 Pi) (1-b) (-4(EllipticE[b])/(b-1)) = 1 - 4/(2 Pi) EllipticE[b] K(v) = 1 - 2 Pi EllipticE[v^2/c^2] or more appropriately: K(v) = 1 - 2 Pi EllipticE[v^2/c^2] Through use of Mathematica, the following confirming values of K(v) were obtained: Mathematica evaluation of K(v) = v/c K(v) 1 - 2 EllipticE[(v/c)^2]/Pi .999999 0.363371045179493 0.363375 .5 6.57845423323069D-02 0.0657845 .1 2.50470713873419D-03 0.00250471 .01 2.5000468772296D-05 0.0000250005 .001 2.50000048662713D-07 2.5e-7 .0001 2.50000153911856D-09 2.5e-9 Table 2 Thus it appears there is some evidence for a predicted net apparent charge, when matter is viewed in a plane containing the matter and normal to the magnetic field, in both neutral condensed matter and plasmas, or even magnetron chambers, if a sufficient magnetic field is present. The fact that apparent charge does not manifest in condensed matter might be construed to confirm the QM view that the "electron is everywhere" in the wave function, or that it has no specific location until sampled. There is thus no radiation from atoms because the orbital electrons do not actually "move." Plasma electrons are not so constrained by the QM boundaries as electrons in atoms though. The upper bound on the possible effect is less, due to lower velocities, but still significant. It should be noted that this speculation so far ignores the effects of charge acceleration and general relativity effects. Now, to evaluate the integral giving k(b) for b = (v/c)^2, b small. Given the first few terms of EllipticE: EllipticE[b] = Pi/2 - (Pi b^2)/8 - (3 Pi b^2)/128 + ... we can evaluate the integral giving k(b) for b = (v/c)^2, b small: K(v) = 1 - 2 EllipticE[b]/Pi = 1 - 2 {1/2 - b/8 - 3 b^2/128} K(v) = b/4 + (3/64) (b^2) which is pretty good, and for many things K(v) = b/4 works OK too, or the series K(v) = (1/4) b + (3/64) (b^2) + (5/256) (b^3) + (175/16384) (b^4) + ... can be used to compute the degree of accuracy desired. It is interesting though, that: EllipticE[1] = 1 so, a limit to the effect is provided by: K(c) = 1 - 2 EllipticE[q]/Pi = 1 - 2/Pi = 0.363380227632 EXAMINATION OF THE PANCAKING EFFECT Let's assume uniform circular motion, i.e. DC current, in a charge balanced medium. It is commonly assumed there is then no induction. However, it is often stated that accelerating charges produce fields, so perhaps the uniform acceleration of charges about the circle produce a field that precisely cancels the pancake effect field computed above. This would be a very unusual field that uniform charge acceleration about the circle must produce if it exactly cancels the special relativistic (SR) Coulomb field of a circle current, which is non-conservative. Given the SR Coulombic field pancaking equation and b = v^2/c^2, we have: k(theta) = (1 - b)/(1 - b sin^2 theta)^(3/2) At theta = 90 deg we have: k(Pi/2) = (1 - b)(1 - b)^(-3/2) = (1 - b)^(-1/2) = gamma(v) which represents an apparent charge increase for every charge as viewed from a point on the major axis and distant from the circle. The charge motion, from the polar vantage point, is viewed from the "side" at approximately 90 degrees. At theta = 0 deg. we have: K(v) = b/2 + ... which represents an apparent charge decrease. Using q' to designate the apparent charge observed for an actual current bearing charge q, this gives the following picture from the perspective of the velocity dependent SR field component: q' = q * gamma (q' > q) (-) N | | (+) o | x (+) q' = q * K(v) (q' < q) | | S Magnetic Poles (-) o - current out of page (electrons into page) x - current into page (electrons out of page) (+) - positive net apparent charge (-) - negative net apparent charge Fig. 1 - Diagram of SR based Coulombic field Note that, because the proposed current is carried by electrons moving within a positive medium, that the field is positive to the sides. If the current were carried by positive charge, the SR Coulombic field would be reversed. EFFECTS OF CHARGE ACCELERATION Next, it is necessary to consider the special relativistic effects of acceleration. In *Classical Electromagnetism via Relativity,* Plenum Press, 1968, W. G. V. Rosser develops (p. 272 ff) a proof that the field from a closed circuit, ignoring radiation fields, is zero. Rosser utilizes the following SR based equations for his proof: E = Ev + Ea Ev = q/(4 Pi e0 s^3) [r - r u/c][1 - v^2/c^2] Ea = q/(4 Pi e0 s^3 c^2) {r x ([r - r u/c] x [a])} s = [r - (r dot u)/c] where r, u, and a are vectors. Earlier in the text (p. 252) Rosser credits the above equations to Frisch and Wilets (Amer. J. Phys. 24(1956) p.574.) The above equations are not approximations and are consistent with the Maxwell-Heaviside equations. Rosser only actually proves his case for a specific circuit which has sharp bends, but assumes the bends are not significant because the accelerations involved are not large (apparently due to the fact the electron velocity is slow in wires ) This seems to be a flawed approach and also as immaterial to high velocity situations, like those found in stars. Further, Rosser's proof has the glaring limitation that it only shows a netting to zero in the plane of his special circuit, which consists of two (radial from the point of observation) straight lines and two arcs centered on the point of observation. Even if Rosser's proof is assumed to be correct in general, to the level of accuracy he produces, and even if the apparent charge is assumed to net to zero in the plane of the circuit, a non-conservative field appears when we look at the ramifications of the Ea equation in the polar regions of Fig. 1. Rosser shows (p. 276) that the formula for Ea implies: Ea ~= -q/(4 Pi e0 c^2) [a_perp]/[r] where [a_perp] is the component vector of vector [a] that is perpendicular to vector [r]. Using scalar centripital acceleration a = v^2/r to estimate the Coulombic field at points on the central polar axis distant from the current ring, we obtain: Ea ~= -q/(4 Pi e0 c^2) (v^2/r)/(r) = -q/(4 Pi e0 r^2) (v^2/c^2) and we obtain an apparent charge factor of -v^2/c^2 = -b due to the acceleration component of the polar Coulombic field. Now, clearly , -b does not exactly, at every v, offset the charge factor: gamma(v) = (1-b)^(-1/2) obtained using the standard SR field pancaking equation. We are left with an apparent net charge at the poles of: q' = q [(1-b)^(-1/2) - b] If this is true, then a field is predicted which is not energy conservative. A path from the polar region to a distant point on the plane of the circular current, to a near point on the plane, and back to the polar region, gains a fixed increment of energy. Call [(1-b)^(-1/2) - b] the net relativistic polar apparent charge factor Fp(v). Table 1 provides a quick look at various evaluations of Fp(v). b gamma(v) Fp(v) Incr., 1-Fp(v) v/c (v/c)^2 1/(1-b)^.5 1/(1-b)^.5-b 1-1/(1-b)^.5+b 0.0000 0 1 1 0 0.0001 0.00000001 1 0.99999999 1E-08 0.0010 0.000001 1 0.999999 9.99999E-07 0.0100 0.0001 1.000000005 0.999900005 9.9995E-05 0.1000 0.01 1.000050004 0.990050004 0.009949996 0.2000 0.04 1.000800961 0.960800961 0.039199039 0.5000 0.25 1.032795559 0.782795559 0.217204441 0.6000 0.36 1.071866157 0.711866157 0.288133843 0.7000 0.49 1.147154143 0.657154143 0.342845857 0.9000 0.81 1.70523372 0.89523372 0.10476628 0.9900 0.9801 5.037672145 4.057572145 -3.057572145 0.9990 0.998001 15.82325228 14.82525128 -13.82525128 0.9999 0.99980001 50.00375017 49.00395016 -48.00395016 Table 1 - Tabulation of Polar Apparent Charge Factors Note that the slope of Fp(b) near b=0, is given by: d/db Fp(b) = 1/(2(1-b)^(3/2)) - 1 which for b very small evaluates to roughly -1/2. Therefore, the incremental charge Q'(b) in a neutral planar circular conductor, for b very small is roughly: Q'(b) = b/2 Q = Q [v^2/(2c^2)] = [Q/(2c^2)] v^2. This addition of an apparent charge, proportional to v^2, to a neutral circular planar conductor, implies that if that neutral conductor is spun about its major axis in the direction of current flow, that the net polar apparent charge will increase. If the drift velocity is v_drift and the rim velocity is v, then the two current net polar charge factor will be: F_net(v,v_drift) = [1/(2c^2)] (v+v_drift)^2 - [Q/(2c^2)] (v)^2 F_net(v,v_drift) = [2 v v_drift + v_drift^2]/(2c^2) and since v_drift is typically under 1 mm/sec, and v can be many meters per second, a gain in the polar charge of at least 4 orders of magnitude can obtained by rotating the current carrier about its axis. SOME POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES It might be conjectured at this point that the Podkletnov antigravity experiment that NASA has been replicating, which uses a current carrying levitated spinning superconducting ring, does not show any artificial gravity because NASA is using a sensitive gravitometer. The field predicted looking at the pancake effect is electrostatic. Such a field might achieve the effect Podkletnov first noticed, namely that smoke rose above the spinning superconducting disk. It may be that the smoke particles were somewhat ionized. However, all the antigravity effects reported by Podkletnov can not be justified by the means discussed here, because the suggested electrostatic field would induce attracting charges on neutral objects. It is of interest that, due to the Faraday ice pail effect, shielding for the suggested force, which is electrostatic in nature, can not be easily achieved. The numbers can be significant for current carrying masses spinning at very high velocities, and in cases where very strong magnetic fields are involved and thus affecting atomic structure and alignment, and might provide an explanation for polar jets observed for fast spinning astronomical objects. In addition, a net anti-gravitational force from flat galaxies, or more specifically from aligned spinning structures within them, is predicted by the proposed theory. It is of further interest that if the proposed potential exists then conservation of energy is violated, free energy devices can be made. A SMALL TEST CASE Let's First look at a specific and mundane case readily tested by amateur means. Copper density is 8.96 g/cm^3 at 300 K, and atomic weight is 63.546. Avogadro's number is 6.0221x10^23 atoms/mole. There is thus 8.96 * 6.0221x10^23 /63.546 = 8.49x10^22 atoms per cm^3 of copper. This is also the approximately number of conduction band electrons per cm^3. If we assume a 7 cm radius disk spinning at 1800 rpm, or 30 rps, we obtain about a 13.2 m/s rim velocity. Assume the perimeter of the disk is wrapped with 140 turns, or 6160 cm of 0.02846 in, 0.0723 cm dia., No. 21 copper wire, carrying 1 amp DC. This wire has a cross sectional area of 0.0164 cm^2, or 1.64 mm^2. Total wire volume is (0.0164 cm^2)(6160 cm) = 101 cm^3. This wire has 13.05 ohms per 100 ft., or .428 ohms/meter. Total resistance is thus estimated at (.428 ohms/meter)(6160 cm) = 26.3 ohms, thus the wire is driven at 26.3 volts to achieve the 1 amp current. The 101 cm^3 of wire has a total (8.49x10^22 atoms per cm^3)(101 cm^3) = 8.57x10^24 conduction band electrons. There are thus (8.57x10^24 electrons)/(6160 cm) = 1.39x10^21 electrons/cm of wire. We have a current of 1.0 amps in the wire, or 1.0 coulomb/second. There is 1/q_e = 6.2415x10^18 electrons/coulomb, giving 6.2415x10^19 electrons/sec flowing in the wire. The electrons thus move at (6.24x10^19 electrons/sec)/{1.39x10^21 electrons/cm) = 0.0449 cm/sec, so: v_drift = 4.49x10^-4 m/sec We have about 8.57x10^24 conduction band electrons carrying the current so at 6.24x10^18 electrons/coulomb we have: Q = 1.37 x 10^6 coulombs carrying the current, so since: F_net(v,v_drift) = [2 v v_drift + v_drift^2]/(2c^2) Q' = Q [2 v v_drift + v_drift^2]/(2c^2) Q' = (1.37x10^6 coul.) [ 2 (13.2 m/s) (4.49x10^-4 m/sec) + (4.49x10^-4 m/sec)^2]/(1.8x10^17 m^2/s^2) ] = (1.37x10^6 coul.)(6.59x10^-20) Q' = 2.71x10^-14 coul. If we had a test charge of 1 coul. at a distance of 1 m from the spinning coil, and lying on its axis, we would have a force: F = [1/(4 Pi epsilon_0)] Q1 Q2/r^2 = [1/(4 Pi (8.85x10^12 F/m)](1 coul.)(2.71x10^-14 coul.)/(1 m)^2 F = 2.44x10^-4 N giving a field strength of: E = 2.44x10^-4 N/coul. = 2.44x10^-4 volts/meter which might be barely usable, but would be readily detected by use of a very low resistance loop. In that the field is non-conservative, it may be of sufficient magnitude to be of some utility if used with a superconducting current loop, or big cross section copper loop, wrapped about a magnetic core, but the back emf of the magnetic field building in the conductor would prohibit much power from being extracted. The power to drive the device is about 26 watts, plus maybe another 20-180 watts to drive the motor. However, a spinning superconductor could be used for the primary, and that would take almost no power except cooling. Suppose we could get 2 mV out of a 2 m triangular secondary current loop (the potential gain is higher near the rotating primary loop) and we have a copper conductor with a cross section of 144 cm^2, or 22.3 in^2. Copper has a conductivity of 4.01x10^6 ohm^-1 cm^-1, so the conductor has conductivity of (144 cm^2)(4.01x10^6 ohm^-1 cm^-1) = 5.77x10^8 cm ohm^1, or a resistance of 1.73x10^-9 ohm/cm. Using 600 cm for a length we have a total resistance of (1.73x10^-9 ohm/cm)(600 cm) = 1.03x10^-6 ohm. We would thus have a current I = E/R of (.002 V)/(1.03x10^-6 ohm) = 1940 amps, which is of course readily detectable. The heat output would be a mere (0.002 V)(1940 amps) = 3.88 watts. A practical device might be made by using very high speed rotating superconductor(s) carrying lots of current. If a 2000 amp carrying superconductor rotating at 18000 rpm is used, then the power output jumps to 388 watts. A variation is to drive the primary with A/C. The secondary would then be driven at (0.002 V) (1940 amps) = 3.88 watts A/C. It could be used to drive a transformer primary in order to drive a secondary at 3.88 watts and the voltage desired. Upping the rpms to 18,000 would produce about 38.8 watts, which would be above theoretical break-even if frictionless brushes and low friction bearings were used. SCALING UP By using supercooled aluminum wire, the conductivity can be increased by a factor of 10^5. This means the current can be increased by a factor of 10^(5/2) = 316 and still maintain the same I^2 R heat dissipation, and electron drift velocity v_drift can also be increased by a factor of 316. The drift velocity could be about (4.49x10^-4 m/s)(316) = 0.1419 m/s. Assuming a rim velocity of (60 rps)(1m)(Pi) = 188 m/s, the performance per turn can be compared to the small proof of concept experiment by: perf = F_net(188 m/s,0.1419 m/s) / F_net(188 m/s,4.49x10^-4 m/s) = [2 (188 m/s) (0.1419 m/s) + (0.1419 m/s)^2] / [2 (13.2 m/s) (4.49x10^-4 m/sec) + (4.49x10^-4 m/s)^2] = (53.4 m^2/s^2) / (.1186 m^2/s^2) = 450 The coil cross section can be increased from about 1 in^2 to about 100 in^2, thus giving another 100 fold increase in number of turns, and a total ampere-turns multiplier of 100*316 = 31600. The computed field strength of about 2.44x10^-4 volts/meter for the experiment then becomes (2.44x10^-4 v/m) * 31600 * 450 = 347 v/m, spread out over an area of about 3 m^2. A special triangular coil of cross section 3 m can length 3m to a side can then gain about (347 + 1/4 (347) + 1/9(347)) V/turn = 472 volts/turn. Assuming 100 turns that is 47.2 kV output, with a conductor cross section of 3 m^2/100 = 300 cm^2. Assuming the secondary is driven at a mere 1000 A/cm^2, with half the cross section taken up by winding space and insulation, that is (300 cm^2)*(1000 A/cm^2) = 30 kamps at 47.2 kV, or 1.42 GW. This indicates a very practical output. This is by far the most commercial idea, if proven feasible experimentally, even if it disappointingly does not result in the hoped for inertial drive. The proof of principle experiment was to take 140 turns of 1 amp. The proposed practical device armature has 14000 turns at 316 A/turn, therefore has total amp turns of (14000 turns)(316 amps/turn) = 4.42 mega-amp-turns in a coil of radius 1 m, and a 10 inch by 10 inch cross section, or 25.4 cm square cross section. It may not be feasible to hold this together. However, major offsetting gains in performance can be had by supercooling the secondary coil, and by increasing the area of the rotating coil, which then permits a much larger secondary coil, both in area and acceleration length, and reduces the magnetic pressure on the rotating coil. The coil cross section can be made thinner and wider, so structural support can be beefed up around it. The coil would actually consist of a series of concentric coils with structural support and cooling conduits interlaced between them. Using a seat of the pants number of about .7 N for 1000 amps. for the 1m radius coil hoop force, that force is increased by the square of the ratio of the amperages, (4.42x10^6/10^3)^2 or about 1.954x10^7, giving a force of 8.37x10^7 N, or 1.882x10^7 lbf, or about 9410 tons force between two halves of the proposed coil. Too much. At a 1m radius, or 6.28 m, that is about 75 inches perimeter giving a lateral force of about 213 tons/inch. Centrifugal force has to be added to that too. An FEA simulation of the 1 m diameter coil (to the conductor cross section midline) with 23.4 cm square conductor carrying 4,420,000 amps was run. The half hoop force was 1.267x10^7 N, or 2.85x10^6 lbs, or 1424 tons. The field strength at the conductor midline was a modest 1.27 T, seemingly not out of the ordinary to contain, even rotating. However, the iLB force of 1.426 N/inch, or 32,000 lbs/in. This is difficult considering the need for cooling and the fact the coil also needs to rotate. There is considerable room for design adjustment, and at the anticipated power output, much leeway in cost. Earlier, for the proof of principle experiment, it was assumed a secondary coil would reside only on one side of the rotating primary. However, a duplicate secondary (stator coil) can be placed on the other side of the rotating primary, thus doubling the output. Also, by adding another meter to the radius, the current and thus the power output of the secondary is quadrupled, or the primary current can be correspondingly reduced. If feasible, superconducting wire would be useful for the spinning primary coil from a couple aspects. One is cooling would not be a function of current, and another would be that the insulation is actually metal, and thus much more resistant to stress than plastic or rubber at cryogenic temperatures. There is no apparent way that a back e.m.f can be generated, but superconducting wire must be tested to see if a back e.m.f. somehow is generated. Unfortunately, a couple meter diameter superconducting coil would cost fairly big dollars, but nothing like a nuclear plant. Unless there is a significant mistake, and provided the basic principle stands the experimental test, it should be feasible to put a GW plant in a box about 10 meters to a side. TEST RESULTS A test using copper conductors was conducted by Frank Stenger in 2001. The results were negative. It is my belief that the formula changes applied due to acceleration are incorrect. A thorough test of principle, however, requires use of a superconducting secondary coil. In such a case a spontaneously increasing magnetic field in the superconductor would be evidence for the expected field. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 00:36:18 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 iB48ZljX021857; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:35:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB48ZkYI021842; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:35:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:35:46 -0800 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, 3 Dec 2004 23:42:53 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: <0oOj7C.A.OVF.ibXsBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56766 X-Loop: vortex-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 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, >perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not >conserved in all contexts. Here are some additional old posts you might find of interest on this subject, though more along the lines of "magnetic charge". Gravity, Electromagnetism, Maxwell Horace Heffner - 4/16/97 The following are some (gravity related) personal opinions and a follow-up of discussion of an earlier thread regarding Maxwell's laws with Daniel T (the empiricist) and Robert Stirniman. Also, some experiment ideas at the end. Any protracted discussion of gravity is likely to be a discussion of electromagnetism (EM) and issues of "free energy". This is because: 1. The understanding of fields and the mathematics of vector fields developed largely as a result of electromagnetic theory 2. Much of the effort to understand gravity is centered in developing a unified field theory, i.e. linking gravity to EM effects, and vice versa. To the degree that effort is successful, a study of gravity *is* a styudy of EM, and vice versa. Gravity is considered by some researchers to be, wholly or in part, a second or third order EM effect, thus the term "electrogravity." 3. Our senses only operate with electromagnetism (e.g. touch, sight, hearing, smell, etc.), so our perceptions and direct measurements of the effects of gravity or any physical thing can only be derived through effects of that thing on electromagnetic entities. 4. Classical EM is totally embodied in and deriveable from the vector form of Maxwell's laws. EM fields conserve energy. Any mechanism that does not conserve energy in our EM world is likely to violate Maxwell's laws, as any process operating consistently with Maxwell's laws will not. 5. Much of the interest in gravity is really more an interest in antigravity and/or gravity sheilding (especially in this newslist.) Anitgraivity, if it exists in the forms typically envisioned, denies conservation of energy, and very possibly light speed limits to travel velocities. 6. A result of all the above is that it is reasonable to search for keys to antigravity in the arena of any data or EM theories which stand contrary to Maxwell's laws. This arena is surprisingly large, and growing. It is also confusing due in part to the arkane or non-conventional vocabulary and in part due to mathematical complexity. I have only touched the surface of the literature in this strange but fascinating and wildly speculative world. I can only speak from an amateur non-expert viewpoint, but initial impressions of EM outside of Maxwell are that there are probably a number of bogus theories, nonsensical theories, and unfathomable theories, maybe some good and workable theories, certainly a lot of "mainstream rejected" theories, and lots of very interesting experimental data. - - - - - - - - - - At 1:17 PM 4/3/97, I wrote under the thread name "Planets; Elements; Magnetics": "I think B dot dS = 0 is totally equivalent to the statement there is no monopole. Ignoring the question of whether this Maxwell's equation is indeed a law -- if it is a law, it is equivalent to the statement that there are no free monopoles." "All this is a consequence of the postulates (assumptions) of Maxwell's laws, which of course would need to be revised in the face of the discovery of a monopole. The existence or not of such a particle is a fact of nature while the rest are assumptions." "It does seem to me fitting that Maxwell's Laws be called such because the other EM principles can be derived from them, so although they were a culmination of a long search and a summation of many principles discovered by others, they seem to me to have a very fundamental compact distilled quality. Just opinion." "About the monopoles, though, they could only exist in pairs and be consistent with B dot dS = 0 if they at all times occupied exacly the *same point* in space. Otherwise, you could always have a way to place the envelope S around one and exclude the other. However, this being the case that they are always co-centered, they would therefore then always represent a scalar field, unless acted upon by a charged particle or EM field in the viciniy." - - - - - - - - In regard to the above issues, Robert Stirniman brought to my attention "Advanced Electromagnetism Foundations, Theories and Applications", edited by Terrence W. Barrett and Dale M. Grimes, World Scientific Publishing, 1995. Of particular interest is the article "Six experiments with Magnetic Charge", V.F. Mikhailov, p. 593 ff., which discusses a modern look at the work of Felix Eherenhaft (1879-1952). Eherenhaft performed the magnetic equivalence of a Millikan's oil drop experiment in the hopes of isolating magnetic monopoles and measuring magnetic charge. Surprisingly, Eherenhaft had positive results, obtaining a value for magnetic charge in the range of 10^-9 to 10^-14 Gauss*cm^2. Because this did not agree with Dirac's theorized value of 3.29x10^-8 gauss*cm^2, interest waned in Ehrenhafts work. Mikhailov created 10^-5 to 10^-6 cm dia. ferromagnetic aerosols by electrospark sputtering. This was accomplished by use of current interrupter iron contacts in argon at one atmosphere. Helmholtz coils provided a uniform magnetic field. The falling aerosol was placed in an intense light beam and viewed with a microscope. The initial experiment showed a roughly equal number of both N and S monopoles. Switching the field of the Helmholz coils reversed the lateral motion of the magnetically charged particles. It was noted that increasing *either* magnetic field intensity or light intensity increased the lateral rate of travel. Many of the particles were electrically and magnetically charged, permiting a comparison of the electrostatic quantum to the magnetic quantum of charge. Mikhailov found agreement with Eherenhaft that the quantum of magnetic charge is g = (a)(e)/6 = (1/3)(a^2)(gD) = 5.84x10^-13 gauss*cm^2, where Gd is the charge of Dirac's theoretical monopole, a is the fine structure constant a = (1/137). The monopoles of Eherenhaft and Mikhailov are not monopole particles in the conventional sense, however. Mikhailov states: "Magnetic charges (monopoles) are experimentally observed only in the presence of two components: light and ferromagnetic particles. It seems therefore, that magnetic charges are created a a consequence of of an interaction between photons ans ferromagnetic particles, and moreover, such charges cannnot exists without these physical conditions: without light a particle loses magnetic charge almost instantaneously." - - - - - - - Some observations in regard to Mikhailov's experiments: 1. Lateral motion observed in a uniform magnetic field, regadless of light direction, appears to be a clear violation of Maxwell's laws, regardless of other conclusions drawn by Mikhailov. The existence of a monopole of course also denies the law being the orginal subject, namely B dot dS = 0. 2. The magnetic charge, though apparently produced in pairs, is not conservative in that the dual requirements for existence imply you can separate the N and S particles, turn off the light which sustains, say, the S particles, leaving only the N particles. (Save a sufficient number and you can lift off the North magnetic pole! 8^) 3. There might just possibly be a convenient way for amateurs to experiment with this. There now exist ferrofluids which could be used in Millikan style experiments. Since sputtering would not be involved, it might be necessary to artificially charge the drops when atomizing the ferrofluid. Bill Beaty posted 9/23/96 that ferrofluid might be available from Ferrofluidics Inc. I checked and found , email: , phone 603-883-9800. They sell 30 ml kits for prototyping loudspeakers. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 00:55:46 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 iB48tdjX030288; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:55:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB48tccn030274; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:55:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:55:38 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 00:02:45 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: <0iu-qD.A.-YH.KuXsBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56767 X-Loop: vortex-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 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, >perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not >conserved in all contexts. Irreverance here, especially amateur irreverence, also sometimes extends to thermodynamics. Why not? Something might even be learned by just bungling around. Second Law Violating Nanochip (SLVN) GENERAL The purpose here is to discuss issues regarding the construction of a Second Law Violating Nanochip (SLVN). The goal is to design a device that demonstartes that the assumed Second law of Thermodynamics is invalid by showing that it is possible to extract heat from one of two equal temperature compartments to increase the temperature of the second compartment. That is to say, extract kinetic energy from matter in the first compartment, convert it to electrical energy, and heat the second compartment via a joule heater. THE PIEZO-KINETIC APPRAOCH Let us consider the possiblility of manufacturing a chip with very thin very small piezoelectric crystals on the surface connected to integrated fullwave diode bridges. The output of all the tiny bridges would be collected together, the chip placed into a havy noble gas. Suppose the chip is placed in a compartment adjacent to which is another compartment at the same temperature. The chip drives a joule heater in the second compartment. At some operating temperature the chip it might be possible to convert kinetic energy from one compartment to electrical energy, which is then transferred to the kinetic energy of the second compartment. The difficulty is making the chip so it will not be destroyed by the operating temperature and the piezoelectric crystals small enough in area compared to the size of the impinging gas molecule, so that the voltage generated by the piezo-compression is sufficient to make it through the diode bridge, i.e. overcoming the diode forward bias potential. The peizo must have a small surface area to prevent the charge being spread over a wide plate, thus reducing the voltage. Any required energy requirement can be met by utilizing a sufficient particle energy, or operating temperature. The main difficulties are achiving a small piezo area, a small integrated fulwave bridge in the same cross section, and low enough diode forward bias. For a rough first cut at this assume an operating temp of 300 K. Since 1 eV = 11,600 K, at 300 K the typical particle in a gas will have an energy of 300/11,600 eV = .026 eV = .026 * (1.602 x 10^-19 J/eV) = 4.166 x 10^-21 J. Let's assume we want to charge a capacitor to .3 V. Since E = .5(C)V^2 we get C = 2E/V^2 = 2*(4.166 x 10^-21 J)/.09 F = 9.76 x 10^-20 F. Now C = Ke (A/w) (8.85 x 10^-12 F) where Ke is the dielectric constant, A is the plate area in m, and w is the thickness of the capacitor in m. For the sake of simplicity and to get scale, let's assume A = w^2, and Ke = 4, so C = 3.54 x 10^-11 F/m * w. So now w = (9.76 x 10^-20 F)/(3.54 x 10^-11 F/m) = 2.76 x 10^-9 m. The structure size for the device should be in the range of about 27.6 Angstroms. The atomic radii of Si, O, and Au are 1.46 A, .65 A, and 1.79 A respectively. So 27 A represents a structure about 7-10 atoms across. However, this assumes a perfectly non-elastic collision every time (estimate optimistic), yet the kinetic energy of a gas is a distribution, so many collisions will be more energetic, some much more so (estimate pessimistic). So, what does this say? The design is infeasible. The structures are too small to be practical or functional. The difficulty centers about the need to focus on a small enough area a sufficient amount of energy to overcome the forward bias of the diode. The forward bias sets a minimumn voltage level, which sets a maximum surface area over which the generated charge is to be distributed. If the forward bias of the diode were zero then there would be no upper limit to the size of the energy trapping structure, but like with browian motion, smaller gives more of a result. What about power? If such a device can be built that works at all, then there is a very good potential for significant energy production. This is because, assuming some of the generated energy is returned to stir the gas, a very large percentage of the molecules will connect with the sides of the container per second. This means a significant portion of the specific heat of the gas could be drained off per second. One problem with the chip might be maintaining balance, not cooling the compartment so much the energy is not transferred and yet not overheating the chip. But those are much easier problems. THE CHARGE-TRANSPORT APPROACH Having seen some of the difficulties of extracting energy from neutral gas particles, it is now easier to appreciate the advantages of extracting energy from an electrolyte. Here, the idea is to use local charge fluctuations, thus indirectly heat, in an electrolyte to drive the chip. Similar particle kinetic energies apply, based on temperature, however, the energy of individual particles (or clusters of particles, or even large brownian type particles) is expended driving a charged particle to an electrode, as opposed to driving a neutral particle to a crystal to generate a piezo electric effect. One adavntage of this approach is that the operation directly results in electrical energy. Other advantages are increased efficiency due to less generation from the resulting collisions, and a reduction in the number of parts to each element on the nano-chip (only a diode and protective covering is required.) The method is to build the chip out of vertical diodes separated, i.e. surrounded by, a lattice of insulating material. Two type of chips could be built, positve exposed end (PEE) and negative exposed end (NEE) diodes, as opposed to NP or PN. The diodes would have one end attached to a shared conducting plane, the other end exposed to the electrolyte. Except for the conducting plane shared in common, the diodes would be electrically isolated from each other except through the electrolyte. The face of each diode would be hardened with a layer of gold. A PEE chip could be manufactured, for example, by building on top of a substrate an N doped layer, then a P doped layer, followed by a Gold layer. This could be followed by cutting a lattice of grooves, leaving a matrix of small independent diodes, and then filling the groves with an electrolyte impervious insulating material and then removing the top layer of insulating material sufficiently to expose the gold contact points but not the diode material. The resulting PEE SLVN would look like the following: EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH GGGGGGGG HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH PPPPPPPP HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH NNNNNNNN HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHH SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH E - electrolyte, G - gold or other protective conductor, H - insulating material impervious to electrolyte, N - N type semiconductor P - P type semiconductor S - substrate A PEE type array and a NEE type array would be placed in an electrolyte simulataneously. As the random motion of the liquid would bring charges close, and then move them away, the induced field in the diodes would cause current to flow, but primarily in accord with the diode polarity. Moving the charges away from the exposed diode ends would reduce the kinetic energy of the electrolyte. A charge would be build up on the exposed end of the diode which would eventually attract an ion that would be neutralized. Electrolysis would result. This brings the diode back to a neutral positon to recycle. Three good things happen: the electrolyte cools, current is available, and you get electrolysis. It seems reasonable that this is a workable idea, based upon the problems and limits of chip miniaturization. One limit is power density, but another is the fact that molecules bouncing off chips produce electric pulses. The fact that the electric pulses can be significant at some level of miniaturization means that impacting molecules are able to generate voltages in excess of the minimum required to exceed the diode or transistor bias. However, to make the design more practical and immediately implementable, a method is now suggested to overcome the diode bias potential, the PN barrier potential, and thus increase the maximum size of the nano-structures required to extract the kinetic energy of the electrolyte. The method suggested is to capacitively bias the interface, to establish a field gradient that increases the ion concentration and charge in the vicinity of the chip surface. Here is a suggested arrangement: ++++++++++++++ ----------------- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE PPPPPPPPPPPPPP EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII + - a positive conductive plate - - a negative conductive plate I - insulating wall of electrolyte container E - electrolyte N - NEE chip P - PEE chip The PEE and NEE chips would be electrically connected via a power extraction device. Such a power extraction device might include a pump of some kind to move the electrolytic fluid. Such movement, in addition to assisting in degassification, would actually increase the electrolysis. It should be noted that such electrolysis resulting strictly from electrolyte flow, i.e. energy extraction from the the fluid flow, is exactly offset by pump power requirements. The movement of charge against a field gradient increases the fluid flow resistance. The main advantage of this approach is to bias the input potential to the diode array by jamming a large number of ions of the correct potential toward the surface of the diode array, thus minimizing the fluctuations in potential necessary to cause current flow across the diode forward potential barrier. Note that no energy is extracted from the charged metal plates which create this bias potential, as they are insulated from the electrolyte. The + plate drives + ions toward the P type semiconductor, which positively biases the the P side of the PN junction. This bias allows the small ionic noise voltage oscillations to generate current across the junction. If a plus charge is lost to the diode current, this creates a plus deficit or net negative charge on the surface of the PEE chip. This charge deficit is made up through electrolyte diffusion, thus heat is extracted from the diffusion processs itself. If the fluid is flowing then this process is further enhanced. Due to the statistical effects of the motion, electrical noise level and the oscillating potentials in an electrolyte, especially a flowing electrolyte, can get fairly high compared to the potential a single charged particle can cause. A kind of macro level thing happens, similar to brownian motion. It could possibly be enhanced with colloids. Of course pumping, H2 extraction, etc., are simply practical matters. The electrical power generated could also be used to heat the theoretically all important second compartment. The important issue here is hope. If the Second Law is dead, there is then solid hope for "the" energy solution. A successful yet very small scale demonstration would be of very great scientific and practical value. The present chip technology keeps getting smaller and smaller, and the diodes and transistors in them work very reliably. Someday nanotechnology will catch up to thermodynamics and change the rules. The question is, are close enough today? It appears we are. References courtesy of Dr. Hal Puthoff who posted them on the vortex-l list: Yater, Power conversion of energy fluctuations," Phys. Rev. A 10, 1361 (1974); Comments by EerNisse, Phys Rev A 18, 767 (1978); Rebuttal by Yater, Phys Rev A 20, 623 (1979). See also articles by Maddox in Nature with titles "Directed motion from random noise," and "Bringing more order out of noisiness," both in vol 369, pp. 181 and 271 (1994). Finally article J. Travis, "Making light work of Brownian motion," Science 267, 1593 (1995). Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 01:05:28 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 iB495N4k020132; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 01:05:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB495AKS020033; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 01:05:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 01:05:10 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 00:12:20 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Latest from Iwamura Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56768 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:45 PM 12/3/4, Edmund Storms wrote: >The flood gates open and people in the CF field become heroes and are asked >to help develop the field. Park becomes a "believer" and criticizes the >DoE for being so slow. If that ever happens I'll happily send Park a painting of a pig flying over a dancing tortoise wearing an Order of the Tortoise medal. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 09:34:40 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 iB4HYQjX010498; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB4HYOhh010482; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:24 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 08:41:32 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56770 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Speaking of obtaining energy from the Zero Point Field (ZPF), the Atomic Expansion Hypothesis (AEH) might be applied to obtain free energy from the vaccum by doing electrolysis using a metal coated piezo-kinetic SLVN (described in prior post in this thread) for a cathode. I will post the Atomic Expansion Hypothesis separately now. As the H3O+ hydronium molecules are electronated at the cathode, as the proton tunnels through the interface to the cathode, the atomic expansion fueled entirely by ZPE provides mechanical free energy, which can readily be convered to electrical form by a piezo-kinetic SLVN. Alternatively, the sudden local presence of the tunneling proton charge might be used to obtain free energy directly by use of an EEP coated with an insulating layer and then cathode layer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 09:34:48 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 iB4HYPjX010497; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB4HYNCN010472; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:34:23 -0800 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="iso-8859-1" Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 08:41:13 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iB4HYHjX010432 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56769 X-Loop: vortex-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 ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS by Horace Heffner 12/30/1996 STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND ASSUMPTIONS The Atomic Expansion Hypothesis (AEH) is the idea that atomic expansion (AE), the increase in the size of an ionized atom or molecule, like H+, which occurs when it takes on an orbital electron, can perform work on the surroundings of the ion, and that the amount of energy released can be greater than the initial ionization energy, provided the ion is in a sufficiently confined space when the expansion occurs. This is an idea that leads to various possible experiments and, if correct, may provide a basis for the design of over unity devices. If correct, the AEH also explains various previously observed results. This hypothesis is another expression among many of the idea that the excess heat from cold fusion devices does not come from fusion, or transmutation, but from extraction of energy from the zero point energy (ZPE) sea, the zero point field (ZPF). This is not to say that transmutation or conventional fusion does not occur in cold fusion experiments, only that the heat producing source of cold fusion (CF) devices is primarily ZPE. It is an assumption of this hypothesis that ZPF energy is what keeps atoms from collapsing and is part of the glue that holds atoms together without radiation. There have been various publications referencing ZPE, especially by Dr. H. E. Puthoff [1 - 6] Atoms, more particularly orbitals, though quantized in energy, can be deformed, both in shape and electron probability distribution. These deformations can occur as a result of external stress on the orbitals due to collisions or pressure, or because of electromagnetic fields. The deformations are capable of storing energy, converting kinetic energy into potential energy, and back. With the exception of the occasional resulting photon emissions, such collisions are perfectly elastic, which is why the gas laws and thermodynamics work so well. It is true that collision and pressure deformations of orbitals are also electromagnetic in origin, but differ from purely field generated deformations in that the collision/deformation caused fields (or field distortions) are highly localized and mostly cancel at a distance, and in the fact that the field distortions convert kinetic energy into potential energy at a high energy density. HOW MUCH ENERGY AND POWER IS AVAILABLE FROM ZPE? John Wheeler and Richard Feynman, when first examining the possibility of vacuum energy, calculated that there is enough energy in the vacuum of a light bulb to boil all the seas. The problem is designing a mechanism to effectively extract this energy. The energy available is dependent upon the method used to extract it, be that polarization of the vacuum, the Casimir Effect, etc. The atomic expansion method depends upon the amount of orbital deformation achievable per transaction, and the transaction repeat rate per volume achievable. It does appear the two goals, high repeat rate, and high confinement, typically oppose each other. The ZP energy fills every vacuum. If there is not a cutoff frequency, that energy is infinite. Assuming a cutoff frequency of near the Plank frequency (wavelength) of about 10^-33 cm, the energy density is on the order of 10^94 g/cm^3. Multiply by c^2 and you have an enormous energy density - which does not have to remain constant, but can replenish itself from the ZPE sea if tapped. The energy density rho(w) is characterized by H. E. Puthoff (Ref. 7) by: rho(w) dw = [w^2/pi^2*c^3]/[hw/2] dw = (hw^3) / (2*pi^2*c^3) dw joules/m^3 Rearranging we have: rho(w) dw = (h/(2*pi^2*c^3)) w^3 dw joules/m^3 rho(w) dw = K w^3 dw, where K = (h/(2*pi^2*c^3)) joules/m^3 Integrating over w=0 to w=B to get cumulative energy density f(B) to cutoff frequency B: f(B) = K/4 B^4 This indicates that the total energy density of the vacuum (though not constant if tapped) is proportional to the fourth power of the cutoff frequency being tapped. The big problem is figuring out how to tap this energy. If a method of tapping ZPE energy is found, conservation of energy is not violated, the second law of thermodynamics is violated, as the replacement energy ultimately flows from elsewhere in the universe. Of interest is that most of the ZP energy is in the top frequencies of the ZP spectrum tapped. The bottom 98 percent of the frequency distribution tapped contains (.98)^4 or 92 percent of the energy. The top two percent contains about 8 percent of the energy. This implies it is best to utilize the smallest possible wavelengths in a ZPE extracting mechanism, and therefore, most likely, the smallest possible structures. This leaves atomic structures as the most likely regime to get good results. Further evaluating f(B) for dimensionless frequency B (in Hz) we get: f(B) = [1.556 x 10^-61 joules/m^3] B^4 Now, considering radiation on an atomic scale, i.e. wavelength of 1 angstrom, or 10^-10 m, we get B ~ [3 x 10^17 Hz.] so: f(B) = [1.556 x 10^-61 joules/m^3] [3 x 10^17 Hz.]^4 f(B) = 1.26 x 10^9 joules/m^3 f(B) = 1260 joules/cm^3 If only the top 2 percent of the accessible ZPE frequency band is utilized, we get an energy density of about 1260/8 ~ 100 joules per cm^3. Now, to consider power tapping capabilities, and some pretty big guesses. Given the extreme ZPE energy density at high frequencies, it is reasonable to assume that the tapped energy, i.e. energy removed from the imaginary cm^3 can be replaced at nearly the speed of light, or about 10^-10 second to replenish the cm^3. Given a collection of atomic sized devices located in the cm^3, we could use the macro size of 1 cm instead of 1 angstrom as the distance from which the replenishing energy must come, even though the higher ZPE wavelengths within the angstrom dimension micro structure volume could resupply the volume initially, with the minor resulting deficit at all ZPE frequencies spreading like a wave throughout the universe. This conservative choice gives an event cycle rate maximum of 10^10 event cycles per second, each cycle taking at most some fraction of the 100 joules residing in the imaginary cm^3. If we can somehow extract 1/10,000 the ZPE energy in the cm^3, we would be able to extract 10^5 joules / cm^3 / sec., or 10,000 W/cm^3. If there are only 1 out of 10,000 sites active per cycle, and we could extract 1/10,000 the ZPE energy in each site per cycle, we would get 1 W/cm^3. However, since we are using such a small part of the ZPE spectrum, replenishment might be able to happen from the locality as fast as 10^-20 second per cell, so would not be a practical limitation in any sense. Such a local replenishment would depend upon the existence of a mechanism for the energy of higher ZPE frequencies being converted to and replenishing the frequency band being tapped. The potential energy release is unlimited from any reasonable standpoint. The real limitations are event density and event repetition rate, and these are strictly design parameters that depend upon the ingenuity of the designer and choice of medium. This is not to say that finding a method of extracting any net energy is easy. Though the ZPE sea abounds, it is very difficult to extract the energy from it. This is possibly the main value to the AE concept. If there is any truth to the idea that ZPE provides the support for orbitals, then ZPE does interact with our environment in a big way continuously. Massive energy exchanges occur in springs, sonic devices, etc., simply from orbital deformation. Enormous forces can be involved and enormous energies, even in the compression and expansion of relatively cold systems, like metal lattices. The intended method of extracting energy from the massive ZPE sea is to cause orbital expansion to occur in a confined space, thus creating extreme orbital deformation without supplying the deforming energy to the process. This is like manufacturing watch springs that are already wound. A PROPOSED MECHANISM FOR PRODUCING HEAT IN A METAL LATTICE 1) An ion, e.g. H+ or He++, is injected into a metal lattice. This can be accomplished via high energy ion acceleration or via electrolysis. 2) As the ion comes to a halt in the lattice, any kinetic energy initially imparted to the ion is given up to the lattice. 3) The ion takes up an electron from an adjacent atom or conduction band. If from an adjacent atom, that atom may momentarily shrink (or lose a bond and expand), but will quickly return to size by obtaining an electron from a conduction band. The net result is an electron from the locality is taken up by the ion. 4) An orbital is formed about the ion, increasing the size of the ion. 5) As the electron occupies the orbital, quantized EM energy (e.g. a photon), equivalent to the original ionization energy, is released - heating the local environment. 6) As the small ion and acquired electron(s) expands from nuclear dimensions to atomic dimensions, at some point force is applied in all directions to the lattice provided the interstitial sites do not accommodate the size of the de-ionized product. Further expansion of the de-ionized product to it's final size results in work being performed on the lattice. The energy thus produced has no antecedent. It is derived solely from the force that keeps atoms from collapsing. However, unlike a collision, no initial compressive kinetic energy was supplied. The energy is supplied from the ZPE sea. ENERGY DERIVED FROM ATOMIC EXPANSION IN LIQUID OR GAS PHASES Energy might be similarly obtained in a gas or liquid phase, though not with the efficiency of a metal lattice. A conducting liquid, like mercury, would behave similarly to the metal lattice, but the force resisting the AE would be almost entirely inertial, thus much smaller than the resisting force of a molecular bond. The force resisting the AE would still be exerted over a slightly sub-atomic distance, so the excess energy produced per atomic expansion would almost entirely be proportional to the AE resisting force. Similar arguments can be made for the collision of an ion with a non-ion in a gas. The main difference here is the lack of an electron source to bring the net charge to zero, and thus the cost of extracting the electron from the neutral atom to fill the ion's orbital. A negative balance in ionization potentials (e.g. H+ hits He) must be overcome using the kinetic energy of the collision. Similar arguments can also be made for gas/metal interfaces where low energy ions strike metal electrodes, but do not penetrate. Here again, the AE is only inertially confined, and results in the ion product being accelerated upon its rebound from the plate. EXAMPLE OF POSSIBLE MECHANISM FOR PRODUCING HEAT IN A GAS 1) Hydrogen is ionized to create H+ in a mixture of H2 and Rn (radon gas). This might be accomplished in an arc, a point or wire discharge, or via RF, x-ray, or other indirect excitement. 2) The H+ ion comes into contact with a Rn atom, stripping an electron from the Rn atom producing a H atom and Rn+ ion. In the event one of the other noble gasses is used in place of Rn, some of the H+ kinetic energy is required to strip the electron, and the post collision noble gas atom may still ultimately retain the electron even though a momentary H orbital forms during the collision. 3) An orbital is formed about the H+ ion, suddenly increasing the size of the ion. The expansion, fueled by ZPE, imparts "free" energy to the atoms in the form of potential, then kinetic, energy as the collision progresses. 4) As the electron occupies the H orbital, quantized EM energy (e.g. one or more photons), equivalent to the original ionization energy less the Rn ionizing energy, is released - heating the local environment. 5) The initial momentums and energies of the H and Rn nuclei gets applied to their shells, distorting them, and are returned to the environment via the normal elastic collision mechanism. 6) Eventually the Rn+ is reconstituted to Rn and a photon is released, gaining back the complete energy of ionization of the H atom initially. The net energy gained is the energy of expansion (AE energy) of the H+ orbital in close proximity to the Rn+ ion - thus imparting additional kinetic energy to both. WHAT DOES THE AEH EXPLAIN? The AEH provides a possible explanation for the varied effectiveness of the alpha, beta, and gamma phases of CF loading. I suggest that in the initial loading phase the adsorbed hydrogen is, as suggested by others, alternately in H and H+ form, but primarily in H+ form. It is primarily ionically bound to the lattice, especially when in motion. An H atom almost fits inside a tetrahedral lattice cell, but not through the triangular portals between cells. In the beta phase, many of the cells are occupied by H molecules, and in such a state, diffusion between cells requires displacement of some H molecules, the diffusion paths tend to be blocked, and the continued diffusion requires the ionization of a path blocking H or its tunneling out of the way. Some degree of H confinement upon the reconversion from an H+ to H would occur, thus some small AE excess energy might be produced in beta phase. In the gamma phase, H loading would be to the point that additional loading would force the formation of H2 molecules in the tetrahedral sites and in the face holes. In looking at the geometry of the Ni lattice and H2 molecules, it appears such a formation is possible with only a deformation of the lattice of about 2 percent. This would, however, imply extreme confinement and local pressure, which would dramatically increase the work done by ZPE in supporting the H2 formation, or "expansion". Some numbers regarding H2 molecules and the face centered cubic geometry of the Ni lattice: H atomic radius: .79 Å H covalent radius .32 Å H2 bond length .7414 Å Ni atomic radius 1.62 Å Ni covalent radius 1.15 Å Ni bond length 2.4916 Å >From this it is determined that the face hole will pass a sphere of radius 0.2885 Å and the tetrahedral space will accommodate a sphere of radius 0.6118 Å. However, an H2 molecule can be placed across one axis of the tetrahedron with each atom partway through a face hole. In fact, the H2 atom could pass through the face holes with only an expansion of the bond length of 2*(.3200 -.2885) = .063 Å. This is an increase in bond length of about 2.5 percent. Less expansion is sufficient to fit the H2 into the tetrahedron. Note that it is also possible, when there is sufficient heat, to trap or form an H2 molecule in the face hole and that the three Ni atoms can act like two hammers and an anvil, or a tri-jawed anvil - popping the H2 atom apart, each atom then expanding in separate tetrahedral spaces. Such an expansion is at least inertially constrained, thus AE energy could result. Note that each half of the H2 "dumbbell" resides in a different tetrahedral space. These spaces can act as pistons, i.e the vacuum will accumulate zero point energy. This energy may assist the cracking of the H2 by the anvil by exerting a Casimir force on the expanding H orbital surface. Further, when the orbitals of the expanding H and the boundary metal atoms make contact, a kind of orbital "blow through" may occur, creating free electrons that further heat the lattice. The H nucleus would be accelerated in the direction of the center of its tetrahedral site by the expanding H orbital. This momentum could carry the H nucleus on into the next tetrahedral site, thus ZPE may help facilitate the H diffusion. Sufficient energy might momentarily create an H "supermolecule," two H nuclei orbited by two electrons. Such events would increase the likelihood of fusion, if only a small amount. Maximizing the ZPE extraction via these means would mean loading the lattice at a (or eventually heating it to a) temperature near the melting point of the Ni in order to permit maximum occupation of the triangular face holes by H2 atoms. Similar arguments apply to the Pd-D system. The following chart of FCC elements shows possible candidates for such a mechanism: Elem. Bond Covalent Atomic Face Hole Tetrahedral Length Radius Radius Radius Space Radius (A) (A) (A) (A) (A) Ge 2.4498 1.22 1.52 0.1944 0.5123 Pt 2.7460 1.30 1.83 0.2854 0.6417 Ni 2.4916 1.15 1.62 0.2885 0.6118 Cu 2.5560 1.17 1.57 0.3057 0.6373 Pd 2.7511 1.28 1.79 0.3083 0.6653 Au 2.8841 1.34 1.79 0.3251 0.6993 Ag 2.8894 1.34 1.75 0.3282 0.7031 Al 2.8630 1.25 1.82 0.4030 0.7744 Ce 3.6500 1.65 2.70 0.4573 0.9309 Yb 3.8800 1.74 2.40 0.5001 1.0035 Ca 3.9470 1.74 2.23 0.5388 1.0509 Pb 3.5003 1.47 1.81 0.5509 1.0051 Sr 4.3020 1.91 2.45 0.5738 1.1319 Since hydrogen has a covalent radius of 0.32 A, it appears superficially that Pd, Cu, Ni, and Pt are the only reasonable candidates for the suggested anvil/piston mechanism. However, this table is only an approximation, and a detailed analysis of the crystal structure, utilizing the Schroedinger Equation, is required. It is especially noteworthy that Pt, Cu, and Au are relatively impervious to hydrogen adsorption at standard temperatures. The best candidates capable of both trapping the H2 in a face hole and also being capable of anvil pressure on the bond appear to be Nu, Cu, and Pd, but again, detailed analysis is required. Also, the more impervious elements might become active at a high temperature, especially Pt and Cu. Note also that above Al in the table, the H atom, having a radius of 0.79 Å, appears to readily fit into the tetrahedral space without orbital deformation. This would greatly diminish the free energy generating potential. The AEH model also may explain why various discharge tubes, especially those containing H2 or He, appear to produce excess energy. The ions are injected into the metal lattice where they are confined prior to atomic expansion. A repetitive ion oscillation may produce a kind of synchronized shock wave in the metal surface causing it to rebound and add energy to the impinging and reflecting particles at the surface. The source of the AE energy may be primarily in the electrodes, especially cathodes, but to some degree may occur in the gas as well, or at the electrode surface due to AE surface effect expansion. The AEH may also explain the mechanism by which cavitation devices produce excess heat - namely that some of the H2O is ionized in the cavitation bubbles and the collapsing bubble results in the ions being injected into the the high pressure water wall where the ions reconstitute and expand, undergo AE, adding pressure, thus kinetic energy, to the collapsing pressure wall. The AEH may also explain the over unity performance of an arc in producing water gas in that collision of H+ with C, or CO or CO2 could potentially create AE energy. Here are some ionization potentials of interest: H 13.598 C 11.260 CO 14.014 CO2 13.773 Note that no kinetic energy is required to trigger the AE reaction between H+ and C and that little is required for CO or CO2. Note that the AE reaction might possibly push the chemical equilibrium in the arc toward the production of CO by supplying the excess energy required to split the second O from the CO2. Two things are bothersome about this concept though. One is that if the AE effect exists it should have been observed in chemistry long ago. Another is that, unlike the case where H+ and a noble gas are used, a bond can form between the H and the reactant, so the kinetic energy would end up in molecular vibration, or in reducing the probability of such a bond. The main difficulty, though, is that the shared orbital, the bond, creates an attractive force instead of a repulsive force. AE excess energy is based upon repulsion, not attraction. Perhaps one difficulty answers the other. In any event, He++ would make a more logical AE generator than H+ in this application. The He would act as an energy booster, and thereby as a kind of catalyst, in cracking the H2O and CO2 bonds. Such a process may work best at very low voltages and high frequencies, especially in a manner similar to that suggested by Puharich (Ref. 8) for cracking water. His method adapted to a steam/CO2 environment, catalyzed by He, could assist in the production of water gas. Such a gas could be used, within a sealed glass envelope containing both discharges, to feed oscillations (due to operation in the negative resistance range) of a higher voltage arc or electric discharge, to produce electrical energy directly, without mechanical devices. SO WHAT ABOUT DESIGN CRITERIA? This model results in some concrete design suggestions: 1) Produce ions (especially H+ or H++) in as large a quantity and as efficiently as possible. 2) Accelerate or transport the ions into a confining and preferably conducting medium where they are deionized under pressure. 3) Utilize the increased pressure and heat in the confining medium. 4) Make the confining medium as gas recycling as possible, preferably extracting energy from the higher pressure and temperature post-AE gas before repeating the cycle. SOME APPLICATION AND EXPERIMENTATION THOUGHTS 1) Mercury, though not as confining as a lattice, may make a good medium for ion injection as it would expel the gasses quickly. Mercury also conducts electricity well. Other metals could be used at higher temperatures; however, electron emission from hot cathodes would not be good as it would increase the power demand. The increased power would have to be utilized to result in more ionizations. The simplest possible test device may be a small sealed glass tube of H2 or He with a point anode at the top and mercury cathode at the bottom, activated with high frequency high voltage pulsed DC current. An improvement might be to use two anode electrodes, isolated from the cathode, with a lower voltage discharge between the anodes to do the ionization. 2) Hot anodes are fine as they will increase ionization and kinetic energy of the gas. An arc created by an isolation transformer may make a very good anode. 3) It may be possible to use water as a cathode. The atomic expansion may assist in boiling the water at the surface. The water could provide it's own H2 from the evolved steam which migrates to an arc anode. It might be good to use a helium atmosphere to get safe recombination. An electrolyte would, of course, increase the cathode conductivity. 4) Electrolysis (or arcs) under water may produce usable energy if done under extreme pressure. Simply use the evolved high pressure gas to move pistons. Additional process stages could be added for recombination and heat recovery. Some of the energy of compression, by the AEH model, would come from the ZPE sea. 5) As suggested earlier, a closed tube with an electrically excited mixture of H2 and a noble gas, especially radon, may produce some over unity results. 6) The process of producing water gas, i.e. burning carbon in an arc under water to produce CO and H2, may be improved by avoiding the use carbon rods altogether. This might be done by recycling the CO2 and H2O (as steam) into an arc and driving its equilibrium to a mixture of H2O, CO2, CO, and H2 in the arc. The AE energy would assist in driving the reaction in reverse in the arc and would be the energy derived from the recycling process. This process might be assisted by adding He to the atmosphere as the He has a much higher ionization potential (24.587 volts) than CO or CO2, and will not bond with it. REFERENCES 1. H. E. Puthoff, "Everything for Nothing," New. Sci., vol. 127, p. 52 (28 July 1990). 2. H. E. Puthoff, "Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point-Fluctuation-Determined State," Phys. Rev. D, vol. 35, p. 3266 (1987). 3. D. C. Cole and H. E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the Vacuum," Phys. Rev. E, vol. 48, p. 1562 (1993). 4. H. E. Puthoff, "The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy Research," Spec. in Sci. and Tech., vol. 13, p. 247 (1990). 5. Timothy Boyer, "The Classical Vacuum," Scientific American, p. 70, August 1985 6. Walter Greiner and Joseph Hamilton, "Is the Vacuum Really Empty?", American Scientist, March-April 1980, p. 154 7. H. E. Puthoff, "The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy Research", Speculations in Science and Technology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 247-257, 1990. 8. US Patent 4,394,230, "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SPLITTING WATER MOLECULES," Henry K. Puharich, Attorney, Agent, or Firm - Mandeville and Schweitzer Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 09:59:02 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 iB4HwrjX016954; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:58:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB4HwqrX016936; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:58:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:58:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008501c4da2a$8322e400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: Chicea, Iwamura and carbon Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:55:58 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0082_01C4D9E7.74363980" 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/56771 X-Loop: vortex-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_0082_01C4D9E7.74363980 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Regarding the Iwamura finding of 12 nucleon transmutation additions: A = number of comments appeared here regarding a paper 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 Some apparently thought this carbon was due to contamination. I don't = think that this is the case, nor do many experts particularly G. Miley. = At least the bulk of carbon is indeed the ash of nuclear reactions. = Hopefully, someone will replicate this work soon. Also, there has been a recent flurry in the mainstream scientific press = concerning many new aspects of BEC condensation. Most do not = specifically mention LENR, so it is not likely that any of them was = hurried out in anticipation of a more positive verdict from DoE. Here is = one which might be somewhat relevant to LENR:=20 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/12/041203084004.htm Many mainstream articles in metallurgy and hydrogen storage journals, = with focus on palladium and other metals suggest that far more than two = deuterium atoms can easily be squeezed closely together in metal = vacancies - resulting in even more tight spacing than in deuterium = molecules. In contrast, one of the common arguments of skeptics against = CF in the past has been that the vacancies in Pd actually permit larger = spacing than in the normal D2 molecule. I always suspected that this was = a bogus argument and now it appears certain to be bogus. First, to back-track and clear up some semantic issues: BECs are formed = of Bosons, integer spin particles, which category does include many = atoms and nuclei, including a deuteron nucleus. The D atom, electron = and all, would not have a "net" integer spin, and would be a fermion, = but things are different within a metal matrix. Deuterium in a lattice = is subject to the Pauli exclusion principle unless these confined = deuterons don't have tightly bound electrons, which seems to be the = case, and they are at least "virtual" bosons. Consequently, to avoid = semantic issues, it is easier to say that CF could possibly involve a = "BEC-like" reaction. In answer to the critics, then, an "atom" of = deuterium is a fermion but that doesn't change the fact that deuterons = in a metal matrix may act like Bosons. As to the issue of lack of = cryogenic temperature, I am also suggesting that confinement acts just = as effectively as low temperature and that the important variable is the = lack of kinetic freedom of movement at the instant of coherence. CF may = be BEC-like for only a few picoseconds out of every second, and that is = why it is ultimately based on "probability". Looking at all of these ideas in composite suggests a possible mechanism = for cold fusion which actually lies if not within the framework of = present-day physics, then fairly closer than one might realize... = except, that is, for the lack of gamma radiation following the fusion.=20 "Super abundant vacancies" is a catch-phase which one see a lot these = days. These occur in many transition period metals such as palladium, = iron, nickel, titanium and so on. Under ordinary laboratory conditions = super abundant vacancies have been proven to form easier when metals are = deposited electrolytically instead of being cold-worked or forged (ala = Miles work). There are disagreements about how many deuterium atoms can = fit in such a vacancy (about 10 cubic-angstroms).=20 The classic and still valid opinion on how many fit into an active = vacancy IMHO is 6 D atoms (Nordlander - Phys. Rev. B. 40, 1990). The = only thing Nordlander got wrong was the *minimum* spacing. Side Note: In = regard to the Iwamura paper and others where 12 nucleons seem to be = "in-play" which is 3 alphas or six D atoms, which could be the = equivalent of one carbon - this opinion makes a lot of sense, but cannot = be generalized to cover other kinds of CF reactions. It is accepted in the mainstream that if two deuterons are forced within = 0.1 angstrom (1 pm) the fusion rate would be the equivalent about one = million per sec per mole (Cottingham, = http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/15/8/003=20 It is also known that that three-body boson interactions can have = considerably longer range than two-body boson interactions, and = presumably this reaction rate goes up with the number of bound nucleons, = even without a BEC-like condensation. Deuterium-filled super-abundant = vacancies like this would, of course, open up the reality of multi-body = fusion, as has been suggested by Takahashi of Osaka University. But = something has been missing in these models. How does one envision the collapse of the vacancy in which 6 D atoms are = held from about 10 cubic-angstroms down to about 2 cubic-angstroms? The = super abundant vacancy hypothesis (together with the multi-body fusion = hypothesis) needs one further bit of help which can be supplied by a = previously mentioned idea about the overlap of sonofusion with normal = CF. This dynamic mechanism also benefits from the decided advantage of = *spherical convergence* in condensed matter and the proven kinetics of = "excitons."=20 As mentioned in a previous posting, excitons may be the "operative = structure" in LENR and can be analogized to coincide geometrically with = the phonon structure of certain types of containment matrices. = Coincidently they are on the geometric scale of the Casimir "force" = (beta aether). IOW - it is suggested that phonon/exciton "pulsation," = becomes another kind of "ultrasound," on a much smaller geometric = scale... with this addition then it becomes clearer that certain kinds = of CF may involve a new kind of sonofusion on a much smaller scale. As mentioned good *visual* answer as to why LENR can occur at = "apparently" low kinetic energy (actually not low, just greatly = underestimated) or at least how that low energy can be multiplied = enormously in certain physical structures, can be found in a certain applet near the top of this page: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Alternative-Energy-Cold-Fusion.htm which rather intuitively demonstrates how waves: In-Waves and Out-Waves = - can form a Standing Wave around the Wave-Center 'particle'. A LENR = exciton may end up being best described as a sphere-within-a-sphere of a = few microns in diameter, containing a central core of perhaps 50 nm in = diameter, where the loading of deuterium is super-saturated by the = pumping action of the skin layer(optimally giving 6 D atoms per = vacancy). The waves are a result of DC current flow being modulated to = terahertz frequency by both geometry and heat - and the resultant = pulsations end-up doing about the same thing that one finds in = sonofusion, except the frequency is 10 billion times higher (and as we = know, the net energy of waves is proportional to frequency).=20 Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0082_01C4D9E7.74363980 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Regarding the Iwamura finding of 12 nucleon transmutation = additions: A=20 number of comments appeared here regarding a paper presented at ICCF-10 = entitled=20 "Comment On Carbon Production In Deuterium-Metal Systems" by Dan Chicea, = Visiting Research Associate Professor at Portland State.
http://ww= w.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChiceaDcommentonc.pdf
 
Some apparently thought this carbon was due to contamination. I = don't=20 think that this is the case, nor do many experts particularly G. = Miley. At=20 least the bulk of carbon is indeed the ash of nuclear reactions. = Hopefully,=20 someone will replicate this work soon.
Also, there has been a recent flurry in the mainstream scientific = press=20 concerning many new aspects of BEC condensation. Most do not = specifically=20 mention LENR, so it is not likely that any of them was hurried out in=20 anticipation of a more positive verdict from DoE. Here is one which = might be=20 somewhat relevant to LENR: 
ht= tp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/12/041203084004.htm
 
Many mainstream articles in metallurgy and hydrogen storage = journals, with=20 focus on palladium and other metals suggest that far more than two=20 deuterium atoms can easily be squeezed closely together in metal = vacancies -=20 resulting in even more tight spacing than in deuterium molecules. In = contrast,=20 one of the common arguments of skeptics against CF in the past has been = that the=20 vacancies in Pd actually permit larger spacing than in the normal D2 = molecule. I=20 always suspected that this was a bogus argument and now it appears = certain to be=20 bogus.
 
First, to back-track and clear up some semantic issues: BECs are = formed of=20 Bosons, integer spin particles, which category does include many atoms = and=20 nuclei, including a deuteron nucleus.  The D atom, electron and = all, would=20 not have a "net" integer spin, and would be a fermion, but things are = different=20 within a metal matrix. Deuterium in a lattice is subject to = the Pauli=20 exclusion principle unless these confined deuterons don't have tightly = bound=20 electrons, which seems to be the case, and they are at least "virtual" = bosons.=20 Consequently, to avoid semantic issues, it is easier to say that CF = could=20 possibly involve a "BEC-like" reaction. In answer to the critics, then, = an=20 "atom" of deuterium is a fermion but that doesn't change the fact that = deuterons=20 in a metal matrix may act like Bosons. As to the issue of lack of = cryogenic=20 temperature, I am also suggesting that confinement acts just as = effectively as=20 low temperature and that the important variable is the lack of kinetic = freedom=20 of movement at the instant of coherence. CF may be BEC-like for only a = few=20 picoseconds out of every second, and that is why it is ultimately based = on=20 "probability".
 
Looking at all of these ideas in composite suggests a possible = mechanism=20 for cold fusion which actually lies if not within the framework of = present-day=20 physics, then fairly closer than one might realize... except, that is, = for the=20 lack of gamma radiation following the fusion.
 
"Super abundant vacancies" is a catch-phase which one see a = lot these=20 days. These occur in many transition period metals such as = palladium, iron,=20 nickel, titanium and so on. Under ordinary laboratory = conditions super=20 abundant vacancies have been proven to form easier when metals are = deposited=20 electrolytically instead of being cold-worked or forged (ala Miles = work). There=20 are disagreements about how many deuterium atoms can fit in such a = vacancy=20 (about 10 cubic-angstroms).
 
The classic and still valid opinion on how many fit into = an=20 active vacancy IMHO is 6 D atoms (Nordlander - Phys. Rev. B. 40, = 1990). The=20 only thing Nordlander got wrong was the *minimum* spacing. Side Note: In = regard=20 to the Iwamura paper and others where 12 nucleons seem to be "in-play" = which is=20 3 alphas or six D atoms, which could be the equivalent of one = carbon -=20 this opinion makes a lot of sense, but cannot be generalized to cover = other=20 kinds of CF reactions.
 
It is accepted in the mainstream that if two deuterons are forced = within=20 0.1 angstrom (1 pm) the fusion rate would be the equivalent about one = million=20 per sec per mole (Cottingham, http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/15/8/003=20
It is also known that that three-body boson interactions can have=20 considerably longer range than two-body boson interactions, and = presumably this=20 reaction rate goes up with the number of bound nucleons, even without a = BEC-like=20 condensation. Deuterium-filled super-abundant vacancies like this would, = of=20 course, open up the reality of multi-body fusion, as has been=20 suggested by Takahashi of Osaka University. But something has been = missing in=20 these models.
 
How does one envision the collapse of the vacancy in which 6 D = atoms are=20 held from about 10 cubic-angstroms down to about 2=20 cubic-angstroms? The super abundant vacancy hypothesis (together with = the=20 multi-body fusion hypothesis) needs one further bit of help which can be = supplied by a previously mentioned idea about the overlap of sonofusion = with=20 normal CF. This dynamic mechanism also benefits from the decided = advantage of=20 *spherical convergence* in condensed matter and the proven kinetics of=20 "excitons."
 
As mentioned in a previous posting, excitons may be the "operative=20 structure" in LENR and can be analogized to coincide geometrically with = the=20 phonon structure of certain types of containment matrices. Coincidently = they are=20 on the geometric scale of the Casimir "force" (beta aether). IOW - it is = suggested that phonon/exciton "pulsation," becomes another kind of=20 "ultrasound," on a much smaller geometric scale... with this = addition then=20 it becomes clearer that certain kinds of CF may involve a new kind = of=20 sonofusion on a much smaller scale.

As mentioned good = *visual*=20 answer as to why LENR can occur at "apparently" low kinetic energy = (actually not=20 low, just greatly underestimated) or at least how that low energy can be = multiplied enormously in certain physical structures, can be found in a=20 certain
applet near the top of this page:
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Alternative-Energy-Cold-Fusion.htm
=
which rather=20 intuitively demonstrates how waves: In-Waves and Out-Waves - can form a = Standing=20 Wave around the Wave-Center 'particle'.  A LENR exciton may = end up=20 being best described as a sphere-within-a-sphere of a few microns in = diameter,=20 containing a central core of perhaps 50 nm in diameter, where the = loading of=20 deuterium is super-saturated by the pumping action of the skin = layer(optimally=20 giving 6 D atoms per vacancy). The waves are a result of DC current = flow being modulated to terahertz frequency by both geometry = and heat=20 - and the resultant pulsations end-up doing about the same thing = that one=20 finds in sonofusion, except the frequency is 10 billion times higher = (and as we=20 know, the net energy of waves is proportional to frequency).
 
Jones

------=_NextPart_000_0082_01C4D9E7.74363980-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 15:52:10 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 iB4Nq3jX012502; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:52:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB4Npok1012347; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:51:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:51:50 -0800 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: Dual electron catalysed fusion Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:51:42 +1100 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 iB4NpljX012302 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56773 X-Loop: vortex-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, 03 Dec 2004 11:06:54 -0900: Hi Horace, >If a pair of deuterium hydrinos fuse, or if two electrons are involved in D >+ D catalysis, without the electrons "falling into the Coulomb well" and >thus gaining kinetic energy, the resulting highly *de-energized* neutral >nucleus resulting from multiple quantum wavefunction collapse would be >momentarily free to migrate into heavy nucleii. Thus is obtained heavy >nucleus LENR without any characteristic gamma or particle signatures. [snip] Could you please explain this in terms I can understand (it sounds very interesting)? i.e. what does "multiple quantum wavefunction collapse" mean in physical terms, and why is the newly formed He4 nucleus neutral? What does *de-energized* mean? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 16:09:48 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 iB509e4k019918; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:09:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB509cAg019902; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:09:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:09:38 -0800 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: CF in everyday life Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 11:09:30 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001e01c4d8b3$9fbee550$0100007f@xptower> <000a01c4d954$7dcacee0$ac037841@xptower> In-Reply-To: <000a01c4d954$7dcacee0$ac037841@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 iB509Z4k019863 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56774 X-Loop: vortex-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 RC Macaulay's message of Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:23:57 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Robin, The tile is 1" representing a potential of 1 " water column pressure >against the surface of the tile. As the water touches the tile an audible >sucking sound occurs indicating a vacuum forms at the surface. A pressure >greater than 1" w.c. psid is required to produce an audible sound...... Tiny bubbles escaping from the surface of the tile should produce a hissing sound, which may be misinterpreted as a sucking sound. The greater the water pressure, the faster the process will occur, and the greater the sound volume. >Regarding the water olla temperature, the differential temperature cannot be >reconciled using the math I learned in school.. of course, in Texas, there >have been cases of finger and toe counting where paper was in short supply. [snip] Since you haven't posted the math, I can't really comment on that. The water cools, because only the "hottest" molecules have sufficient energy to break the hydrogen bonds*, and evaporate. The energy remaining in the fluid is then redistributed over all the remaining molecules resulting in a lower temperature. The nature of the clay vessel may also aid the process by changing the nature of the surface film exposed to the air such as to enhance evaporation. (It may present individual molecules to the air, preventing them from clustering together to form a fluid surface. This prevents surface tension from playing a role in inhibiting evaporation). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 16:23:40 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 iB50NWjX021111; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:23:33 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB50NVB9021099; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:23:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:23:31 -0800 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: Latest from Iwamura Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 11:23:15 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <80l4r0did7rrdpd30idbelmuousmg5lnva@4ax.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iB50NKjX021015 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56775 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:24:17 -0500: Hi, [snip] >See: > >http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf > >- Jed > If the Pd is first washed with Acetone, then heated to 900ºC in vacuum, some of the acetone may have been decomposed into carbon by the heat. Aqua-regia would not dissolve the carbon AFAIK. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 17:59:22 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 iB51xHjX009928; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:59:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB51xFTY009913; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:59:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:59:15 -0800 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: Latest from Iwamura Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 12:59:03 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203132359.041fd550@pop.mindspring.com> <80l4r0did7rrdpd30idbelmuousmg5lnva@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <80l4r0did7rrdpd30idbelmuousmg5lnva@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iB51x8jX009702 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56776 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin van Spaandonk's message of Sun, 05 Dec 2004 11:23:15 +1100: Hi, [snip] >>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiob.pdf >If the Pd is first washed with Acetone, then heated to 900ºC in vacuum, some of the acetone may have been decomposed into carbon by the heat. >Aqua-regia would not dissolve the carbon AFAIK. [snip] SIMS only distinguishes by mass. A BaC+ ion would easily be confused with Sm. What is required for experiments like these is that NAA also be applied to determine if the resultant product is indeed a nucleus or a molecular ion. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 18:40:46 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 iB52ecjX017241; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB52ebUL017223; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204211133.020771a8@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:29:13 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Chicea, Iwamura and carbon In-Reply-To: <008501c4da2a$8322e400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> References: <008501c4da2a$8322e400$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56778 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:55 PM 12/4/2004, Jones Beene wrote:
"Super abundant vacancies" is a catch-phase which one see a lot these days. These occur in many transition period metals such as palladium, iron, nickel, titanium and so on. Under ordinary laboratory conditions super abundant vacancies have been proven to form easier when metals are deposited electrolytically instead of being cold-worked or forged (ala Miles work). There are disagreements about how many deuterium atoms can fit in such a vacancy (about 10 cubic-angstroms).
 
The classic and still valid opinion on how many fit into an active vacancy IMHO is 6 D atoms (Nordlander - Phys. Rev. B. 40, 1990). The only thing Nordlander got wrong was the *minimum* spacing. Side Note: In regard to the Iwamura paper and others where 12 nucleons seem to be "in-play" which is 3 alphas or six D atoms, which could be the equivalent of one carbon - this opinion makes a lot of sense, but cannot be generalized to cover other kinds of CF reactions.
 
It is accepted in the mainstream that if two deuterons are forced within 0.1 angstrom (1 pm) the fusion rate would be the equivalent about one million per sec per mole (Cottingham, http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/15/8/003
It is also known that that three-body boson interactions can have considerably longer range than two-body boson interactions, and presumably this reaction rate goes up with the number of bound nucleons, even without a BEC-like condensation. Deuterium-filled super-abundant vacancies like this would, of course, open up the reality of multi-body fusion, as has been suggested by Takahashi of Osaka University. But something has been missing in these models.
 
How does one envision the collapse of the vacancy in which 6 D atoms are held from about 10 cubic-angstroms down to about 2 cubic-angstroms? The super abundant vacancy hypothesis (together with the multi-body fusion hypothesis) needs one further bit of help which can be supplied by a previously mentioned idea about the overlap of sonofusion with normal CF. This dynamic mechanism also benefits from the decided advantage of *spherical convergence* in condensed matter and the proven kinetics of "excitons."



   Many of your posts are very interesting.   This one too.

   The vacancies of current interest to me are Frenkel defects,
and they can also be induced by high dose rate irradiation, as we have shown for years.
There is an article which is pending or just out in Hal Fox's J. New Energy showing
evidence of "lattice quakes" as the early large number of Frenkel defects collapse in some of
our samples.

  You are right about the importance of filling and should also include the fact that loaded palladium can
undergo catastrophic desaturation of the deuterons leading to flow which can augment
both the microscopic and, in some systems like the Phusor ICCF10 Demo, the macroscopic
flow.  Add in the interactions of polarons, Jahn-Teller changes, Anderson focusing,
and some other semiconductor and coherent effects and I suspect that it appears
that although the such vacancy populations are speculative, they might even
be, paroxysmally, higher.

            Dr. Mitchell Swartz

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Refs of catastrophic desorption: 
Swartz, M., "Hydrogen Redistribution by Catastrophic
    Desorption in Select Transition Metals", Journal of New Energy, 1, 4, 26-33, (1997).
Swartz. M., "Catastrophic Active Medium Hypothesis of Cold Fusion" Vol. 4.
"Proceedings: "Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion"
sponsored by EPRI and the Office of Naval Research (1994) .

Refs and Deuteron flow shown here   http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html
and discussed here:
Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity
Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices" - ICCF-10
and here  Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to
Demonstrate the Optimal Operating Point?" - ICCF-10 (2003)
and shown with respect to loading here:
Swartz. M., "Dances with Protons - Ferroelectric Inscriptions in Water/Ice
Relevant to Cold Fusion and Some Energy Systems", Infinite Energy, 44, (2002)
and here:
 Swartz, M., "Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled to Reactions at an Electrode",
Fusion Technology, 26, 4T, 74-77 (December 1994)
 Swartz, M., "Quasi-One-Dimensional Model of Electrochemical Loading of
Isotopic Fuel into a Metal", Fusion Technology, 296-300 (1992).

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 18:40:53 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 iB52eV4k027372; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB52eRN8027348; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:40:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204132450.0211deb0@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:39:44 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041203165411.0420cc20@pop.mindspring.com> References: <41B0899F.C31498F6@ix.netcom.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041203151555.022b32a8@pop.theworld.com> <41B0CA3B.920E3593@ix.netcom.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041203165411.0420cc20@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56777 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:00 PM 12/3/2004, Jed, disingenuous and deceiving as ever, wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:

For the general reader, Dr Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to submit
his paper in a form that Jed can read.  He has failed to do this, preferring
instead to complain about censorship.

Specifically, Swartz should upload his paper to his own web site and then give me the URL. I will copy it. Easy-peasy!

Also, Swartz should respond to my form letter asking permission to upload his ICCF-9 paper. I cannot upload any of the ICCF-9 papers without the author's permission, per my agreement with Tsinghua U.

Nowadays, PowerPoint presentations and manuscripts in Microsoft Word format are often too large to be sent as e-mail attachments. For the last several months I have successfully been sending them back and forth to authors by uploading them to web pages. It is a convenient technique. I store all of the chapters of the book I am writing online, so that my Dragon Lady editor can view them any time, and sharpen her claws on my prose.

- Jed


    I must address this thread because unfortunately Jed Rothwell has not been honest again.
Despite my reluctance to waste bandwidth, Rothwell has created a new thread
woven with his disingenuity.

  On his censored (and misnamed) LENR/CANR website is the following:
"PROCEEDINGS Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-10)
Cambridge, Massachusetts 24 - 29 August 2003
Papers are listed by the principal author's last name. "
  which thus falsely claims to list all papers presented at ICCF-10.

  Rothwell knows this list of titles is censored, just as he knows it is his right to do so, but Rothwell expects
readers to believe his faux innocence when there has instead been much
confabulation and censorship on his part.

  The fact is that Jed and Ed, maintainers of the long-censored LENR/CANR website,
simply removed our three papers' titles from the ICCF10 list, including two which were
on the original ICCF10 oral presenters list, because of reasons including
what appears to have been an attempt at plagiarism (addressed once here already).  
Rothwell knows this, and knows what this about,
and plays dumb, as is his right and pathetic modus operandi.

  Furthermore, beyond the titles not being listed for two years,
the three censored ICCF10 papers were shared on CDROM, through the web,
in pdf format, and in hard copy, and by snail mail to Jed and Ed.
Jed wanted permission to edit the papers, and did not receive it
because he is not a scientist and has a history of inaccuracy.

  Most objectionable about Jed's faux innocence is that this was
brought up before (like so many complaints by so many to Jed)
and yet his disingenuity continued even after this was previously brought up;
and further the errors (which they could have elected to simply correct)
were maintained at the censored and misnamed LENR/CANR website.

  As noted Ed Storms and Jed Rothwell have their right to do so,
consistent with their agenda.

  Therefore, for any serious scientist or student, the papers
(and for those interested the first two were oral presentations on day
1 and day 2 of the meeting) were:

Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity
Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices",
ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10,  (2003).

Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized
Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10,  (2003).

Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate
the Optimal Operating Point?", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10,  (2003). 

 It was an honor to present two oral papers and an open demonstration with over
250% (excess with respect to an ohmic control) at ICCF10, so it
is useless to address the rest of Mr. Rothwell's disingenuous statements
slickly blended with his ubiquitous ad hominem because truth to Rothwell
is like a "mirrorless"-attack on the Medusa.

         Dr. Mitchell Swartz

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 19:44:50 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 iB53igjX032397; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:44:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB53id3R032373; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:44:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:44:39 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 18:51:40 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56779 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michell Swartz, How can you have any credibilty in this issue when you even persist in sending HTML only to a text newslist. You are censoring your own posts for those like me who do not process HTML. Do this on usenet and you'll likely get properly flame roasted. 8^) I'd like to see automatic HTML filters in all newslists. HTML is just worms waiting to happen. At 9:39 PM 12/4/4, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > >
>At 05:00 PM 12/3/2004, Jed, disingenuous and deceiving as ever, >wrote:
>
Edmund Storms wrote:

>
For the general reader, Dr >Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to submit
>his paper in a form that Jed can read.  He has failed to do this, >preferring
>instead to complain about censorship.

>Specifically, Swartz should upload his paper to his own web site and then >give me the URL. I will copy it. Easy-peasy!

>Also, Swartz should respond to my form letter asking permission to upload >his ICCF-9 paper. I cannot upload any of the ICCF-9 papers without the >author's permission, per my agreement with Tsinghua U.

>Nowadays, PowerPoint presentations and manuscripts in Microsoft Word >format are often too large to be sent as e-mail attachments. For the last >several months I have successfully been sending them back and forth to >authors by uploading them to web pages. It is a convenient technique. I >store all of the chapters of the book I am writing online, so that my >Dragon Lady editor can view them any time, and sharpen her claws on my >prose.

>- Jed


>    I must address this thread because unfortunately Jed >Rothwell has not been honest again.
>Despite my reluctance to waste bandwidth, Rothwell has created a new >thread
>woven with his disingenuity.

>  On his censored (and misnamed) LENR/CANR website is the >following:
>"PROCEEDINGS Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion >(ICCF-10)
>Cambridge, Massachusetts 24 - 29 August 2003
>Papers are listed by the principal author's last name. "
>  which thus falsely claims to list all papers >presented at ICCF-10.

>  Rothwell knows this list of titles is censored, just as he knows >it is his right to do so, but Rothwell expects
>readers to believe his faux innocence when there has instead been >much
>confabulation and censorship on his part.

>  The fact is that Jed and Ed, maintainers of the long-censored >LENR/CANR website,
>simply removed our three papers' titles from the ICCF10 list, including >two which were
>on the original ICCF10 oral presenters list, because of reasons >including
>what appears to have been an attempt at plagiarism (addressed once here >already).  
>Rothwell knows this, and knows what this about,
>and plays dumb, as is his right and pathetic modus operandi.

>  Furthermore, beyond the titles not being listed for two >years,
>the three censored ICCF10 papers were shared on CDROM, through the >web,
>in pdf format, and in hard copy, and by snail mail to Jed and Ed.
>Jed wanted permission to edit the papers, and did not >receive it
>because he is not a scientist and has a history of inaccuracy.

>  Most objectionable about Jed's faux innocence is that this >was
>brought up before (like so many complaints by so many to Jed)
>and yet his disingenuity continued even after this was previously brought >up;
>and further the errors (which they could have elected to simply correct) >
>were maintained at the censored and misnamed LENR/CANR website.

>  As noted Ed Storms and Jed Rothwell have their right to do so, >
>consistent with their agenda.

>  Therefore, for any serious scientist or student, the papers
>(and for those interested the first two were oral presentations on >day
>1 and day 2 of the meeting) were:

>Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity >
>Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", >
>ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10,  (2003).

>Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated >Electrically-Polarized
>Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10,  (2003).

>Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate >
>the Optimal Operating Point?", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10,  (2003). 

> It was an honor to present two oral papers and an open >demonstration with over
>250% (excess with respect to an ohmic control) at ICCF10, so it
>is useless to address the rest of Mr. Rothwell's disingenuous statements >
>slickly blended with his ubiquitous ad hominem because truth to >Rothwell
>is like a "mirrorless"-attack on the Medusa.

>         Dr. Mitchell >Swartz

> > Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 20:08:03 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 iB547d4k015550; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:07:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB547K3G015297; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:07:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:07:20 -0800 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: Astounding statement in upcoming paper by Cirillo and Iorio Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:07:06 +1100 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 ultra5.eskimo.com id iB547D4k015249 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56780 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 Thu, 02 Dec 2004 19:12:56 -0900: Hi, [snip] >At 1:24 PM 12/3/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >>The thing that bothers me most about this is that if hydrinos are >>producing nuclear reactions, then I would expect to see at least the >>occasional gamma ray. >>(Though there may be possible particle reactions that are far more >>probable than gamma ray production). > >Maybe we can expect no gammas, at least when it comes to D + D reactions. >Consider the ordinary branching ratios: > >D + D -> T (1.01 MeV) + p (3.02 MeV) (50%) > -> He3 (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (50%) <- most abundant fuel > -> He4 + about 20 MeV of gamma rays (about 0.0001%; depends > somewhat on temperature.) > > >One argument against the possiblity of CF is "We know what the branching >ratios of He* is, so CF can't be real because" there is no signature >radiation. This argument is bous. In electron catalysed fusion, or >hydrino fusion, there is an electron present in the reaction which does not >necessarily gain any momentum from the fusion which it catalyses. The CF >reaction is thus: > > D + D + e -> ? + e > > >That catalysing electron does not "fall into the Coulomb well" and thus the >resulting excited fused nucleus is not the conventional He* at all. There ...but the electron doesn't fall into the Coulomb well in any of the conventional reactions above. The excited state of the nucleus has nothing to do with electrons. It is simply a consequence of the mass excess of deuterons compared to alpha particles. >is much less excitement! How much less depends on four things: (1) the Consequently, the degree of excitement wouldn't be expected to change (with one small exception - the "reflation" of the shrunken electron from the hydrino could absorb some of the energy of the excited nucleus - about 250 keV at most). Alternatively, the shrunken electron may tunnel into the nucleus along with the proton/deuteron, and promptly be expelled as a fast beta particle - this is one of the possible particle reactions I alluded to above. >size of the electron wavefunction at the moment of fusion, (2) the amount >of energy supplied to the catalytic electron from the ZPE sea to expand its >wavefuntion out of the nucleus, (3) the amount of energy the electron >radiates while captured by the nucleus and (4) whether or not an electron >capture occurs. We seem to be saying more or less the same thing here, except that I see the reflation energy coming from he mass excess rather than the ZPE. (However these may in fact be one and the same thing, if all mass is a consequence of ZPE interactions with charge anyway). > >I feel it might be argued that at the moment of fusion the wavefunction of >the electron, or the entire fused body for that matter, exists at a point. >The energy of the combined wavefunctions is momentarily returned to the >vacuum. The quantum wavefuntions of the participating bodies collapse into >a single point. The ensuing wavefunction inflation depends upon energy >exchanged with the vacuum. There is no convenient formulation to determine >exactly what signature energy will be available! The potential energy U of >an electron and nucleus pair depends upon the separation of that pair. If >that separation is momentarily zero, then, by definition, a singularity >exists. It is entirely possible the electron could require the entire 20 >MeV to escape. It is further even likely that the branching ratios for D + >D + e differ entirely from those for D + D. It makes sense that the most >likely branch might look like: > > D + D + e + energy -> He + e - 13.59844 eV I think this should be D + D + e -> He + e + energy The energy is about 23.8 MeV, and completely overwhelms the energy required to reflate the electron from nuclear dimensions (or reinflate hydrino shrunken electrons). The - 13.59844 eV has to do with the energy difference between the ground state and infinite separation. The energy difference between a singularity and infinite separation would be infinite. That between nuclear dimensions and infinite separation is 7-800 keV. > >In other words, as I posted in "THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS" thread >here some years ago, the catalysing electron may only be able to dig itself >out of the hole by borrowing (back) from the vacuum enough energy to reach >equilibrium, i.e. to become a ground state orbital electron. To that >extent, this concept is compatible with Puthoff's theory that orbital >stability, i.e. the failure of the orbit to collapse, depends on the >orbital electron reaching equilibriumn with the zero point field. If the >electron radiates during its catalysis, or the expanding orbital radiates >during its expansion, or dislocates neighboring orbitals that radiate or >produce phonons, then that accounts for the modicum of free energy >observed. Increasing the free energy then amounts to additional >confinement of the expanding orbitals. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > BTW I wasn't primarily thinking of the D+D reaction when I wrote my previous post, but rather about reactions like M(z,A) + Hy -> M(z+1,A+1)*, or possibly M(z,A) + Hy -> M(z,A+1)* if the electron is also captured. Deuterino reactions would likely primarily go like: M(z,A) + D -> M(z,A+1)* + H or M(z,A) + D -> M(z+1,A+1)* + n Reactions like this might be expected to yield the occasional gamma, as at least some of the time one might expect the newly formed nucleus to be formed in an energetic state that then relaxes back to the nuclear ground state by emitting gamma rays. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 20:18:36 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 iB54IG4k019124; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:18:16 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB54IFv3019103; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:18:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:18:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231627.02069910@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:17:49 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Chicea, Iwamura and carbon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <7G8FXC.A.bqE.HwosBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56781 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:55 PM 12/4/2004, Jones Beene wrote: >"Super abundant vacancies" is a catch-phase which one see a lot these >days. These occur in many transition period metals such as palladium, >iron, nickel, titanium and so on. Under ordinary laboratory conditions >super abundant vacancies have been proven to form easier when metals are >deposited electrolytically instead of being cold-worked or forged (ala >Miles work). There are disagreements about how many deuterium atoms can >fit in such a vacancy (about 10 cubic-angstroms). > >The classic and still valid opinion on how many fit into an active vacancy >IMHO is 6 D atoms (Nordlander - Phys. Rev. B. 40, 1990). The only thing >Nordlander got wrong was the *minimum* spacing. Side Note: In regard to >the Iwamura paper and others where 12 nucleons seem to be "in-play" which >is 3 alphas or six D atoms, which could be the equivalent of one carbon - >this opinion makes a lot of sense, but cannot be generalized to cover >other kinds of CF reactions. > >It is accepted in the mainstream that if two deuterons are forced within >0.1 angstrom (1 pm) the fusion rate would be the equivalent about one >million per sec per mole (Cottingham, >http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/15/8/003 > >It is also known that that three-body boson interactions can have >considerably longer range than two-body boson interactions, and presumably >this reaction rate goes up with the number of bound nucleons, even without >a BEC-like condensation. Deuterium-filled super-abundant vacancies like >this would, of course, open up the reality of multi-body fusion, as has >been suggested by Takahashi of Osaka University. But something has been >missing in these models. > >How does one envision the collapse of the vacancy in which 6 D atoms are >held from about 10 cubic-angstroms down to about 2 cubic-angstroms? The >super abundant vacancy hypothesis (together with the multi-body fusion >hypothesis) needs one further bit of help which can be supplied by a >previously mentioned idea about the overlap of sonofusion with normal CF. >This dynamic mechanism also benefits from the decided advantage of >*spherical convergence* in condensed matter and the proven kinetics of >"excitons." Many of your posts are very interesting. This one too. The vacancies of current interest to me are Frenkel defects, and they can also be induced by high dose rate irradiation, as we have shown for years. There is an article which is pending or just out in Hal Fox's J. New Energy showing evidence of "lattice quakes" as the early large number of Frenkel defects collapse in some of our samples. You are right about the importance of filling and should also include the fact that loaded palladium can undergo catastrophic desaturation of the deuterons leading to flow which can augment both the microscopic and, in some systems like the Phusor ICCF10 Demo, the macroscopic flow. Add in the interactions of polarons, Jahn-Teller changes, Anderson focusing, and some other semiconductor and coherent effects and I suspect that it appears that although the such vacancy populations are speculative, they might even be, paroxysmally, higher. Dr. Mitchell Swartz --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Refs of catastrophic desorption: Swartz, M., "Hydrogen Redistribution by Catastrophic Desorption in Select Transition Metals", Journal of New Energy, 1, 4, 26-33, (1997). Swartz. M., "Catastrophic Active Medium Hypothesis of Cold Fusion" Vol. 4. "Proceedings: "Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion" sponsored by EPRI and the Office of Naval Research (1994) . Refs and Deuteron flow shown here http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html and discussed here: Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices" - ICCF-10 and here Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate the Optimal Operating Point?" - ICCF-10 (2003) and shown with respect to loading here: Swartz. M., "Dances with Protons - Ferroelectric Inscriptions in Water/Ice Relevant to Cold Fusion and Some Energy Systems", Infinite Energy, 44, (2002) and here: Swartz, M., "Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled to Reactions at an Electrode", Fusion Technology, 26, 4T, 74-77 (December 1994) Swartz, M., "Quasi-One-Dimensional Model of Electrochemical Loading of Isotopic Fuel into a Metal", Fusion Technology, 296-300 (1992). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 20:20:54 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 iB54KE4k019858; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB54K9ud019839; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231139.02076820@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:13:57 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz In-Reply-To: References: 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/56782 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ooooops. Thanks. Murphy works in many ways. Was not aware of that. Best wishes, Horace. At 10:51 PM 12/4/2004, you wrote: >Michell Swartz, > >How can you have any credibilty in this issue when you even persist in >sending HTML only to a text newslist. You are censoring your own posts for >those like me who do not process HTML. Do this on usenet and you'll likely >get properly flame roasted. 8^) > >I'd like to see automatic HTML filters in all newslists. HTML is just >worms waiting to happen. > > >At 9:39 PM 12/4/4, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > > > > >
> >At 05:00 PM 12/3/2004, Jed, disingenuous and deceiving as ever, > >wrote:
> >
Edmund Storms wrote:

> >
For the general reader, Dr > >Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to submit
> >his paper in a form that Jed can read.  He has failed to do this, > >preferring
> >instead to complain about censorship.

> >Specifically, Swartz should upload his paper to his own web site and then > >give me the URL. I will copy it. Easy-peasy!

> >Also, Swartz should respond to my form letter asking permission to upload > >his ICCF-9 paper. I cannot upload any of the ICCF-9 papers without the > >author's permission, per my agreement with Tsinghua U.

> >Nowadays, PowerPoint presentations and manuscripts in Microsoft Word > >format are often too large to be sent as e-mail attachments. For the last > >several months I have successfully been sending them back and forth to > >authors by uploading them to web pages. It is a convenient technique. I > >store all of the chapters of the book I am writing online, so that my > >Dragon Lady editor can view them any time, and sharpen her claws on my > >prose.

> >- Jed


> >    I must address this thread because unfortunately Jed > >Rothwell has not been honest again.
> >Despite my reluctance to waste bandwidth, Rothwell has created a new > >thread
> >woven with his disingenuity.

> >  On his censored (and misnamed) LENR/CANR website is the > >following:
> >"PROCEEDINGS Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion > >(ICCF-10)
> >Cambridge, Massachusetts 24 - 29 August 2003
> >Papers are listed by the principal author's last name. "
> >  which thus falsely claims to list all papers > >presented at ICCF-10.

> >  Rothwell knows this list of titles is censored, just as he knows > >it is his right to do so, but Rothwell expects
> >readers to believe his faux innocence when there has instead been > >much
> >confabulation and censorship on his part.

> >  The fact is that Jed and Ed, maintainers of the long-censored > >LENR/CANR website,
> >simply removed our three papers' titles from the ICCF10 list, including > >two which were
> >on the original ICCF10 oral presenters list, because of reasons > >including
> >what appears to have been an attempt at plagiarism (addressed once here > >already).  
> >Rothwell knows this, and knows what this about,
> >and plays dumb, as is his right and pathetic modus operandi.

> >  Furthermore, beyond the titles not being listed for two > >years,
> >the three censored ICCF10 papers were shared on CDROM, through the > >web,
> >in pdf format, and in hard copy, and by snail mail to Jed and Ed.
> >Jed wanted permission to edit the papers, and did not > >receive it
> >because he is not a scientist and has a history of inaccuracy.

> >  Most objectionable about Jed's faux innocence is that this > >was
> >brought up before (like so many complaints by so many to Jed)
> >and yet his disingenuity continued even after this was previously brought > >up;
> >and further the errors (which they could have elected to simply correct) > >
> >were maintained at the censored and misnamed LENR/CANR website.

> >  As noted Ed Storms and Jed Rothwell have their right to do so, > >
> >consistent with their agenda.

> >  Therefore, for any serious scientist or student, the papers
> >(and for those interested the first two were oral presentations on > >day
> >1 and day 2 of the meeting) were:

> >Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity > >
> >Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", > >
> >ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10,  (2003).

> >Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated > >Electrically-Polarized
> >Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of > >ICCF-10,  (2003).

> >Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate > >
> >the Optimal Operating Point?", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of > >ICCF-10,  (2003). 

> > It was an honor to present two oral papers and an open > >demonstration with over
> >250% (excess with respect to an ohmic control) at ICCF10, so it
> >is useless to address the rest of Mr. Rothwell's disingenuous statements > >
> >slickly blended with his ubiquitous ad hominem because truth to > >Rothwell
> >is like a "mirrorless"-attack on the Medusa.

> >         Dr. Mitchell > >Swartz

> > > > > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 20:21:39 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 iB54Kd4k020043; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB54KX31020017; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:33 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231453.020373b8@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:15:30 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz Cc: Mitchell Swartz 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/56783 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:00 PM 12/3/2004, Jed, disingenuous and deceiving as ever, wrote: >Edmund Storms wrote: > >>For the general reader, Dr Swartz has been asked on repeated occasions to >>submit >>his paper in a form that Jed can read. He has failed to do this, preferring >>instead to complain about censorship. > >Specifically, Swartz should upload his paper to his own web site and then >give me the URL. I will copy it. Easy-peasy! > >Also, Swartz should respond to my form letter asking permission to upload >his ICCF-9 paper. I cannot upload any of the ICCF-9 papers without the >author's permission, per my agreement with Tsinghua U. > >Nowadays, PowerPoint presentations and manuscripts in Microsoft Word >format are often too large to be sent as e-mail attachments. For the last >several months I have successfully been sending them back and forth to >authors by uploading them to web pages. It is a convenient technique. I >store all of the chapters of the book I am writing online, so that my >Dragon Lady editor can view them any time, and sharpen her claws on my prose. > >- Jed I must address this thread because unfortunately Jed Rothwell has not been honest again. Despite my reluctance to waste bandwidth, Rothwell has created a new thread woven with his disingenuity. On his censored (and misnamed) LENR/CANR website is the following: "PROCEEDINGS Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) Cambridge, Massachusetts 24 - 29 August 2003 Papers are listed by the principal author's last name. " which thus falsely claims to list all papers presented at ICCF-10. Rothwell knows this list of titles is censored, just as he knows it is his right to do so, but Rothwell expects readers to believe his faux innocence when there has instead been much confabulation and censorship on his part. The fact is that Jed and Ed, maintainers of the long-censored LENR/CANR website, simply removed our three papers' titles from the ICCF10 list, including two which were on the original ICCF10 oral presenters list, because of reasons including what appears to have been an attempt at plagiarism (addressed once here already). Rothwell knows this, and knows what this about, and plays dumb, as is his right and pathetic modus operandi. Furthermore, beyond the titles not being listed for two years, the three censored ICCF10 papers were shared on CDROM, through the web, in pdf format, and in hard copy, and by snail mail to Jed and Ed. Jed wanted permission to edit the papers, and did not receive it because he is not a scientist and has a history of inaccuracy. Most objectionable about Jed's faux innocence is that this was brought up before (like so many complaints by so many to Jed) and yet his disingenuity continued even after this was previously brought up; and further the errors (which they could have elected to simply correct) were maintained at the censored and misnamed LENR/CANR website. As noted Ed Storms and Jed Rothwell have their right to do so, consistent with their agenda. Therefore, for any serious scientist or student, the papers (and for those interested the first two were oral presentations on day 1 and day 2 of the meeting) were: Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003). Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003). Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate the Optimal Operating Point?", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003). It was an honor to present two oral papers and an open demonstration with over 250% (excess with respect to an ohmic control) at ICCF10, so it is useless to address the rest of Mr. Rothwell's disingenuous statements slickly blended with his ubiquitous ad hominem because truth to Rothwell is like a "mirrorless"-attack on the Medusa. Dr. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 20:21:57 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 iB54Kl4k020142; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB54Ki0T020094; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:20:44 -0800 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: comments on the Cirillo paper Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:20:24 +1100 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 ultra5.eskimo.com id iB54KS4k019940 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56784 X-Loop: vortex-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, 03 Dec 2004 10:57:47 -0900: Hi, [snip] >BTW, I see the referenced medical web site uses "KeV". The prefix "k" >(small k) is the standard prefix for kilo-, even though "M" is the standard >prefix for mega-. Necessary, because lower case m is the prefix for milli. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 21:35:02 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 iB55YvjX027601; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:34:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB55YtrF027566; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:34:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:34:55 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 20:42:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Dual electron catalysed fusion Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56785 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:51 AM 12/5/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 03 Dec 2004 11:06:54 -0900: >Hi Horace, >>If a pair of deuterium hydrinos fuse, or if two electrons are involved in D >>+ D catalysis, without the electrons "falling into the Coulomb well" and >>thus gaining kinetic energy, the resulting highly *de-energized* neutral >>nucleus resulting from multiple quantum wavefunction collapse would be >>momentarily free to migrate into heavy nucleii. Thus is obtained heavy >>nucleus LENR without any characteristic gamma or particle signatures. >[snip] >Could you please explain this in terms I can understand (it sounds very >interesting)? i.e. what does "multiple quantum wavefunction collapse" mean >in physical terms, and why is the newly formed He4 nucleus neutral? What >does >*de-energized* mean? Well, being an amateur with only one college physics class to my credit, this is all way over my head. However, being a member of the lunatic free energy fringe, what, me worry? Besides, I feel certain you have a very good idea already what these things mean. 8^) The quantum wavefunction of a particle is a function that provides by location the probability amplitude for finding a particle. The square root of the probability amplitude is the probability density, the probability of finding the particle per volume of space. The amplitude can be summed over a volume to determine the probability amplitude of the particle being present in a given volume. The Schroedinger equation can be used to compute the wavefuntion of a particle or orbital particle system through time. In some interpretations of quantum mechanics, a particle has no real existence until measured, only a potentiality for existence, its wavefunction. Further its wavefunction extends throughout the universe, but most of its amplitude is located in a small volume. Once the location of a particle is measured, it can have a very specific location. Its wavefunction then has no meaning at all. It is said to be "collapsed". The probability of finding that particle miles away was non-zero before the collapse and exactly zero after the collapse. When the event of fusion occurs, the multiple wavefunctions of the constituent particles essentially become the wavefunction of a single particle. Fusion then represents an observational event. The wavefunctions of the constituent particles cease to exist per se. Their wavefunctions collapse, and are replaced by a new wavefunction. In this respect, the collapse of the wavefunctions, fusion is an event similar to an observation. A similar collapse occurs at the moment of a tunneling event, and fusion and tunneling may in fact be the same thing. The wavefunctions of the electron and nucleus of a hydrino share the same center of charge. However, the wavefunction of the electron is spread all over the place, not just located at the center of charge. The energy of the electron *as a point particle* depends on how close it is located to the nucleus. The closer a point electron is to a point nucleus, the less potential energy the system has. If an electron "falls into the nucleus" it gains kinetic energy equal to the potential energy lost by the fall. If a point sized electron could magically be transported to the location of a point charge nucleus without gaining the corresponding kinetic energy, it would take an infinite amount of energy to separate them. I would call such a system highly *de-energized*. As I showed in regards to a specific case of electron catalyzed fusion, the electron gains no kinetic energy at all, yet ends up in the nucleus at the conclusion of the fusion. The question at hand: just how big is that fused nucleus at the time of wavefunction collapse? Providing that answer requires experimental work. In fact, the existence of even wavefunction collapse is still an issue of debate. In the case of hydrino fusion, the electrons have a center of charge located at the nucleus center. If the hydrino electron(s) join in the wavefunction collapse, they can be located in the nucleus with no lateral translation of charge whatsoever, and no relative velocity change. Once again the resulting nucleus can end up *de-energized*. Just how de-energized depends on the initial size of the resulting system wavefunction, and other variables I listed earlier. Electrons in compressed orbitals, i.e. with compressed wavefunctions, can essentially reinflate their orbitals to an equilibrium with the ZPE sea, according to Puthoff. Unless the electron(s) are captured by the new nucleus (not feasible in a stable way for either 2H or 4He) they should be free to tap energy from the ZPF and expand to a stable orbital. In the case of dual electron catalyzed D + D fusion, we have: D+ + D+ + e- + e- --> He4 --> He4++ + e- + e- The middle step, upon wavefunction collapse to a point, is a neutral He4 particle. It might be asked exactly why in D + D fusion it could be expected that the hydrino electrons collapse along with the tunneling nuclei. One answer is that it is energetically expected. In superconductors, tunneling of electrons across Josephson junctions is done by pairs more often than singly. When the hydrino nuclei wavefunctions collapse, their individual centers of charge move. It is thus necessary for the centers of charge of the electrons to move similarly, else the tunneling would be energetically denied. Since the two electrons tunnel simultaneously, their total center of charge does not change at all, just like the total center of charge of the nuclei do not move either. The electrons thus exhibit equal but opposite momentum exchanges just like cooper pairs, and thus should tend tunnel together. The tunneling collapse of the electrons wavefunctions returns potential energy to the ZPF, but that is the very place it long-term borrowed it in the first place. This of course is all highly speculative, and may even involve mixed metaphors. It certainly is *not* a conventional way to look at these things. On the other hand it may provide a useful starting point for analysis under various interpretations in that it makes a bit of common sense regarding some things which otherwise make no sense at all. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 21:49:05 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 iB55mwjX030482; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:48:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB55mvv0030468; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:48:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:48:57 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 20:56:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: comments on the Cirillo paper Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56786 X-Loop: vortex-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 3:20 PM 12/5/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:57:47 -0900: >Hi, >[snip] >>BTW, I see the referenced medical web site uses "KeV". The prefix "k" >>(small k) is the standard prefix for kilo-, even though "M" is the standard >>prefix for mega-. > >Necessary, because lower case m is the prefix for milli. Only absolutely necessary to get single character prefixes. They could have used M for kilo- and MM for mega- or some other multi-character arrangements like those used in the petrolium industry. It was the objective of the standardization to get rid of just those kinds of things, so yes, it was necessary. After M the abbreviations are all capitalized for the positive exponents, whether the negative exponent abbreviatons match on first letter or not. For example, 10^18 is "exa-" or prefix "E", yet 10^-18 is "atto" or prefix "a". Similarly true for peta- and femto-, tera- and pico-, and giga- and nano-. All the negative exponent prefixes have small letters. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 21:50:53 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 iB55oljX030909; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:50:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB55ojmA030880; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:50:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:50:45 -0800 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, 4 Dec 2004 20:58:03 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56787 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:13 PM 12/4/4, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Ooooops. Thanks. > > Murphy works in many ways. Was not aware of that. Thanks much for the text reposts! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 07:58:24 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 iB5FwG4k007313; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:58:16 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5FwDc0007298; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:58:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:58:13 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001201c4dae2$d21a0080$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231627.02069910@pop.theworld.com> Subject: Re: Chicea, Iwamura and carbon Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 07:55:05 -0800 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/56788 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz writes, > The vacancies of current interest to me are Frenkel defects, > and they can also be induced by high dose rate irradiation, as we have > shown for years. > There is an article which is pending or just out in Hal Fox's J. New Energy > showing evidence of "lattice quakes" as the early large number of Frenkel defects > collapse in some of our samples. This is most interesting, for several reasons - one being the potential ability to engineer active materials which do not require Pd, or at least do not require as much of it. Certain ceramics seem like they could be good candidates. I found some background info on the web about Frenkel Defects for those like myself who were not up to speed on this. Historically, point defects in crystals were first considered in ionic crystals, but not in metal crystals. The reason was that some known properties of ionic crystals (ion migration at high temperatures) could be understood for the first time in terms of point defects, while no special properties of metals (historically) were in similar need of an explanation, nor were there obvious uses. Frenkel defects are usually distinguished from ionic or Schottky defects, as there is no (or only a negligible) *volume expansion* of the crystal when Frenkel defects are formed. This builds in stress, which could be beneficial for CF. Researchers with a chemical or ceramics background tend to classify all point defects in the category "Schottky" or "Frenkel". In this classification, Frenkel defects do not appear in thermal equilibrium but may be produced by energetic irradiation which transfers sufficient energy to crystal atoms to displace atoms into adjoining interstitial sites while at the same time creating a vacancy. I hope that Mitchell has the time to elaborate a little further on using Frenkel defects and whether or not he sees this leading to alternative (cheaper) active materials for use as an LENR matrix, and what kind of lifetime he sees for such a cathode. I guess (thinking aloud) that an ideal implementation would be the kind of "warm" fusion devices with low-energy accelerator-driven or electrostatically-driven deuterons - which device can both create the needed defects (which are probably fairly transitory) while at the same time provide some or all of the EMF needed to drive the fusion reaction.... Something along the lines of using a solid target in a Farnsworth-type fusor at 20 keV ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 08:15:47 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 iB5GFc4k012327; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 08:15:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5GFaXV012314; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 08:15:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 08:15:36 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net Message-ID: <41B34097.C0E7302@centurytel.net> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:08:39 +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: Papers by M. Swartz References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56789 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > I'd like to see automatic HTML filters in all newslists. > HTML is just worms waiting to happen. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > At 11:13 PM 12/4/4, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > Ooooops. Thanks. > > Murphy works in many ways. Was not aware of that. > > Horace wrote: > > Thanks much for the text reposts! Hi All, Turning off html is both courteous and sanitary. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 09:23:40 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 iB5HNQ4k030715; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:23:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5HNONV030700; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:23:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:23:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c4daee$b80f5260$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Dual electron catalysed fusion Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:20:29 -0800 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/56790 X-Loop: vortex-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 writes, > The quantum wavefunction of a particle is a function that provides by > location the probability amplitude for finding a particle. The square root > of the probability amplitude is the probability density, the probability of > finding the particle per volume of space..... A similar collapse occurs at > the moment of a tunneling event, and fusion and tunneling may in fact be > the same thing. Reading this post again, but in the broader context of both "probability waves" and how they can be enhanced... and also in the context of Frenkel defects (being caused by radiation), brings to mind once again a particular experiment. I have this particular technology filed away in the category: "why isn't this a commercial product yet", alongside the work of Randall Mills, et al. Rather than repeat the curious details, here is a 12 yr old post to sci.physics.fusion: http://tinyurl.com/5fejp "From successfully obtaining cold fusion on demand, we have an experimental proof of Ying's general theory of 'using incident stimulation bosons to grab decay channels out of probability space into normal space, and thus enhancing probability' ....and then there is the inevitable skeptical reply from Britz (the only Dieter I know who is worth consulting with about an energy anomaly is a VW mechanic....) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 11:44:39 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 iB5JiW4k008427; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:44:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5JiPYI008394; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:44:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:44:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00a101c4db02$6a2147c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <001e01c4daee$b80f5260$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: What the [bleep] Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:41:28 -0800 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/56791 X-Loop: vortex-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.whatthebleep.com/ Held over for 18 weeks in Sebastopol (did M. Goldes buy up all the tickets?) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 12:22:51 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 iB5KMljX012113; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:22:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5KMjoH012105; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:22:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:22:45 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205150822.03a00030@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:22:45 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz Cc: Mitchell Swartz In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231453.020373b8@pop.theworld.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231453.020373b8@pop.theworld.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <2AsStC.A.A9C.V42sBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56792 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > On his censored (and misnamed) LENR/CANR website is the following: >"PROCEEDINGS Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-10) >Cambridge, Massachusetts 24 - 29 August 2003 >Papers are listed by the principal author's last name. " > which thus falsely claims to list all papers presented at ICCF-10. Incorrect. Those are all the papers submitted to the proceedings. I do not include papers presented but never submitted. One or two were submitted to Peter Hagelstein but not to me, and the authors said they did not want me to upload them to LENR-CANR.org. > The fact is that Jed and Ed, maintainers of the long-censored LENR/CANR > website, >simply removed our three papers' titles from the ICCF10 list, including >two which were >on the original ICCF10 oral presenters list, because of reasons including >what appears to have been an attempt at plagiarism (addressed once here >already). Nope. Never happened. I deleted a few that never materialized, because after two years I assumed the authors have no intention of writing them. If the printed proceedings ever show up from Peter, and I find some papers included that I did not know about, I will add them to the list. > Furthermore, beyond the titles not being listed for two years, >the three censored ICCF10 papers were shared on CDROM, through the web, >in pdf format, and in hard copy, and by snail mail to Jed and Ed. I could not read the CDROM. Swartz never gave me a URL for the web. If he has one, he should repeat it HERE AND NOW, and I will transfer the paper to LENR-CANR in a day or two. If he will not post the URL here, all of the readers here will see that he is bullshitting us. I do not keep hard copies, and I will not scan them or upload them. > Therefore, for any serious scientist or student, the papers >(and for those interested the first two were oral presentations on day >1 and day 2 of the meeting) were: > >Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity >Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", >ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003). > >Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated >Electrically-Polarized >Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10, (2003). > >Swartz. M., "Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate >the Optimal Operating Point?", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10, (2003). Since I do not have ESP, I have no knowledge of these papers. Have they been submitted for the proceedings? I never saw them. Presumably they went to Peter. I have no idea what he has. He never told me anything or discussed the proceedings -- not a single e-mail message or phone call. I have no idea if or when he intends to publish them. If these papers have not been submitted for the proceedings, I will not include them in the list. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 12:48:58 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 iB5Kmk4k025573; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5Kmi1p025549; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:48:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:48:34 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! 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/56793 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz accuses us of censoring him and cutting his papers from indexes. Anyone who looks in our index will see that we list 28 papers by him. Obviously his statements are nonsense. We have "censored" three papers but we included 28 others by the same author?!? What kind of censorship would that be? Here is the list of papers in our index. They will remain in the index unless he publicly asks me to remove them: 1. Swartz, M.R., Quasi-one-dimensional model of electrochemical loading of isotopic fuel into a metal. Fusion Technol., 1992. 22: p. 296. 2. Swartz, M.R. A Method to Improve Algorithms Used to Detect Steady State Excess Enthalpy. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993. Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304. 3. Swartz, M.R. Some Lessons From Optical Examination of the PFC Phase-II Calorimetric Curves. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993. Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304. 4. Swartz, M.R., Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled to Reactions at an Electrode. Trans. Fusion Technol., 1994. 26(4T): p. 74. 5. Swartz, M.R. Generalized Isotopic Fuel Loading Equations. in International Symposium on Cold Fusion and Advanced Energy Sources. 1994. Belarusian State University, Minsk, Belarus: Fusion Information Center, Salt Lake City. 6. Swartz, M.R., Improved calculations involving energy release using a buoyancy transport correction. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 219. 7. Swartz, M.R., Possible deuterium production from light water excess enthalpy experiments using nickel cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 68. 8. Swartz, M.R., Potential for positional variations in flow calorimetric systems. 1996. 9. Swartz, M.R., The Relationship between Input Power and Enthalpic Behavior of Nickel Cathodes During Light Water Electrolysis. 1996. 10. Swartz, M.R., Four Definitions of Power Ratio used to Describe Excess Enthalpy in Solid-State Loading Systems. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 54. 11. Swartz, M.R., The Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 141. 12. Swartz, M.R., Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 68. 13. Swartz, M.R., Hydrogen Redistribution by Catastrophic Desorption in Selected Transition Metals. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(4): p. 26. 14. Swartz, M.R., Codeposition of palladium and deuterium. Fusion Technol., 1997. 32: p. 126. 15. Swartz, M.R., Consistency of the biphasic nature of excess enthalpy in solid-state anomalous phenomena with the quasi-one-dimensional model of isotope loading into a material. Fusion Technol., 1997. 31: p. 63. 16. Swartz, M.R., Phusons in nuclear reactions in solids. Fusion Technol., 1997. 31: p. 228. 17. Swartz, M.R., Explanation for Some Difference Between Reports of Excess Heat in Solid State Fusion Experiments. J. New Energy, 1997. 2(1): p. 60. 18. Swartz, M.R., Noise Measurement in Cold Fusion Systems. J. New Energy, 1997. 2(2): p. 56. 19. Swartz, M.R. Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments. in The Seventh International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1998. Vancouver, Canada: ENECO, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT. 20. Swartz, M.R., The Importance of Controlling Zero-Input Electrical Power Offset. J. New Energy, 1998. 3(1): p. 14. 21. Swartz, M.R., Generality of Optimal Operating Point Behavior in Low Energy Nuclear Systems. J. New Energy, 1999. 4(2): p. 218-228. 22. Swartz, M.R. and G. Verner, Bremsstrahlung in Hot and Cold Fusion. J. New Energy, 1999. 3(4): p. 90-101. 23. Swartz, M.R., et al. Importance of nondimensional numbers in cold fusion. in Symposium on New Energy. 1999. Salt Lake City, UT. 24. Swartz, M.R., Further confirmation of optimal operating point behavior. 1999. 25. Swartz, M.R., Optimal Operating Point Analysis of Dr. Mizuno's, Dr. Arata's and Other Data. 1999. 26. Swartz, M.R., Patterns of success in research involving low energy nuclear reactions- A metanalysis. 1999. 27. Swartz, M.R., Summary of the seventh international conference on cold fusion. Fusion Technol., 2000. 37: p. 99. 28. Swartz, M.R., G.M. Verner, and A.H. Frank. The impact of heavy water (D2O) on nickel-light water cold fusion systems. in The 9th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2002. Tsinghua Univ., Beijing, China: Tsinghua Univ. Press. His papers are listed in the index but there are none in the Library because he has never submitted one. I never upload papers unless the authors submit them, or tell me where to find them on the web and give me explicit, written permission. Dr. Li gave me 98 papers from the ICCF-9 proceedings, including one by Swartz. However, I have to get permission from the individual authors before uploading these papers. I have asked Swartz for permission twice: once by e-mail, once on this forum. Unless he responds with a clear "Yes," I will not upload his ICCF-9 paper. He may have written other papers which are not in the index, but I have no knowledge of them. That is because -- as I mentioned -- I do not have ESP. He may have submitted ICCF10 papers to Peter, but again, I know nothing about this. I am quite sure he never submitted any to me. He sent me a CDROM that I could not read -- as I told him repeatedly. I have no clue what was on it. I tossed it in the trash two minutes after determining it was unreadable. I do not know what papers he has on his own web site. I have not looked at it closely. If he has a paper there he would like me to copy, he will have to post the URL for the paper right here, in Vortex, and he will have to tell me in plain English that he gives me permission to copy it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 13:06:06 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 iB5L5tjX022524; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:05:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5L5sTY022517; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:05:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:05:54 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160055.00ba7358@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:05:40 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Papers by M. Swartz In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205150822.03a00030@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20041204231453.020373b8@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205150822.03a00030@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56794 X-Loop: vortex-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 dishonestly states: >"Incorrect. Those are all the papers submitted to the proceedings. I do >not include papers presented but never submitted. One or two were >submitted to Peter Hagelstein but not to me, and the authors said they did >not want me to upload them to LENR-CANR.org." This is just another obvious falsehood by Jed Rothwell, which requires a correction. My two papers, Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), and Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), were both listed originally for ICCF10, and assigned Monday and Tuesday for the dates. They were deleted at the long-censored LENR/CANR website. BTW, that censorship was confirmed in conversations by both Rothwell and Storms to others, whose names shall appear in the appropriate forum and time. Such conversations are inconsistent with Rothwell's faux innocence because said papers were on the list, scheduled for ICCF-10, and given. Only thereafter, Rothwell and Storms censored the papers as has been their m.o. Dr. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 13:07:05 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 iB5L6xjX023045; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:06:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5L6vhK023022; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:06:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:06:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:06:49 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56795 X-Loop: vortex-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 just another obvious falsehood by Jed Rothwell who tries to deflect the issue and a falsehood which requires a response. The actual issue involves the ICCF10 Titles. Nothing else. The actual issue is: The censored LENR-CANR "database" removed the two oral papers and one demonstration paper, pending for the ICCF10 Proceedings. Furthermore, when this was discussed, others contacted me with the same complaint. Despite Rothwell's changing the subject, our two papers, Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), and Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), were both listed originally for ICCF10, and assigned Monday and Tuesday for the dates. They were deleted at the long-censored LENR/CANR website. BTW, that censorship was confirmed in conversations by both Rothwell and Storms to others, whose names shall appear in the appropriate forum and time. Such conversations are inconsistent with Rothwell's faux innocence because said papers were on the list, scheduled for ICCF-10, and given. Only thereafter, Rothwell and Storms censored the papers as has been, unfortunately, their m.o. Dr. Mitchell Swartz The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 13:36:53 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 iB5Lah4k003654; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:36:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5LagjN003645; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:36:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:36:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:36:37 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> 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/56796 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > The censored LENR-CANR "database" removed the two oral papers >and one demonstration paper, pending for the ICCF10 Proceedings. >Furthermore, when this was discussed, others contacted me with the >same complaint. We include no oral papers in the LENR-CANR database. We only list papers that have been (or will be) published in journal or proceedings. Generally, we only list papers that are available to our readers and the general public, not privately circulated papers. There are a few in the database that have not circulated, such as the Amoco report, but I believe I deleted any others. If I find one I will delete it. As I said, I have no knowledge of what may or not have been submitted to Peter Hagelstein for ICCF10. If Swartz will publicly declare here that one, two or three of those titles was submitted, I will take his word for it, and add them to the database. I do not believe these mysterious "others" who complained to Swartz exist, but if they do exist they should have enough sense to contact me, or Storms, instead of complaining to Swartz. Some people apparently think we have godlike powers, we assembled the database by ESP, we know about all papers that have ever been published anywhere, and all 3,189 items in the database are correct and complete. For the record, that's incorrect. If authors do not inform me of problems I probably will not catch them. > Despite Rothwell's changing the subject, our two papers, >Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity >Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", >ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), >and >Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated >Electrically-Polarized >Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10, (2003), >were both listed originally for ICCF10, and assigned Monday and Tuesday >for the dates. They were deleted at the long-censored LENR/CANR website. They were deleted -- as I told Swartz about a dozen times -- because they were never sent to me, and I heard nothing about them. Naturally, I assumed they do not exist. I still assume that. Any conference paper that is never submitted will be deleted, obviously! The LENR-CANR database is a list of actual papers, not phantom papers. The deadline for ICCF10 papers passed quite a long time ago. As I recall, I also deleted phantom ICCF10 papers by Hagelstein and McKubre. Does Swartz think I have it in for them, as well? Mitch: Stop horsing around and wasting bandwidth. Cut the politics, the garbage and the idiotic accusations. Answer the following questions Yes or No. If you do not answer these questions Yes or No, here in this forum, in public, I will not add anything of yours to the database and I will not upload any of your papers: 1. Oral presentations do not count. Do these papers exist in writing? 2. Did you submit them to Peter Hagelstein? 3. Are they available on your web site and if so, would you like me to upload copies? 4. If you would like me to upload them, what is the exact URL? I will not go on a wild goose chase through your web site looking for them. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 13:48:41 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 iB5LmT4k006386; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:48:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5LmRwP006350; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:48:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:48:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205162823.020fa770@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:48:17 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: CF and Orientation . In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <6Y2j1.A.GjB.qI4sBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56797 X-Loop: vortex-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 02:04 AM 11/28/2004, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 11:11 PM 11/27/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >Hi, > > > >This is my first post. > > > >I was wondering if anyone in CF community has looked for evidence of a > >correlation between the orientation of a CF cell and the amount of excess > >heat produced. > > > >Perhaps the performance of a CF cell would change if the cell or some of its > >parts were rotated 90 degrees or even spun. > > > >This questions are based on the speculation that the direction of gravity > >(rather than the magnitude of gravity) may effect the performance of CF > >cells. > > > >Harry Veeder > > >I don't know of any gravitational effects related to actual CF. However, >Mitchell Schwartz, who posts here sometimes and is publiher of COLD FUSION >TIMES, has published on the existence of *calorimetry anomalies* relating >to gravity. Issues related to convection and stratification are important >to the design of reliable calorimeters. Improperly designed calorimeters >can give false data regarding CF. Calorimetry is vitally important to the >study of CF because the heat signature of CF does not appear concurrent >with the high energy particle emissions characteristic of hot fusion. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Horace is correct. The ideas are interesting. Regarding calorimeters, there are several possible ways both thermal stratification and Bernard instability can effect all and vertically-directed flow calorimeters, respectively. The latter can be corrected. Thus, continuum electromechanics (through possible Bernard instabilities both within and outside calorimeters) can be used to analyze these systems and suggest possible sources of error and means to improve calculations. The relevant papers are: ROLE OF GRAVITY IN PRODUCING ERRORS IN HORIZONTAL-FLOW CALORIMETERS ==================================================================== Swartz, M., "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy 1,1, 126-130 (1996) (*) Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) ROLE OF GRAVITY IN THERMAL STRATIFICATION ======================================== Swartz, M., "Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter", Journal of New Energy, 2, 219-221 (1996) Swartz, M., "Time Course of Thermal Stratification and Its Relevance to Flow Calorimeters", Journal of New Energy, 4, 4, 120-125, (2000). Also relevant ================== Swartz. M., "Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments", Proceedings of the 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, August 2-6, (1998) Swartz. M., G. Verner, A. Frank, H. Fox "Importance of Non-dimensional Numbers and Optimal Operating Points in Cold Fusion", Journal of New Energy, 4, 2, 215-217 (1999) Swartz, M., "Thermal Conduction and Non-differential Temperature Corrections to the Enthalpic Flow Equation", Journal of New Energy, 3, 1, 10-13, (1998) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 14:58:08 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 iB5Mvw4k021054; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:57:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB5MvtQH021033; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:57:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:57:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:57:40 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56798 X-Loop: vortex-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 continues his high-bandwidth falsehoods. First, Rothwell got the papers in title before ICCF10, in follow-up by email, in the listing FROM ICCF10, and thereafter over and over and over. Caught in his lies, he again changes the subject, but cannot tell the truth. Second, at least some of those who contacted me about the Storms-Rothwell censorship at the misnamed LENR/CANR website, DID contact at least one of them. Third, there is the following outright bogus Rothwell rant. >Rothwell: "1. Oral presentations do not count. Do these papers exist in >writing?" The proof that Rothwell is utterly disingenuous is that he was personally handed each of these papers (the papers, and not just the censored titles removed from the "List of Titles") when as a courtesy I drove him from Dr. Eugene Mallove's funeral in New Hampshire to Boston near the Boston Commons. The transfer of the papers in-hand to the disingenuous and ungrateful Rothwell was witnessed by people astonished at his claim, "Do these papers exist in writing?" His disingenuity is amazing. I could respond to the rest of Rothwell's cornucopia of falsehoods but they would just continue to flow. In cold fusion, we are very disappointed that Rothwell has continued to hurt the field for so long with his inaccurate posts, his constant disassembling of the truth, and his occasional bogus whopper calculation predictably followed by attacks on any scientist who might happen to catch his error. Dr. Mitchell Swartz ================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 18:27:47 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 iB62RejX029094; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:27:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB62Rckn029076; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:27:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:27:38 -0800 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: Dual electron catalysed fusion Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:27:29 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <93d7r09i4cl6k38kgrh2pd6m0c9hva3fru@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 iB62RYjX029043 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56799 X-Loop: vortex-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, 04 Dec 2004 20:42:11 -0900: Hi, [snip] >respect, the collapse of the wavefunctions, fusion is an event similar to >an observation. A similar collapse occurs at the moment of a tunneling >event, and fusion and tunneling may in fact be the same thing. Makes sense. > >The wavefunctions of the electron and nucleus of a hydrino share the same >center of charge. However, the wavefunction of the electron is spread all >over the place, not just located at the center of charge. > >The energy of the electron *as a point particle* depends on how close it is >located to the nucleus. The closer a point electron is to a point nucleus, >the less potential energy the system has. If an electron "falls into the >nucleus" it gains kinetic energy equal to the potential energy lost by the >fall. In theory yes, but you also need to conserve angular momentum, and as the radius shrinks the velocity has to go up. Before the electron can enter the nucleus, if I'm not mistaken, the velocity would have to exceed the speed of light (unless angular momentum is passed to the nucleus?). >If a point sized electron could magically be transported to the >location of a point charge nucleus without gaining the corresponding >kinetic energy, it would take an infinite amount of energy to separate >them. I would call such a system highly *de-energized*. I suspect that the key word here is "magically". ;) Perhaps you could explain why you believe that it would not gain kinetic energy? > >As I showed in regards to a specific case of electron catalyzed fusion, the >electron gains no kinetic energy at all, yet ends up in the nucleus at the >conclusion of the fusion. Sorry, I didn't read all of that post, partly because it was longish, and partly because I'm not all that taken with QM anyway. >The question at hand: just how big is that fused >nucleus at the time of wavefunction collapse? Providing that answer >requires experimental work. In fact, the existence of even wavefunction >collapse is still an issue of debate. Personally, I tend to take Einstein's view that wave function collapse is simply a mathematical statement of the fact that our knowledge of the situation has changed as a consequence of our having taken a measurement. Nevertheless that interpretation is one of the things on which my professor failed me many years ago. > >In the case of hydrino fusion, the electrons have a center of charge >located at the nucleus center. If the hydrino electron(s) join in the >wavefunction collapse, I doubt Mills would be too happy talking about wave functions in regard to his hydrinos. :) [snip] >Electrons in compressed orbitals, i.e. with compressed wavefunctions, can >essentially reinflate their orbitals to an equilibrium with the ZPE sea, >according to Puthoff. This isn't true for hydrinos, because as hydrinos shrink, the specifics of their orbits change, e.g. the De Broglie wavelength, and velocity etc. change, which I think means that if you were to plug the new numbers into Hal's equations, you would find that the new orbits are also stable. IOW there is no force that would tend to make them expand (once in such a new orbit). > Unless the electron(s) are captured by the new >nucleus (not feasible in a stable way for either 2H or 4He) they should be >free to tap energy from the ZPF and expand to a stable orbital. Perhaps, but wouldn't you also expect the Heisenberg bank to lay a claim for borrowed energy at the door of the newly created nucleus, which just happens to be brimming over with energy derived from all that excess mass? IOW the net result is going to be that any electron inflation energy simply detracts from the fusion energy of the nuclei whether or not that goes through the ZPE as an intermediary. I have also wondered, if it may not go further, and end up with the electron(s) being ejected with all of the fusion energy, in the form of kinetic energy. If so, this would make for a nice clean reaction, however no one doing CF seems to have observed the fast electrons. > >In the case of dual electron catalyzed D + D fusion, we have: > >D+ + D+ + e- + e- --> He4 --> He4++ + e- + e- > >The middle step, upon wavefunction collapse to a point, is a neutral He4 >particle. Yes, but with a very short life. In fact it might look rather like a cluster of 4 neutrons from the outside (which seems to be what you meant in your previous post, when you referred to neutral He4). I suspect that it would be a toss up whether or not the electrons were actually captured resulting in real neutrons, or ejected. However a cluster of 4 neutrons is energetically far less favourable than a He4 nucleus (28.83 MeV), so I suspect that the latter is going to be favoured by an extremely wide margin. > >It might be asked exactly why in D + D fusion it could be expected that the >hydrino electrons collapse along with the tunneling nuclei. One answer is >that it is energetically expected. In superconductors, tunneling of >electrons across Josephson junctions is done by pairs more often than >singly. When the hydrino nuclei wavefunctions collapse, their individual >centers of charge move. >It is thus necessary for the centers of charge of >the electrons to move similarly, else the tunneling would be energetically >denied. Not really, because the nuclei tunnel under influence of the nuclear force, while the interaction with the electrons is "only" electrostatic. Granted this may make a difference at the limit of the nuclear force range, but as the distance gets less the electrons become less and less relevant. >Since the two electrons tunnel simultaneously, their total center >of charge does not change at all, just like the total center of charge of >the nuclei do not move either. The electrons thus exhibit equal but >opposite momentum exchanges just like cooper pairs, and thus should tend >tunnel together. Actually, it's only necessary that the total momentum of the system as a whole be conserved, the momentum of the electrons isn't necessarily tied only to other electrons, and that of the nuclei not necessarily only to one another. >The tunneling collapse of the electrons wavefunctions >returns potential energy to the ZPF, but that is the very place it >long-term borrowed it in the first place. Can one "long-term borrow" energy from the ZPE? Surely according to HUP, only for a period inversely related to the amount of energy? > >This of course is all highly speculative, and may even involve mixed >metaphors. It certainly is *not* a conventional way to look at these >things. On the other hand it may provide a useful starting point for >analysis under various interpretations in that it makes a bit of common >sense regarding some things which otherwise make no sense at all. What do you consider makes no sense at all? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 19:32:46 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 iB63We4k028000; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:32:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB63WXkH027949; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:32:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:32:33 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:29:25 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56800 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harry Veeder wrote: > Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, > perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not > conserved in all contexts. > > Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'. Furthermore, consider the fusion process: d + d --> He + gamma When deuterium fuses in a vacuum the wavelength of resulting gamma radiation is relatively short. If deuterium is able fuse in a Pd matrix because it periodically experiences a charge reduction (not charge shielding) the wavelength of the radiation will be longer. If a CF cell produces longer wavelength emissions, it might be evidence that subatomic charge is variable (not conserved) in some contexts. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 19:39:59 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 iB63doPi029866; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:39:51 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB63dn6S029843; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:39:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:39:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002e01c4db45$37956320$f0027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Ceramics and material science Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 21:39:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002A_01C4DB12.D58A4740"; 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/56801 X-Loop: vortex-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_002A_01C4DB12.D58A4740 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_002B_01C4DB12.D58BCDE0" ------=_NextPart_001_002B_01C4DB12.D58BCDE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankJones made an interesting comment regarding ceramics in his post. = One of my objectives in studying the various threads in this group is = try to keep current on material sciences as it relates to the wonderful = new quasi metal-ceramic technology emerging. Our industry has so many = new products in theory stage waiting for these promising strange and = wondeful new materials.=20 For example.. an ultra high speed flywheel design awaits the material = that can withstand the rotational forces in excess of 250 thousand RPM. = To be economically feasible a compact flywheel would need to exceed 750 = thousand RPM. Shazzaam! an energy storage unit. I actually enjoy the crabbing back and forth between the posters because = in science there has never been anything quite like the internet for = open and free discussion.. err.. well perhaps a well placed kick to the = shins . Way back in the stone age ( 1950's ) we used to sit around talking about = the future, dreaming up great things to build. One was a suitcase one = man heliocopter that could fly nonstop from Houston and back from San = Antonio Texas. The copter we envisioned was powered by a small flywheel, = it was flown by computer ( mind you there were NO computers), the rotors = were opposing rotation driven by a stepless variable speed differential = torque proportioning box consisting of a variation of a ceramic = composite type of air bearing having self lubricating qualities. The = rotor blades would achieve a hardness by centripital forces creating = post tension permitting feathering control. The rotor blade would unfurl = like the material of an old fashion venetian blind. No tail rotor would = be required because the opposite rotation of the rotors would be = feathered and proportionally controlled plus the rotor assembly would = tilt for direction control. Today, 50 years later, the only thing awaiting is the ceramic-metal = materials technology. The Hutchinson Effect website is another hint = toward that possibliity. Interesting that some years later I read Joel = Chptr 2 about an army of locusts that do not jostle each other .. enter = through the window. Made me consider that it was a description of a one = man copter with a plastic windshield shaped like a grasshoppers head.. = hmmm The most enjoyable component of this group is the self discipline that = is demonstrated . Fuss if you may, BUT at the end of the day forgive , = remembering that opposing opinions may both be technically correct, just = different. Richard .=20 ------=_NextPart_001_002B_01C4DB12.D58BCDE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Jones made an interesting comment regarding = ceramics in=20 his post. One of my objectives in studying the various threads in this = group is=20 try to keep current on material sciences as it relates to the wonderful = new=20 quasi metal-ceramic technology emerging. Our industry has so many new = products=20 in theory stage waiting for these promising strange and wondeful new = materials.=20
 
For example.. an ultra high speed flywheel = design awaits=20 the material that can withstand the rotational forces in excess of 250 = thousand=20 RPM. To be economically feasible a compact flywheel would need to exceed = 750=20 thousand RPM. Shazzaam! an energy storage unit.
 
I actually enjoy the crabbing back and forth = between the=20 posters because in science there has never been anything quite like the = internet=20 for open and free discussion.. err.. well perhaps a well placed kick to = the=20 shins <grin>.
Way back in the stone age ( 1950's ) we used = to sit=20 around talking about the future, dreaming up  great things to = build. One=20 was a suitcase one man heliocopter that could fly nonstop from Houston = and back=20 from San Antonio Texas. The copter we envisioned was powered by a small=20 flywheel, it was flown by computer ( mind you there were NO = computers), the=20 rotors were opposing rotation driven by a stepless variable speed = differential=20 torque proportioning box consisting of a variation of a ceramic=20 composite type of air bearing having self lubricating qualities. = The rotor=20 blades would achieve a hardness by centripital forces creating post = tension=20 permitting feathering control. The rotor blade would unfurl like the = material of=20 an old fashion venetian blind. No tail rotor would be required because = the=20 opposite rotation of the rotors would be feathered and proportionally = controlled=20 plus the  rotor assembly would tilt for direction = control.
Today, 50 years later, the only thing  = awaiting is=20 the ceramic-metal materials technology. The Hutchinson Effect website is = another=20 hint toward that possibliity. Interesting that some years later I read = Joel=20 Chptr 2 about an army of locusts that do not jostle each other .. enter = through=20 the window. Made me consider that it was a description of a one man = copter with=20 a plastic windshield shaped like a grasshoppers head.. hmmm
 
The most enjoyable component of this group is = the self=20 discipline that is demonstrated . Fuss if you may, BUT at the end of the = day=20 forgive , remembering that opposing opinions may both=20 be technically correct, just different.
 
Richard
. 

 

------=_NextPart_001_002B_01C4DB12.D58BCDE0-- ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C4DB12.D58A4740 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002901c4db45$200a9f90$f0027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C4DB12.D58A4740-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 00:14:19 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 iB68EBlc024179; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 00:14:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB68E8wW024157; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 00:14:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 00:14:08 -0800 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, 5 Dec 2004 23:21:02 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Dual electron catalysed fusion Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56803 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: And we cook a metaphor stew ... >>The wavefunctions of the electron and nucleus of a hydrino share the same >>center of charge. However, the wavefunction of the electron is spread all >>over the place, not just located at the center of charge. >> >>The energy of the electron *as a point particle* depends on how close it is >>located to the nucleus. The closer a point electron is to a point nucleus, >>the less potential energy the system has. If an electron "falls into the >>nucleus" it gains kinetic energy equal to the potential energy lost by the >>fall. > >In theory yes, but you also need to conserve angular momentum, and as the >radius shrinks the velocity has to go up. Before the electron can enter >the nucleus, if I'm not mistaken, the velocity would have to exceed the >speed of light (unless angular momentum is passed to the nucleus?). In the case of electron catalysed fusion, this is not true. It would help if you would read the example I gave. In the case of dual hydrino fusion, the angular momentum will cancel if the spins are opposed before the tunneling. I should note that the tunneling to a central location between the two hydrino nuclei may require a high energy electron passing between them providing a tunneling location, a kind of tunneling nucleation. The spin of the catalytic electron would not be cancelled, but the catalytic electron would be a free electron and not hang around long anyway. > > >>If a point sized electron could magically be transported to the >>location of a point charge nucleus without gaining the corresponding >>kinetic energy, it would take an infinite amount of energy to separate >>them. I would call such a system highly *de-energized*. > >I suspect that the key word here is "magically". ;) >Perhaps you could explain why you believe that it would not gain kinetic >energy? I already did this. If you would like me to repost it I will do so. > >> >>As I showed in regards to a specific case of electron catalyzed fusion, the >>electron gains no kinetic energy at all, yet ends up in the nucleus at the >>conclusion of the fusion. > >Sorry, I didn't read all of that post, partly because it was longish, and >partly because I'm not all that taken with QM anyway. The post I did on electron catalysed fusion was not based on QM. It is pretty easy to follow, but also has the drawback that it is merely illustative and only a clue as to what might be described via quantum mechanics. >Personally, I tend to take Einstein's view that wave function collapse is >simply a mathematical statement of the fact that our knowledge of the >situation has changed as a consequence of our having taken a measurement. >Nevertheless that interpretation is one of the things on which my >professor failed me many years ago. > >> >>In the case of hydrino fusion, the electrons have a center of charge >>located at the nucleus center. If the hydrino electron(s) join in the >>wavefunction collapse, > >I doubt Mills would be too happy talking about wave functions in regard to >his hydrinos. :) This is one of those times experiment might outweigh theory, even Mills' theory, which stikes me as having a number of flaws. Just because his theory *might* have pointed the way to a possible unknown atomic structure does not mean his theory is right in all respects. >[snip] >>Electrons in compressed orbitals, i.e. with compressed wavefunctions, can >>essentially reinflate their orbitals to an equilibrium with the ZPE sea, >>according to Puthoff. > >This isn't true for hydrinos, because as hydrinos shrink, the specifics of >their orbits change, e.g. the De Broglie wavelength, and velocity etc. >change, which I think means that if you were to plug the new numbers into >Hal's equations, you would find that the new orbits are also stable. IOW >there is no force that would tend to make them expand (once in such a new >orbit). All you are really saying here is that the equilibrium point may not be at the Bohr ground state. The final energy deficit thus is then even less than 13 eV. This is just fine and dandy and still consistent with the proposed catalysed fusion. > >> Unless the electron(s) are captured by the new >>nucleus (not feasible in a stable way for either 2H or 4He) they should be >>free to tap energy from the ZPF and expand to a stable orbital. > >Perhaps, but wouldn't you also expect the Heisenberg bank to lay a claim >for borrowed energy at the door of the newly created nucleus, which just >happens to be brimming over with energy derived from all that excess mass? As I noted earlier, some of the excess mass will be radiated away due to the presence of one or more unbound (by the weak force) electrons in the nucleus. Some of the excess mass may be required to inflate the free electron orbitals. The rest has to be borrowed from the ZPF. >IOW the net result is going to be that any electron inflation energy >simply detracts from the fusion energy of the nuclei whether or not that >goes through the ZPE as an intermediary. Yes indeed. That is in fact my main point. I am attemtping to explain whay the fusion energy is not observed in the form of typical signature radiation, why the branching ratios are changed. >I have also wondered, if it may not go further, and end up with the >electron(s) being ejected with all of the fusion energy, in the form of >kinetic energy. If so, this would make for a nice clean reaction, however >no one doing CF seems to have observed the fast electrons. Exactly! No super-energetic electons, no gammas, no fast neutrons or protons. The energy is released gradually, i.e. in many small steps, thus probably mostly as comaparatively low energy photons. > >> >>In the case of dual electron catalyzed D + D fusion, we have: >> >>D+ + D+ + e- + e- --> He4 --> He4++ + e- + e- >> >>The middle step, upon wavefunction collapse to a point, is a neutral He4 >>particle. > >Yes, but with a very short life. In fact it might look rather like a >cluster of 4 neutrons from the outside (which seems to be what you meant >in your previous post, when you referred to neutral He4). I suspect that >it would be a toss up whether or not the electrons were actually captured >resulting in real neutrons, or ejected. The creation of "real" neutrons depends on the distribution (extent) of the inital wavefunction and how long it survives. My thinking on this realy hasn't gone that far. The important thing is that the small wavefunction and low electorn kinetic energy, and thus the de-energizing of the nucleus, creates a strong bond between the electrons and the nucleus, and thus it is neutral. THe sum of the charges is zero, and the wavefuntion is small, thus the He4 in this state is free to migrate into a heavy nucleus like Pd. >However a cluster of 4 neutrons is energetically far less favourable than >a He4 nucleus (28.83 MeV), so I suspect that the latter is going to be >favoured by an extremely wide margin. > >> >>It might be asked exactly why in D + D fusion it could be expected that the >>hydrino electrons collapse along with the tunneling nuclei. One answer is >>that it is energetically expected. In superconductors, tunneling of >>electrons across Josephson junctions is done by pairs more often than >>singly. When the hydrino nuclei wavefunctions collapse, their individual >>centers of charge move. >>It is thus necessary for the centers of charge of >>the electrons to move similarly, else the tunneling would be energetically >>denied. > >Not really, because the nuclei tunnel under influence of the nuclear force, > while the interaction with the electrons is "only" electrostatic. I don't think I've made it clear what I am suggesting for the hydrino tunneling scenario. The idea is that both hydrinos tunnel to a central point between the nuclei. Their wavefuntions both extend to that central point so the tunneling is feasible, but the storng force does not extend the full distance between the nuclei, which is twice the distance each individual nucleus is capable of tunneling with useful probablity. Tunneling probability drops off very fast with distance, so two nuclei tunneling to the same central location is far more likely than one nucleus tunneling the full (double) distance. >Granted this may make a difference at the limit of the nuclear force >range, but as the distance gets less the electrons become less and less >relevant. I don't know how the strong force might actually be computed into this. I don't think it plays no part in the Schroedinger equation as is though. > >>Since the two electrons tunnel simultaneously, their total center >>of charge does not change at all, just like the total center of charge of >>the nuclei do not move either. The electrons thus exhibit equal but >>opposite momentum exchanges just like cooper pairs, and thus should tend >>tunnel together. > >Actually, it's only necessary that the total momentum of the system as a >whole be conserved, the momentum of the electrons isn't necessarily tied >only to other electrons, and that of the nuclei not necessarily only to >one another. > >>The tunneling collapse of the electrons wavefunctions >>returns potential energy to the ZPF, but that is the very place it >>long-term borrowed it in the first place. > >Can one "long-term borrow" energy from the ZPE? The universe is here isn't it? Atoms don't radiate and don't collapse. >Surely according to HUP, >only for a period inversely related to the amount of energy? That depends on the assumptions. The HUP itself might even be used to permanently borrow energy. I can repost some old thinking along those lines if you would like, if I can find it. Stange you would bring up the Heisenberg when hydrinos themselves are denied by the HUP - their wavelengths are way too compact for the energy they carry. > >> >>This of course is all highly speculative, and may even involve mixed >>metaphors. It certainly is *not* a conventional way to look at these >>things. On the other hand it may provide a useful starting point for >>analysis under various interpretations in that it makes a bit of common >>sense regarding some things which otherwise make no sense at all. > >What do you consider makes no sense at all? The fact that there is plenty of evidence for heavy nucleus LENR at low potetials, extending all the way back to Bockris et al CF experiments at TAMU in 1989-90. There is an abundance of evidence for "beyond chemical" energy coming from cells without accompanying nulcear signature radiation. There is evidence of helium and tritium formation. This all boils down to nuclear reactions having unexplained branching ratios. None of this makes any sense at all by ordinarily publishable and patentable standards. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 06:06:08 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 iB6E63eI002327; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:06:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6E5tCH002291; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:05:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:05:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206083835.021332b8@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 08:58:32 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Dual electron catalysed fusion In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <8-cO-D.A.rj.DdGtBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56804 X-Loop: vortex-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 03:21 AM 12/6/2004, Horace Heffner wrote: >The fact that there is plenty of evidence for heavy nucleus LENR at low >potetials, extending all the way back to Bockris et al CF experiments at >TAMU in 1989-90. There is an abundance of evidence for "beyond chemical" >energy coming from cells without accompanying nulcear signature radiation. >There is evidence of helium and tritium formation. This all boils down to >nuclear reactions having unexplained branching ratios. None of this makes >any sense at all by ordinarily publishable and patentable standards. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner FWIW, the branching ratios are explainable. There is cold fusion of active fully loaded palladium, but the reactions are high, not low, energy (1). The desired reactions are not chemically assisted, but lattice-enabled. In any case, this is the only place I disagree with Horace about this. In cold fusion , the branches are conventional, except that involving energy transfer to the lattice where quite a few ~40 millivolt phonons remove the ~20+ MeV energy from the excited deuteron nucleus, as it goes to ground state and the lattice temperature heats up (a.k.a. 'excess heat'). As discussed elsewhere (2), most of the branches are the same as in hot fusion, but there is insufficient energy at room temperature kT to get to the neutron emission branch from the first excited state of the deuteron nucleus. The photon (gamma) emission is forbidden anyway (3), but at extremely hot fusion temperatures, such emission happens a bit anyway for several reasons, but does not do so at cold fusion temperatures. Also, at cold fusion temperatures, the penetrating ionizing radiation shifts to lower frequencies (actually the near IR), where it locked into the palladium by 'skin-depth' (4). Those radiations then can couple to the deuteron flow within the lattice, as a previous thread briefly discussed. In summary, the physics and branches available involving cold fusion appears conventional except for the coupling to the lattice through the phonons (only when they are present (5-7)). Dr. Mitchell Swartz --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Swartz, M., "Possible Deuterium Production From Light Water Excess Enthalpy Experiments using Nickel Cathodes", Journal of New Energy, 3, 68-80 (1996) 2. Swartz, M., "Phusons in Nuclear Reactions in Solids", Fusion Technology, 31, 228-236 (March 1997). 3. Schwinger, J. Cold Fusion Theory, Proc. ICCF-4, Vol. 4, EPRI TR-104188-V4 (July 1994) 4. Swartz, M, G. Verner, "Bremsstrahlung in Hot and Cold Fusion", J New Energy, 3, 4, 90-101 (1999) 5-7. Swartz. M.., "Patterns of Failure in Cold Fusion Experiments", Proceedings of the 33RD Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion, IECEC-98-I229, Colorado Springs, CO, August 2-6, (1998); Swartz, M, "Noise Measurement in cold fusion systems, Journal of New Energy, 2, 2, 56-61 (1997); Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 07:12:56 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 iB6FCelc028300; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 07:12:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6FCbsm028275; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 07:12:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 07:12:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206095749.04225c70@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 10:12:27 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> 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/56805 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Jed Rothwell continues his high-bandwidth falsehoods. > >First, Rothwell got the papers in title before ICCF10, in follow-up by email, >in the listing FROM ICCF10, and thereafter over and over and over. Yes. As I said, I cut them from the database along with McKubre, Hagelstein, and several others who never submitted papers. (As far as I know they did not.) A title does not a paper make. >Second, at least some of those who contacted me about the Storms-Rothwell >censorship at the misnamed LENR/CANR website, DID contact at least >one of them. And who would that be? Santa Claus? >Third, there is the following outright bogus Rothwell rant. > >>Rothwell: "1. Oral presentations do not count. Do these papers exist in >>writing?" > >The proof that Rothwell is utterly disingenuous is that he was personally >handed >each of these papers (the papers, and not just the censored titles removed >from the >"List of Titles") when as a courtesy I drove him from Dr. Eugene Mallove's >funeral >in New Hampshire to Boston near the Boston Commons. That did not look like a paper to me. It was a couple of graphs with no explanation of what they were, or what they meant. Was that submitted to Hagelstein for the proceedings? Anyway, I do not keep paper copies of anything. If you have a paper, you must upload it to your web site, and then give me the URL. If you do not consider this paper -- or these graphs, or whatever they were -- good enough for your website, and you do not consider them good enough to submit to Hagelstein, then I suppose they are not good enough for LENR-CANR.org. So let's drop the subject. >The transfer of the papers in-hand to the disingenuous and >ungrateful Rothwell was witnessed by people astonished at his >claim, "Do these papers exist in writing?" His disingenuity is amazing. I do not deal with papers on paper. I cannot upload them and I will not scan them. I did read those graphs but I could not understand what they were about, so I tossed them out. > I could respond to the rest of Rothwell's cornucopia of falsehoods but they >would just continue to flow. In cold fusion, we are very disappointed >that Rothwell >has continued to hurt the field for so long with his inaccurate posts . . . Whose we? Do you have worms? If you want something uploaded, cut the crap, answer the following questions, and it WILL be uploaded within a few hours: 1. Oral presentations do not count. Do these papers exist in writing? 2. Did you submit them to Peter Hagelstein? 3. Are they available on your web site and if so, would you like me to upload copies? 4. If you would like me to upload them, what is the exact URL? I will not go on a wild goose chase through your web site looking for them. Of course you will not do that because you want to pretend I am persecuting you by listing only 28 of your papers instead of 30. That is a peculiar way to persecute someone! If you would like, I will delete the other 28. Just ask, in writing, in this forum. Then you will have a much larger imaginary beef. You can go around complaining I deleted 28 papers, and you deny you ever asked me. A few idiots may believe you. What are you going to if I go ahead and add those two titles, anyway? You will have nothing to scream about. No pretend persecution to whine about. I think I will do that, just out of spite! Why not? Even if the papers do not exist, no one will ever know, because no one will read the ICCF10 proceedings even if they are published. A little more garbage in the database will not hurt. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:15:20 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 iB6GFDeI000992; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:15:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6GFCQq000977; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:15:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:15:12 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:14:48 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database 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/56807 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Okay! Even though I doubt these papers exist in any tangible sense, I have added them to our database. I hope that makes everyone happy. Except Swartz, obviously. I hope that frustrates him now that he has nothing to complain about. The complete list is attached. This list comes from the "All Authors" index, under "S": http://lenr-canr.org/LibFrame2.html It is also in the Complete Bibliography: http://lenr-canr.org/DetailOnly.htm Swartz is not listed in the first index "Authors with papers here" because he has not submitted any papers to LENR-CANR. (Or at least, we never actually got any from him.) His phantom ICCF10 papers are not listed in the "Special Collection" screen because they are not part of our collection, obviously. They may or may not be part of the official printed proceedings, but I doubt those proceedings will ever materialize, so whether his papers are "included" in them or not is more of a theological or metaphysical question than a practical one. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Swartz, M.R., Quasi-one-dimensional model of electrochemical loading of isotopic fuel into a metal. Fusion Technol., 1992. 22: p. 296. 2. Swartz, M.R. A Method to Improve Algorithms Used to Detect Steady State Excess Enthalpy. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993. Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304. 3. Swartz, M.R. Some Lessons From Optical Examination of the PFC Phase-II Calorimetric Curves. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993. Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304. 4. Swartz, M.R., Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled to Reactions at an Electrode. Trans. Fusion Technol., 1994. 26(4T): p. 74. 5. Swartz, M.R. Generalized Isotopic Fuel Loading Equations. in International Symposium on Cold Fusion and Advanced Energy Sources. 1994. Belarusian State University, Minsk, Belarus: Fusion Information Center, Salt Lake City. 6. Swartz, M.R., Improved calculations involving energy release using a buoyancy transport correction. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 219. 7. Swartz, M.R., Possible deuterium production from light water excess enthalpy experiments using nickel cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 68. 8. Swartz, M.R., Potential for positional variations in flow calorimetric systems. 1996. 9. Swartz, M.R., The Relationship between Input Power and Enthalpic Behavior of Nickel Cathodes During Light Water Electrolysis. 1996. 10. Swartz, M.R., Four Definitions of Power Ratio used to Describe Excess Enthalpy in Solid-State Loading Systems. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 54. 11. Swartz, M.R., The Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air Surrounding a Calorimeter. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 141. 12. Swartz, M.R., Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 68. 13. Swartz, M.R., Hydrogen Redistribution by Catastrophic Desorption in Selected Transition Metals. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(4): p. 26. 14. Swartz, M.R., Codeposition of palladium and deuterium. Fusion Technol., 1997. 32: p. 126. 15. Swartz, M.R., Consistency of the biphasic nature of excess enthalpy in solid-state anomalous phenomena with the quasi-one-dimensional model of isotope loading into a material. Fusion Technol., 1997. 31: p. 63. 16. Swartz, M.R., Phusons in nuclear reactions in solids. Fusion Technol., 1997. 31: p. 228. 17. Swartz, M.R., Explanation for Some Difference Between Reports of Excess Heat in Solid State Fusion Experiments. J. New Energy, 1997. 2(1): p. 60. 18. Swartz, M.R., Noise Measurement in Cold Fusion Systems. J. New Energy, 1997. 2(2): p. 56. 19. Swartz, M.R. Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments. in The Seventh International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1998. Vancouver, Canada: ENECO, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT. 20. Swartz, M.R., The Importance of Controlling Zero-Input Electrical Power Offset. J. New Energy, 1998. 3(1): p. 14. 21. Swartz, M.R., Generality of Optimal Operating Point Behavior in Low Energy Nuclear Systems. J. New Energy, 1999. 4(2): p. 218-228. 22. Swartz, M.R. and G. Verner, Bremsstrahlung in Hot and Cold Fusion. J. New Energy, 1999. 3(4): p. 90-101. 23. Swartz, M.R., et al. Importance of nondimensional numbers in cold fusion. in Symposium on New Energy. 1999. Salt Lake City, UT. 24. Swartz, M.R., Further confirmation of optimal operating point behavior. 1999. 25. Swartz, M.R., Optimal Operating Point Analysis of Dr. Mizuno's, Dr. Arata's and Other Data. 1999. 26. Swartz, M.R., Patterns of success in research involving low energy nuclear reactions- A metanalysis. 1999. 27. Swartz, M.R., Summary of the seventh international conference on cold fusion. Fusion Technol., 2000. 37: p. 99. 28. Swartz, M.R., G.M. Verner, and A.H. Frank. The impact of heavy water (D2O) on nickel-light water cold fusion systems. in The 9th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2002. Tsinghua Univ., Beijing, China: Tsinghua Univ. Press. 29. Swartz, M.R. and G. Verner. Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices. in Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, MA: in print. 30. Swartz, M.R. Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O. in Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, MA: in print. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:23:21 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 iB6GNBlc014936; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:23:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6GN8ua014912; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:23:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:23:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002101c4dbaf$739f5c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:20:05 -0800 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/56808 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ...real fast-food. A post arrived from another forum (Blaze Labs) which some observers here might find intriguing (I cannot vouch for the accuracy, but the experimenter is both credible (genius-level perhaps) and credentialed, so I will try to find out more details about the particular experiment). He says, "A few years ago, I had done experiments trying to measure the propagation speed within a standing wave, and I can say that propagation speeds much in excess of c were detected. In fact, it seemed that *within the near field,* the signal suffers no aberration...." Now we all know that *near fields* are a different beast - far removed form normal Hertzian electro-dynamics, but is there really a faster-than-lightspeed component to the near-field, in general, and is that component of the near field what makes it so markedly different? Suspend disbelief for a moment. As mentioned in previous postings about "excitons" and why LENR does occur at "apparently" low kinetic energy (actually not low, just greatly underestimated) or at least how that low energy can be multiplied enormously in certain physical structures, this above mentioned result from Blaze about near-fields, IF TRUE, might provide part of the answer. If excitons are the "operative structure" in some kinds of LENR and can be analogized to coincide geometrically with the phonon structure of certain types of containment matrices, then we suddenly have found what could be the driving force behind the increased level of containment - which is the effect of the FTL near-field. Actually we are not talking about just "containment" but pulsating containment in the terahertz frequency range. Coincidently, since excitons are on the geometric scale of the Casimir force, one wonders if the Casimir force itself is really all about the effects of an FTL near-field? ...not ot mention the implications of near-fields with regard to magnetic domains. IOW - it was suggested that phonon/exciton "pulsation," becomes another kind of inertial ultra-ultra-sound, an ICF reaction on a much smaller geometric scale... and with this additional near-field mechanism, then it becomes clearer that certain kinds of CF may involve a new kind of ICF (inertial confinement fusion) similar to solid-state sonofusion but on a much smaller scale... That scale being the one-and-only "crossover" region where EMF waves can overlaps with kinetic effects - because of identical wavelengths being possible. When an exciton becomes resonant with a modulated DC current, then exterior kinetic waves form on the exciton particle which may have a FTL component, and all that implies with regard to field-effects: the product being: In-Waves and Out-Waves - which can form a Standing Wave around the Wave-Center 'particle' (it's hard not to bring up Geoff Haselhurst's little animation applet once again for its visual effect). Therefore, to update the previous stab at verbalizing this new slant on an underlying ICF methodology for some kinds of cold fusion: The LENR "exciton" is best described as a double layer object - a sphere-within-a-sphere of a few microns in outside diameter, containing a central core of perhaps 50 nm in diameter. In the core itself, the loading of deuterium is super-saturated, due to the pumping action of the skin layer (optimally giving 6 D atoms per vacancy). The exciton waves are a result of DC current flow being modulated to essentially a terahertz frequency by both an imposed resonance which develops between geometry and heat, plus the very strong near-field of the exciton. The resultant pulsations end-up doing about the same thing that one finds in ICF or sonofusion, except that here the frequency is 10 billion times higher (and as we know, the net energy of waves is proportional to frequency). Jones Hey... is it time yet?... time for a newly manufactured lingoism to propose for the growing LENR argot, or is this word-of-the-week silliness getting tiresome? There was an art movement in French cinema in the 1960s called "nouvelle vague" a kind of "new wave"... cool name and appropriately vague... So - how about the above refinement of previous ideas (which suggest a new kind of ICF methodology for certain LERN)being the opening salvo for a "NVE hypothesis for LENR,"? NVE being "Nouvelle-Vague-Exciton". This is really high-energy ICF as it satisfies Lawson-like criteria (see below), but is masquerading as low-energy LENR). PPS: The "Farside criteria" ... or Larson vs Lawson Lawson's Density (particles/cm3) x Time (sec) = 10^16 (Deuterium-Deuterium fusion) can easily be recalibrated to make-up for the relatively low ignition temperature of LENR in what I am calling "the Farside criteria for LENR". As you notice, I am taking the radical leap of saying that a temperature "threshold" is not accurate but that the threshold is merely a time-delineated measure of the probability of deuterons getting close enough to each other - so effective pressure can substitute for temperature (actually it is the same high temp but so local that it is unmeasureable.Also, most CF reactions of this type in a Pd matrix are likely to be multi-body reactions and furthermore, the accelerating gradient is NVE pressure - which is the thermo-electric enhancement to Casimir-like pressure which operates on excitons of a specific geometry. And there is more. Pd has a density of 20 gm/cc (and has 106.4 Atm wt), this gives 5E^21 Pd atoms/cc and at 1:1 overall loading the number of deuterons is astronomical compared to Lawson's wimpy plasma density. There is thus an effective gain in density of Lawson-like criteria over that of hot-fusion of 10E^17. Plus, have most observers (including myself) failed to realize the importance of the time factor in CF(assuming that some warped version of the Lawson criteria hold)? When a CF reaction doesn't show much effect for a couple of days, could it mean that the particle [virtual temperature x time] factor is off by a factor of nearly a billion (50 hrs = 180,000 sec which gives CF initiation almost a billion times more statistical *time* i.e. comparing this particular factor to the 200 microseconds of the hot fusion variety) ? Think about this - the Farside criteria for LENR, compared to Lawson, when the two factors are combined show a gain of ten-thousand-trillion to one in two of the three necessary parameters. That should indicate that the reaction is viable at absolute zero, where BEC-like conditions are likely to become overwhelming and influence the reaction on an all-or-nothing scale. ...or at least, can we opine that Larson and his "Farside" contingent of fringe lunatics "rules" over Lawson and his cadre of well-trained monkeys. ? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:25:17 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 iB6GPBeI003403; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:25:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6GPAUq003386; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:25:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:25:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041206162458.00970fb8@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, 06 Dec 2004 16:24:58 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Ceramics and material science Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56809 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dick I found your metal-ceramic technology post very interesting. The reason that ceramics are brittle and achieve only a fraction of their potential strength is because the Beta-atmosphere can easily enter through surface cracks. This is not possible with ductile metals as shown by their characteristic necking failure. By combining the two into a "concrete" in which the metal in effect becomes the cement phase it should be possible to produce a material in which the two components act interact in a synergistic way. If you think about it, this is what happened when mild steel was developed from cast iron. Interestingly enough, many years ago the Portland cement technologists produced a very dense cement by subjected it to enormous pressures as it set. This enabled them to make cement springs and the like. I think you would be interested to read our book chapter on concrete technology (Clayton and Grimer) extending the concepts set out in the Southampton paper. With your permission, I will download the page scans to you. Cheers Grimer At 21:39 05/12/2004 -0600, you wrote: >Jones made an interesting comment regarding ceramics in his post. One of my objectives in studying the various threads in this group is try to keep current on material sciences as it relates to the wonderful new quasi metal-ceramic technology emerging. Our industry has so many new products in theory stage waiting for these promising strange and wonderful new materials. > >For example.. an ultra high speed flywheel design awaits the material that can withstand the rotational forces in excess of 250 thousand RPM. To be economically feasible a compact flywheel would need to exceed 750 thousand RPM. Shazzaam! an energy storage unit. > >I actually enjoy the crabbing back and forth between the posters because in science there has never been anything quite like the internet for open and free discussion.. err.. well perhaps a well placed kick to the shins . >Way back in the stone age ( 1950's ) we used to sit around talking about the future, dreaming up great things to build. One was a suitcase one man helicopters that could fly nonstop from Houston and back from San Antonio Texas. The copter we envisioned was powered by a small flywheel, it was flown by computer ( mind you there were NO computers), the rotors were opposing rotation driven by a stepless variable speed differential torque proportioning box consisting of a variation of a ceramic composite type of air bearing having self lubricating qualities. The rotor blades would achieve a hardness by centripetal forces creating post tension permitting feathering control. The rotor blade would unfurl like the material of an old fashion venetian blind. No tail rotor would be required because the opposite rotation of the rotors would be feathered and proportionally controlled plus the rotor assembly would tilt for direction control. >Today, 50 years later, the only thing awaiting is the ceramic-metal materials technology. The Hutchinson Effect website is another hint toward that possibility. Interesting that some years later I read Joel Chptr 2 about an army of locusts that do not jostle each other .. enter through the window. Made me consider that it was a description of a one man copter with a plastic windshield shaped like a grasshoppers head.. hmmm > >The most enjoyable component of this group is the self discipline that is demonstrated . Fuss if you may, BUT at the end of the day forgive , remembering that opposing opinions may both be technically correct, just different. > >Richard >. > > >Blank >href="file://E:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Stationery\"> > > > >background=cid:002901c4db45$200a9f90$f0027841@xptower> >
Jones made an interesting comment regarding ceramics in >his post. One of my objectives in studying the various threads in this group is >try to keep current on material sciences as it relates to the wonderful new >quasi metal-ceramic technology emerging. Our industry has so many new products >in theory stage waiting for these promising strange and wondeful new materials. >
>
 
>
For example.. an ultra high speed flywheel design awaits >the material that can withstand the rotational forces in excess of 250 thousand >RPM. To be economically feasible a compact flywheel would need to exceed 750 >thousand RPM. Shazzaam! an energy storage unit.
>
 
>
I actually enjoy the crabbing back and forth between the >posters because in science there has never been anything quite like the internet >for open and free discussion.. err.. well perhaps a well placed kick to the >shins <grin>.
>
Way back in the stone age ( 1950's ) we used to sit >around talking about the future, dreaming up  great things to build. One >was a suitcase one man heliocopter that could fly nonstop from Houston and back >from San Antonio Texas. The copter we envisioned was powered by a small >flywheel, it was flown by computer ( mind you there were NO computers), the >rotors were opposing rotation driven by a stepless variable speed differential >torque proportioning box consisting of a variation of a ceramic >composite type of air bearing having self lubricating qualities. The rotor >blades would achieve a hardness by centripital forces creating post tension >permitting feathering control. The rotor blade would unfurl like the material of >an old fashion venetian blind. No tail rotor would be required because the >opposite rotation of the rotors would be feathered and proportionally controlled >plus the  rotor assembly would tilt for direction control.
>
Today, 50 years later, the only thing  awaiting is >the ceramic-metal materials technology. The Hutchinson Effect website is another >hint toward that possibliity. Interesting that some years later I read Joel >Chptr 2 about an army of locusts that do not jostle each other .. enter through >the window. Made me consider that it was a description of a one man copter with >a plastic windshield shaped like a grasshoppers head.. hmmm
>
 
>
The most enjoyable component of this group is the self >discipline that is demonstrated . Fuss if you may, BUT at the end of the day >forgive , remembering that opposing opinions may both >be technically correct, just different.
>
 
>
Richard
>
. 
>

 

>Content-Type: image/gif; > name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" >Content-ID: <002901c4db45$200a9f90$f0027841@xptower> > >Attachment Converted: C:\internet\email\attach\Blank Bkgrd.gif > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:35:23 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 iB6GZBlc019027; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:35:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6GZ95Y019008; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:35:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:35:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206111833.02087cf0@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:25:57 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: LENR-CANR database include 28 papers by Swartz! In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206095749.04225c70@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206095749.04225c70@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56810 X-Loop: vortex-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 12/6/2004, the ever-disingenuous Rothwell wrote: >>Third, there is the following outright bogus Rothwell rant. >> >>>Rothwell: "1. Oral presentations do not count. Do these papers exist in >>>writing?" >> >>The proof that Rothwell is utterly disingenuous is that he was personally >>handed >>each of these papers (the papers, and not just the censored titles >>removed from the >>"List of Titles") when as a courtesy I drove him from Dr. Eugene >>Mallove's funeral >>in New Hampshire to Boston near the Boston Commons. > >That did not look like a paper to me. It was a couple of graphs with no >explanation of what they were, or what they meant. Was that submitted to >Hagelstein for the proceedings? That is another untruth, and further false statement by Rothwell. LOL. Despite the faux innocence by Rothwell, the papers were far more than a couple of graphs. They were complete, including references and acknowledgements. Furthermore, despite the systematic faux innocence by Rothwell, reportedly Peter Hagelstein told Storms or Rothwell that he had the papers and that it was wrong for them not to list even the titles of papers at their purported (but not) "official ICCF-10 Site", located on the documented censored, and apparently misnamed, LENR/CANR site. Dr. Mitchell Swartz ===================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:48:51 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 iB6GmQlc023427; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6GmK6d023371; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:48:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:48:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206113821.04247030@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:48:14 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: LENR-CANR is the UNOFFICIAL ICCF10 site! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206111833.02087cf0@pop.theworld.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206095749.04225c70@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041206111833.02087cf0@pop.theworld.com> 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/56811 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > LOL. Despite the faux innocence by Rothwell, the papers were >far more than a couple of graphs. They were complete, including >references and acknowledgements. I do not recall what they had. They were not electronic, and I do not deal with non-electronic documents. I am a new age digital person, unlike Mizuno who says he is "an analog human in a digital world." > Furthermore, despite the systematic faux innocence >by Rothwell, reportedly Peter Hagelstein told Storms or Rothwell . . . Peter Hagelstein has told me absolutely nothing. I do not have a single e-mail message from him after ICCF10. I do not think he is upset with me or anything like that, but he has been awfully busy. We had a nice time together in Marseille, but we did not discuss ICCF10. I bought him some chocolate snails, because he seems so fond of French cooking -- especially escargot. >that he had the papers and that it was wrong for them not to list even the >titles of papers at their purported (but not) "official ICCF-10 Site", >located on >the documented censored, and apparently misnamed, LENR/CANR site. It is emphatically NOT the "official ICCF-10 Site"!!! We had to make this clear per our agreement with Peter Hagelstein. Every paper must have the following disclaimer at the top: "This paper was presented at the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion. It may be different from the version published by World Scientific, Inc (2003) in the official Proceedings of the conference." I hope there is nothing on the page that will give anyone the idea this is the official site. I expect Swartz will continue to tell people that in order to stir up trouble, but anyone who glances at any paper in the collection will see he is wrong. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 08:53:56 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 iB6GrqeI015094; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:53:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6Grk4k015047; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:53:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:53:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206113436.02107e68@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:45:37 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56812 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:14 AM 12/6/2004, Jed Rothwell, disingenuous-as-ever, falsely wrote that our papers were "phantom". The only phantom is what would be seen on Rothwell's head CAT scan. 1) First, we object to Rothwell's false statements and waste of bandwidth. The papers were not "phantom". Rothwell simply lies again, as is his way. The two papers, Swartz. M., G. Verner, "Excess Heat from Low Electrical Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), and Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), were BOTH listed originally for ICCF10, and assigned Monday and Tuesday for the dates. They were deleted at the long-censored LENR/CANR website. BTW, that censorship was confirmed in conversations by both Rothwell and Storms to others, whose names shall appear in the appropriate forum and time. Such conversations are inconsistent with Rothwell's faux innocence because said papers were on the list, scheduled for ICCF-10, and given. Only thereafter, Rothwell and Storms censored the papers as has been their m.o. ======> The issue is Storms/Rothwell Censorship and not any phantom paper. 2) Furthermore, despite the systematic faux innocence by Rothwell, reportedly Peter Hagelstein told Storms or Rothwell that he had the papers and that it was wrong for them not to list even the titles of papers at their purported (but not) "official ICCF-10 Site", located on the documented censored, and apparently misnamed, LENR/CANR site. Thus, the issue again is Storms/Rothwell Censorship and not any phantom paper. 3) Finally, on this subject, the late Dr. Eugene Mallove was prophetic, too. Gene's final words on this matter were already once posted, and shall not be repeated again on this thread to save bandwidth, except for the conclusion, which is: ==== email excerpt ==== Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship From: "Eugene F. Mallove" ".... This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms doesn't have leg to stand on and he knows it. - Gene " === end of email excerpt === Q.E.D. Dr. Mitchell Swartz ===================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion web site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 09:30:33 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 iB6HUKeI027543; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:30:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6HUH7J027504; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:30:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:30:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206115948.04245d80@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 12:30:20 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206113436.02107e68@pop.theworld.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041206113436.02107e68@pop.theworld.com> 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/56813 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: >At 11:14 AM 12/6/2004, Jed Rothwell, disingenuous-as-ever, >falsely wrote that our papers were "phantom". Well, Mitch, phantom or real, they are now listed in the database. So you have nothing left to complain about. Ha, ha! I will delete them if you would like. I would be happy to delete all 30 of your papers. Just say the word! >Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt Devices", >ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of ICCF-10, (2003), and >Swartz. M., "Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated >Electrically-Polarized >Palladium Cathodes in D2O", ICCF-10 (Camb. MA), Proceedings of >ICCF-10, (2003), > >were BOTH listed originally for ICCF10, and assigned Monday and Tuesday >for the dates. Of course. Anyone reading the ICCF-10 program and abstracts will see that: http://lenr-canr.org/iccf10/ICCF10Abstracts.pdf They will also see that we have not "censored" Swartz from this or any other document. But that has nothing to do with our bibliography. Whether papers were assigned or read makes no difference to me. I only list papers that were actually written and published. As far as I know these two phantom papers were not published and never will be, but I will bend the rules and include them anyway. What harm? By the same token, if someone prepares a paper for a conference, but they are not able to attend, I would be happy to publish the paper at LENR-CANR.org anyway. After all that work they deserve to have the paper published, at least by us. >From: "Eugene F. Mallove" >".... This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms >doesn't >have leg to stand on and he knows it. - Gene " Well, Gene was often full of crap, wasn't he? I never hesitated to tell him that when he was alive, and I do not mind repeating it now. I have no special respect for the dead. Anyway, he did more good than harm. But he had out-of-date notions about the Internet. He thought of it as a new type of print medium. He did not understand the key differences between publishing electronically and on paper. He did not understand the Web is unbounded and therefore a web site such as LENR-CANR.org should be narrowly focused and limited to papers strictly about metal lattice cold fusion, because otherwise the readers will be annoyed. It is like "pop-up" advertising. Even if the reader would be favorably disposed toward a paper on zero point energy, he will be annoyed when you shove it in his face when he is looking for a paper about cold fusion instead. Gene thought it was censorship to exclude papers about other anomalous energy claims, whereas I see it as simple logic and a librarians' prerogative. We can open up a dozen other web sites devoted to other topics -- such as zero point energy. It would cost virtually nothing, and readers would find these other sites as easily and as readily as they find LENR-CANR.org. Nearly all searches nowadays come through Google. Therefore it makes no sense to assert we are "censoring" papers, when all we are saying is that these other papers fall in other categories so they should be uploaded elsewhere. Gene's objection was analogous to getting upset because a librarian refuses to put cold fusion books on the same shelf with cook books or detective stories. It is true though, that we have rejected a small number of papers for being technically inept and without merit. We also insist that papers be written into reasonably understandable English. I have devoted a couple of months to rewriting them myself. Even a public library will occasionally refuse to carry books that fail to meet minimum standards of quality. However, Gene was not complaining about these rare rejections. In fact I doubt he knew about them. He was complaining about the general principle of excluding entire categories, such as zero-point energy. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 10:03:05 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 iB6I2tlc021375; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:02:56 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6I2rpH021346; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:02:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:02:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:02:12 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <002101c4dbaf$739f5c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56814 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones. I saw this post too, and should respond to it there but for the fact that I find the whole forum thing kind of klunky and inconvienent. I wish he would stick with the email list; it's the best technology. I have done many experiments like this. Saviour is correct in his observation that in cavity resonators ( for example ) the relation of wavelength to frequency is determined by the cavity parameters and can be engineered to be about anything you like. This is standard radio theory. The same is true for antennas in the near field. I disagree with his conclusion, that the underlying velocity exceeds C. This claim was made by a researcher at Marquette (sp?) University in the late 80's, using microwave cavities and diode detectors. I was intrigued enough at the time to try the experiment, but I wanted to see what was happening in real time with a sensor that could measure the waveform. The experiment I cooked up was pretty simple. I used 55 gallon drums as waveguide, which gave me a low order TE mode resonance at about 300MHz. For the drum waveguide, that was something like 2 times C ( all this from memory, I can dig up my notes if you want accurate figures ). I used an ancient Farnsworth RF oscillator that could be gated as the source, and an excellent scope ( LeCroy 9450 ) with Tek CT-2 current transformers at the base of 1/4 wave antennas as detectors. The cavity was a couple of drums long, and the detectors space along the cavity to measure velocity. When I excited the cavity continuously, I could easily measure the relation of wavelength to freq and confirm the predicted 2*c result. When I gated the signal, I could also easily see that the gating transition would require the ordinary c delay between detectors ( actually longer, but line of sight signal is always present along with the slower reflected signal ). OTOH, if you could get the longitudinal mode ( LM in the case above ) to propagate by itself outside the cavity perhaps you'd have a superluminal signal. The near field is not so mysterious as you make it out to be, rather it's the consequence of the antenna being physically large w/respect to the wavelength at close range and thus allowing the wave to interact with itself in free space. K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:20 AM To: vortex Subject: Fast-food for thought ...real fast-food. A post arrived from another forum (Blaze Labs) which some observers here might find intriguing (I cannot vouch for the accuracy, but the experimenter is both credible (genius-level perhaps) and credentialed, so I will try to find out more details about the particular experiment). He says, "A few years ago, I had done experiments trying to measure the propagation speed within a standing wave, and I can say that propagation speeds much in excess of c were detected. In fact, it seemed that *within the near field,* the signal suffers no aberration...." Now we all know that *near fields* are a different beast - far removed form normal Hertzian electro-dynamics, but is there really a faster-than-lightspeed component to the near-field, in general, and is that component of the near field what makes it so markedly different? Suspend disbelief for a moment. As mentioned in previous postings about "excitons" and why LENR does occur at "apparently" low kinetic energy (actually not low, just greatly underestimated) or at least how that low energy can be multiplied enormously in certain physical structures, this above mentioned result from Blaze about near-fields, IF TRUE, might provide part of the answer. If excitons are the "operative structure" in some kinds of LENR and can be analogized to coincide geometrically with the phonon structure of certain types of containment matrices, then we suddenly have found what could be the driving force behind the increased level of containment - which is the effect of the FTL near-field. Actually we are not talking about just "containment" but pulsating containment in the terahertz frequency range. Coincidently, since excitons are on the geometric scale of the Casimir force, one wonders if the Casimir force itself is really all about the effects of an FTL near-field? ...not ot mention the implications of near-fields with regard to magnetic domains. IOW - it was suggested that phonon/exciton "pulsation," becomes another kind of inertial ultra-ultra-sound, an ICF reaction on a much smaller geometric scale... and with this additional near-field mechanism, then it becomes clearer that certain kinds of CF may involve a new kind of ICF (inertial confinement fusion) similar to solid-state sonofusion but on a much smaller scale... That scale being the one-and-only "crossover" region where EMF waves can overlaps with kinetic effects - because of identical wavelengths being possible. When an exciton becomes resonant with a modulated DC current, then exterior kinetic waves form on the exciton particle which may have a FTL component, and all that implies with regard to field-effects: the product being: In-Waves and Out-Waves - which can form a Standing Wave around the Wave-Center 'particle' (it's hard not to bring up Geoff Haselhurst's little animation applet once again for its visual effect). Therefore, to update the previous stab at verbalizing this new slant on an underlying ICF methodology for some kinds of cold fusion: The LENR "exciton" is best described as a double layer object - a sphere-within-a-sphere of a few microns in outside diameter, containing a central core of perhaps 50 nm in diameter. In the core itself, the loading of deuterium is super-saturated, due to the pumping action of the skin layer (optimally giving 6 D atoms per vacancy). The exciton waves are a result of DC current flow being modulated to essentially a terahertz frequency by both an imposed resonance which develops between geometry and heat, plus the very strong near-field of the exciton. The resultant pulsations end-up doing about the same thing that one finds in ICF or sonofusion, except that here the frequency is 10 billion times higher (and as we know, the net energy of waves is proportional to frequency). Jones Hey... is it time yet?... time for a newly manufactured lingoism to propose for the growing LENR argot, or is this word-of-the-week silliness getting tiresome? There was an art movement in French cinema in the 1960s called "nouvelle vague" a kind of "new wave"... cool name and appropriately vague... So - how about the above refinement of previous ideas (which suggest a new kind of ICF methodology for certain LERN)being the opening salvo for a "NVE hypothesis for LENR,"? NVE being "Nouvelle-Vague-Exciton". This is really high-energy ICF as it satisfies Lawson-like criteria (see below), but is masquerading as low-energy LENR). PPS: The "Farside criteria" ... or Larson vs Lawson Lawson's Density (particles/cm3) x Time (sec) = 10^16 (Deuterium-Deuterium fusion) can easily be recalibrated to make-up for the relatively low ignition temperature of LENR in what I am calling "the Farside criteria for LENR". As you notice, I am taking the radical leap of saying that a temperature "threshold" is not accurate but that the threshold is merely a time-delineated measure of the probability of deuterons getting close enough to each other - so effective pressure can substitute for temperature (actually it is the same high temp but so local that it is unmeasureable.Also, most CF reactions of this type in a Pd matrix are likely to be multi-body reactions and furthermore, the accelerating gradient is NVE pressure - which is the thermo-electric enhancement to Casimir-like pressure which operates on excitons of a specific geometry. And there is more. Pd has a density of 20 gm/cc (and has 106.4 Atm wt), this gives 5E^21 Pd atoms/cc and at 1:1 overall loading the number of deuterons is astronomical compared to Lawson's wimpy plasma density. There is thus an effective gain in density of Lawson-like criteria over that of hot-fusion of 10E^17. Plus, have most observers (including myself) failed to realize the importance of the time factor in CF(assuming that some warped version of the Lawson criteria hold)? When a CF reaction doesn't show much effect for a couple of days, could it mean that the particle [virtual temperature x time] factor is off by a factor of nearly a billion (50 hrs = 180,000 sec which gives CF initiation almost a billion times more statistical *time* i.e. comparing this particular factor to the 200 microseconds of the hot fusion variety) ? Think about this - the Farside criteria for LENR, compared to Lawson, when the two factors are combined show a gain of ten-thousand-trillion to one in two of the three necessary parameters. That should indicate that the reaction is viable at absolute zero, where BEC-like conditions are likely to become overwhelming and influence the reaction on an all-or-nothing scale. ...or at least, can we opine that Larson and his "Farside" contingent of fringe lunatics "rules" over Lawson and his cadre of well-trained monkeys. ? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 12:36:19 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 iB6KaEeI014197; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 12:36:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6Ka6dv014153; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 12:36:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 12:36:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:32:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56815 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Just a suggestion. It might be helpful to develop a system of qualifying flags. e.g. One flag would denote the web site manager's knowledge of a paper's state of completion. Harry Jed Rothwell at JedRothwell@mindspring.com wrote: > Okay! Even though I doubt these papers exist in any tangible sense, I have > added them to our database. I hope that makes everyone happy. Except > Swartz, obviously. I hope that frustrates him now that he has nothing to > complain about. > > The complete list is attached. This list comes from the "All Authors" > index, under "S": > > http://lenr-canr.org/LibFrame2.html > > It is also in the Complete Bibliography: > > http://lenr-canr.org/DetailOnly.htm > > Swartz is not listed in the first index "Authors with papers here" because > he has not submitted any papers to LENR-CANR. (Or at least, we never > actually got any from him.) His phantom ICCF10 papers are not listed in the > "Special Collection" screen because they are not part of our collection, > obviously. They may or may not be part of the official printed proceedings, > but I doubt those proceedings will ever materialize, so whether his papers > are "included" in them or not is more of a theological or metaphysical > question than a practical one. > > - Jed > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > 1. Swartz, M.R., Quasi-one-dimensional model of electrochemical loading of > isotopic fuel into a metal. Fusion Technol., 1992. 22: p. 296. > 2. Swartz, M.R. A Method to Improve Algorithms Used to Detect Steady State > Excess Enthalpy. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993. > Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo > Alto, CA 94304. > 3. Swartz, M.R. Some Lessons From Optical Examination of the PFC Phase-II > Calorimetric Curves. in Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. > 1993. Lahaina, Maui: Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Ave., > Palo Alto, CA 94304. > 4. Swartz, M.R., Isotopic Fuel Loading Coupled to Reactions at an > Electrode. Trans. Fusion Technol., 1994. 26(4T): p. 74. > 5. Swartz, M.R. Generalized Isotopic Fuel Loading Equations. in > International Symposium on Cold Fusion and Advanced Energy Sources. 1994. > Belarusian State University, Minsk, Belarus: Fusion Information Center, > Salt Lake City. > 6. Swartz, M.R., Improved calculations involving energy release using a > buoyancy transport correction. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 219. > 7. Swartz, M.R., Possible deuterium production from light water excess > enthalpy experiments using nickel cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(3): p. 68. > 8. Swartz, M.R., Potential for positional variations in flow calorimetric > systems. 1996. > 9. Swartz, M.R., The Relationship between Input Power and Enthalpic > Behavior of Nickel Cathodes During Light Water Electrolysis. 1996. > 10. Swartz, M.R., Four Definitions of Power Ratio used to Describe Excess > Enthalpy in Solid-State Loading Systems. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 54. > 11. Swartz, M.R., The Relative Impact of Thermal Stratification of the Air > Surrounding a Calorimeter. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(2): p. 141. > 12. Swartz, M.R., Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes. J. New Energy, 1996. > 1(3): p. 68. > 13. Swartz, M.R., Hydrogen Redistribution by Catastrophic Desorption in > Selected Transition Metals. J. New Energy, 1996. 1(4): p. 26. > 14. Swartz, M.R., Codeposition of palladium and deuterium. Fusion Technol., > 1997. 32: p. 126. > 15. Swartz, M.R., Consistency of the biphasic nature of excess enthalpy in > solid-state anomalous phenomena with the quasi-one-dimensional model of > isotope loading into a material. Fusion Technol., 1997. 31: p. 63. > 16. Swartz, M.R., Phusons in nuclear reactions in solids. Fusion Technol., > 1997. 31: p. 228. > 17. Swartz, M.R., Explanation for Some Difference Between Reports of Excess > Heat in Solid State Fusion Experiments. J. New Energy, 1997. 2(1): p. 60. > 18. Swartz, M.R., Noise Measurement in Cold Fusion Systems. J. New Energy, > 1997. 2(2): p. 56. > 19. Swartz, M.R. Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light > Water Experiments. in The Seventh International Conference on Cold Fusion. > 1998. Vancouver, Canada: ENECO, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT. > 20. Swartz, M.R., The Importance of Controlling Zero-Input Electrical Power > Offset. J. New Energy, 1998. 3(1): p. 14. > 21. Swartz, M.R., Generality of Optimal Operating Point Behavior in Low > Energy Nuclear Systems. J. New Energy, 1999. 4(2): p. 218-228. > 22. Swartz, M.R. and G. Verner, Bremsstrahlung in Hot and Cold Fusion. J. > New Energy, 1999. 3(4): p. 90-101. > 23. Swartz, M.R., et al. Importance of nondimensional numbers in cold > fusion. in Symposium on New Energy. 1999. Salt Lake City, UT. > 24. Swartz, M.R., Further confirmation of optimal operating point behavior. > 1999. > 25. Swartz, M.R., Optimal Operating Point Analysis of Dr. Mizuno's, Dr. > Arata's and Other Data. 1999. > 26. Swartz, M.R., Patterns of success in research involving low energy > nuclear reactions- A metanalysis. 1999. > 27. Swartz, M.R., Summary of the seventh international conference on cold > fusion. Fusion Technol., 2000. 37: p. 99. > 28. Swartz, M.R., G.M. Verner, and A.H. Frank. The impact of heavy water > (D2O) on nickel-light water cold fusion systems. in The 9th International > Conference on Cold Fusion, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2002. Tsinghua > Univ., Beijing, China: Tsinghua Univ. Press. > 29. Swartz, M.R. and G. Verner. Excess Heat from Low Electrical > Conductivity Heavy Water Spiral-Wound Pd/D2O/Pt and Pd/D2O-PdCl2/Pt > Devices. in Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, > MA: in print. > 30. Swartz, M.R. Photoinduced Excess Heat from Laser-Irradiated > Electrically-Polarized Palladium Cathodes in D2O. in Tenth International > Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, MA: in print. > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 13:56:39 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 iB6LuXku012670; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:56:33 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6LuUAS012643; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:56:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:56:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206162055.04241820@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:47:54 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <7qVo3C.A.fFD.OWNtBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56816 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harry Veeder wrote: >Just a suggestion. > >It might be helpful to develop a system of qualifying flags. >e.g. One flag would denote the web site manager's knowledge of a paper's >state of completion. Normally, this is not a problem. Normally, I only record papers when I am sure they have been published. That is why there are only eight papers presently listed for ICCF-11. I will add the others to the database when Biberian sends them to me (or when he informs me he has them). In the case of ICCF-10, I was in charge of collecting and filing the papers, and I had to prepare the abstract book and conference schedule. I used the EndNote database for these jobs. I entered every author and title as the abstracts came in, before the conference. After the conference I left them all on file for a while. Months after the submission deadline passed, I figured they would be no more papers coming in, so I went into the database and deleted all titles that were never received, including Swartz's. If I had not been in charge of ICCF10, I would never have heard a word about Swartz's phantom papers in the first place, and this brouhaha would not have erupted. As far as I know, there is only one other unpublished paper in the database. If anyone finds others, please let me know. The only one is Amoco's and it is on file because other papers refer to it. (The whole point of EndNote is to make references easier.) I erased the titles from several other no-show authors, but only Swartz went apeshit about it. Of course he is not really upset, because he did not bother to upload this paper into his own web page! (Or if he did, he is keeping the URL secret from me, and he will not give me permission to copy and upload it.) As you have seen here, I have a copy of his ICCF-9 paper, but he refuses to give me permission to upload it. In other words, he is censoring himself. He is the only person who is preventing his own papers from reaching LENR-CANR, and he is only doing this to make a stink and fool people into thinking that Storms and I censor the site. It is gutter politics, and childish nonsense. Of course it is Swartz's choice to publish or not, and I could not care less about it. But he is certainly is weird. And childish, and annoying. Swartz and Steve Jones are both famous for playing these inept political games. Frankly, they both make me sick. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 14:07:34 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 iB6M7Sku015604; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:07:28 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6M7QNj015590; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:07:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:07:26 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007f01c4dbdf$57e48300$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:02:55 -0800 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/56817 X-Loop: vortex-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, > I disagree with his conclusion, that the underlying > velocity exceeds C. This claim was made by a researcher > at Marquette.... I can't blame anyone for disagreeing with this. Yesterday, I would have disagreed also. However, having had a little run at Google, there seems to be a fair number of "non-cranks" espousing this view. This one looks interesting: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0009023 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 15:10:46 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 iB6NAN52029066; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:10:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6NAKkr029041; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:10:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:10:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206142933.0219dc70@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 14:30:37 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206115948.04245d80@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041206113436.02107e68@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206115948.04245d80@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56818 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:30 PM 12/6/2004, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>From: "Eugene F. Mallove" >>".... This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms >>doesn't >>have leg to stand on and he knows it. - Gene " > >Well, Gene was often full of crap, wasn't he? No, he was not. You are, however; and full of yourself. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 15:36:45 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 iB6Naeku012867; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6NacqF012841; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:38 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206143146.0219dc70@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:36:28 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: LENR-CANR is the UNOFFICIAL ICCF10 site! In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206113821.04247030@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041205153142.03a01930@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205160130.00ba7210@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041205161153.03a12ac0@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041205165122.020c1420@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206095749.04225c70@pop.mindspring.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041206111833.02087cf0@pop.theworld.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206113821.04247030@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56819 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:48 AM 12/6/2004, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Peter Hagelstein has told me absolutely nothing. I do not have a single >e-mail message from him after ICCF10. I do not think he is upset with me >or anything like that, but he has been awfully busy. We had a nice time >together in Marseille, but we did not discuss ICCF10. I bought him some >chocolate snails, because he seems so fond of French cooking -- especially >escargot. On one hand is Jed's word, on the other is Peter's. Seems a femtosecond or less is required before I reasonably know whom to believe. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 15:36:52 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 iB6Nal52005581; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6Nae3N005524; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:36:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041206183410.00ba73a8@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:36:12 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206162055.04241820@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041206110417.04218740@pop.mindspring.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041206162055.04241820@pop.mindspring.com> 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/56820 X-Loop: vortex-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 lying Rothwell purports I was a "no-show author". Mr. Rothwell knows that is not true, and I have the emails to prove it. Rothwell is a truly sick individual. Dr. Mallove was correct. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 15:40:08 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 iB6Ne2ku013627; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:40:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB6Ne1Mp013609; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:40:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:40:01 -0800 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, 6 Dec 2004 14:47:02 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Electron traps Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56821 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Electron traps Some fun speculations follow that consider possible use of the Heisenberg principle to design devices that continuously borrow free energy from the vacuum. Uncertainty of momentum for a particle (electron) constrained by distance delta x is given by: delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x) but since KE = 1/2 m v^2 = 1/(2 m) {delta mv)^2 delta KE = 1/(2 m) (h/(2 Pi delta x))^2 delta KE = h^2 /(8 Pi^2 m) (delta x)^2 the more you can confine the POSITION of an electron the more energy you can potentially observe when you sample that energy. If an electron can be confined to a 1 angstrom range then there is an uncertainty of 1.06x10^-24 kg-m/s on the momentum and thus 6.1x10^-19 J or 3.8 eV uncertainty on energy. This could be an explanation in part for "heat after death", excess heat in the Szpak cell (where electrons are concentrated on one end of the cathode), as well as other excess heat observations not occurring until the gamma phase of loading. Conductivity of the cathode is reduced in the gamma phase of loading. The necessary condition for heat creation in Pd type CF experiments is filling of (and therefore eliminating) the Pd conduction bands - in addition to basic loading. This has to happen without cracking the lattice, which is apparently the difficult part. When the lattice cracks the gas in the vicinity leaks and confinement is ended. Large parts of an electrode volume have cracks and thus there is a steady flow of hydrogen intoi and out of a cathode, which precludes electron trapping in those volumes. Adsorbed protons are ionically bound to the lattice. A paired electron moves along with the adsorbed proton as it moves through the lattice. THe paired electron moves within the conduction bands. Once loading reaches the point where the conduction bands become filled, the electrons trapped along with their paired hydrogen nuclei lose all degrees of freedom and are thus trapped by the confines of the interstitial site in which the paired nucleus is trapped. The electron location is thus known and fixed, and there must be a corresponding range increase on uncertainty of the trapped electron's momentum, and thus the average momentum observed when sampling the electron's energy. This increase in momentum is not temporary - it is permanent for the duration of confinement. The lattice samples the trapped electron's energy via Brownian like collisions. Sampling the electron's energy by collision does not release the electron's confinement, or change its energy uncertainty. This means that, as the lattice bleeds off energy from the electron, in the form of phonons, that energy gets replaced to the electron from the zero point field (ZPF). The result is continual and permanent energy output with no observable input. The key to practical free energy is permanently trapping electrons in small volumes. This may or may not require trapping them with associated hydrogen nuclei, as is done in CF cells, but it is clear that having net charge be neutral, as it is in the lattice, is a useful advantage. The key to building successful CF electrodes is likely in engineering lattice material in which the conduction bands exist in only one or two axes, thus are easily filled and blocked, leaving a confined one dimensional degree of freedom. The object is to load the lattice with protons in spaces too confined to form atoms, and then shut off all the conduction paths so as to fix the location of and thereby trap free electrons associated with trapped (but covalently unbound) nuclei. One possibility for doing this might be to use a semiconducting material used for making FET's. If protons (not in the form of atoms) can be injected or built into the lattice, the associated electrons can be frozen in place by imposition of an electrostatic field gradient that removes conductivity from the lattice. There are the problems of keeping the interstitial spaces intact and small enough and strong enough to prevent hydrogen atom formation. Perhaps a similar strategy can be implemented using powerful magnetic fields - imposed on proton doped semiconductor lattices to eliminate conductivity. It is possible that geometry is more important than composition for trapping electrons, i.e. confining many electrons in a small volume. The ideal location for doing so is at the tips of dendrites on a cathode. The formation of long thin dendrites takes time, and this may help explain in part the long run times before excess heat is observed. The use of platinum anodes may in fact inhibit the dendrite formation or limit the duration of dendrite activity due to dendrite erosion. Perhaps energy generating solids can be built using epitaxy, crystal growing techniques, electrodeposition, or other means. All that is required is the trapping of free electrons in the lattice and confinement of their range. Knowing the objective should make the materials science much easier. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 16:26:27 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 iB70QK7L026819; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:26:21 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB70QIwd026804; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:26:18 -0800 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: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:25:49 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <007f01c4dbdf$57e48300$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56822 X-Loop: vortex-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. You callin' me a crank!?!? yeah, well I'm pretty cranky... The paper was very nice, but the author failed to gate the generator and measure the transition velocity ( aka group velocity ) of the LM mode. He calculates it from the phase velocity measurement, which isn't exactly according to Hoyle. I have no problem with the measurements as such ( I've seen the same thing ) just the interpretation. Try searching the archives of Aperion magazine, I seem to remember more papers there. As well as LANL's site. The work done with active media looked the most promising to me. The vacuum is tenacious stuff. K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:03 PM To: knagel@gis.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Keith, > I disagree with his conclusion, that the underlying > velocity exceeds C. This claim was made by a researcher > at Marquette.... I can't blame anyone for disagreeing with this. Yesterday, I would have disagreed also. However, having had a little run at Google, there seems to be a fair number of "non-cranks" espousing this view. This one looks interesting: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0009023 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 17:17:05 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 iB71H0qC006932; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:17:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB71GnLX006695; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:16:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:16:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=4iWajqgQsTMmEzbnFJR6XOMasg9aY8jSJ4ELbaGC+/WxCrvbu8Z4F1pJAezho5N4eZQgLcICdxsMpxloCbB2IBkwZDsXUiw5j5doBvddPwpigHFSZmHBNgvX4OdnmfplLxz6DdgHDHWbiovyYgFPkciAeV3l2IvBaelobp7cl+o= ; Message-ID: <20041207011642.51391.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:16:42 -0800 (PST) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <002101c4dbaf$739f5c80$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/56823 X-Loop: vortex-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: > ...real fast-food. > > A post arrived from another forum (Blaze Labs) which > some observers here might find intriguing (I cannot > vouch > for the accuracy, but the experimenter is both > credible > (genius-level perhaps) and credentialed, so I will > try to > find out more details about the particular > experiment). He > says, > > "A few years ago, I had done experiments trying to > measure > the propagation speed within a standing wave, and I > can say > that propagation speeds much in excess of c were > detected. The action of electrical impulses within a tesla coil secondary is said to be a standing wave, and propagation speeds of the impulse are said to exceed C. If the frequency were determined by C, the quarter wavelength of the frequency of the standing wave would be identical to the wire length of the secondary, but opponents of that idea are numerous. Here are some references. "The 1/4 wave length "theory" comes from the thought that signals travel in a straight wire at the speed of light (or something related to it, slightly less for various choices of conductor). BUT, in a TC the wire that would be 100 feet away in a straight line antenna(where 1/4 wave theory does apply) will only be a fraction of an inch away in a TC coil, and the inductive and capacitive coupling between those portions of the coil that are 100 feet apart wire length wise are "much closer" in the electrical (and physical sense. So the propagation speed of signals along a coil do not have anything to do with the propagation speed in straight wire." -Peter Lawrence. "The 1/4 wave resonant frequency of a wire, when wound into a solenoid, is typically more than 50% higher than that of the straight line value. The extraordinary persistance of the wire-length myth comes from the willingness of people to accept things on faith without making even the most basic of cross checks." See the comments and graph in http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/misc.html "Paul Nicholson" I also constructed a TC secondary and attempted to resonate it by figuring in the C propagation speed, where the wire length was given a time period for the impulse to reach the end of the wire at C, and then multiplying by 4 times that time period, and taking the inverse of that time period; arriving at a frequency answer of 250,000 hz. No resonance was found using a primary also resonating at 250 khz. Later methods showed that the natural resonant frequency of the secondary was actually ~ 330,000 hz, well above the value given by a standing wave exhibiting a propagation impulse speed at C. Sincerely HDN ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 18:07:44 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 iB727YqC020323; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:07:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB727Vfl020309; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:07:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:07:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:07:30 -0700 Message-Id: <200412061907.AA795803990@mail1.myexcel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Jeff and Dorothy Kooistra" Reply-To: X-Sender: To: , Subject: Jed's Gene observation [was Re: Swartz's phantom papers added to LENR-CANR database] X-Mailer: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56824 X-Loop: vortex-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 said: >Well, Gene was often full of crap, wasn't he? I never hesitated to tell him >that when he was alive, and I do not mind repeating it now. I have no >special respect for the dead... But he >had out-of-date notions about the Internet. He thought of it as a new type >of print medium. He did not understand the key differences between >publishing electronically and on paper. He did not understand the Web is >unbounded and therefore a web site such as LENR-CANR.org should be narrowly >focused and limited to papers strictly about metal lattice cold fusion, >because otherwise the readers will be annoyed. It is like "pop-up" >advertising. Even if the reader would be favorably disposed toward a paper >on zero point energy, he will be annoyed when you shove it in his face when >he is looking for a paper about cold fusion instead. > >Gene thought it was censorship to exclude papers about other anomalous >energy claims, whereas I see it as simple logic and a librarians' >prerogative. And so on... FWIW: Jed's observation of Gene's attitude here fits perfectly with the Gene Mallove I knew. He could never keep his own "enthusiasm of the moment" out of his reasoning, and when others voiced doubts about what he wanted to do, he couldn't accept them as doubts--they had to be evidence of censorship, or plots against him, or something like that. Then after awhile he'd usually settle down and see reason again. Those of you who remember the "debates" we had here over the Correa work will recall accusations of how Jed and I were supposedly in some kind of cabal against him and Correa, when we simply agreed that we found the research decidedly unconvincing. So, in short, yeah, Gene could be full of crap. Jeffery D. Kooistra From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 5 22:54:56 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 iB66shlc007107; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:54:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB66seh0007087; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:54:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:54:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <200412060654.iB66sclc007037@ultra5.eskimo.com> Reply-To: From: "Don Wiegel" To: Subject: RE: Ceramics and material science Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 23:54:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 In-Reply-To: <002e01c4db45$37956320$f0027841@xptower> Thread-Index: AcTbRURmAd8mXKzQRMu2Yt2HotLivQAFQEWQ Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56802 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 also "enjoy the crabbing back and forth between the posters". I have been lurking for "A-Few" years now; and, look forward each day to the "Vortex" Group. I have not found any other group on the net that is as interesting as this one. I'm sure there are many others, like me, out there. An interesting story: On Nov 26th I was standing in line at 6:30am at the local Office Depot. I was buying a USB Memory stick (1Gig @ $50) and in line behind me, a young man was also buying one. I asked what he used them for .. His response .. "We put them in Diplomatic Pouches". (We have a USAF Mobile Satellite unit near here). He was from that post and had just retuned from Iraq. I asked if he would answer a few questions, I had. He agreed. One of the Questions I asked was: How long do you think the War in Iraq will last. His response: "They will be pounding dirt in ten years. This was not a normal answer. Somewhat surprised .. I asked "WHY?" .. "Alternative Energy", he said. "Cold Fusion", I stated. He just smiled. I appears the Government is more involved in this field than we realize. -DonW- Ps I converted this post to text just for Horace Heffner (and others, of course) ________________________________ From: RC Macaulay [mailto:walhalla@cvtv.net] Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 8:39 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Ceramics and material science Jones made an interesting comment regarding ceramics in his post. One of my objectives in studying the various threads in this group is try to keep current on material sciences as it relates to the wonderful new quasi metal-ceramic technology emerging. Our industry has so many new products in theory stage waiting for these promising strange and wonderful new materials. For example.. an ultra high speed flywheel design awaits the material that can withstand the rotational forces in excess of 250 thousand RPM. To be economically feasible a compact flywheel would need to exceed 750 thousand RPM. Shazzaam! an energy storage unit. I actually enjoy the crabbing back and forth between the posters because in science there has never been anything quite like the internet for open and free discussion.. err.. well perhaps a well placed kick to the shins . Way back in the stone age ( 1950's ) we used to sit around talking about the future, dreaming up great things to build. One was a suitcase one man helicopter that could fly nonstop from Houston and back from San Antonio Texas. The copter we envisioned was powered by a small flywheel, it was flown by computer ( mind you there were NO computers), the rotors were opposing rotation driven by a stepless variable speed differential torque proportioning box consisting of a variation of a ceramic composite type of air bearing having self lubricating qualities. The rotor blades would achieve a hardness by centripital forces creating post tension permitting feathering control. The rotor blade would unfurl like the material of an old fashion venetian blind. No tail rotor would be required because the opposite rotation of the rotors would be feathered and proportionally controlled plus the rotor assembly would tilt for direction control. Today, 50 years later, the only thing awaiting is the ceramic-metal materials technology. The Hutchinson Effect website is another hint toward that possibility. Interesting that some years later I read Joel Chptr 2 about an army of locusts that do not jostle each other .. enter through the window. Made me consider that it was a description of a one man copter with a plastic windshield shaped like a grasshoppers head.. hmmm The most enjoyable component of this group is the self discipline that is demonstrated . Fuss if you may, BUT at the end of the day forgive , remembering that opposing opinions may both be technically correct, just different. Richard . From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 19:10:05 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 iB739vqC004433; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:09:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB739urQ004416; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:09:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:09:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <031901c4dc09$cc4e0ca0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041207011642.51391.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:06:49 -0800 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/56826 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harvey Norris writes > I also constructed a TC secondary and attempted to > resonate it by figuring in the C propagation speed, > where the wire length was given a time period for the > impulse to reach the end of the wire at C, and then > multiplying by 4 times that time period, and taking > the inverse of that time period; arriving at a > frequency answer of 250,000 hz. No resonance was found > using a primary also resonating at 250 khz. Later > methods showed that the natural resonant frequency of > the secondary was actually ~ 330,000 hz, well above > the value given by a standing wave exhibiting a > propagation impulse speed at C. There are a few semantic issues here but as far as practicality, it is generally accepted (for government work, as they say) that the EMF or "electrical signal" (not the electrons) in a copper wire travel at approximately 2/3 the speed of light." In circuit design, I believe that the engineers at places like Intel use the figure of 2.3 x 10^8 m/sec for copper. So my question is this, if you had used this lower figure instead of c, wouldn't the actual resonance (330,000 khz) have worked out correctly from the math - or are you saying that there is another (near-field ?) component that one needs to deal with because of the close proximity of the windings in a Tesla coil? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 19:02:26 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 iB732JqC002195; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:02:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB732Hwp002180; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:02:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:02:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041206211622.02a6d860@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 6.1.2.0 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:02:01 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Colin Quinney Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought In-Reply-To: <007f01c4dbdf$57e48300$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> References: <007f01c4dbdf$57e48300$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> 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/56825 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 Jones, Keith, I found a few more FTL papers listed under category FTL Phenomena, on Robert Neil Boyd's web site.. ..and two more papers by William D. Walker , AND, a search in arXiv.org using the term, "superluminal", in "Abstracts", of category "Physics" returns 1,142 hits. The first one is a *theoretical* paper by Modanese and Fontana. "Effect of Vacuum Energy Density on Graviton Propagation". What caught my eye with this paper is that just under equation 8 is stated that gravitons under certain conditions may have a wavelength of 10^25 cm. They state that is over 10^7 light years. If William Walker's superluminal experiments are true for near fields of electromagnetic waves then is it that much of a stretch to consider that a graviton's near field may also display FTL phenomena? BTW, does anyone know how to turn off outgoing HTML with Eudora? Thanks. Best, Colin At 05:02 PM 12/6/2004, you wrote: >Keith, > > > I disagree with his conclusion, that the underlying > > velocity exceeds C. This claim was made by a researcher > > at Marquette.... > >I can't blame anyone for disagreeing with this. > >Yesterday, I would have disagreed also. > >However, having had a little run at Google, there seems to >be a fair number of "non-cranks" espousing this view. This >one looks interesting: > >http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0009023 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 19:15:24 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 iB73F4O6032081; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:15:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB73EkI1031916; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:14:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:14:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B5208D.1040507@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:16:29 -0500 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 Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080708080402010905010205" Resent-Message-ID: <1upk4.A.oyH.mAStBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56827 X-Loop: vortex-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. --------------080708080402010905010205 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keith Nagel wrote > <>Try searching the archives of Aperion magazine, I seem to > remember more papers there. Something recent: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1 Good news for causality 18 November 2004 Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nicolas Gisin and colleagues at the University of Geneva have shown that the "group velocity" of a laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster than the speed of light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at which information travels - cannot (N Brunner et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 203902). --------------080708080402010905010205 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Keith Nagel wrote
<>Try searching the archives of Aperion magazine, I seem to
remember more papers there.

Something recent:

http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1

Good news for causality

18 November 2004

Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nicolas Gisin and colleagues at the University of Geneva have shown that the "group velocity" of a laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster than the speed of light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at which information travels - cannot (N Brunner et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 203902).

--------------080708080402010905010205-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 4 15:19:24 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 iB4NJK4k007434; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:19:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB4NJ8Mo007390; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:19:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 15:19:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: <8c.1b575389.2ee39fdf@aol.com> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:18:55 EST Subject: Solar Eclipse, Neutrinos, & How To Prevent Earth Changes To: Baronvolsung@aol.com, ThomasClark123@aol.com, NEO-ROUNDTABLE@yahoogroups.com, a-albionic@yahoogroups.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_8c.1b575389.2ee39fdf_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10578 Resent-Message-ID: <9Tyj2D.A.VzB.sXksBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56772 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_8c.1b575389.2ee39fdf_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Solar Eclipse, Neutrinos, & How To Prevent Earth Changes Konstantine Meyl in his book Scalar Waves points out the exact dates of Solar Eclipses in history, and how the solar eclipse focuses the neutrino radiation at specific points on the Earth to move the tectonic plates to potentially cause Earth quakes, floods, and tilting of the axis of Earth, that have been predicted by Nostrodumus's calculations but not foreseen to have occurred around 11/13/2012, so that they may not occur if prevented by technological means which I shall post below. The US government has already developed satellites as posted at the vortex web site which can capture solar energy and create a beam force field from the solar energy, so that we should be able to use a series of satellites to create a tesla neutrino force field to filter, or deflect the neutrino radiation at the exact know points where the solar neutrino energy is focused by the moon during a solar eclipse so that it does not create floods, earth quakes, or a tilting of the Earth's axis. It seems to me the reason that the Mayan calendar ended around 2012, is because the Mayans or the South American's lose their present control of the US government around 2012 due to civil wars in the US, etc., so that they cannot see into the future by means of time travel and information passed to them back in time by means of their present control of the US government. We also have the Israeli's, and other groups which work with Asia, and South America who also live in underground caves, and think themselves safe during solar eclipses, to secretly control the US government to use its resources such as satellites, against the USA citizens, but a civil war in the USA may prevent this and prevent biblical apocalyptic events from occurring by using the US governments technologies to prevent biblical apocalypses rather than encourage them. It seems to me that the US government has already created a force field system around the Earth by means of satellites, which already filters out helpful neutrino radiation that can make life on the surface of the Earth much more positive and extend life, since presently the US government is controlled by underworld forces that live in caves from South America, which want to repress and genocide societies on the surface of the Earth. If no revolution or civil war occurs to restore the US government back in control by the USA surface societies, then the South American, Middle Eastern, and Asian underworld's control of the US government may allow the focused neutrino radiation to cause floods and earthquakes around 2012 and until then the underworld uses the solar satellites to harass and repress USA citizens with beam weapons as well as reduce the helpful neutrinos that extend life spans and prevent old age. Konstantine Meyl also mentions that a hundred years ago the intensity of the neutrino Radiation was greater to allow longer and healthier life, to allow crystals to glow, and to allow Keely's technologies to work. It may be that the US government went back in time starting around 1994, to place satellites around the Earth starting around the 1900's to place a force field around the Earth to then filter out neutrinos, to reduce neutrino radiation levels, to shorten life spans, reduce the quality of life, and for other reasons, since the US government has been controlled by groups living in underground caves, which are at war with the surface societies, and which use the US governments resources against the surface societies on Earth presently. "20.10 Interaction of the neutrinos with Earth's core by Konstantine Meyl, Scalar Waves, Pg 431-432, 2003, Indel A strong neutrino field still doesn't make a catastrophe. Only in connection with one of the regularly happening eclipses of the sun should one be expected under certain circumstances. Only, which eclipses of the sun can get dangerous, we have to ask us, and why warns e.g. Nostradamus only for very particular dates? The check of the respective eclipses of the sun results in a critical constellation every time for the cases, where the line of the complete shadow and the circle of the projection of Earth's core intersect under a very flat angle and both points of intersection lie very close together. In the extreme case finally the lines only are touching and the points of intersection fuse to a line of intersection. A corresponding constellation the next time is expected at 11/13/2012. For 7/7/3797, at similar conditions Nostradamus foretells the end of the world; but why? >From the interaction of the neutrinos arises as from every other interaction a force effect. If the points of intersection lie far apart, then earth's core is pulled once to the East and a short time later again to the West by the focussed neutrino radiation. On the average this will hardly influence earth's mantle and earth's crust because of the immense moment of inertia. The possible earthquakes will remain regionally restricted to the area around the two points of intersection. But if a line of intersection forms, then no compensation of the force effects take place anymore, then during the whole time one-sided is pulled at earth's core and that can have fatal results. It is the same as for a spinning top, which is given a blow from the side: it staggers several times, until the gyroscopic forces have stabilized it again. But if the earth's axis staggers, then the sun describes strange orbits in the sky, it goes backwards again, for a longer time doesn't set or it doesn't show for the same period of time for the people living on the other side of the globe. Such an event already is described in the Bible. For the twenty hours, in which in Europe the sun didn't set for a day, again describe the chroniclers of the inhabitants in the South American Andes, how at their place the sun didn't show for twenty hours. ..... 20.11 Changing of polarity and apocalypse The pulling at earth's core, which shows as a wobbling of the magnetic axis and in damped form can lead to a tilting of the axis of rotation of the earth, still doesn't make an apocalypse, no end of the world. ...." 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_8c.1b575389.2ee39fdf_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Solar Eclipse= , Neutrinos, & How To Prevent Earth Changes

Konstantine Meyl in his book Scalar Waves points out the exact dates of=20= Solar Eclipses in history, and how the solar eclipse focuses the neutrino ra= diation at specific points on the Earth to move the tectonic plates to poten= tially cause Earth quakes, floods, and tilting of the axis of Earth, that ha= ve been predicted by Nostrodumus's calculations but not foreseen to have occ= urred around 11/13/2012, so that they may not occur if prevented by technolo= gical means which I shall post below.   

The US government has already developed satellites as posted at the vort= ex web site which can capture solar energy and create a beam force field fro= m the solar energy, so that we should be able to use a series of satellites=20= to create a tesla neutrino force field to filter, or deflect the neutrino ra= diation at the exact know points where the solar neutrino energy is focused=20= by the moon during a solar eclipse so that it does not create floods, earth=20= quakes, or a tilting of the Earth's axis.=20

It seems to me the reason that the Mayan calendar ended around 2012, is=20= because the Mayans or the South American's lose their present control of the= US government around 2012 due to civil wars in the US, etc., so that they c= annot see into the future by means of time travel and information passed to=20= them back in time by means of their present control of the US government. &n= bsp;We also have the Israeli's, and other groups which work with Asia, and S= outh America who also live in underground caves, and think themselves safe d= uring solar eclipses, to secretly control the US government to use its resou= rces such as satellites, against the USA citizens, but a civil war in the US= A may prevent this and prevent biblical apocalyptic events from occurring by= using the US governments technologies to prevent biblical apocalypses rathe= r than encourage them.=20

It seems to me that the US government has already created a force field=20= system around the Earth by means of satellites, which already filters out he= lpful neutrino radiation that can make life on the surface of the Earth much= more positive and extend life, since presently the US government is control= led by underworld forces that live in caves from South America, which want t= o repress and genocide societies on the surface of the Earth.  If no re= volution or civil war occurs to restore the US government back in control by= the USA surface societies, then the South American, Middle Eastern, and Asi= an underworld's control of the US government may allow the focused neutrino=20= radiation to cause floods and earthquakes around 2012 and until then the und= erworld uses the solar satellites to harass and repress USA citizens with be= am weapons as well as reduce the helpful neutrinos that extend life spans an= d prevent old age.  

Konstantine Meyl also mentions that a hundred years ago the intensity of= the neutrino Radiation was greater to allow longer and healthier life, to a= llow crystals to glow, and to allow Keely's technologies to work.  It m= ay be that the US government went back in time starting around 1994, to plac= e satellites around the Earth starting around the 1900's to place a force fi= eld around the Earth to then filter out neutrinos, to reduce neutrino radiat= ion levels, to shorten life spans, reduce the quality of life, and for other= reasons, since the US government has been controlled by groups living in un= derground caves, which are at war with the surface societies, and which use=20= the US governments resources against the surface societies on Earth presentl= y.=20

"20.10 Interaction of the neutrinos with Earth's core by  Konsta= ntine Meyl, Scalar Waves, Pg 431-432, 2003, Indel

A strong neutrino field still doesn't make a catastrophe.  Only &nb= sp;in connection with one of the regularly happening eclipses of the sun sho= uld one be expected under certain  circumstances.  Only, which ecl= ipses of the sun can get dangerous, we have to ask us, and why warns e.g. No= stradamus only for very particular dates?

The check of the respective eclipses of the sun results in a critical &n= bsp;constellation every time for the cases, where the line of the complete s= hadow and the circle of the projection of Earth's core intersect under a ver= y flat angle and both points of intersection lie very close together.  = In the extreme case finally the lines only are touching and the points of in= tersection fuse to a line of intersection.
A corresponding constellation the next time is expected at 11/13/2012. &= nbsp;For 7/7/3797, at similar conditions Nostradamus foretells the end of th= e world; but why?

From the interaction of the neutrinos arises as from every other interac= tion a force effect.  If the points of intersection lie far apart, then= earth's core is pulled once to the East and a short time later again to the= West by the focussed neutrino radiation.  On the average this will har= dly influence earth's mantle and earth's crust because of the immense moment= of inertia.  The possible earthquakes will remain regionally restricte= d to the area around the two points of intersection.=20

But if a line of intersection forms, then no compensation of the force e= ffects take place anymore, then during the whole time one-sided is pulled at= earth's core and that can have fatal results.  It is the same as for a= spinning top, which is given a blow from the side: it staggers several time= s, until the gyroscopic forces have stabilized it again.=20

But if the earth's axis staggers, then the sun describes strange orbits=20= in the sky, it goes backwards again, for a longer time doesn't set or it doe= sn't show for the same period of time for the people living on the other sid= e of the globe.
Such an event already is described in the Bible.  For the twenty ho= urs, in which in Europe the sun didn't set for a day, again describe the chr= oniclers of the inhabitants in the South American Andes, how at their place=20= the sun didn't show for twenty hours.=20

.....

20.11 Changing of polarity and apocalypse

The pulling at earth's core, which shows as a wobbling of the magnetic a= xis and in damped form can lead to a tilting of the axis of rotation of the=20= earth, still doesn't make an apocalypse, no end of the world. ...."



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_8c.1b575389.2ee39fdf_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 19:16:37 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 iB73GTvF006472; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:16:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB73GSIc006453; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:16:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:16:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B520F3.1000103@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:18:11 -0500 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 Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought 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/56828 X-Loop: vortex-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, sans html: > Try searching the archives of Aperion magazine, I seem to > remember more papers there. Something recent: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1 Good news for causality 18 November 2004 Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nicolas Gisin and colleagues at the University of Geneva have shown that the "group velocity" of a laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster than the speed of light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at which information travels - cannot (N Brunner et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 203902). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:02:13 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 iB7420nS015205; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:02:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB741xqt015197; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:01:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:01:59 -0800 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: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:01:31 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <41B520F3.1000103@rtpatlanta.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <8HLWZ.A.ZtD.2sStBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56829 X-Loop: vortex-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 Terry. You will see from their scope graph http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 that the light speed pulse is larger than both; measuring from the peak like that can be deceptive as they show. I also agree with the authors that a "signal velocity" or what I might call a shock wave velocity need be measured. Hey, HTML free, saves bandwidth and leaves your virtual breathe minty fresh! K. -----Original Message----- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:blantont@rtpatlanta.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:18 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Oops, sans html: > Try searching the archives of Aperion magazine, I seem to > remember more papers there. Something recent: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1 Good news for causality 18 November 2004 Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nicolas Gisin and colleagues at the University of Geneva have shown that the "group velocity" of a laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster than the speed of light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at which information travels - cannot (N Brunner et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 203902). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:20:44 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 iB74KbvF027313; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:20:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB74KZ2Z027293; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:20:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:20:35 -0800 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, 6 Dec 2004 19:27:52 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electron traps Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56830 X-Loop: vortex-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: "One possibility for doing this might be to use a semiconducting material used for making FET's. If protons (not in the form of atoms) can be injected or built into the lattice, the associated electrons can be frozen in place by imposition of an electrostatic field gradient that removes conductivity from the lattice. There are the problems of keeping the interstitial spaces intact and small enough and strong enough to prevent hydrogen atom formation. Perhaps a similar strategy can be implemented using powerful magnetic fields - imposed on proton doped semiconductor lattices to eliminate conductivity." The above part was a fairly dumb idea because the key electron will merely form an orbital on the proton and deform the lattice. It seems to me getting Li++ into an ionic lattice is possibly an effective idea. Deposition of Li and Pd by sputtering, on a base of copper or gold, followed by electrolysis to load protons where feasible and raise fugacity, may be a reasonable approach. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:30:17 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 iB74U5nS023215; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:30:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB74U3B0023201; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:30:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:30:03 -0800 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, 6 Dec 2004 19:37:12 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electron traps Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56831 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Correction: "One possibility for doing this might be to use a semiconducting material used for making FET's. If protons (not in the form of atoms) can be injected or built into the lattice, the associated electrons can be frozen in place by imposition of an electrostatic field gradient that removes conductivity from the lattice. There are the problems of keeping the interstitial spaces intact and small enough and strong enough to prevent hydrogen atom formation. Perhaps a similar strategy can be implemented using powerful magnetic fields - imposed on proton doped semiconductor lattices to eliminate conductivity." The above part was a fairly dumb idea because the key electron will merely form an orbital on the proton and deform the lattice. It seems to me getting Li+ into an ionic lattice is possibly an effective idea. Deposition of Li and Pd by sputtering or codeposition, on a base of copper or gold, followed by electrolysis to load protons where feasible and raise fugacity, may be a reasonable approach. Sound familiar? My posting is rushed of late, due to injuring my foot and thus a major increase in time to do my daily activities. Guess this means good news and bad news for you guys. Good news is you get a break from my incessant drivel. Bad news is what I do post is even less thought out and edited than normal. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 6 20:38:13 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 iB74c4tk024921; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:38:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB74c1fO024872; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:38:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:38:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:34:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <8O7fP.A.iEG.oOTtBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56832 X-Loop: vortex-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 world of light I know from daily experience doesn't fit into an optical fibre. Perhaps in other contexts the signal velocity of light does exceed C. Harry > > http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1 > > Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that information cannot be > transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nicolas Gisin and colleagues > at the University of Geneva have shown that the "group velocity" of a > laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster than the speed of > light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at which information > travels - cannot (N Brunner et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 203902). > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 00:45:53 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 iB78jeAS019162; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 00:45:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB78jcmC019146; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 00:45:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 00:45:38 -0800 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, 6 Dec 2004 23:52:52 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56833 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:01 PM 12/6/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Terry. > >You will see from their scope graph > >http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 > >that the light speed pulse is larger than both; measuring from the peak like >that can be deceptive as they show. I also agree with >the authors that a "signal velocity" or what I might call >a shock wave velocity need be measured. It seems to me that if the group velocity can be sensed at 3*c then that constitutes data transmitted FTL. Live data can thus be sent FTL using parallel data cables (or fibers) for a single bit (a bundle), and parallel bundles of cables for a binary word, provided it is known *with good confidence* an interval for the arrival of some indication of the value of each of the parallel data bits in a word. Multiple cables can be used to transmit each bit, including multiple cables to transmit (initiate) the timing (strobe) pulse which starts the sensing interval for a binary word. In this manner multi-bit words can be sent FTL asynchronously. The first indication of a signal on any cable for a given bit then sets that bit. This would not be 100 percent reliable, but neither is any other form of transmission. An indication of both a 1 and a 0 value for a given bit would trigger error processing. If 32 cables were used to transmit a pulse indicating a 1 bit in a given position of a binary word, and 32 cables used to indicate a 0 bit in that word position, then it is known with great reliability much faster than the speed of light if a given bit is 0, 1, or in error. Transmitting an 8 bit byte (with parity) in parallel would take 9*64 + 32 = 608 cables. It may be worthwhile to dedicate 64 cables to the timing pulse bundle, which is always a 1 bit, for reliablity in identifying an earliest possible start for the strobe window. The 640 cables is extravagant, but so what. It's just a proof of principle. > >Hey, HTML free, saves bandwidth and leaves your virtual >breathe minty fresh! How sweet it is! And flouride protected too. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 03:43:25 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 iB7BhKe5028830; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 03:43:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7Bh8dR028764; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 03:43:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 03:43:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041207114210.006ae0e4@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, 07 Dec 2004 11:42:10 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56834 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:52 pm 06-12-04 -0900, you wrote: >At 11:01 PM 12/6/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >>Hi Terry. >> >>You will see from their scope graph >> >>http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 >> >>that the light speed pulse is larger than both; measuring from the peak like >>that can be deceptive as they show. I also agree with >>the authors that a "signal velocity" or what I might call >>a shock wave velocity need be measured. > > >It seems to me that if the group velocity can be sensed at 3*c then that >constitutes data transmitted FTL. > >Live data can thus be sent FTL using parallel data cables (or fibers) for a >single bit (a bundle), and parallel bundles of cables for a binary word, >provided it is known *with good confidence* an interval for the arrival of >some indication of the value of each of the parallel data bits in a word. > >Multiple cables can be used to transmit each bit, including multiple cables >to transmit (initiate) the timing (strobe) pulse which starts the sensing >interval for a binary word. In this manner multi-bit words can be sent FTL >asynchronously. The first indication of a signal on any cable for a given >bit then sets that bit. This would not be 100 percent reliable, but >neither is any other form of transmission. An indication of both a 1 and a >0 value for a given bit would trigger error processing. If 32 cables were >used to transmit a pulse indicating a 1 bit in a given position of a binary >word, and 32 cables used to indicate a 0 bit in that word position, then it >is known with great reliability much faster than the speed of light if a >given bit is 0, 1, or in error. Transmitting an 8 bit byte (with parity) >in parallel would take 9*64 + 32 = 608 cables. It may be worthwhile to >dedicate 64 cables to the timing pulse bundle, which is always a 1 bit, for >reliability in identifying an earliest possible start for the strobe window. >The 640 cables is extravagant, but so what. It's just a proof of >principle. So what indeed. A very clear explanation Horace. Even I managed to follow that. 8^) Cheers Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 06:09:18 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 iB7E9Ew0023622; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:09:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7E9Cqa023608; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:09:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:09:12 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004122713750580@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: Is The Sun A Cold Fusion Damper? Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 07:07:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94078b9ad08d832717ab2f0cee263965266350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.208 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56835 X-Loop: vortex-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 Sun: Mass 2.0e30 Kg Volume 1.41e27 Cubic Meters Mean Density 1.41 grams/ cubic centimeter Energy Output 3.86e26 Watts (0.193 watts/kg) or 0.273 watts/ cubic meter) Temperature 5,700 K to > 20,000,000 K IOW. Is Cold (Condensed Matter) Fusion more practical/efficient than Hot (Plasma) Fusion? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

The Sun:
 
Mass  2.0e30 Kg
Volume 1.41e27 Cubic Meters
Mean Density  1.41 grams/ cubic centimeter
Energy Output 3.86e26 Watts    (0.193 watts/kg) or 0.273 watts/ cubic meter)
Temperature 5,700 K to > 20,000,000 K
 
IOW. Is Cold (Condensed Matter) Fusion more practical/efficient than Hot (Plasma) Fusion?
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 06:28:48 2004 Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iB7ESh6n001415; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:28:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7ESGp2001347; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:28:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 06:28:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra7.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:38:52 -0800 From: Robert Brady User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050105050806010504040507" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56836 X-Loop: vortex-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. --------------050105050806010504040507 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <>*December 7, 2004** * *Hi all,* *The WMAP study conducted by NASA concluded with startling revelations which should give ZPE supporters support. 23 percent of the universe is unknown dark matter and another 73 percent is mysterious dark energy. That leaves only 4 percent we know about.* *NASA also announced that the universe was expanding at an expanding rate. That would seem to make the universe "flat" and expanding forever.* <>*To test this, I developed a simulator of the Big Bang. I created a computer model that simply produces an energy field and drops matter into it. The object was to see what happens. Here is what I got: * *1. **Matter self organizes in an energy field. Gravity, centripetal, and acceleration forces all appear naturally but you need to look closely.* *2. **As matter approaches the edge of the field, it expands faster away* *from the center.* *3. **Local groups tend to hold together longer, but eventually as the * * field diminishes, the matter loses integrity. I would believe that * * matter would turn into quarks or something similar later in * * the expansion phase as energy is cooled or fades. (not shown in * * the simulator).* *In my mind, these results are physics-shaking.* *For any of you that might be interested in this line of research, the simulator is available on my web site. It is clean, 'cause I wrote it-placed it there. The URL is http://www.eskimo.com/~rebrady/BigBang1.exe* * * *Robert E. Brady* --------------050105050806010504040507 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <>December 7, 2004 

Hi all,

The WMAP study conducted by NASA concluded with startling revelations which should give ZPE supporters support.  23 percent of the universe is unknown dark matter and another 73 percent is mysterious dark energy.  That leaves only 4 percent we know about.

NASA also announced that the universe was expanding at an expanding rate.  That would seem to make the universe “flat” and expanding forever.

<>To test this, I developed a simulator of the Big Bang.  I created a computer model that simply produces an energy field and drops matter into it.  The object was to see what happens.  Here is what I got:
 

1.     Matter self organizes in an energy field.  Gravity, centripetal,   and acceleration forces all appear naturally but you need to look closely.

2.     As matter approaches the edge of the field, it expands faster away

from the center.

3.     Local groups tend to hold together longer, but eventually as the  

     field diminishes, the matter loses integrity.  I would believe that   

     matter would turn into quarks or something similar later in    

     the expansion phase as energy is cooled or fades. (not shown in  

     the simulator).

In my mind, these results are physics-shaking.

For any of you that might be interested in this line of research, the simulator is available on my web site.  It is clean, ‘cause I wrote it-placed it there.  The URL is http://www.eskimo.com/~rebrady/BigBang1.exe

 

Robert E. Brady

--------------050105050806010504040507-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 08:48:40 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 iB7GmYw0010736; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:48:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7GmWAg010731; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:48:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 08:48:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004801c4dc7c$5ebcbf60$f42efea9@default> From: "Emeka Okafor" To: Subject: Greenview Group: Cold Fusion Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:46:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0045_01C4DC52.73939FA0" 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: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56837 X-Loop: vortex-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_0045_01C4DC52.73939FA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Experts provide practical perspective to a new and challenging = scientific field.=20 http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb186609.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C4DC52.73939FA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 Experts provide practical perspective = to a=20 new and challenging scientific field.
 
http://www= .prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb186609.htm
  ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C4DC52.73939FA0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 09:05:20 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 iB7H5De5027501; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:05:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7H54YD027471; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:05:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:05:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B5D516.CBE48870@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:52:33 -0700 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: Greenview Group: Cold Fusion References: <004801c4dc7c$5ebcbf60$f42efea9@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56838 X-Loop: vortex-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 Lew, here is an enterprising group that might be worth contacting to see what they know. Ed > Emeka Okafor wrote: > > Experts provide practical perspective to a new and challenging > scientific field. > > http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb186609.htm > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 10:29:33 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 iB7ITMe5022165; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:29:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7ITKB5022146; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:29:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:29:20 -0800 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: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 12:28:59 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> In-Reply-To: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.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 iB7ITHe5022122 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56839 X-Loop: vortex-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 Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:38:52 -0800, you wrote: ><>*December 7, 2004** * > >*Hi all,* > >*The WMAP study conducted by NASA concluded with startling revelations >which should give ZPE supporters support. 23 percent of the universe is >unknown dark matter and another 73 percent is mysterious dark energy. >That leaves only 4 percent we know about.* > >*NASA also announced that the universe was expanding at an expanding >rate. That would seem to make the universe "flat" and expanding forever.* > ><>*To test this, I developed a simulator of the Big Bang. I created a >computer model that simply produces an energy field and drops matter >into it. The object was to see what happens. Here is what I got: > * > >*1. **Matter self organizes in an energy field. Gravity, >centripetal, and acceleration forces all appear naturally but you need >to look closely.* > >*2. **As matter approaches the edge of the field, it expands faster >away* > >*from the center.* > >*3. **Local groups tend to hold together longer, but eventually as >the * > >* field diminishes, the matter loses integrity. I would believe >that * > >* matter would turn into quarks or something similar later in * > >* the expansion phase as energy is cooled or fades. (not shown in * > >* the simulator).* > >*In my mind, these results are physics-shaking.* --- NASA'a announcement and your results seem to add credence to my hypothesis that there was no big bang but, instead, a "big bubble" which sprang into being much like a bubble in a cavitating fluid. All of the matter in our universe would have "outgassed" from the other side of the wall of the bubble as it expanded, and has been being attracted back ever since the beginning of the expansion. Assuming the bubble is nonspherical and that what lies behind it is massive, the matter on our side of the wall being attracted to it will be attracted to it more strongly the closer it gets, so it will accelerate and its doppler signature will be increasingly red shifted from any viewpoint in the bubble. That would seem to explain the increase of red shift with distance and the apparent expansion of the bubble. Next, assume that the bubble is not expanding at a rate faster than that which would allow the matter on this side of the wall to collide with the wall, and that's where the missing matter went; it's been absorbed! Or, perhaps, the matter accelerated to the point where it went superluminal and got added to the ZPE pool. In either case, it would seem to be missing. -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 10:32:46 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 iB7IWae5023477; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:32:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7IWZoo023460; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:32:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:32:35 -0800 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: <20041118172611.69579.qmail@web81106.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041118172611.69579.qmail@web81106.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:32:10 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Triple coherency experiment Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id iB7IWOe5023229 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56840 X-Loop: vortex-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 Posted; >The following is an evolution of ideas towards the >design of a state-of-the-art LENR experiment. The >purpose here is to explain an enhancement called >ìtriple coherency, >You raise a number of issues that I don't understand Jones. >It is hoped and suspected that this ìtriple coherencyî >(overlapping coherency between photon, phonon, and >conduction electrons) I assume that conduction electrons are the outer most of the electron. I'm wondering what photon and phonon electrons are. >will give the same kind of >paradigm shift that arises in light itself, once it >becomes phase locked, as in a laser. paradigm shift? I though that was something that happened in mind when I understood a new way of explaining a phenomena. > >coherency would work, one should understand the >interplay of kinetic vibration with mass: and the I've enjoyed the various posts on the nature of the electrons cloud particularly the pancaking effect and the Frenkel defects. I downloaded a paper on the subject. It showed circles which I assume were the nucleus and curved triangles extending outward from them. The triangles intersected, and there was a note that the electron positions weren't centered over either nucleus, I assume that this is were the Frenkel defects occur in a crystal. I assume that as you increase the speed of an atom the electron cloud flattens out, is this correct? The other thing that interests me is tunneling. I assume that this is the quantum tunneling that the webmaster of Singularity Technologies was talking about. The question I have is how is this initiated? I assume that it is more difficult than two particles having the same De Borglie wave length. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 11:09:03 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 iB7J8sw0019245; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:08:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7J8qSU019236; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:08:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:08:52 -0800 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: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:08:23 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56841 X-Loop: vortex-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: >It seems to me that if the group velocity can be sensed at 3*c then that >constitutes data transmitted FTL. Let's look at that graph again. http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 Notice how the light speed delayed pulse is larger than the slow or fast wave? Let's imagine two machines as you describe, the only difference being that one is implemented using the fast wave and the other with the light speed delayed signal ( the large one ). If I set the detector to trigger at the peak ( roughly the "center of mass" of the energy of the pulse ) the fast wave will be faster than the delayed wave. If I set the trigger at the 50% point on the risetime, now my light speed delayed system is going to be faster than my fast wave system. Hmmm, that doesn't seem very attractive now. does it? Frankly, IMHO, the math is not adequate to describe the physical system. I agree with the authors that a new velocity definition is needed. I have no problem with FTL transmission, I just want to actually DO IT and judge the physical implementations accordingly... By the way, things do get more interesting when the transmission media is nonlinear and active. What is described on the site is pretty much the argument about tunnelling in QM, it's easy to build macroscopic models with radio techniques that behave the same way as the quantum systems do. One can see the same results as this experiment. However, you can probe the radio system much more intimately than the QM system. Very enlightening. Here's some more refs. http://www.aei-potsdam.mpg.de/~mpoessel/Physik/FTL/tunnelingftl.html This guy in particular has some interesting work. http://www.ph2.uni-koeln.de/Nimtz/pub/paper-list.html K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 12:20:08 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 iB7KJxe5025719; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:20:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7KJpda025655; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:19:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:19:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005301c4dc95$823d26a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:46:27 -0800 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/56842 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Fields writes, > [snip] my hypothesis that there was no big bang but, instead, a "big bubble" which sprang into being much like a bubble in a cavitating fluid. > All of the matter in our universe would have "outgassed" from the > other side of the wall of the bubble as it expanded, and has been > being attracted back ever since the beginning of the expansion. Much as I like the basic idea, it is clear from observation that there are numerous "loci" or centers of attraction, spread uniformly throughout the universe, but no "common" center-of-attraction (or repulsion) for all of them. It also glosses over the most important basic starting point - the distinction between an "open" and "closed" universe. The real beauty of your idea (is it original?) on the other hand, is that the bubble "wall" may itself be a "dimensional" wall, instead of a "physical" wall. To expound on this a little. Almost all the mass in our visible sky (that being the mass which is blue-shifted wrt to our solar system) is moving towards our "great attractor," located in the night sky at about Sagittarius, 14 degrees and two minutes. This "local" or blue-shifted mass (wrt to our solar system) consists of our "local group" and a few thousand other galaxies - all in the Virgo supercluster. This is one factor that must be explained by any larger scale model. No galaxy which is red-shifted to our local group, which is "supposedly" over 99% of the rest of the universe, is moving towards our great attractor. All those other galaxies have their own superclusters (about 10,000 supposedly) and therefore they all have their own individual "great attractors." It is really a two-tier system, gravitationally. The only way to salvage your main point is to say that all of those individual "great attractors" are themselves moving outward towards the bubble wall, BUT not for the normal reason. The normal "reason" is also what is to be expected in the "open universe" of the standard model, and it is indeed what the bulk of observation now tends to show - which is that the 10,000 or so superclusters are all moving away from each other. The "open" universe model cannot be disproven yet, however, despite the apparent "continuity logic" of a closed universe model (which many of us "prefer" if only because of our meager brains needing the same kind of psychological "closure," so that we are dealing to some extent with transference). Without some evidence of a closed universe, then, what is there to distinguish a "bubble" from a "big-bang"? IOW they become just two similar ways of expressing the same thing ... without the factor of gravitational closure, that is ... The factor which would bolster your theory would be to find both 1) evidence that the universe is indeed "closed" (gravitationally) and not open AND also 2) evidence that despite (1. above) that the individual "great attractors" are nevertheless all still moving away from a common center, as if the universe was "open" Note that 1.) is incompatible with the current standard cosmological model (which to be honest is based mostly on 2). But both 1) and 2) are necessary for your hypothesis to be valid. Do you see the subtle distinction, or am I not clear on the details of your hypothesis ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 12:47:00 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 iB7Kkme5003247; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:46:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7KkhPe003216; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:46:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:46:43 -0800 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, 7 Dec 2004 11:53:44 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56843 X-Loop: vortex-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 2:08 PM 12/7/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Let's look at that graph again. > >http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 > >Notice how the light speed delayed pulse is larger than the slow or >fast wave? Let's imagine two machines as you describe, the only >difference being that one is implemented using the fast wave and the >other with the light speed delayed signal ( the large one ). > >If I set the detector to trigger at the peak ( roughly the "center of mass" >of the energy of the pulse ) the fast wave will be faster than >the delayed wave. If I set the trigger at the 50% point on the >risetime, now my light speed delayed system is going to be >faster than my fast wave system. It appears you are misinterpreting the subject graphic (or I am.) I take it as in incident count graph. It is a tabulation of photons by arrival times. Some photons arrive early, some late. It is not a pulse trace, but could be if all the photon's detection pulses were summed (pulse time averaged) together. I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. My point is that it pays to go way out on the tip of the trace as far as possible. In this case that would be at the single photon detection level. Now, the problem is that on average, the first photon may arrive early or late. On average we don't do better than c with a single fiber. My suggestion is to simultaneously transmit a given bit on lots of fibers at once. Then, *with any desired degree of but not perfect reliability*, based on the number of fibers used in a bundle, an early photon will be sensed within a time window that provides communication at greater than c velocity. We can do reliable communications way out on the front of the distribution. By sending multiple bits at a time in parallel, along with a timing pulse, we can use error detection and correction techniques to greatly increase reliability. By sending photons on two bundles, one bundle having photons sent if the data bit is 1, the other having photons sent if the data is 0, we can reliably do error correction at the bit level way out on the tip of the pulse, before any photons even arrive at velocity c. A more simple test of concept might be to use two bundles from Alice to Bob, with Bob having a repeater to send the data back to Alice on two return bundles. Alice could then measure the error rate as well as turn-around time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 13:56:21 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 iB7Lu65V026734; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:56:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7Lu2is026697; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:56:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:56:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B62753.1040304@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:57:39 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <0Z3VqD.A.ChG.ybitBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56844 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Fields wrote: > On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:38:52 -0800, you wrote: > > >><>*December 7, 2004** * >> >>*Hi all,* >> >>*The WMAP study conducted by NASA concluded with startling revelations >>which should give ZPE supporters support. 23 percent of the universe is >>unknown dark matter and another 73 percent is mysterious dark energy. >>That leaves only 4 percent we know about.* >> >>*NASA also announced that the universe was expanding at an expanding >>rate. That would seem to make the universe "flat" and expanding forever.* >> >><>*To test this, I developed a simulator of the Big Bang. I created a >>computer model that simply produces an energy field and drops matter >>into it. The object was to see what happens. Here is what I got: >>* >> >>*1. **Matter self organizes in an energy field. Gravity, >>centripetal, and acceleration forces all appear naturally but you need >>to look closely.* >> >>*2. **As matter approaches the edge of the field, it expands faster >>away* >> >>*from the center.* >> >>*3. **Local groups tend to hold together longer, but eventually as >>the * >> >>* field diminishes, the matter loses integrity. I would believe >>that * >> >>* matter would turn into quarks or something similar later in * >> >>* the expansion phase as energy is cooled or fades. (not shown in * >> >>* the simulator).* >> >>*In my mind, these results are physics-shaking.* > > > --- > NASA'a announcement and your results seem to add credence to my > hypothesis that there was no big bang but, instead, a "big bubble" > which sprang into being much like a bubble in a cavitating fluid. > > All of the matter in our universe would have "outgassed" from the > other side of the wall of the bubble as it expanded, and has been > being attracted back ever since the beginning of the expansion. > > Assuming the bubble is nonspherical and that what lies behind it is > massive, the matter on our side of the wall being attracted to it will > be attracted to it more strongly the closer it gets, so it will > accelerate and its doppler signature will be increasingly red shifted > from any viewpoint in the bubble. That would seem to explain the > increase of red shift with distance and the apparent expansion of the > bubble. There may be a problem with this. _IF_ the attractive force directed toward whatever is on the other side of the wall diverges in 3 dimensions (like an electric field or Newtonian gravity), and _IF_ the stuff on the other side of the wall is "ignorably thick" (so we can assume we're stuck inside an absolutely enormous sphere), then the force seems very unlikely to be generally directed toward the wall. If the cavity were spherical there would either be no force at all or it would point uniformly in one direction, depending on whether the mass around us is symmetric or not. (A spherical cavity centered in a sphere has no field in it; a spherical cavity off-center in a sphere has a perfectly uniform field in it.) But you specified a non-spherical cavity, which makes it more complex, and I don't know what a general solution would look like. But to take one simple example, suppose the cavity is lozenge-shaped, like the intersection of two spheres. For simplicity assume it's centered inside a spherical mass. Then in the "middle" of the lozenge, where it's thickest, the force will be directed toward the walls. But out toward the thin edges, if I've pictured this correctly, the force would actually be _away_ from the walls. At some point in between the force would be tangential to the walls. The point is that the force which results from such a situation seems likely to be either too uniform (such that there's a global "down" direction) or too nonuniform (such that things are flying apart in some places and flying together in others). > > Next, assume that the bubble is not expanding at a rate faster than > that which would allow the matter on this side of the wall to collide > with the wall, and that's where the missing matter went; it's been > absorbed! Or, perhaps, the matter accelerated to the point where it > went superluminal and got added to the ZPE pool. In either case, it > would seem to be missing. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 14:48:36 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 iB7MmSbc032271; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:48:28 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7MmL4O032239; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:48:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:48:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=IOsB/ImjgHksT/jPO3mVZKtO4n3/WrJwKoS+F25Zj+6ndWzseiXEZF//WokJY1dO6/yxhKSsJfad9lNykkZnBFu73uUf5vawAqoDV7ZRhcLvQMUlz9OkYI0NJfI7rPFtX4xUCq88nsBbnwA+UMMMylRxHfQze6RcrWZtg/hIL7E= ; Message-ID: <20041207224810.21826.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:48:10 -0800 (PST) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <031901c4dc09$cc4e0ca0$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/56845 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Harvey Norris writes > > > I also constructed a TC secondary and attempted to > > resonate it by figuring in the C propagation > speed, > > where the wire length was given a time period for > the > > impulse to reach the end of the wire at C, and > then > > multiplying by 4 times that time period, and > taking > > the inverse of that time period; arriving at a > > frequency answer of 250,000 hz. No resonance was > found > > using a primary also resonating at 250 khz. Later > > methods showed that the natural resonant frequency > of > > the secondary was actually ~ 330,000 hz, well > above > > the value given by a standing wave exhibiting a > > propagation impulse speed at C. > > > There are a few semantic issues here but as far as > practicality, it is generally accepted (for > government work, > as they say) that the EMF or "electrical signal" > (not the > electrons) in a copper wire travel at approximately > 2/3 the > speed of light." In circuit design, I believe that > the > engineers at places like Intel use the figure of > 2.3 x 10^8 > m/sec for copper. So my question is this, if you had > used > this lower figure instead of c, wouldn't the actual > resonance (330,000 khz) have worked out correctly > from the > math - or are you saying that there is another > (near-field > ?) component that one needs to deal with because of > the > close proximity of the windings in a Tesla coil? > > Jones If the freq were calculated at 2/3 C, the time period to reach the end of the wire should be 3/2, or 50 % greater then it would be at C. Since this time period of the pulse traveling through the wire represents only 1/4 of the total action of a complete cycle, that time period is first multiplied by 4, which gives the time period for the cycle. This time period is then the (time period if fractions of a sec) per 1 cycle, which for these cases is a very small no. Taking the reciprocal of this no will give a different form of expression which then becomes cycles/sec. The smaller the no. that is inverted, or taken the reciprocal of, the larger the answer in cycles/sec. or frequency. In this case if we used 2/3 C instead of C, the time period becomes a larger no., thus a smaller no. when it is inverted, thus the time period that formerly yeilded 250 Khz as an answer before would now yeild an answer of 2/3 lower frequency, around 166.6 khz. HDN ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:34:47 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 iB7NYd5V022106; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:34:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7NYWho022059; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:34:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:34:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 18:31:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56846 X-Loop: vortex-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 at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 2:08 PM 12/7/4, Keith Nagel wrote: > >> Let's look at that graph again. >> >> http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 >> >> Notice how the light speed delayed pulse is larger than the slow or >> fast wave? Let's imagine two machines as you describe, the only >> difference being that one is implemented using the fast wave and the >> other with the light speed delayed signal ( the large one ). >> >> If I set the detector to trigger at the peak ( roughly the "center of mass" >> of the energy of the pulse ) the fast wave will be faster than >> the delayed wave. If I set the trigger at the 50% point on the >> risetime, now my light speed delayed system is going to be >> faster than my fast wave system. > > > It appears you are misinterpreting the subject graphic (or I am.) I take > it as in incident count graph. It is a tabulation of photons by arrival > times. Some photons arrive early, some late. It is not a pulse trace, but > could be if all the photon's detection pulses were summed (pulse time > averaged) together. I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons > do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. > > My point is that it pays to go way out on the tip of the trace as far as > possible. In this case that would be at the single photon detection level. > > Now, the problem is that on average, the first photon may arrive early or > late. On average we don't do better than c with a single fiber. My > suggestion is to simultaneously transmit a given bit on lots of fibers at > once. Then, *with any desired degree of but not perfect reliability*, based > on the number of fibers used in a bundle, an early photon will be sensed > within a time window that provides communication at greater than c > velocity. We can do reliable communications way out on the front of the > distribution. By sending multiple bits at a time in parallel, along with a > timing pulse, we can use error detection and correction techniques to > greatly increase reliability. > > By sending photons on two bundles, one bundle having photons sent if the > data bit is 1, the other having photons sent if the data is 0, we can > reliably do error correction at the bit level way out on the tip of the > pulse, before any photons even arrive at velocity c. > > A more simple test of concept might be to use two bundles from Alice to > Bob, with Bob having a repeater to send the data back to Alice on two > return bundles. Alice could then measure the error rate as well as > turn-around time. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner The null result of Michelson-Morely experiment may also be some sort of statistical illusion. It seems to me the best way to look for an aether is to directly measure travel times, rather than infer travel times from an interference pattern. Since we now have the technological means to do so, somebody should do so. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:43:39 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 iB7NhUbc010909; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:43:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7Ng48X010660; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:42:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:42:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: John Fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:41:46 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> <005301c4dc95$823d26a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <005301c4dc95$823d26a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> 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 iB7Ng0bc010641 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56847 X-Loop: vortex-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 Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:46:27 -0800, you wrote: >John Fields writes, > >> [snip] my hypothesis that there was no big bang but, >instead, a "big bubble" which sprang into being much like a >bubble in a cavitating fluid. > >> All of the matter in our universe would have "outgassed" >from the >> other side of the wall of the bubble as it expanded, and >has been >> being attracted back ever since the beginning of the >expansion. > >Much as I like the basic idea, it is clear from observation >that there are numerous "loci" or centers of attraction, >spread uniformly throughout the universe, but no "common" >center-of-attraction (or repulsion) for all of them. --- I don't believe that presents a problem as long as the bubble isn't spherical and as long as the loci aren't distributed symmetrically throughout the volume of the bubble. --- >It also glosses over the most important basic starting point - the >distinction between an "open" and "closed" universe. --- It seems to, but I believe that by virtue of its undetectability, the distiction is irrelevant because it can never be determined. Consider: If the universe is open, and the bubble expands forever, mass will continue to accelerate toward the wall and the universe will seem to be expanding because it is. On the other hand, if the universe is closed the bubble will one day begin to collapse. However, the mass on our side of the wall will still continue to be accelerated toward the wall, we will still see the rate of red shift increase, and we will conclude that because of the increase in rate the universe is expanding, when exactly the opposite will be the case! On the third hand, if the bubble has ceased to either expand or contract, the mass on this side will still be accelerated more and more as it heads for the wall, but we will still see the increase in the shift with distance and conclude that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the only thing we will ever be able to detect is the shift, and since its rate of change will increase with distance, we will always perceive the universe as being open. There is one exception I can think of, however, that being that if stars start disappearing, that may be because they're colliding with the wall. If they go nova when the collision occurs, and all of a sudden we start seeing a LOT of novas, then maybe the bubble will be collapsing... --- >The real beauty of your idea (is it original?) --- As far as I know, it is. The lightbulb going off was due to something of Fred Sparber's or Frank Znidarsik's (sp?) that I read a few years ago on vortex, and since then I've been looking but haven't been able to find anything quite like it. A month or so ago I talked to Hal Puthoff about it and he also thought it was novel, so maybe it is. --- >on the other >hand, is that the bubble "wall" may itself be a >"dimensional" wall, instead of a "physical" wall. > >To expound on this a little. Almost all the mass in our >visible sky (that being the mass which is blue-shifted wrt >to our solar system) is moving towards our "great >attractor," located in the night sky at about Sagittarius, >14 degrees and two minutes. This "local" or blue-shifted >mass (wrt to our solar system) consists of our "local group" >and a few thousand other galaxies - all in the Virgo >supercluster. This is one factor that must be explained by >any larger scale model. > >No galaxy which is red-shifted to our local group, which is >"supposedly" over 99% of the rest of the universe, is moving >towards our great attractor. All those other galaxies have >their own superclusters (about 10,000 supposedly) and >therefore they all have their own individual "great >attractors." It is really a two-tier system, >gravitationally. --- Assuming that superclusters formed because the distribution of mass in the universe wasn't isotropic and that the gravitational attraction between some "clumps" of mass caused them to aggregate to the exlusion of other clumps, and that the resulting superclusters are being drawn toward a location on the wall which they find attractive, then the two-tiered system seems to work. That is, if all the members of a supercluster are bound gravitationally and are attracting each other they will all be more or less blue shifted toward each other and to a gravitational center (their "great attractor") common to the supercluster, while the entire assemblage hurtles toward a location on the wall which is attracting them. If we call the local attraction within the supercluster tier 1, and the attraction between the supercluster and the wall tier 2, then one supercuster will be red shifted WRT any other supercluster because they will all be being pulled away from each other by different attractors in the wall; tier 2 attractors. So the tier 1 attractors will cause mass to clump into superclusters, while tier 2 attractors will pull superclusters away from each other. --- >The only way to salvage your main point is to say that all >of those individual "great attractors" are themselves moving >outward towards the bubble wall, BUT not for the normal >reason. The normal "reason" is also what is to be expected >in the "open universe" of the standard model, and it is >indeed what the bulk of observation now tends to show - >which is that the 10,000 or so superclusters are all moving >away from each other. --- Yes, they're all being separately attracted to the wall and, therefore, away from each other. --- >The "open" universe model cannot be disproven yet, however, >despite the apparent "continuity logic" of a closed universe >model (which many of us "prefer" if only because of our >meager brains needing the same kind of psychological >"closure," so that we are dealing to some extent with >transference). Without some evidence of a closed universe, >then, what is there to distinguish a "bubble" from a >"big-bang"? IOW they become just two similar ways of >expressing the same thing ... without the factor of >gravitational closure, that is ... > >The factor which would bolster your theory would be to find >both >1) evidence that the universe is indeed "closed" >(gravitationally) and not open > > AND also > >2) evidence that despite (1. above) that the individual >"great attractors" are nevertheless all still moving away >from a common center, as if the universe was "open" > >Note that 1.) is incompatible with the current standard >cosmological model (which to be honest is based mostly on >2). But both 1) and 2) are necessary for your hypothesis to >be valid. > >Do you see the subtle distinction, or am I not clear on the >details of your hypothesis ? Yes, I understand. Thank you for your comments, they're certainly appreciated! -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 15:51:03 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 iB7Noxbc012974; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:51:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB7Nnb4C012691; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:49:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:49:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 18:46:26 -0500 Subject: 'The Little Commentary' by Copernicus From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56848 X-Loop: vortex-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 comes from http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Copernicus.html Harry Veeder --------- Around 1514 he distributed a little book, not printed but hand written, to a few of his friends who knew that he was the author even though no author is named on the title page. This book, usually called the Little Commentary, set out Copernicus's theory of a universe with the sun at [near!? HV] its centre. The Little Commentary is a fascinating document. It contains seven axioms which Copernicus gives, not in the sense that they are self evident, but in the sense that he will base his conclusions on these axioms and nothing else; see [79]. What are the axioms? Let us state them: 1.There is no one centre in the universe. 2.The Earth's centre is not the centre of the universe. 3.The centre of the universe is near the sun. 4.The distance from the Earth to the sun is imperceptible compared with the distance to the stars. 5.The rotation of the Earth accounts for the apparent daily rotation of the stars. 6.The apparent annual cycle of movements of the sun is caused by the Earth revolving round it. 7.The apparent retrograde motion of the planets is caused by the motion of the Earth from which one observes. Some have noted that 2, 4, 5, and 7 can be deduced from 3 and 6 but it was never Copernicus's aim to give a minimal set of axioms. The most remarkable of the axioms is 7, for although earlier scholars had claimed that the Earth moved, some claiming that it revolved round the sun, nobody before Copernicus appears to have correctly explained the retrograde motion of the outer planets. Even when he wrote his Little Commentary Copernicus was planning to write a major work, for he wrote in it (see [77]):- Here, for the sake of brevity, I have thought it desirable to omit the mathematical demonstrations intended for my larger work. It is likely that he wrote the Little Commentary in 1514 and began writing his major work De revolutionibus in the following year. --------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 16:44:43 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 iB80icbc024668; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:44:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB80ib5W024653; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:44:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:44:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005b01c4dcbe$ac61bd00$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041207224810.21826.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:41:36 -0800 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/56849 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harvey Norris writes > thus the time period that formerly > yeilded 250 Khz as an answer before would now yeild an > answer of 2/3 lower frequency, around 166.6 khz. > HDN OK. That makes it interesting, doesn't it? Now... we seem to have resonance showing-up at what might look to some observers like there is - either an orthogonal component to the signal which is, in effect. somehow taking a short-cut... or else there is a component which is traveling at greater than c - about 40% greater it would seem. But then again, your resonance expectation was based on quarter wavelength assumption (which is usually valid), but which may have somehow become invalidated by other factors in the coil. If not, maybe Keith or Horace can suggest a way to determine if an FLT message can somehow be transmitted using this accelerated-resonance finding ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:47:47 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 iB81ldc8008031; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:47:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB81lbL0008010; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:47:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:47:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:47:28 EST Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a9.684f4fbc.2ee7b730_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/56850 X-Loop: vortex-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_a9.684f4fbc.2ee7b730_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/7/2004 6:44:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes: > As far as I know, it is. The lightbulb going off was due to something > of Fred Sparber's or Frank Znidarsik's (sp?) that I read a few years > ago on vortex, and since then I've been looking but haven't been able > to find anything quite like it. A month or so ago I talked to Hal > Puthoff about it and he also thought it was novel, so maybe it is. > Thanks for the comment. Here is what I had to say on the subject. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html Frank Znidarsic --part1_a9.684f4fbc.2ee7b730_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/7/2004 6:44:0= 0 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes:

As far as I know, it is. =20= The lightbulb going off was due to something
of Fred Sparber's or Frank Znidarsik's (sp?) that I read a few years
ago on vortex,  and since then I've been looking but haven't been able<= BR> to find anything quite like it.  A month or so ago I talked to Hal
Puthoff about it and he also thought it was novel, so maybe it is.


Thanks for the comment.  Here is what I had to say on the subject.

http://www.ang= elfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html

Frank Znidarsic --part1_a9.684f4fbc.2ee7b730_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 17:57:23 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 iB81vHc8010285; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:57:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB81vG98010272; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:57:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:57:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=wEXAjnh00l8tUvsqYYPoGosp+6jr/Jbib7OjvF5+vVVeKtH+Jm1ZgvHaRhYOZxY/lOX8s4EJMiPpB4NDvS2l8WKMn5hFPtuV4jrkF+4aPtO8J7Lwo+lxtx0m8Yg7N/Vg6PUxQuWeMDaz00diFwDUfnXvehoQoAk3Kqj9ZykujIo= ; Message-ID: <20041208015710.9455.qmail@web12401.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:57:10 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <41B520F3.1000103@rtpatlanta.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/56851 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Physicists in Switzerland have confirmed that > information cannot be > transmitted faster than the speed of light. Hmmm....the writers of the quoted article have made an error in the above statement. It would be more correct to say that it is confirmed that within the experimental proceedures used, information WAS not transmitted faster than the speed of light, not the catch-all phrase that this one experiment proves that information cannot be sent FTL, period. > Nicolas > Gisin and colleagues > at the University of Geneva have shown that the > "group velocity" of a > laser pulse in an optical fibre can travel faster > than the speed of > light but that the "signal velocity" - the speed at > which information > travels - cannot This group/phase/information/signal/front/blah velocity stuff is getting old. Most of the experiments I have seen fall into either: A. The signal was distorted severely by its passage through the medium in which "FTL" is supposed to take place, thus making it "appear FTL". Usually the signal is neither brief (compared to the dimensions of the transmission path) nor sharp (usually a spread or gaussian distribution) B. It is "just" phase/group/whatever velocity which moves super-c. Well, if it *is* moving super-c, and not just some distortion, it is important to think about this, regardless of whether or not we can use it at the present time to transmit something. C. They don't know what is going on for sure. The last category is of course the most interesting. Just my thoughts on this. --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 18:18:15 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 iB82I4Pf028764; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:18:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB82I32I028755; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:18:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:18:03 -0800 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: Fast-food for thought Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:17:35 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <005b01c4dcbe$ac61bd00$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56852 X-Loop: vortex-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. You write: "either an orthogonal component to the signal which is, in effect. somehow taking a short-cut..." Yep, that's it exactly. The resonator has two modes, an inductive slow wave mode and a capacitive fast wave mode. The capacitive coupling permits energy to travel directly along the axis of the coil, which means the coil is a true resonator rather than a simple inductor. Measuring along the wire length sure looks FTL, but then you'd be measuring along the wrong path for the flow of the "fast" signal. Tesla was one of the first people to my knowledge to understand the important role inter-turn capacity plays in a coil. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 20:42:03 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 iB84fvGB014685; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:41:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB84ftO1014674; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:41:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:41:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B68677.6030402@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 23:43:35 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought References: <20041207011642.51391.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> <031901c4dc09$cc4e0ca0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <031901c4dc09$cc4e0ca0$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/56853 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Harvey Norris writes > > >>I also constructed a TC secondary and attempted to >>resonate it by figuring in the C propagation speed, >>where the wire length was given a time period for the >>impulse to reach the end of the wire at C, and then >>multiplying by 4 times that time period, and taking >>the inverse of that time period; arriving at a >>frequency answer of 250,000 hz. No resonance was found >>using a primary also resonating at 250 khz. Later >>methods showed that the natural resonant frequency of >>the secondary was actually ~ 330,000 hz, well above >>the value given by a standing wave exhibiting a >>propagation impulse speed at C. > > > > There are a few semantic issues here but as far as > practicality, it is generally accepted (for government work, > as they say) that the EMF or "electrical signal" (not the > electrons) in a copper wire travel at approximately 2/3 the > speed of light." In circuit design, I believe that the > engineers at places like Intel use the figure of 2.3 x 10^8 > m/sec for copper. Minor nit: The speed of the signal "in copper" is not generally very well defined, at least for the purposes of ordinary engineering. The copper acts as a waveguide, and the wave itself travels through the insulator. The wave speed is determined by the refractive index of the insulator around the wire. In a PC board, or on a chip, this is the "stripline speed": the trace and adjacent ground plane guide the wave, which travels between them. 2.3 * 10^8 sounds awfully fast for a signal in a PC board. The claimed refractive indices I've seen for PC board material were all small integers (3, 4, like that) which would imply a stripline speed of about half the number you quoted. But my knowledge of this, such as it is, is very out of date, and materials change. > So my question is this, if you had used > this lower figure instead of c, wouldn't the actual > resonance (330,000 khz) have worked out correctly from the > math - or are you saying that there is another (near-field > ?) component that one needs to deal with because of the > close proximity of the windings in a Tesla coil? > > Jones > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 7 22:35:32 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 iB86ZMsa002823; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:35:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB86Xunt002436; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:33:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:33:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20041207223618.036e9750@mail.dlsi.net> X-Sender: steven%newenergytimes.com@mail.dlsi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 22:36:46 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: NEW BOOK EXPLAINS COLD FUSION CONTROVERSY Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_890266016==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56854 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_890266016==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DECEMBER 8, 2004 CONTACT: Melissa Brown (310) 470-8189 pr@pacificoakspress.com NEW BOOK EXPLAINS THE SCIENCE CONTROVERSY THAT JUST WON'T QUIT LOS ANGELES, Dec. 8, 2004 -- The Rebirth of Cold Fusion, by Steven B. Krivit and Nadine Winocur Psy.D., explains the science and significance of this new field of energy research. Written for the general public, the book provides an excellent foundation for anyone wishing to learn more about this complex science story and controversy. Reputable scientists from around the world consider cold fusion a fascinating new field of scientific study. A recent Energy Department review indicates that cold fusion continues to show promise as a potential new energy source. Research indicates that cold fusion is free of nuclear waste and harmful emissions. "The Rebirth of Cold Fusion fills an evident and urgent need to inform the scientific and lay public about this topic, which has been so massively misunderstood," Dr. Martin Fleischmann, co-discoverer of cold fusion, said. "Krivit and Winocur have done sterling work on this." The book explains the past, present, and possible future ramifications of cold fusion research and technology. "The Rebirth of Cold Fusion gives much insight into how the 'due processes of science' came up with a decision that now appears to have been precisely the wrong one," commented Dr. Brian Josephson, a Nobel prize winner in physics who has analyzed cold fusion research. The book contrasts the 50-year hot fusion research program, paid for with tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, to other competitive, promising and much less-expensive alternatives, which have been put aside as unworthy of investigation. "The future is almost unlimited," world-renowned futurist Sir Arthur C. Clarke wrote in the book's foreword. "It can be the end of the fossil fuel age and the end, incidentally, of many of our worries about global pollution and global warming. This book strengthens my hope." December 8, 2004 * Current Affairs/General Science * Paperback Original 320 Pages * 40 Diagrams/Photos * $25.95 * ISBN: 0-9760545-8-2 For more information please visit: http://www.newenergytimes.com --=====================_890266016==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DECEMBER 8, 2004

CONTACT:
Melissa Brown
(310) 470-8189
pr@pacificoakspress.com
 

NEW BOOK EXPLAINS THE SCIENCE CONTROVERSY
THAT JUST WON'T QUIT


LOS ANGELES, Dec. 8, 2004 -- The Rebirth of Cold Fusion, by Steven B. Krivit and Nadine Winocur Psy.D., explains the science and significance of this new field of energy research.

Written for the general public, the book provides an excellent foundation for anyone wishing to learn more about this complex science story and controversy.

Reputable scientists from around the world consider cold fusion a fascinating new field of scientific study.

A recent Energy Department review indicates that cold fusion continues to show promise as a potential new energy source. Research indicates that cold fusion is free of nuclear waste and harmful emissions.

"The Rebirth of Cold Fusion fills an evident and urgent need to inform the scientific and lay public about this topic, which has been so massively misunderstood," Dr. Martin Fleischmann, co-discoverer of cold fusion, said. "Krivit and Winocur have done sterling work on this."

The book explains the past, present, and possible future ramifications of cold fusion research and technology. 

"The Rebirth of Cold Fusion gives much insight into how the 'due processes of science' came up with a decision that now appears to have been precisely the wrong one," commented Dr. Brian Josephson, a Nobel prize winner in physics who has analyzed cold fusion research.

The book contrasts the 50-year hot fusion research program, paid for with tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, to other competitive, promising and much less-expensive alternatives, which have been put aside as unworthy of investigation.

"The future is almost unlimited," world-renowned futurist Sir Arthur C. Clarke wrote in the book's foreword. "It can be the end of the fossil fuel age and the end, incidentally, of many of our worries about global pollution and global warming. This book strengthens my hope." 


December 8, 2004 * Current Affairs/General Science * Paperback Original
320 Pages * 40 Diagrams/Photos * $25.95 * ISBN: 0-9760545-8-2
For more information please visit: http://www.newenergytimes.com


--=====================_890266016==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 01:55:03 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 iB89st70026811; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 01:54:55 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB89rX7R026528; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 01:53:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 01:53:33 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 01:00:48 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56855 X-Loop: vortex-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 5:41 PM 12/7/4, John Fields wrote: [snip] > >>The real beauty of your idea (is it original?) > >--- >As far as I know, it is. The lightbulb going off was due to something >of Fred Sparber's or Frank Znidarsik's (sp?) that I read a few years >ago on vortex, and since then I've been looking but haven't been able >to find anything quite like it. A month or so ago I talked to Hal >Puthoff about it and he also thought it was novel, so maybe it is. You may want to check out the thread: "Qball: Electrostatic Sphere Field Evaluator". A sample post late in the thread follows below. I wrote (and posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical distribution of charge, and sample data. We learned a few things from the exercise if you recall... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - At 10:27 AM 6/19/3, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 9:58 AM 6/19/3, John Fields wrote: > >>Yes, I agree. However, the equipotential surfaces look like infinitely >>thin nested spherical shells surrounding an undisturbed charged >>particle, and my analogy merely picked a balloon to represent a >>particular potential. Bringing two otherwise undisturbed charged >>particles together, then, should create a region between them (a plane >>perpendicular to a line drawn between the charges and extending to >>infinity) where the potential between them is equal and diminishes as >>the distance from the line drawn between their centers increases. Place >>a third charged particle on this plane where the line intersects it and >>it should stay there; place it anywhere else on the plane and it will go >>zooming off, but will be confined to the plane. > > >Note, however, that the force outward in the plane lying between them is >smaller than if both charges were located at their midpoint. Their >effectiveness is in effect diluted by their separation 2*r. Their >effectiveness will be further diluted if we place two more charges in the >central plain in another axis. At any point outside the central plain, >these extra charges lying on the plain *repel* the test charge away from >the plain to some degree. The centering force is reduced. There are >still channels of confinement, but the field magnitudes in every channel >is reduced with the increasing adding of charges. As the number of >channels is increased, the field strength in each channel is reduced. >However, understanding this slight reduction is only half the intuition >problem. The fact that the channel strengh is reduced does not in itself >guarantee that it goes to zero. In fact, I think as long as the number of >points if finite, as you add more charge points, each with fixed charge Q, >there will always exist channels of confinement and repelling channels. >What was surprising to me was the comparatively large magnitude of the >fields in these channels when the uniformity of the distribution is only >fraction of a percent off. This was not intuitive to me. But let's get >on with finding out why this analogy fails in the limit ... > > >> >>Why? Construct two planes parallel to the plane centered between the >>charges and cutting the centers of the charges, and insert a charge >>anywhere in the region bounded by the outer planes. What do you think >>will happen? I think the inserted charge will be repelled by the charge >>closest to it until it crosses the central plane, then be repelled by >>the particle now closest to it and will thereafter be shepherded by both >>charges until its oscillations are damped to the point where it can be >>effectively considered to be confined to the central plane. > > >Let's ignore the details about the above and assume it is completely >correct with the caveat's I already noted above. > >> >>Of course no analogy is perfect, but that's what mine was about. > > >I think this analogy is very good except for consideration of charge >dilution. To meet the criteria of the original problem we must assume >that a fixed charge is distributed around the sphere. We have a charge >density Q/A = rho. We have a fixed charge on the spherical shell, and a >fixed area A in which the charge is (or in our case is to be) distributed. >Note that we can not assume an infinite charge density, or we have a >discontinuity, and all logic it would seem falls apart - but we can deal >with that also by solving finite rho and then summing on finite rho's to >infinity. > >I think what you have intuitively shown is that when the charge Q is >distributed around a finite number of points, there will be volumes >containing confining fields separated by volumes of repelling fields. >These volumes are in the form of "channels". > >The maximum field strength in these channels is diluted by the fact the >charges are separated from each other by distance 2*r, and by the fact >that addition of more charge Q around the sphere adds more channels but >reduces the fields in each of the channels. There is one other major >dilution factor to considered. > >In your analogy, you keep adding more point charges. This is a false >analogy in that the final charge Q aroud the sphere must be Q, a fixed >value. As you add charge points in your scenario, the charge in Q_i each >point must be diminshed. This is an error I made and then discovered and >corrected between runs 2, and runs 3 of Qball. Runs 1-2 keep adding >charge as the number of points is increased. Runs 3-5 in effect keep the >total charge on the sphere constant. In runs 3-5 you can clearly see the >field intensity drop across the entire sphere interior as the number of >points goes up, the average charge separation distance goes down. > >Now to try to see if we can intuit why the field intensites go to zero as >the number of charge location points goes to infinity. Let's imagine an >initial state of N charge points spread around sphere in an approximately >grid like fashion (this is technically not feasible on a sphere, but we >are only approximating, and in fact the Qball program roughly does this, >except the "rectangles" are mostly parallelograms.) The maximum field >stength in any channel is Emax. The charge Q_i distributed at each point >is Q/N. > >At each step j that follows, we double the number of points to 2*N, and >distribute the new points in the centers of the old rectangles (or >parallelograms.) We have thus doubled the number of channels and very >slightly reduced the channel fields. However, we must now divide all the >field strengths by 2. Emax_j <= Emax_(j-1)/2. Therefore E_max -> 0 as >j-> inf. That division of charge at each point by 2 must be done to make >the final total charge distributed around the sphere constant at Q. At >each step j, we diminish the channel field strength by (1/2)^j. Since lim >j->0 (1/2)^j = 0, the channel field strengths all go to zero. > >Now let's attempt to look at your initial problem of the bubble universe >and an infinitely dense surrounding. The confinement force is now an >expansion force, due to gravity being attractive, but all else is really >the same, except for dealing with the infinite nature of the infinitely >dense volume outside the bubble. To begin this we can examine a single >shell, but only a finite portion of mass m in the shell, uniformly >distributed. This gives us a finite mass density in the shell. Such a >shell has zero force inside it, as we saw earier. We can now sum >(integrate) an infinite number of such shells, all of the same fixed >radius, each having mass m, so that the total mass in the resulting shell >is infinite. Since the force of each shell everywhere is zero, the same >is true of the final infinite sum. We can then sum (integrate) the shells >at every radius r, with r-> inf. Since the force inside every shell is >everywhere zero, this must be true inthe final sum. There is thus no >force of gravity exerted by the external volume on the universe. > >Of ourse one tiny change in density out in that infinitely dense volume ... Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 02:24:16 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 iB8AOB70002256; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:24:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8AMoLj001911; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:22:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:22:50 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 01:30:12 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56856 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John, Below is your original posting of the idea in the thread "Conjecture: dark matter and the red shift". Not clear what article just prior triggered it. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:11:20 -0700 From: John Fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Conjecture: dark matter and the red shift. Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 14:09:02 -0500 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA23123 Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/50774 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Suppose for a moment that our universe is merely a bubble surrounded by an infinite expanse of infinitely dense, infinitely energetic Universe. For want of a better analogy, a void in a block of Swiss cheese. When our universe was formed and the void appeared, some of the material from the Universe outgassed into the void and eventually became the matter of which everything in our universe is composed. However, since the beginning of the formation of the void, the gravitational force of the Universe has been attracting matter back to itself. Because of the inverse square law on our side of the void wall, the closer the matter gets to the void's wall the more it is attracted, the greater its velocity becomes, and the greater the red shift becomes the farther out we look. If the velocity becomes luminal, then its mass becomes infinite, it leaves our local universe and rejoins the infinite Universe. So, if this conjecture was true it would explain the reason for the increasing red shift with distance, the discrepancy between how much matter should be here and how much there is, and the reason for the horizon of the universe. It would also settle the question of whether we have an open or a closed universe. Interestingly, it would bring up the question of whether or not the Swiss cheese was really a black hole! Comments, please? -- John Fields - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 06:55:10 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 iB8EshU6011939; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:54:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8EsgWl011932; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:54:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:54:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B7158E.6020807@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:54:06 -0500 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: Where is LENR? 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/56857 X-Loop: vortex-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 this is the best a "panel of experts" can come up with, we're f*****: http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/08/news/economy/energy_report.reut/index.htm A plan for U.S. energy security? Nation must diversify supplies, expand reserves, up fuel efficiency says panel of energy experts. December 8, 2004: 6:52 AM EST WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States must diversify its global oil supplies, expand a world network of strategic petroleum reserves and raise fuel efficiency standards to ensure its energy security, a panel of experts will recommend Wednesday. These are some of the findings from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan group of energy experts, company executives and government officials, that will be released in Washington to attack major long-term energy challenges. The recommendations could be used next year by lawmakers in the new Congress who will try to approve a bill to overhaul U.S. energy policy. "Recent developments in world oil markets, including rapid growth in global demand and the emergence of terrorist threats to oil facilities, are bringing new urgency to perennial concerns about the nation's exposure to oil price shocks and supply disruptions," the panel's report said. A copy of the report's executive summary was obtained by Reuters. The commission took over two years to come up with its findings. While it calls for increased energy supplies, it also links energy production and the environment -- especially global climate change. The commission suggests mandatory limits on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming that can be spewed by power plants, oil refineries and other industrial facilities. To meet that goal, it recommends creating a trading program that would allow more polluting companies to buy permits to emit carbon dioxide emissions from cleaner firms. President Bush withdrew the United States from the Kyoto international treaty that restricts greenhouse gas emissions, arguing it would hurt the economy. The White House instead wants companies to voluntarily cut emissions. The commission also recommends the government provide support to build an Alaskan natural gas pipeline, one or two advanced nuclear power reactors, and take steps to protect critical energy infrastructure from "accidental failure and terrorist threats." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 06:59:16 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 iB8Ex970017082; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:59:10 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8Ex8qd017073; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:59:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 06:59:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B71723.2070300@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:00:51 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? 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/56858 X-Loop: vortex-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 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >>Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum, >>perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not >>conserved in all contexts. >> >>Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'. > > > > There are various concepts in which charge might not be conserved. Here is > an example I posted here a while back that indicates apparent charge moving > in a circle may vary depending the angle of observation. > > Planar Circular Currents > > BACKGROUND AND ASSUMPTIONS > > It is well known that special relativity predicts changes in the observed > field of a particle due to the flattening of the field in the direction of > motion. This flattening is due to application of the Lorentz contraction > due to relative motion. This relativistic effect of flattening the > apparent field is called the "pancaking" of the Coulombic field. It is the > intent here to discuss the effects of pancaking with respect to planar > circular direct currents. > > On p.492 of *The Electromagnetic Field*, Albert Shadowitz provides the > equation for relativistic (Coulombic) field pancaking... I had three comments on this analysis (which I snipped -- hope that's OK). First, watch out for Shadowitz -- I've seen an instance where he messed up an analysis by using the "motion" of the EM field relative to a particle, which has no role in relativistic EM. Rindler, Jackson, and Griffiths seem more reliable, to name some I'm aware of. I don't know any reason to doubt Shadowitz's formula for pancaking, but you should definitely double check any general assertions he makes about how fields transform. Second, pancaking of the field for a point charge is derived from evaluating the 4-vector potential for the charge using the retarded integral. Pancaking isn't really "fundamental"; the representation in terms of retarded integrals is. So, to see what's really going on in a complex situation involving accelerated charges, it's probably safer to use the retarded integrals directly. Finally, let's do just that. For simplicity, assume a rotating ring of uniform negative charge density, with a fixed positive charge in the middle of the ring. Let's look at the axial field. Since the ring is uniform, the 4-current density is not varying in time, and we can forget about the "retarded" part. The motion of the ring affects the spacelike parts of the integral but not the timelike part. So, the timelike part of the 4-vector potential will be identical to the timelike part of the 4-vector potential for a STATIONARY ring of charge. The E field measured in the lab frame depends on the timelike part of the 4-vector potential, and on its time derivative. We already noted that the situation is time invariant, so the time derivative of the 4-vector potential is zero. So, the actual E field we measure is going to be IDENTICAL to the E field for a stationary ring of negative charge with a single positive charge in the center of the ring. This field is well understood and it's certainly conservative. It's got a nonzero dipole moment but the far field on axis goes rapidly to zero (1/r^3, I think?). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 07:08:46 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 iB8F8L70020833; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:08:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8F8JY7020797; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:08:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:08:19 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003a01c4dd37$50bb2bc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:05:10 -0800 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: <4mZLqC.A.5EF.ijxtBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56859 X-Loop: vortex-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, > Yep, that's it exactly. The resonator has two modes, an inductive > slow wave mode and a capacitive fast wave mode. The capacitive > coupling permits energy to travel directly along the axis of > the coil, which means the coil is a true resonator rather than a simple > inductor. The implication being that the coil might have two overlapping resonant modes, which could be partially self-canceling unless one was careful to make the ratio between the fast mode and slow mode into an integer multiple.... Which task is not exactly a simple matter... as Stephen Lawrence points out, especially since the magnet wire in these coils is small dia and may have a varnish of imprecise thickness, so that the refractive index may not even be consistent enough to be published. Maybe that's why so many people have failed to get Scott McKie's tank circuit device to work as claimed....? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 07:38:58 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 iB8FclU6031349; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:38:55 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8FckAH031338; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:38:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:38:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Sender: jack@mail3.centurytel.net Message-ID: <41B72C73.A535694@centurytel.net> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:31:47 +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: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xd" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xd" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56860 X-Loop: vortex-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 Tue, 07 Dec 2004 06:38:52 -0800, SOMEONE wrote: NASA also announced that the universe was expanding at an expanding rate. That would seem to make the universe "flat" and expanding forever. To test this, I developed a simulator of the Big Bang. I created a computer model that simply produces an energy field and drops matter into it. The object was to see what happens. Here is what I got: ... 2. As matter approaches the edge of the field, it expands faster away from the center ... John Fields wrote: NASA'a announcement and your results seem to add credence to my hypothesis that there was no big bang but, instead, a "big bubble" which sprang into being much like a bubble in a cavitating fluid. Assuming the bubble is nonspherical and that what lies behind it is massive, the matter on our side of the wall being attracted to it will be attracted to it more strongly the closer it gets, so it will accelerate and its doppler signature will be increasingly red shifted from any viewpoint in the bubble. That would seem to explain the increase of red shift with distance and the apparent expansion of the bubble. Jones Beene wrote: [John's proposal] also glosses over the most important basic starting point - the distinction between an "open" and "closed" universe. John Fields wrote: It seems to, but I believe that by virtue of its undetectability, the distinction is irrelevant because it can never be determined. Consider: If the universe is open, and the bubble expands forever, mass will continue to accelerate toward the wall and the universe will seem to be expanding because it is. On the other hand, if the universe is closed the bubble will one day begin to collapse. However, the mass on our side of the wall will still continue to be accelerated toward the wall, we will still see the rate of red shift increase, and we will conclude that because of the increase in rate the universe is expanding, when exactly the opposite will be the case! On the third hand, if the bubble has ceased to either expand or contract, the mass on this side will still be accelerated more and more as it heads for the wall, but we will still see the increase in the shift with distance and conclude that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the only thing we will ever be able to detect is the shift, and since its rate of change will increase with distance, we will always perceive the universe as being open. Hi All, For me it is simpler to assume an infinite and eternal universe, but I have not yet come to grips with the idea that the "expansion" is accelerating, which I think is based on the unexpected dimness of certain stars. John's ideas are very exciting here. I think that the Cosmic Background Radiation has nothing to do with some big bang; but, instead, is is the result of absorption and re-radiation of energy by intersteller particles. As far as the redshift is concerned, it has been suggested that it might be caused by light losing energy during its long voyage through space, the tired-light theory. Halton Arp argues that redshift is primarily a function of age, and that tired light plays no more than a secondary role. He presents abundant observational evidence to show that low-redshift galaxies sometimes eject high-redshift quasars in opposite directions, which then evolve into progressively lower-redshift objects and finally into normal galaxies. Ejected galaxies can, in turn, eject or fission into smaller objects, in a cascading process. Within galaxies, the youngest, brightest stars also have excess redshifts. The reason all distant galaxies are redshifted is because we see them as they were when light left them, i.e., when they were much younger. About seven local galaxies are blueshifted. The orthodox view is that they must be moving towards us even faster than the universe is expanding, but in Arp's theory, they are simply older than our own galaxy as we see them. If the universe is expanding, redshifts should show a continuous range of values. Instead, however, they are quantized, i.e., they tend to be multiples of certain basic units, the main ones (expressed as velocities) being 72.4 km/s and 37.5 km/s. This phenomenon, says Arp, is so unexpected that conventional astronomy has never been able to accept it, in spite of the overwhelming observational evidence. He suggests that redshift quantization could be due to episodes of matter creation taking place at regular intervals. Does anyone have a reference to an explanation of the "acceleration of the expansion" in terms of Arp's theory? Jack Smith From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 07:47:41 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 iB8FlYU6001576; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:47:35 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8FlXY6001563; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:47:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:47:33 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B72278.6070704@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:49:12 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: off topic..mad about software References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <9ZbKtD.A.XY.VIytBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56861 X-Loop: vortex-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 8:45 PM 11/28/4, RC Macaulay wrote: > >>With the advent of new technology there is no end to the variations of the >>game. > > > > Amen to that brother! You're preachin to the choir. Following is a post I > made some time ago that you probably missed, but which still has some > meaning along these lines: > > A Gambling Perspective Thanks, Horace -- that's the clearest analysis of lotteries versus casino gambling I've seen. In fact, it's the only serious attempt I've seen to actually compare the effects of those two forms of gambling. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 08:01:07 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 iB8G12U6004320; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:01:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8G0uOS004261; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:00:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:00:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041208104500.020a8278@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:50:44 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, "Terry Blanton" From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Where is cold fusion? [previously 'Re: Where is LENR?'] In-Reply-To: <41B7158E.6020807@rtpatlanta.com> References: <41B7158E.6020807@rtpatlanta.com> 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/56862 X-Loop: vortex-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 09:54 AM 12/8/2004, "Terry Blanton" wrote: >If this is the best a "panel of experts" can come up with, we're f*****: > >http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/08/news/economy/energy_report.reut/index.htm > >A plan for U.S. energy security? >Nation must diversify supplies, expand reserves, up fuel efficiency says >panel of energy experts. >December 8, 2004: 6:52 AM EST >WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States must diversify its global oil >supplies, expand a world network of strategic petroleum reserves and raise >fuel efficiency standards to ensure its energy security, a panel of >experts will recommend Wednesday. >These are some of the findings from the National Commission on Energy >Policy, a bipartisan group of energy experts, company executives and >government officials, that will be released in Washington to attack major >long-term energy challenges. >The recommendations could be used next year by lawmakers in the new >Congress who will try to approve a bill to overhaul U.S. energy policy. >"Recent developments in world oil markets, including rapid growth in >global demand and the emergence of terrorist threats to oil facilities, >are bringing new urgency to perennial concerns about the nation's exposure >to oil price shocks and supply disruptions," the panel's report said. >A copy of the report's executive summary was obtained by Reuters. The >commission took over two years to come up with its findings. >While it calls for increased energy supplies, it also links energy >production and the environment -- especially global climate change. >The commission suggests mandatory limits on the amount of greenhouse gas >emissions linked to global warming that can be spewed by power plants, oil >refineries and other industrial facilities. >To meet that goal, it recommends creating a trading program that would >allow more polluting companies to buy permits to emit carbon dioxide >emissions from cleaner firms. >President Bush withdrew the United States from the Kyoto international >treaty that restricts greenhouse gas emissions, arguing it would hurt the >economy. The White House instead wants companies to voluntarily cut emissions. >The commission also recommends the government provide support to build an >Alaskan natural gas pipeline, one or two advanced nuclear power reactors, >and take steps to protect critical energy infrastructure from "accidental >failure and terrorist threats." Exactly. It is as incredible that cold fusion (by any name) is ignored. "For each gigawatt-day a city needs, a city must burn coal at a rate of 9,000 tons per day. And in doing that, the pollution by this old technology will make 30,000 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 600 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), and 80 tons of (nitrogen dioxide) NO2, and tons of other contaminants, each and every day. .. By contrast, with cold fusion producing the same amount of power ... would produce only 4 pounds of helium exhaust." Full text: http://world.std.com/~mica/jetprdxn.html ===================================================== COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion web site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 08:07:51 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 iB8G7fU6006230; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:07:41 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8G7eil006211; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:07:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:07:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006201c4dd3f$9ac079c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <41B71723.2070300@pobox.com> Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:04:31 -0800 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/56863 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Stephen A. Lawrence writes > Horace Heffner wrote: There are various concepts in which charge might not be conserved. [snip] > Since the ring is uniform, the 4-current density is not varying in time, > and we can forget about the "retarded" part. The motion of the ring > affects the spacelike parts of the integral but not the timelike part. > So, the timelike part of the 4-vector potential will be identical to the > timelike part of the 4-vector potential for a STATIONARY ring of charge. This may be adding too much complexity, but... Thinking (out loud) about "conservation of charge" and "capacitive coupling" in the context of RTSC (room temperature superconductivity) raises a nonreciprocality issue. Does the capacitive coupling from a superconductor to a normal conductor always obey all the energy conservation laws? The knee-jerk reaction is "yes, why not?"... but have all the "4-vector potentials" you mention been accounted for with RTSC as one component ? There seems to be some avenue for nonreciprocality in that instance, but it sounds like you are very much up-to-speed on these issues and may recognize why this would not work. Vortexians seem to be always looking for something new which fits into the idea of nonreciprocality : such that a source of potential energy (i.e. magnet or static field) + efficient means of modulating potential energy + nonreciprocal element = OU The "information" provided by any Maxwell's Demon type-device, of course, provides one generalized notable feature: the characteristic of classical nonreciprocality and asymmetry. Other devices like gyroscopes, Hall effect devices, Faraday effect devices, and microwave isolators are examples of classical nonreciprocality, but it has been difficult to fashion an energy device out of them, so many experimenters are thinking about the possibility of "layering" of two nonreciprocal devices. Using the magnetic vector potential may end up being one of the most inviting instance of classical nonreciprocality for the clever researcher - as it can be nonzero in regions of zero magnetic field. It may be possible to scale up this effect to a usable level by combining it with flux modulation (or flux-gating, for lack of a better term) or modulation of the capacitive coupling situation. At first glance one would say that an air coil surrounding a RTSC toroid coil which surrounds a PM magnetic core will have little interaction with either but there is such a delicate balance there that if capacitive coupling was not conserved, then any slight movement in the coil could be multiplied in two nonreciprocal ways. Either way alone might not be OU (in the sense of overcoming the parasitic losses of moving the coil (ultrasonics?), but the combination of the two might be OU (riiiiight....). ...but he beauty of the A-B effect in part of any device is that it does not depend on EM radiation, but might be able to modulate it ... or not. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 08:22:01 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 iB8GLq70023828; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:21:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8GLolI023812; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:21:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:21:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B72A52.9060100@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:22:42 -0500 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: Modern Vimanas 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/56864 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Antigravity being tested in India? http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/12-04e-04.asp What's a Vimana? http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Vimanas.htm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:01:12 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 iB8H0v70009018; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:01:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8H0tGM008995; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:00:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:00:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041238155930700@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: Where is LENR? Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:59:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a9c431e7b56bc1e8ab07be90aae2d97b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.174 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56865 X-Loop: vortex-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 At 09:54 AM 12/8/2004, "Terry Blanton" wrote: > >If this is the best a "panel of experts" can come up with, we're f*****: > >http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/08/news/economy/energy_report.reut/index.htm > >> The commission also recommends the government provide support to build >> an Alaskan natural gas pipeline, one or two advanced nuclear power >> reactors, and take steps to protect critical energy infrastructure from >> "accidental failure and terrorist threats." > It's in that Pipeline, Terry. Pons and Fleischmann said "25 years" in their 1989 PBS interview :-) Frederick http://cem.colorado.edu/archives/sp2003/power.html "Solar-thermal processing of methane to produce hydrogen is a design that, just as it sounds, can use the sun?s energy to make hydrogen from natural gas. As seen in the chemical equation below, CH4 -> C + 2H2 when enough energy is added, a molecule of methane splits to produce one molecule of carbon and two molecules of hydrogen, which can then be separated and stored for later use. The pure carbon produced, also referred to as carbon black, is used in tires, inks, paint, wire insulation, and various rubber products. Attempts are underway at utilizing the material for a carbon-based fuel cell. " "Carbon fuel cells are an attractive concept because carbon is extremely abundant, easily attainable, and very cheap. Its simplicity as a fuel is also highly beneficial, because where oil must be refined, with the above design, carbon would only need to be purified, a considerably simpler process. A major advantage in using this design over conventional batteries for obtaining electrical current is in its weight. A battery consists of self-contained cathodes and anodes, where the reactive components of both positive and negative terminals necessary to retrieve stored potential chemical energy are housed together as one unit, which compose the total weight of the battery. In Houston?s design, the fuel cell only carries the weight of the carbon in the anode, whereas the atmosphere supplies the cathode?s reacting material, oxygen. A vehicle equipped with this fuel cell could, in principle, carry more energy per unit mass than the same vehicle with traditional batteries. In a true MacGyver-like tactic of using what is abundant to serve an unconventionally useful purpose, Houston is moving with his research in a direction that will most certainly fuel the future. " ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

At 09:54 AM 12/8/2004, "Terry Blanton" <blantont@rtpatlanta.com> wrote:
>
>If this is the best a "panel of experts" can come up with, we're f*****:
>
>http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/08/news/economy/energy_report.reut/index.htm
>
>> The commission also recommends the government provide support to build
>> an Alaskan natural gas pipeline, one or two advanced nuclear power
>> reactors, and take steps to protect critical energy infrastructure from
>> "accidental failure and terrorist threats."
>
It's in that Pipeline, Terry.  Pons and Fleischmann said "25 years" in their 1989 PBS interview  :-)
 
Frederick

"Solar-thermal processing of methane to produce hydrogen is a design that, just as it sounds, can use the sun?s energy to make hydrogen from natural gas. As seen in the chemical equation below,

CH4 -> C + 2H2

when enough energy is added, a molecule of methane splits to produce one molecule of carbon and two molecules of hydrogen, which can then be separated and stored for later use. The pure carbon produced, also referred to as carbon black, is used in tires, inks, paint, wire insulation, and various rubber products. Attempts are underway at utilizing the material for a carbon-based fuel cell. "

"Carbon fuel cells are an attractive concept because carbon is extremely abundant, easily attainable, and very cheap. Its simplicity as a fuel is also highly beneficial, because where oil must be refined, with the above design, carbon would only need to be purified, a considerably simpler process. A major advantage in using this design over conventional batteries for obtaining electrical current is in its weight. A battery consists of self-contained cathodes and anodes, where the reactive components of both positive and negative terminals necessary to retrieve stored potential chemical energy are housed together as one unit, which compose the total weight of the battery. In Houston?s design, the fuel cell only carries the weight of the carbon in the anode, whereas the atmosphere supplies the cathode?s reacting material, oxygen. A vehicle equipped with this fuel cell could, in principle, carry more energy per unit mass than the same vehicle with traditional batteries. In a true MacGyver-like tactic of using what is abundant to serve an unconventionally useful purpose, Houston is moving with his research in a direction that will most certainly fuel the future. "

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 09:03:07 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 iB8H2d70009815; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:02:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8H2XI1009766; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:02:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:02:33 -0800 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: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:02:06 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc 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 ultra5.eskimo.com id iB8H2N70009697 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56866 X-Loop: vortex-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 Wed, 8 Dec 2004 01:00:48 -0900, you wrote: >At 5:41 PM 12/7/4, John Fields wrote: >[snip] >> >>>The real beauty of your idea (is it original?) >> >>--- >>As far as I know, it is. The lightbulb going off was due to something >>of Fred Sparber's or Frank Znidarsik's (sp?) that I read a few years >>ago on vortex, and since then I've been looking but haven't been able >>to find anything quite like it. A month or so ago I talked to Hal >>Puthoff about it and he also thought it was novel, so maybe it is. > >You may want to check out the thread: "Qball: Electrostatic Sphere Field >Evaluator". A sample post late in the thread follows below. I wrote (and >posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical >distribution of charge, and sample data. We learned a few things from the >exercise if you recall... --- Yes. I particularly liked the following paragraph, and especially liked the sentence following it: " >>Now let's attempt to look at your initial problem of the bubble universe >>and an infinitely dense surrounding. The confinement force is now an >>expansion force, due to gravity being attractive, but all else is really >>the same, except for dealing with the infinite nature of the infinitely >>dense volume outside the bubble. To begin this we can examine a single >>shell, but only a finite portion of mass m in the shell, uniformly >>distributed. This gives us a finite mass density in the shell. Such a >>shell has zero force inside it, as we saw earier. We can now sum >>(integrate) an infinite number of such shells, all of the same fixed >>radius, each having mass m, so that the total mass in the resulting shell >>is infinite. Since the force of each shell everywhere is zero, the same >>is true of the final infinite sum. We can then sum (integrate) the shells >>at every radius r, with r-> inf. Since the force inside every shell is >>everywhere zero, this must be true inthe final sum. There is thus no >>force of gravity exerted by the external volume on the universe. >> >>Of ourse one tiny change in density out in that infinitely dense volume ... " --- :-) -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 10:32:53 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 iB8IWlU6021829; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:32:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8IWjUY021820; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:32:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:32:45 -0800 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: Fast-food for thought Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:32:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <003a01c4dd37$50bb2bc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <6gOEbB.A.4UF.Nj0tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56867 X-Loop: vortex-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. Yes, coils have multiple resonances, although generally speaking you'll see a fundamental resonance predicated on the lumped value of the distributed capacity and inductance of the coil. This is why top loading of a coil with a capacity can change the overall resonance, to a point. Stephen is right, PC board traces are strip transmission lines whose wavespeed is determined primarily by the PC board dielectric. Permittivity is about 3 or 4, you can figure the speed to be roughly proportionate to the inverse square root of that. I know very little about Scott Mckie, but I suspect that may be a good thing (grin). K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 10:05 AM To: knagel@gis.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought Keith Nagel writes, > Yep, that's it exactly. The resonator has two modes, an inductive > slow wave mode and a capacitive fast wave mode. The capacitive > coupling permits energy to travel directly along the axis of > the coil, which means the coil is a true resonator rather than a simple > inductor. The implication being that the coil might have two overlapping resonant modes, which could be partially self-canceling unless one was careful to make the ratio between the fast mode and slow mode into an integer multiple.... Which task is not exactly a simple matter... as Stephen Lawrence points out, especially since the magnet wire in these coils is small dia and may have a varnish of imprecise thickness, so that the refractive index may not even be consistent enough to be published. Maybe that's why so many people have failed to get Scott McKie's tank circuit device to work as claimed....? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 10:53:46 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 iB8IrdU6027911; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:53:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8IrZEG027877; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:53:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:53:35 -0800 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: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:53:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56868 X-Loop: vortex-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. I wanted to address you points with the article text, but the link has gone sour... Anyway, I think your differentiation is moot. I can build a radio circuit that displays behavior EXACTLY as shown in the graph. The link I posted to Nimtz illustrates how this can be done ( my own work is unpublished or I'd link you to it instead). The key issue remains, how do we define velocity? As the authors point out, the older notions of group and phase velocity need be extended to include a third velocity, what they call the "signal velocity" or what I call the transistion or shock velocity. Horace writes: >I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons >do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. Really? Are you saying that photons in a vacuum can travel faster or slower than c according to QM? That doesn't seem right to me. Or are you trying to describe the fact that photons tend to take all possible paths from the source to the receiver and therefore arrival times can vary. I seem to remember this from Feynmans QED, and I've seen the exact same thing with free space antennae. K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:54 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought At 2:08 PM 12/7/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Let's look at that graph again. > >http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/10/1/041110 > >Notice how the light speed delayed pulse is larger than the slow or >fast wave? Let's imagine two machines as you describe, the only >difference being that one is implemented using the fast wave and the >other with the light speed delayed signal ( the large one ). > >If I set the detector to trigger at the peak ( roughly the "center of mass" >of the energy of the pulse ) the fast wave will be faster than >the delayed wave. If I set the trigger at the 50% point on the >risetime, now my light speed delayed system is going to be >faster than my fast wave system. It appears you are misinterpreting the subject graphic (or I am.) I take it as in incident count graph. It is a tabulation of photons by arrival times. Some photons arrive early, some late. It is not a pulse trace, but could be if all the photon's detection pulses were summed (pulse time averaged) together. I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. My point is that it pays to go way out on the tip of the trace as far as possible. In this case that would be at the single photon detection level. Now, the problem is that on average, the first photon may arrive early or late. On average we don't do better than c with a single fiber. My suggestion is to simultaneously transmit a given bit on lots of fibers at once. Then, *with any desired degree of but not perfect reliability*, based on the number of fibers used in a bundle, an early photon will be sensed within a time window that provides communication at greater than c velocity. We can do reliable communications way out on the front of the distribution. By sending multiple bits at a time in parallel, along with a timing pulse, we can use error detection and correction techniques to greatly increase reliability. By sending photons on two bundles, one bundle having photons sent if the data bit is 1, the other having photons sent if the data is 0, we can reliably do error correction at the bit level way out on the tip of the pulse, before any photons even arrive at velocity c. A more simple test of concept might be to use two bundles from Alice to Bob, with Bob having a repeater to send the data back to Alice on two return bundles. Alice could then measure the error rate as well as turn-around time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 11:28:32 2004 Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iB8JSS6n023262; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:28:28 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8JSPQl023255; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:28:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 11:28:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra7.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B75859.3090804@eskimo.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:39:05 -0800 From: Robert Brady User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator References: <41B5C07C.9080005@eskimo.com> <6nqbr0lfpsvgs47qj1rvpnmfmrhof31bbg@4ax.com> <005301c4dc95$823d26a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <005301c4dc95$823d26a0$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/56869 X-Loop: vortex-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, Stephen, and John, All of us seem to be on a similar track. Here are some things that seemed to self generate out of the Big Bang Simulator. 1. The universe seems to be open according to the WMAP study, but local clusters do form in the Simulator and do expand outward as a group. 2. Both matter and energy are required to form gravity. As the universe expands, the energy field seems to decrease in strength and probably, but not shown, matter eventually disintegrates. (Perhaps other forces do also) 3. In building the model, it was hard to think of the size and shape of the universe. It may all be contained within a growing wall, or the energy field may be bigger. It seems unlikely that the matter field would be bigger since, as I said above, it would disintgrate without the energy field. The model is based on a round, bubble-like field. It was used because the background radiation is so uniform in all directions. 4. At some point, it would appear that we may be headed for a phase shift. We have a universe where the matter and energy fields exist side by side. The model shows that they are mutually dependent to create gravity and probably many other effects. What happens when one of these fields is removed or lessened? The model shows a rapidly growing outburst (which agrees with the WMAP findings), but what then? Could the "bubble burst" and the universe become closed, for example. Jones, Stephen, and John have made good points. Obviously there are many more questions to answer. Bob From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 13:27:38 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 iB8LRUc4013389; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:27:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8LRQ7l013359; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:27:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:27:26 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: "Mark Jordan" Organization: attached To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:27:05 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fast-food for thought Message-ID: <41B75589.1926.214EAF9@localhost> Priority: normal In-reply-to: <41B68677.6030402@pobox.com> References: <031901c4dc09$cc4e0ca0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.21c) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body X-Authenticated-Sender: mark@cpovo.net X-Spam-Processed: teta.cpovo.net, Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:27:12 -0200 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 200.102.141.181 X-Return-Path: enkitec@yahoo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: teta.cpovo.net, Wed, 08 Dec 2004 19:27:15 -0200 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56870 X-Loop: vortex-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 7 Dec 2004 at 23:43, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > 2.3 * 10^8 sounds awfully fast for a signal in a PC board. The claimed > refractive indices I've seen for PC board material were all small > integers (3, 4, like that) which would imply a stripline speed of about > half the number you quoted. There is some related (and interesting) info here: http://www.ivorcatt.com/em.htm Mark Jordan From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 13:32:40 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 iB8LWPc4014852; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:32:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8LWMvX014826; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:32:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:32:22 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:32:12 EST Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a0.1d4feb62.2ee8ccdc_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/56871 X-Loop: vortex-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_a0.1d4feb62.2ee8ccdc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/8/2004 10:39:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, tjs11@centurytel.net writes: > As far as the redshift is concerned, it has been suggested > that it might be caused by light losing energy during its > long voyage through space, the tired-light theory. > > Halton Arp argues that redshift is primarily a function of > age, and that tired light plays no more than a secondary > The gravitational mass of light is determined by the acceleration produced by the red shift. see page 12 of http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html Frank Z --part1_a0.1d4feb62.2ee8ccdc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/8/2004 10:39:= 35 AM Eastern Standard Time, tjs11@centurytel.net writes:

As far as the redshift is conce= rned, it has been suggested
that it might be caused by light losing energy during its
long voyage through space, the tired-light theory.

Halton Arp argues that redshift is primarily a function of
age, and that tired light plays no more than a secondary


The gravitational mass of light is determined by the acceleration produced b= y the red shift.

see page 12 of

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

Frank Z --part1_a0.1d4feb62.2ee8ccdc_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 13:36:54 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 iB8LamSw003716; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:36:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8Lak6b003706; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:36:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:36:46 -0800 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: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:36:40 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Weirdness at Astronomy Picture of the Day Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <-JFESB.A.y5.tP3tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56872 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: APOD: shadow stripe? http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041207.html Forum http://bb.nightskylive.net/asterisk/viewtopic.php?t=249 ((((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( (o) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ Research Engineer UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 beaty@chem.washington.edu Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 ph:206-543-6195 fax:206-685-8665 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 13:45:00 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 iB8LiqSw005712; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8LipE7005689; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca@aol.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:44:42 EST Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <6thCSB.A.1YB.TX3tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56873 X-Loop: vortex-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_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/8/2004 12:03:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes: > A sample post late in the thread follows below. I wrote (and > >posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical > >distribution of charge, and sample data. We learned a few things from the > >exercise if you recall... > > I worked something out on this also. A spherical charge will experience a minimum of capacitance. The capacitance is a geometric property. The capacitance in a system of fields corresponds to the reciprocal of the elasticity of a mechanical system. Several relationships exist. volts = (1/Cap) q force= kx see http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html Frank Z --part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/8/2004 12:03:= 44 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes:

A sample post late in the threa= d follows below.  I wrote (and
>posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical
>distribution of charge, and sample data.  We learned a few things f= rom the
>exercise if you recall...



I worked something out on this also.  A spherical charge will experienc= e a minimum of capacitance.  The capacitance is a geometric property.&n= bsp; The capacitance in a system of fields corresponds to the reciprocal of=20= the elasticity of a mechanical system.  Several relationships exist.
volts =3D (1/Cap) q

force=3D kx

see

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

Frank Z --part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 13:48:04 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 iB8LlvSw007022; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:47:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8Llu8x007005; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:47:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:47:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e@aol.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:47:42 EST Subject: Fwd: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_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/56874 X-Loop: vortex-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_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_boundary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_alt_boundary" --part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit opps wrong link should be http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html --part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable opps wrong link should be

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html --part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_alt_boundary-- --part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-yi06.mx.aol.com (rly-yi06.mail.aol.com [172.18.180.134]) by air-yi03.mail.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILINYI33-7db41b775df9b; Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:45:31 -0500 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (ultra6.eskimo.com [204.122.16.69]) by rly-yi06.mx.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYI65-7db41b775df9b; Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:45:04 -0500 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 iB8LiqSw005712; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB8LipE7005689; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:44:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca@aol.com> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:44:42 EST Subject: Re: Off Current Subject: Big Bang Simulator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <6thCSB.A.1YB.TX3tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56873 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 204.122.16.69 --part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/8/2004 12:03:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes: > A sample post late in the thread follows below. I wrote (and > >posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical > >distribution of charge, and sample data. We learned a few things from the > >exercise if you recall... > > I worked something out on this also. A spherical charge will experience a minimum of capacitance. The capacitance is a geometric property. The capacitance in a system of fields corresponds to the reciprocal of the elasticity of a mechanical system. Several relationships exist. volts = (1/Cap) q force= kx see http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html Frank Z --part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/8/2004 12:03:= 44 PM Eastern Standard Time, jfields@austininstruments.com writes:

A sample post late in the threa= d follows below.  I wrote (and
>posted) a basic program to integrate the effects of a spherical
>distribution of charge, and sample data.  We learned a few things f= rom the
>exercise if you recall...



I worked something out on this also.  A spherical charge will experienc= e a minimum of capacitance.  The capacitance is a geometric property.&n= bsp; The capacitance in a system of fields corresponds to the reciprocal of=20= the elasticity of a mechanical system.  Several relationships exist.
volts =3D (1/Cap) q

force=3D kx

see

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

Frank Z --part1_9f.53cf1125.2ee8cfca_boundary-- --part1_1c1.21268646.2ee8d07e_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 16:12:26 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 iB90CLSw014869; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:21 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB90CJap014851; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:19 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 15:19:29 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Where is cold fusion? [previously 'Re: Where is LENR?'] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56875 X-Loop: vortex-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 this is the best a "panel of experts" can come up with, we're f*****: Yep, clusterwise. > >http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/08/news/economy/energy_report.reut/index.htm > >A plan for U.S. energy security? >Nation must diversify supplies, expand reserves, up fuel efficiency says >panel of energy experts. One can hardly argue that it will help to "diversify supplies, expand reserves, up fuel efficiency", but exactly how to go about that and the other more important required actions is the issue. Two years for a panel to develop this approach? Must have been done mostly at local pubs. It would appear there is not any clarity on the seriousness of the situation. Build a couple nuclear plants? A joke? A lot more than that is needed. Where are people with vision? At 10:50 AM 12/8/4, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >"For each gigawatt-day a city needs, a city must burn coal at a rate of >9,000 tons per day. >And in doing that, the pollution by this old technology will make 30,000 >tons of >carbon dioxide (CO2), 600 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), >and 80 tons of (nitrogen dioxide) NO2, and tons of other contaminants, >each and every day. .. By contrast, with cold fusion producing the same >amount of power ... >would produce only 4 pounds of helium exhaust." Yes, and there's more. See "Coal combustion no option" email I just posted. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 16:12:45 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 iB90Cac4010496; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB90CYZD010491; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:12:34 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 15:19:32 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Coal combustion no option Resent-Message-ID: <2HJTKC.A.3jC.yh5tBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56876 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some old yet still relevant and stunning information follows that I obtained from Tom Gray and others regarding coal combustion: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Not only is ~10^10 tons/yr carbon becoming resident in the atmosphere due to coal combustion, but coal combustion alone adds 22,000 curies/yr of radiactivity to the biosphere. That's ~8x10^14 nuclear disintegrations/sec of new rads. How does this relate to a typical coal fired utility of 1000 MWe? The Radon-222 component alone adds about 2 Ci per 1000 MWe/yr, about 2250 Ci worldwide (~9x10^13 dis/sec), that is entirely exhausted up the stack. Its halflife of 3.8 days means that Rn-222 that goes up returns as fallout in the form of decay chain species of alpha and beta emitters including Pb-210, Bi-210 and Po-210 (Pb-210 halflife is 21 yrs). These rads are in the catagory of Class 1, Very High Radiotoxicity substances. As an example, Po-210 is about 10^5 times more radiotoxic than Pu-239 - the stuff whose mention strikes intense anquish in the hearts of mankind. In terms of relative radiotoxicities, coal exhausts are equivalent to quite a lot of new biospheric additions of Pu-239, but entirely acceptable to the public because coal is OK. Policy makers have our best interests in hand with worldwide coal combustion projected to be more than double the 1990 level by the year 2015. See Whatever numbers are used in calculating rad components in coal, the results are big because so much coal is burned. The primary source of the uranium and thorium in coal is due to earth's hydrology, filtering ground water that has seeped through igneous deposits over geological time frames. What's instructive about the trend of increasing coal combustion is that regs are tight for nuclear plants to prevent rad releases, but coal goes un-fettered. The literature (Science, McBride et al 12/8/78) says the ratio of rad releases from nuc/coal is about 100/1, and about 4/1 for the entire nuclear fuel cycle (NCRP Reports 92 & 93). More energy resides in the nuclear component in coal than in the coal itself due to the nuc/chem energy ratio of 5M/1. Other minerals of worth constitute about $200M/yr unrecovered in the US alone, millions of tons each year of unutilized aluminum, iron, magnesium, titanium, etc from about 73 elements. Given stated worldwide commitments to ecologically sustainable technologies for the future (fusion is certainly a leading candidate), ponder the releases from coal, along with declines in fusion and basic research, and wonder if more hot air than commitment is present. There's the Resource Conservaton and Recovery Act saying not to waste resources, yet more Al is exhausted in coal ash than the aluminum industry produces. The Energy Conservation Act: more energy resides in the nuclear component of coal than its chemical component and all of it is wasted. Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act, each well intended and showing positive results in the US, but what will happen worldwide as coal combustion grows to meet objectives, for instance China's plan to increase coal combustion 8x by 2015? National priorities resident in similara laws, such as environmental protection and restoration regs, that are increasingly under attack as encumberances to industry and profits. If the world really wants ecologically sustainable technologies, coal is an enormously valuable resource with vast untapped potential, more than $1 trillion/year world wide in mineral and energy wealth. Then there's the proliferation issue. For example, what's to become of millions of tons of uranium and thorium freely exhausted with coal combustion over the years? In a single year's worth of coal production today is 68,000 kg of U-235, and via the net Greenpeace has told the world how to make it into bombs. How much energy? The 68,000 kg of U-235 equates to 377 Mtons of coal. At $17/ton at the mine, that's $6 trillion alone in coal value. Clearly, resource money should be available to support research and create jobs (at home even) to work on these problems. There are ecomominc, security, and even political benefits to be had by going after the energy problem vigorously. A watered down pablum is no answer to feed the masses. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 16:46:04 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 iB90jvSw024219; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:45:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB90jr9d024177; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:45:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:45:53 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 15:53:17 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: <9VRNKD.A.t5F.AB6tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56877 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:00 AM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >I had three comments on this analysis (which I snipped -- hope that's OK). Not only OK, but such snipping is mandated (or at least strongly encouraged) by the vortex rules. IMHO, the list could use more good snippers like you! 8^) > >First, watch out for Shadowitz -- I've seen an instance where he messed >up an analysis by using the "motion" of the EM field relative to a >particle, which has no role in relativistic EM. Rindler, Jackson, and >Griffiths seem more reliable, to name some I'm aware of. I don't know >any reason to doubt Shadowitz's formula for pancaking, but you should >definitely double check any general assertions he makes about how fields >transform. I've seen it various other places too. No refs handy at the moment. > >Second, pancaking of the field for a point charge is derived from >evaluating the 4-vector potential for the charge using the retarded >integral. Pancaking isn't really "fundamental"; the representation in >terms of retarded integrals is. So, to see what's really going on in a >complex situation involving accelerated charges, it's probably safer to >use the retarded integrals directly. Yes, I was wondering what effect acceleration might have. The approach I used for that I even felt was bogus at the time. > >Finally, let's do just that. For simplicity, assume a rotating ring of >uniform negative charge density, with a fixed positive charge in the >middle of the ring. Let's look at the axial field. > >Since the ring is uniform, the 4-current density is not varying in time, >and we can forget about the "retarded" part. This analysis bothers me. It says the whole is not the sum of the parts. I showed that if pancaking is valid for an individual particle, then the sum of such individual pancaking effects does not cancel at all points. However, I must admit I had the nagging feeling I probably left other important effects out of my analysis, like abberation, which might negate field pancaking. I have the impression that aberration applies to photons though, and pancaking to fields. There should be a simple way to visualize this situation. (Beign a rank amateur, I don't consider tensor analysis simple.) [snip conclusions] >This field is well understood and it's certainly conservative. I am curious as to just why it is thought the huge polar jets of material fly out of black holes and neutron stars. An analagous (and additional) polar gravitational field should develop in the vicinity of black holes, if the analysis is done according to the gravimagnetic isomorphism I proposed on this list anyway. > >It's got a nonzero dipole moment but the far field on axis goes rapidly >to zero (1/r^3, I think?). Yes, and thus aligned dipoles have a mutual 1/r^4 force. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 17:19:30 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 iB91JOSw001393; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:19:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB91JIMQ001331; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:19:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:19:18 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 16:26:43 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Weirdness at Astronomy Picture of the Day Resent-Message-ID: <8YtUWD.A.pU.Wg6tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56878 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 1:36 PM 12/8/4, William Beaty wrote: >APOD: shadow stripe? >http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041207.html Looks like a typical teenage small rocket launch to me. Composite rocket from the looks of the long straight track once it got going. Looks like the rocket had some stabilization problems initially or a badly fueled first stage. The visible flame, possibly from second stage ignition, being aligned with the light post (but in front of it) appears coincidental. Notice the visible smoke near the light. The culprits might be driving a white car. 8^) Just weaving a scenario from the cobwebs of the past ... 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 17:31:33 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 iB91VQSw005552; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:31:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB91VPRE005537; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:31:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:31:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412490301330@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" , "awitz" Subject: Re: Mass-Charge Connection Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:30:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940015e802694ebded5d5f205f05dc9af18350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.87.22 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56879 X-Loop: vortex-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 Photons have No Charge, but a 1.02 MeV photon colliding with a body creates a pair of inertial/stationary masses (Electron-Positron) with a "Charge" of -/+ 1.602e-19 Coulombs. If they annihilate one another "Charge" disappears. IOW., Charge and Mass (and gravity) are interrelated . From particle radius, R = kq^2/E and E = mc^2:: Particle Charge = +/- q = +/- (mc^2 R/k)^1/2 suggesting that charge is a Force Property and the +/- "charge conjugate sign" is merely a Phase Difference of the trapped Inertial Photon. "Big Bang Photons" of greater than GeV energy mostlikely created particle pairs with charge +/- q with masses of 540 MeV or so to produce the 3 312 MeV "quarks" (Plus-Minus-Plus) that make up the proton Triad and the antiproton Triad (Minus-Plus-Minus). With the "odd-man-out" particle decaying to the electron or positron. With a group velocity c and a phase velocity 137*c the charge is invariant. But there is a relativistic "unified" Electrostatic-Magnetic - Gravity Field "Hypocharge" q/gamma with a relativistic gamma of 2.0e21 for the Electron or Positron and 3.26e18 for each of the three quarks in a proton or antiproton. Note that as particle mass/energy decreases, the gamma increases proportionately. This doesn't leave much for the fractional eV energy-mass of the Neutrino-AntiNeutrino. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Photons have No Charge, but a 1.02 MeV photon colliding with a body
creates a pair of inertial/stationary masses (Electron-Positron) with a "Charge"
of -/+ 1.602e-19 Coulombs. If they annihilate one another "Charge" disappears.
 
IOW., Charge and Mass (and gravity) are interrelated . From particle radius, R = kq^2/E and E = mc^2::
 
 Particle Charge  =  +/- q =  +/-  (mc^2 R/k)^1/2  suggesting that charge is a Force Property
and the +/- "charge conjugate sign" is merely a Phase Difference of the trapped Inertial Photon.
 
"Big Bang Photons"  of greater than GeV energy mostlikely created
particle pairs with charge  +/- q with masses of 540 MeV or so to produce the
3    312 MeV "quarks" (Plus-Minus-Plus) that make up the proton Triad  and the antiproton
Triad (Minus-Plus-Minus). With the "odd-man-out" particle decaying to the electron or positron.
 
With a group velocity c and a phase velocity 137*c the charge is invariant. But there
is a relativistic "unified" Electrostatic-Magnetic - Gravity Field "Hypocharge"   q/gamma
with a relativistic gamma of 2.0e21 for the Electron or Positron and 3.26e18 for each of the three quarks
in a proton or antiproton.
 
Note that as particle mass/energy decreases, the gamma increases proportionately. This doesn't
leave much for the fractional eV energy-mass of the Neutrino-AntiNeutrino.
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 17:53:32 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 iB91rTj9010551; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:53:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB91rNxD010499; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:53:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:53:23 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c4dd91$d923b950$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Coal combustion no option Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:52:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4DD5F.77945D20"; 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/56880 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4DD5F.77945D20 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4DD5F.77945D20" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4DD5F.77945D20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankCough! Wheeze !! Coal burning power plants have been part of the = industrial revolution. In Texas we have a law passed that addresses the = issue of coal fired electric generating plant. It is called " stranded = costs". The scenario goes thus.. the electric power producers complained to the = state regs they couldn't afford to clean up their air at the price the = state permitted them to charge for electric power. The producers agreed = they would spend the money IF the state would allow them to recover the = costs via temporary increases in billing. As no good deed ever goes = unpunished, the state agreed that if the producers had or recently = purchased an old plant that was grandfathered from pollution rules, they = could write it off without fixing it ( close it ). The deal considered = the costs the power plant owner was stuck with ( stranded with). Along = with coal fired plants, the power plant owners cried about nuke plants = they were also stuck with, so the state lumped them into the deal. Now comes the games.. power producer # numero uno recovers their = stranded cost and sells the junk plant to power producer # dos.. who in = turn cries fowl and gets to recover stranded costs .. and the games = makes the circle until Bush 2 allows that EPA regs are grossly = overweighed against the poor power producer which results in suspending = certain air pollution mandates for smoke stacks. The game of musical = obsolete power plants continues to the next buyer including the smoke = to prove they are still working. Back to square one and the environmentalists are squeeling like a pig = caught under the gate. Meanwhile , back at the ranch.. never let it be said that innovation has = ceased.. Our local Nuke plant was conceived and designed to cost 1 bil, = after the costs reached 3-4 ( who counts anymore) the contractor threw = in the towel and the big boys came in and finished it at.. lets say give = or take 5 bil. Sometimes later, someone in accounting noticed they were = not making a profit with the investment... soooo.. along comes who? Mr stranded cost .of course!!!. BUT , and this is a very big BUT.. it = costs us 8 bil to build..and now we have ..lets see now.. around 11 bil = invested .. so after the poker game, drinks and cigars , the price = became around 13- 15 bil the power producer could recover in stranded = costs for the plant. There is a solution to cleaning up stack gas and coal smoke... its = called money. The technology exists.. the maintenance and waste disposal = is where the work starts.. but !! here that word again.. if they just = dump it in the air.. the problem goes away because its somebody else's = problem. That is not capitalism.. thats greed taught in MBA programs. Richard * gasp* ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4DD5F.77945D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Cough! Wheeze !! Coal burning power plants = have been=20 part of the industrial revolution. In Texas we have a law passed that = addresses=20 the issue of coal fired electric generating plant. It is called " = stranded=20 costs".
The scenario goes thus.. the electric power = producers=20 complained to the state regs they couldn't afford to clean up their air = at the=20 price the state permitted them to charge for electric power. The = producers=20 agreed they would spend the money IF the state would allow them to = recover the=20 costs via temporary increases in billing. As no good deed ever goes = unpunished,=20 the state agreed that if the producers had or recently purchased an old = plant=20 that was grandfathered from pollution rules, they could write it off = without=20 fixing it ( close it ). The deal considered the  costs the power = plant=20 owner was stuck with ( stranded with). Along with coal fired plants, the = power=20 plant owners cried about nuke plants they were also stuck with, so the = state=20 lumped them into the deal.
Now comes the games.. power producer # numero = uno=20 recovers their stranded cost and sells the junk plant to power producer = # dos..=20 who in turn cries fowl and gets to recover stranded costs .. and the = games makes=20 the circle until Bush 2 allows that EPA regs are grossly overweighed = against the=20 poor power producer which results in suspending certain air pollution = mandates=20 for smoke stacks. The game of musical obsolete power = plants continues to=20 the next buyer  including the smoke to prove they are still=20 working.
 
Back to square one and the environmentalists = are=20 squeeling like a pig caught under the gate.
 
Meanwhile , back at the ranch.. never let it = be said=20 that innovation has ceased.. Our local Nuke plant was conceived and = designed to=20 cost 1 bil, after the costs reached 3-4 ( who counts anymore) the = contractor=20 threw in the towel and the big boys came in and finished it at.. lets = say give=20 or take 5 bil. Sometimes later, someone in accounting noticed they were = not=20 making a profit with the investment... soooo.. along comes = who?
Mr stranded cost .of course!!!. BUT , and this = is a very=20 big BUT.. it costs us 8 bil to build..and now we have ..lets see now.. = around 11=20 bil invested .. so after the poker game, drinks and cigars , the price = became=20 around 13- 15 bil the power producer could recover in stranded costs for = the=20 plant.
 
There is a solution to cleaning up stack gas = and coal=20 smoke... its called money. The technology exists.. the maintenance and = waste=20 disposal is where the work starts..  but !! here that word again..=20 if they just dump it in the air.. the problem goes away because its = somebody else's problem. That is not capitalism.. thats = greed taught in MBA=20 programs.
 
Richard  * gasp*

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C4DD5F.77945D20-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4DD5F.77945D20 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c4dd91$c2272c00$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C4DD5F.77945D20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 19:57:20 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 iB93vDj9008923; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:57:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB93vBM5008911; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:57:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:57:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B7CD7C.7060102@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:58:52 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? 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/56881 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:00 AM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >>I had three comments on this analysis... > >>First, watch out for Shadowitz -- I've seen an instance where he messed >>up an analysis by using the "motion" of the EM field relative to a >>particle, which has no role in relativistic EM. Rindler, Jackson, and >>Griffiths seem more reliable, to name some I'm aware of. I don't know >>any reason to doubt Shadowitz's formula for pancaking, but you should >>definitely double check any general assertions he makes about how fields >>transform. > > I've seen it various other places too. No refs handy at the moment. Oh, the pancaking is fine. The caveat is with respect to Shadowitz -- I'm looking at a scan of p. 124 from his "Electricity and Magnetism" in which he concludes that, in a particular case, moving a magnet past a wire produces no EMF in the wire, while moving the wire past the magnet does produce such an EMF. Someplace in there he seems to have suffered a breakdown in intuition which goes pretty deep. After seeing this particular analysis I'd tend to avoid him in favor of other authors. (I don't know the edition and don't have the book, just a scan of a few pages someone sent me during a conversation about homopolar generators. I suppose it's even possible that the text wasn't actually by Shadowitz, but the person who sent it to me is generally pretty reliable.) [ ... ] >>Finally, let's do just that. For simplicity, assume a rotating ring of >>uniform negative charge density, with a fixed positive charge in the >>middle of the ring. Let's look at the axial field. >> >>Since the ring is uniform, the 4-current density is not varying in time, >>and we can forget about the "retarded" part. > > This analysis bothers me. It says the whole is not the sum of the parts. Well, if the parts are accelerating, then perhaps it's not. Rindler, in his misnamed "Introduction to Special Relativity" (if that's an "introduction" then I'm the Pope) goes through the derivation of the pancaking for a single charge in uniform motion, but I got bogged down at the start of that section and went off to study French. (Call me a dilettante, I won't object...) Just before that, he covers the retarded integrals used to obtain the 4-vector potential in the general case, and there were some very tricky bits in there for accelerating charges. Here's the same argument I already gave, in slightly more detail (I've left out the epsilons and mus on general principles). The basic formula for A at a particular point, from Rindler, 2nd edition, p. 111, or Griffiths, 3rd edition, p. 423 is just A = (1/4pi)integral([J]dV/r) where the integral is taken over all space, [J] is the retarded value of the 4-current density, and r is the distance from the point where one is evaluating A. Since J is time invariant in this case, [J] = J. Each component of J is integrated separately, which means phi = (1/4pi) integral(rho dV/r) where phi = electric potential and rho = charge density. To look at it yet one more way, if you're looking at a case where the current is not varying, then you're in the domain of magnetostatics and you don't need anything beyond simple E&M to analyze it. Fancier approaches, such as the pancaking model, must agree with a simple analysis in simple cases. > I showed that if pancaking is valid for an individual particle, then the > sum of such individual pancaking effects does not cancel at all points. But again, the formula you started with was for a point charge in uniform motion. > However, I must admit I had the nagging feeling I probably left other > important effects out of my analysis, like abberation, which might negate > field pancaking. I have the impression that aberration applies to photons > though, and pancaking to fields. There should be a simple way to visualize > this situation. (Beign a rank amateur, I don't consider tensor analysis > simple.) Huh. I agree, there should. But I sure don't know what it is, either -- wish I did. Consider this: There are two charged rings, one positive and one negative, with equal total charge quantities, arbitrarily close together. In the lab frame one is spinning and the other isn't. Hence, in the lab frame, there is a magnetic field present, but the E field is negligible. (You can replace the two charged rings with a simple loop of wire carrying a current, if you prefer -- the point is that the net charge density is zero when averaged over any finite volume.) Now, look at it in a frame of reference which is rotating with the rotating ring. A moment's gedanken experimentation with a "test charge" moving tangentially to the rotating ring (which will feel a force due to the B field in the lab frame) should convince you that there's an E field in the rotating frame of reference. But charge is conserved -- just moving into a different frame of reference doesn't create or destroy it. So where's the E field in the rotating frame coming from? The divergence of E must be zero everywhere unless there's some nonzero charge density somewhere. Did somebody repeal Gauss's law, or what? If you think the answer's obvious then you may need to think about it some more :-) (The discussion of this one accumulated about 200 posts on sci.physics.relativity.) > [snip conclusions] > >>This field is well understood and it's certainly conservative. > > > > I am curious as to just why it is thought the huge polar jets of material > fly out of black holes and neutron stars. An analagous (and additional) > polar gravitational field should develop in the vicinity of black holes, if > the analysis is done according to the gravimagnetic isomorphism I proposed > on this list anyway. I think I just fell into the deep end of the pool here... 'Way past me, Horace! :-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 20:42:05 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 iB94frj9021150; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:41:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB94fqB4021138; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:41:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:41:52 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 19:49:10 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56882 X-Loop: vortex-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 1:53 PM 12/8/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >I wanted to address you points with the article text, but >the link has gone sour... > >Anyway, I think your differentiation is moot. I can build >a radio circuit that displays behavior EXACTLY as shown >in the graph. Yes, but that is not *my* point. My point is that the graph is really a histogram comprised of individual photon measurements. Some are faster than light. The subject measurements (in the graph) show that, but conventional QM, especially QED shows that to be true theoretically also. Some photons can be *statistically* depended upon to be faster than light. The method I suggest takes advantage of that fact to transmit data faster than light on average. I don't know of any method for detecting single photon radio waves, but such a method might exist. >The link I posted to Nimtz illustrates >how this can be done ( my own work is unpublished or >I'd link you to it instead). The key issue remains, how do we >define velocity? It could be defined, for a two way data transmission system, as repeated meaningful transmission of data x over distance d, and return in average time t of transmission t of a meaningful response message f(x), as v = t/(2d). Achieving FTL is then the condition v > c, or t < 2d/c. I think the method I proposed achieves this. >As the authors point out, the older notions >of group and phase velocity need be extended to include >a third velocity, what they call the "signal velocity" >or what I call the transistion or shock velocity. > >Horace writes: >>I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons >>do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. > >Really? Are you saying that photons in a vacuum can travel >faster or slower than c according to QM? That doesn't >seem right to me. Or are you trying to describe the fact >that photons tend to take all possible paths from the >source to the receiver and therefore arrival times can >vary. I seem to remember this from Feynmans QED, and I've seen >the exact same thing with free space antennae. Both. In his book *QED - The Strange Theory of Light and Matter*, Princeton University Press, 1985, Feynman states on page 89: "The major contribution of P(A to B) occurs at the conventional speed of light - when (X_2 - X_1) is equal to (T_2 - T_1). - where one would expect it all to occur, but there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) that the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't only go in straight lines; now you you find out it doesn't only go at the speed of light!" He does go on to say [importantly]: "It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go faster or slower than the conventional speed c. The amplitudes for these possibilities are very small compared to the contribution from speed c; in fact they canel out when light travels over long distances." It appears (from the data) the subject experimenters found a means of extending the range of the alternative amplitudes through use of polarized photons and a birefringent fiber. In any event, I think the data published in the graph support the FTL communications means I proposed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 20:42:06 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 iB94g1j9021228; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:42:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB94fvWY021202; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:41:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:41:57 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 19:49:15 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: <7tJzIB.A.MLF.Ue9tBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56883 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:58 PM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: [snip stuff for a bit] >> I showed that if pancaking is valid for an individual particle, then the >> sum of such individual pancaking effects does not cancel at all points. > >But again, the formula you started with was for a point charge in >uniform motion. [snip] Interesting observation. True, my analysis was based on a moment in time, with an attempted (and probably wrong) instantaneous adjustment for acceleration. If the point charges were *not* to be accelerated on around the circle, but rather allowed to continue along straight line (tangential) paths, we might then expect the non-conservative field to at least momentarily exist. I have to wonder at this point if the subject non-conservative field could be produced momentarily by independent straight current segments. One thing field pancaking does show, however. The effective charge depends on the veloctiy *and* relative location of the observer. In that sense at least, charge is not always conserved. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 20:48:04 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 iB94lvJs020703; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:47:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB94liZJ020638; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:47:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:47:44 -0800 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, 8 Dec 2004 19:55:00 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56884 X-Loop: vortex-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 link I posted to Nimtz illustrates >how this can be done ( my own work is unpublished or >I'd link you to it instead). The key issue remains, how do we >define velocity? Typo: It could be defined, for a two way data transmission system, as repeated meaningful transmission of data x over distance d, and return in average time t of transmission t of a meaningful response message f(x), as v = t/(2d). Correction: It could be defined, for a two way data transmission system, as repeated meaningful transmission of data x_i over distance d, and return in average time t of a meaningful response message f(x_i), as v = t/(2d). Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 8 22:10:10 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 iB969wJs007998; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:09:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB969vDl007992; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:09:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:09:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 01:06:45 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56885 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle wrote: > ...if it *is* moving super-c, and > not just some distortion, it is important to think > about this, regardless of whether or not we can use it > at the present time to transmit something. > I agree. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 09:38:25 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 iB9HcIj9017705; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 09:38:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9HcGn9017693; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 09:38:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 09:38:16 -0800 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: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:37:54 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56886 X-Loop: vortex-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. Damned if I can find my copy of QED, but it seems the link to the original story is working again. Two thoughts. First, looking at the graph, we see the reference pulse/count profile for light speed is spread over a huge range, something like 40 feet of free space. There is no need for any of the experimenters clever messing with polarizing filters or birefringent materials, if you are correct fully half of the photons IN THE REFERENCE CONDITION are traveling faster than C, not a tiny percentage of them and at speeds 3*c and much more. Heck, if my reference pulse was doing that, I'd drop the actual experiment immediately and call the nobel prize people. And as you say, it would be trivial to construct the devices you suggest to achieve superluminal velocity. Something is wrong here. What the experimenters are doing to change the group velocity is to make the dissipation different for the leading and trailing edges. The result is an overall reduction in counts, but less on the leading edge than the trailing edge. Again I've done the exact same thing with nonlinear transmission lines, with roughly the same results. You can indeed get the calculated group velocity to exceed C. Here's the rub. The gold standard I used to make measurements in the radio circuits I worked with was the following. The distance d is measured as direct line of site from the sender to the receiver. If, for example, we make a triangle of bare wire and launch a pulse on it, the first detectable signal will arrive as if it traveled directly along the base of the triangle, not up and down the arms. You might say this is a ground wave, but really it looks more like all paths are being traversed, not just the wire path, but at a much lower signal strength. Sounds sort of familiar, huh??? (grin). wire ******************* * * * d * Sender * ------------------> *Receiver The time is measured as the 50% point on the leading edge of the shock wavefront. We used mercury relays and spark gaps to generate the pulses, risetimes were in the 100's of picosecond range so from the point of view of the total circuit the shock front was basically a straight wall. K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 11:49 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought At 1:53 PM 12/8/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >I wanted to address you points with the article text, but >the link has gone sour... > >Anyway, I think your differentiation is moot. I can build >a radio circuit that displays behavior EXACTLY as shown >in the graph. Yes, but that is not *my* point. My point is that the graph is really a histogram comprised of individual photon measurements. Some are faster than light. The subject measurements (in the graph) show that, but conventional QM, especially QED shows that to be true theoretically also. Some photons can be *statistically* depended upon to be faster than light. The method I suggest takes advantage of that fact to transmit data faster than light on average. I don't know of any method for detecting single photon radio waves, but such a method might exist. >The link I posted to Nimtz illustrates >how this can be done ( my own work is unpublished or >I'd link you to it instead). The key issue remains, how do we >define velocity? It could be defined, for a two way data transmission system, as repeated meaningful transmission of data x over distance d, and return in average time t of transmission t of a meaningful response message f(x), as v = t/(2d). Achieving FTL is then the condition v > c, or t < 2d/c. I think the method I proposed achieves this. >As the authors point out, the older notions >of group and phase velocity need be extended to include >a third velocity, what they call the "signal velocity" >or what I call the transistion or shock velocity. > >Horace writes: >>I think it is fairly well known in QM that all photons >>do not travel at c, but rather have a distribution of travel times. > >Really? Are you saying that photons in a vacuum can travel >faster or slower than c according to QM? That doesn't >seem right to me. Or are you trying to describe the fact >that photons tend to take all possible paths from the >source to the receiver and therefore arrival times can >vary. I seem to remember this from Feynmans QED, and I've seen >the exact same thing with free space antennae. Both. In his book *QED - The Strange Theory of Light and Matter*, Princeton University Press, 1985, Feynman states on page 89: "The major contribution of P(A to B) occurs at the conventional speed of light - when (X_2 - X_1) is equal to (T_2 - T_1). - where one would expect it all to occur, but there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) that the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't only go in straight lines; now you you find out it doesn't only go at the speed of light!" He does go on to say [importantly]: "It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go faster or slower than the conventional speed c. The amplitudes for these possibilities are very small compared to the contribution from speed c; in fact they canel out when light travels over long distances." It appears (from the data) the subject experimenters found a means of extending the range of the alternative amplitudes through use of polarized photons and a birefringent fiber. In any event, I think the data published in the graph support the FTL communications means I proposed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 10:17:14 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 iB9IH26m004891; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:17:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9IGnC9004782; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:16:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:16:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005e01c4de1a$ce535420$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: BEC-like Fusion Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 10:13:37 -0800 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/56887 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Regarding the several recent findings regarding the appearance of Carbon, which is found in the ash of several LENR experiments, together with such related findings as those of Iwamura of Mitsubishi, where12 nucleon transmutation predominates, and assuming that most of this carbon was NOT due to contamination, consider the BEC. There has been a recent flurry in the mainstream scientific press concerning new aspects of BEC condensation. Most do not specifically mention LENR, but there has been plenty of speculation in CF circles going back almost 15 years about a possible role of a new type of BEC condensation, at temperatures above cryogenic. It is only a matter of time before cryogenics enters the cutting edge of LENR experimentation, and in anticipation of that, here is a somewhat surprising suggestion. Forget deuterium. Use helium instead. Deuterium is more easily loaded in metal of course, and helium is much, much harder to fuse in a plasma - but we should be advised to forget about the plasma model, for now. Shouldn't we already know that the plasma model can lead to false assumptions - to wit, 24 MeV gammas? One thing for certain is that NO form of LERN - is of the traditional plasma-type either in the fusion event or in the preconditions. Sure, helium is not amenable to loading by normal electrolysis, but that deficiency can be overcome - and may even become a feature (re: recent M.S. posting on Frankel defects). For instance, in the formation of defect cavities (micro-bubbles, with geometry in the important 50 nm range) - this is already commonly observed after helium loading by high-fluence ion implantation, in other technologies like semiconductors. Looking (way) ahead, this implantation can actually be accomplished 'in situ' as a periodic refueling step in a commercial LENR helium cell as a secondary feature. By "secondary" it is meant by the use of a small on-board accelerator in a working device. The small accelerator would be used to power a FEL (terahertz laser) in noraml operation. But why go to the extra effort? First, to back-track and restate some issues: BECs are formed of Bosons, integer spin particles, which category does include many atoms like helium and certain nuclei, including the deuteron nucleus. The D atom, electron and all, would not have a "net" integer spin, and would be a fermion, not a boson (even thought it may act as a boson in a metal matrix) but helium suffers not such limitation. Things are different within a metal matrix. Deuterium in a lattice is subject to the Pauli exclusion principle unless these confined deuterons don't have tightly bound electrons, which seems to be the case, and they are at least "virtual" bosons. But any way you cut it, helium is a boson and should be more efficient. As to the issue of lack of cryogenic temperature, I am also suggesting that confinement acts just as effectively as low temperature and that the important variable is the lack of kinetic freedom of movement at the instant of coherence. CF may be BEC-like for only a few picoseconds out of every second, and that is why it is ultimately based on "probability". I think using He instead of D2 will require cryogenics, but of a more modest variety - perhaps 150 K which tiny refrigerators can handle. Looking at all of these ideas in composite suggests a possible mechanism for cold fusion which actually liesnear the present-day BEC physics... except, that is, for the lack of gamma radiation following the fusion (which of course is a HUGE advantage). Side Note: In regard to the Iwamura paper and others where 12 nucleons seem to be "in-play" which is 3 alphas or six D atoms, then it seems that Helium may already be playing a transient and intermediary role, so why not optimize its role by completely eliminating the first step (which is deuterium) ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 12:41:39 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 iB9KfOrt015089; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:41:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9KfMAB015072; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:41:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:41:22 -0800 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, 9 Dec 2004 11:48:37 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: <3zZnXB.A.XrD.xhLuBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56888 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:37 PM 12/9/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >First, looking at the graph, we see the reference pulse/count profile >for light speed is spread over a huge range, something like >40 feet of free space. There is no need for any of the >experimenters clever messing with polarizing filters >or birefringent materials, if you are correct fully >half of the photons IN THE REFERENCE CONDITION are >traveling faster than C, not a tiny percentage of >them and at speeds 3*c and much more. Heck, if >my reference pulse was doing that, I'd drop >the actual experiment immediately and call the nobel >prize people. And as you say, it would be trivial >to construct the devices you suggest to achieve >superluminal velocity. Something is wrong here. Yep. Bungled data? For sure, the conclusion, based on the data, that useful information can not be transmitted FTL is wrong. Maybe the experiment is bungled as well? This points out a feature of modern science that I think needs revolutionary change. That is the amount of backup material that should be supplied, and required, and made available for long duration, possibly in national digital archives, or at least in the publisher's archives, for a given scientific article involving experimental results. Given the existence of the web and massive cheap data storage capacity, it is no longer reasonable to depend on the solely integrity and reputation (and for that matter subsequent cooperation) of the researcher and/or peer reviewers (a) to assume the method(s) used to be valid enough to depend on the stated accuracy of the results obtained, and (b) to replicate the experiment. It is often impossible to determine exactly what the researcher did from a published article. Backup material should include photos, videos, logs, notes, plans, equipment specifications, and detailed descriptions, etc., all in digital form. To be accepted for peer review publication, sufficent backup information should be supplied to comfortably do the review and to resolve problems with replication without the cooperation of the author. > >What the experimenters are doing to change the group >velocity is to make the dissipation different for >the leading and trailing edges. The result is an >overall reduction in counts, but less on the >leading edge than the trailing edge. Again I've >done the exact same thing with nonlinear transmission >lines, with roughly the same results. You can >indeed get the calculated group velocity to >exceed C. > >Here's the rub. The gold standard I used to make >measurements in the radio circuits I worked with was the following. > >The distance d is measured as direct line of site from the >sender to the receiver. If, for example, we make a triangle >of bare wire and launch a pulse on it, the first detectable signal >will arrive as if it traveled directly along the base of the > triangle, not up and down the arms. You might say this is >a ground wave, but really it looks more like all paths are >being traversed, not just the wire path, but at a much >lower signal strength. Sounds sort of familiar, huh??? (grin). Yes indeed. This is one reason I suggest a two-way transmission standard using transformed data on the return. It raises the bar for the difficulty of FTL proof, due the dual channel requirement plus transformation circuitry, but these costs are comparatively small compared to the importance of the underlying principles at stake. This standard of proof eliminates the alternate path argument, provided d, the distance between Sender Alice and Reciever Bob used for the FTL calculation, is measured in a straight-line fashion. > > wire > ******************* > * * > * d * >Sender * ------------------> *Receiver I have personally observed this kind of problem of the unexpected secondary path (though not related to the QED multi-path photon amplitudes). It was during a replication of Shoulder's original EV work using a Hewlett Packard analog scope similar to the one he used in his original work. I was getting similar traces to his published traces. Then at one point I disconnected the probe lead to the EV detection (secondary) coil to which it was attached, and yet the EV signal persisted! It was being transmitted by air from the primary spark generator, not through a secondary coil used to "detect" the EV. You have to really watch out for secodary paths for any measurements related to sparks! > >The time is measured as the 50% point on the leading edge >of the shock wavefront. We used mercury relays and spark >gaps to generate the pulses, risetimes were in the >100's of picosecond range so from the point of view >of the total circuit the shock front was basically >a straight wall. So, why not use multiple channels and lower the trigger point as far as possible? I guess the major problem with the relay and spark technique would be the impossiblity of obtaining a fast data turn-around time due to the use of relays. It doesn't lend itself to practical application like fiber techniques might. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 13:40:02 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 iB9LdsP5025631; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:39:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9Ldq2c025617; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:39:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:39:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <143.3a67b490.2eea201d@aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:39:41 EST Subject: Re: BEC-like Fusion To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_143.3a67b490.2eea201d_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/56889 X-Loop: vortex-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_143.3a67b490.2eea201d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/9/2004 1:17:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes: > I think using He instead > of D2 will require cryogenics, but of a more modest > variety - perhaps 150 K which tiny refrigerators can handle. > > I agree. You are forgetting a key point. It's not tan electron condensation we are going for. We are shooting for a nucleon condensation in a proton conductor. The helium nucleus is heaver, moves more slowly at room temperatures, and is easier to condense. You are getting close to what I want to do. Frank Z --part1_143.3a67b490.2eea201d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/9/2004 1:17:4= 3 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9@pacbell.net writes:

I think using He instead
of D2 will require cryogenics, but of a more modest
variety - perhaps 150 K which tiny refrigerators can handle.



I agree.  You are forgetting a key point.  It's not tan electron c= ondensation we are going for.  We are shooting for a nucleon condensati= on in a proton conductor.

The helium nucleus is heaver, moves more slowly at room temperatures, and is= easier to condense.


You are getting close to what I want to do. 

Frank Z --part1_143.3a67b490.2eea201d_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:05:28 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 iB9M52rt004402; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9M51UT004373; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00d501c4de3a$b106d160$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005e01c4de1a$ce535420$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Gold (Tom) and BEC-like Fusion Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:01:52 -0800 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/56891 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'm sure more than a few vortex readers, perhaps everyone except Frank Z, must think that anyone who suggests that LENR fusion could extend all the way to the "impossible" reaction He+He+He --> C must be, well... a little "touched"... as my dear grandmother used to say to politely indicate a pathology far more more severe. Indeed. But here is some further controversial "evidence" which one might like to throw into the blender before making any assessment. Even now, with oil pushing $3/gallon, not everyone believes in the Hubbert's peak oil theory. Actually I do believe most of it, but for statistical reasons only because I also subscribe to a lesser version of the Gold theory, which might now be extended (Gold would NOT buy this "enhancement" most likely and I am not attributing any of it to him) The present enhancement includes the idea of He+He+He --> C resulting in methane genesis deep within the Earth's mantle where there was even little carbon initially. Dr. Thomas Gold, an astrophysicist at Cornell University, proposed a theory more controversial than Hubbert's was once considered to be. Unlike most geologists, Gold does not believe that oil comes from decomposed biomass, i.e., dead dinosaurs and the like. Instead, he has an "abiogenic theory" of oil, believing that oil in mostly primordial and comes from far deeper in the earth than we recognize, was NEVER plant material, and that thus there is (or could be) a lot more of it than we can currently predict. There is a middle ground however, which recognizes that some oil is based on ancient biomass and some is not. IOW both Gold and Hubbert can be partially correct. And there is more. While certainly a minority opinion, the discovery of bacteria at far greater depths than previously known and the claim that some oil fields are actually "refilling themselves" lends some credence to Gold's theory, and not the other way around. "Hubbert's peak is an arbitrary invention," Gold says. Gold's own book on the subject, "The Deep, Hot Biosphere," explains his theory that oil comes from the very same "stuff" from which our planet was formed billions of years ago. We're sitting on a world full of black gold and won't ever run out. OK. That last statement (if viewed alone) is sounding more and more like a crock, but it doesn't mean that the whole Gold theory is too crazy to be believed. In fact, we can extend Gold to "astronomical" lengths by adding that even the primordial carbon (which is seldom seen in first generation H+He stars anyway) is itself unnecessary. There are some good reasons why some of the oil we have been pumping is abiogenic. There are some reason to even go a step further and suggest that some of the methane which we pump did not arrive as primordial methane from a supernova, but instead arrived here on earth from *first generation* primordial gas with ZERO carbon, IOW it arrive here just as just a mixture of hydrogen and helium and the carbon itself comes from the LENR mechanism: He+He+He --> C Whoa, cowboy... now that is some serious nonsense, right? Well, I'm not sure that I am ready to try to extend Gold's theory that far yet, but consider this geographical oddity, which exists around what is today Amarillo, Texas. If that connection seems to be 'not even' a near-sequiter, here are some further items to consider. About 90% of the world's helium is extracted from methane wells from within a "small area" around what is a singularity "The Helium Capital of the World" - Amarillo, Texas. Amarillo is also home to Pantax, not too far from Crawford, and probably has more hidden wealth than any place on earth. George Jr is probably smarter (well shrewder, shall we say) than anyone on the left-coast gives him credit for being... or the luckiest guy in America. How did all that Helium get to Amarillo and no place else? That part is easier to explain. Perhaps over 4 billion years ago, when our own sun was a youngster, a Jupiter sized H+He primordial gaseous object, supercold and very dense, came close enough to earth to dump a small fraction of its load in a tight zone several hundred to a thousand miles under Crawford/Amarillo, which was then a molten mostly iron surface, before glancing off and continuing on towards our sun. Maybe over the next few billion years, because of the enormous pressure, most of the lighter hydrogen outgassed but some of the immobilized H+He began working its way back up, and some of the helium fused to form C before getting to a now cooled surface, and eventually that carbon combined with the H2 to form methane (a lot of the H would have fused also). There could have been some primordial carbon down there too, but it is rare at great depth. Maybe that is why we have this amazing singularity in west Texas extending into N. Mexico. Not only a helium anomaly but also may natural gas wells AND almost as unusual as the helium is the number of CO2 wells. All in one fairly tight geologic area. An anyone who has ever driven through there knows that on the surface, at least, the area can best be described as rat-lands. Maybe papa George found out about this anomaly from his years as head of the CIA... Why else would anyone with money want to live in Crawford? You just cannot plant enough trees and irrigation lines to prettify that place... or maybe junior was smart enough to figure it all out on his own? At least everything but the part about He+He+He --> C More later, Jones BTW, Fred Sparber, former head of the New Mexico BBB ;-) tells me that Clayton (New Mexico) not far from Amarillo, is looking to capitalize on its one major natural resource - the largest carbon dioxide gas field in the world. http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/stories/2002/12/30/story4.html Now get this. Two incredible singularities in one place - massive helium and massive CO2 and plenty of natural gas to pay for having to live there ... but of course, every mainstream scientist will tell you that it is "just a coincidence"... but not that other great New Mexican, Joe Leaphorn - "there are no coincidences" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:05:37 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 iB9M52rt004399; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9M50Ac004357; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:00 -0800 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, 9 Dec 2004 13:12:18 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56890 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:58 PM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >> I am curious as to just why it is thought the huge polar jets of material >> fly out of black holes and neutron stars. For this part of the question I would expect someone in the astrophysics business to have a conventional answer. >An analagous (and additional) >> polar gravitational field should develop in the vicinity of black holes, if >> the analysis is done according to the gravimagnetic isomorphism I proposed >> on this list anyway. > >I think I just fell into the deep end of the pool here... > >'Way past me, Horace! :-) I am sure it is not! Its pretty simple (minded). I do very much appreciate, and this is no joke, anyone not wanting to spend much time responding on the basis of and in the terminology of wacko non-conventional and time consuming theories like mine though! I am not expecting you to respond to this. Just in case you wonder a bit what it is about, though, the isomorphism is established by applying the following correspondence rules to *every* electromagnetic law in order to obtain corresponding gravitational laws. Replace c, mu_0 and epsilon_0 with corresponding terms c_g, mu_g_0, and epsilon_g_0 above. Co-gravity K is defined as the gravitational equivalent to (corresponds under the isomorphism to) B, the magnetic field intensity B. Gravity g is defined as the gravitational equivalent of the electrostatic field E. Wherever charge is used, gravitational mass (gravitational charge) is substituted, with the sign of the charge removed (if ordinary matter is involved, i.e. not anti-gravitational matter) and replaced by the imaginary number i. J_g is the mass current vector corresponding to current density vector J. For the sake of simplicity here assume c = c_g. We then have the full correspondence: Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg c c_g = c Table 3: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table The number i above is the square root of minus 1. Values that are imaginary are gravitational. Values that are real are electromagnetic and can be sensed in the 4 real dimensions. F = m*a, for example, is based on inertial mass m, having no imaginary component, and thus is an electromagnetic equation resulting in a real force on the inertial mass m. It is fairly simple to apply if you have the right kind of pocket calculator. The imaginary and real dimensions intersect influences then where a particle carries both gravitational charge and inertial mass. I'll post a more complete summary of the isomorphism and terminology, giving proper credit to Jefimenko, from whom it was derived almost in its entirety, under the thread name "Gravimagnetism". A much more complete discussion was posted in April under the thread names" "GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #3, Part 1)", "GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #3, Part 2)", "GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #3, Part 3)". Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 14:05:40 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 iB9M5Qrt004603; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:26 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9M5KZF004542; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:05:20 -0800 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, 9 Dec 2004 13:12:23 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravimagnetism Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56892 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: GRAVIMAGNETISM CAUSALITY AND JEFIMENKO'S GRAVITY In establishing his correspondence between gravity and the electromagnetic field, based primarily on causality and the effects of retardation, Jefimenko, in *Causality, Electromagnetism, and Gravity*, creates the correspondence of G to -1/(4*Pi*epsilon_g_0) to -mu_g_0*c^2/(4*Pi). The term epsilon_g_0 here is the gravitational equivalent to the electrostatic permittivity of the vacuum epsilon_0, and mu_g_0 is the equivalent to the magnetic permeability of the vacuum mu_0, as will be explained below. Jefimenko's version of EM fully accounts for causality, i.e. the fact that a cause at a distance d can not precede the effect by time delta t which is less than d/c (or d/c_g in the case of gravity.) Jefimenko shows that causality justifies invention of the co-gravitational field K, analogous to B. This will be shown below to make a full gravitational-electromagnetic field isomorphism possible. Jefimenko demonstrates that B, and thus K, are merely computed quantities, secondary quantities that necessarily follow from the only true causes, the interaction of charge upon charge or mass upon mass. This provides strong evidence for the "real" existence of K, as "real" as B, i.e. that an (apparent) K can be observed experimentally to the same extent B can, though it is much more difficult to observe due to the extreme orders of magnitude involved. In other words, if causal electromagnetism is correct, then the causal gravity is also necessarily correct. The isomorphism holds by necessity because the full set of postulates have already been experimentally verified. However, if it turns out that causal electromagnetism is incorrect, and B exists in a real sense, then it does not follow that K can (any longer) be assumed to exist on the basis that it is merely a computed quantity, like energy. B and E are variable when the velocity of the observer is taken into account. This magnitude dependence on observer velocity is fully accounted for by causality treatment, because the relative velocity of the observer merely changes the apparent retardation. This aspect even more fully justifies Jefimenko's treatment of B as an artifact of charge motion. In Jefimenko's text the world of gravity and electromagnetism are maintained as separate worlds, and merely corresponded to each other. Jefimenko thus uses epsilon_0 in the gravity context to mean -1/(4*Pi*G), and mu_0 to mean -4*Pi*G/c^2. He also uses c to mean the speed of propagation of gravity. Here use the new notation epsilon_g_0 to mean the permittivity of space to gravity, mu_g_0 to mean permeability of space to co-gravity, and c_g to mean the speed of gravity propagation. So far there is really no change with the view of Jefimenko, only an extended notation. There are some immediate advantages to this notation, however. First it provides corresponding constants which could have been nicely used in the EM to gravity correspondences on page 104 of Jefimenko's book: *Causality, Electromagnetism, and Gravity*. Namely we could have the new Table 1, shown below. Electric Gravitational q m E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 mu_0 mu_g_0 Table 1: Initial Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table However, this is still not ideal. We have a problem with signs, as it appears did Jefimenko, but which he remedies by placing minus signs in the corresponding formulae. The problem lies in the fact that, to maintain the convention that a positive force is repelling, we end up with sign problems between the force equations: Fg = G*(m1*m2/r) for gravity and Fe = k*(q1*q2/r^2) = (1/(4*Pi*epsilon_0))(q1*q2/r^2) for the Coulomb force. Jefimenko fixes this problem by making his epsilon_g_0 and mu_g_0 negative. Thus, in effect he has the gravitational equivalent to the above: Fg = G*(m1*m2/r) = (-1/(4*Pi*epsilon_g_0))*(m1*m2/r^2) His gravitational permittivity and co-gravitational permeability thus end up negative in order to preserve the correct sign on force. This eventually causes problems. An example is the Poynting vector correspondence: S = (1/mu_0) E x B vs the Jefimenko gravitational version: P = (c^2/(4*Pi*G)) K x g = (1/mu_g_0) K x g Note that Jefimenko here reverses K and G instead of using an arbitrarily placed minus sign. It appears that there is a handy way out of this lack of true isomorphism. That solution is to specify the sign of the mass charge in terms of i = (-1)^(1/2), the imaginary number i. Charge has sign, so why not mass? This then makes the isomorphism complete. We now have epsilon_g_0 = 1/(4*Pi*G) mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/(c_g)^2 and all the formulae then exactly correspond, including signs. The disadvantage to this approach is that the imaginary number i must be carried throughout the gravitational field units. Perhaps this is really an unexpected advantage though. Gravitational fields are imaginary, electromagnetic are real. There is then some hidden meaning to this? One is that the two worlds ARE for the most part disconnected. We have in fact an indication of field *dis-unification*. Additionally we have that anti-gravitational matter, if it exists as implied by symmetry, would then carry sign (-i). SPEED OF GRAVITY Jefimenko adapts his theory to account for general relativistic effects by adjusting the speed of gravity. He notes (p. 135 ff.) that to account for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, that the speed of propagation of gravity must be about 0.3 c. We thus have c_g = 0.3 * c and we know that (c_g)^2 * epsilon_g_0 * mu_0_1 = 1 thus (0.09 c^2) * epsilon_g_0 * mu_0_1 = 1 and we also have mu_0 = (4/0.9)*Pi*G/c^2 We now have the full correspondence: Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg c c_g = = 8.99x10^7 m/s (Jefimenko's estimate) Table 2: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism (Without Relativity) Correspondence Table where we now (roughly) know epsilon_g_0, mu_g_0, and c_g, and gravitational mass is expressed in terms of imaginary units i. J_g is mass current. Inertial mass everywhere in relativistic cases is the relativistic mass m0*gamma. We have a complete field isomorphism. This isomorphism implies both a connection, as well as disconnection, between the electromagnetic and gravitational fields. We have achieved a form of "field dis-unification." The existence of i in some resulting equations distinctly and permanently isolates the purely gravitational fields and masses from electromagnetic components. We also now have computed fundamental constants: c_g, epsilon_g_0, and mu_g_0, as they must be according to Jefimenko's theory. THE PROPOSED ISOMORPHISM IS NOT LIMITED TO JEFIMENKO'S VISION OF EM Any complete theory of electromagnetism, including electromagnetism within the framework of relativity, can be used to create an isomorphism between electromagnetism and gravity, provided B in the theory is not real in the sense it is simply a byproduct of the other laws of the electromagnetic theory, and the electromagnetic vector potential function can be be derived from the (retarded) motion of charge. Jefimenko showed that the law of causality, if postulated, ensures that B meets this criteria. It is suggested here that the subject isomorphism can be established by first measuring or establishing the rate of propagation of gravity, c_g. We then can compute the permeability of space to co-gravity: mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/(c_g)^2 and the permittivity of space to gravity: epsilon_g_0 = 1/(4*Pi*G). It is expected that c_g = c when full relativistic effects are applied, though, the ratio c/c_g is likley to change within close range to massive objects, due to the fact gravity and electromagnetism operate in separate spacial dimensions. A minimum number of dimensions for a full relativistic gravimagnetism description then is 7. We now establish the isomorphism by applying the following rules to every electromagnetic law in order to obtain corresponding gravitational laws. Replace c, mu_0 and epsilon_0 with corresponding terms c_g, mu_g_0, and epsilon_g_0 above. Co-gravity K is defined as the gravitational equivalent to (corresponds under the isomorphism to) B, the magnetic field intensity B. Gravity g is defined as the gravitational equivalent of the electrostatic field E. Wherever charge is used, gravitational mass (gravitational charge) is substituted, with the sign of the charge removed (if ordinary matter is involved, i.e. not anti-gravitational matter) and replaced by the imaginary number i. J_g is the mass current vector corresponding to current density vector J. When relativity is included, we then have the full correspondence: Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg c c_g = c Table 3: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table NOTATION AND NOMENCLATURE RELATED TO GRAVITATION The EM-GK isomorphism provides analogs to a vast quantity of physical laws, formulae and terms. This can cause much confusion in the process of attempting to assign names and symbols the gravitational analog items. To be consistent, and end terminology confusion, when discussing or expanding the isomorphism proposed here between the electromagnetic (EM) and gravikinetic (GK) fields, when referring to a gravitational feature the analogous term borrowed from the EM universe should be prefixed with "gravi" to indicate that that analogous feature is in the GK universe. If it is not appropriate to prefix a term with "gravi" then it can be preceded with the adjective "gravitational". Under the proposed EM-GK isomorphism every variable, every formula, every unit in EM has a corresponding value, a gravitational analog. The formulas and variables from the EM world should be used faithfully, and simply subscripted where necessary with a g to designate the GK analog. The exceptions to these rules are the variables g, and G, and co-gravitational field K, which is hereby now called the gravimagnetic field K, which are symbols that already have specific meanings. Based on the above principles, the following are sample correspondences: electrostatic field E: gravitational field g magnetic field B: gravimagnetic field K electromagnetic (EM) : gravikinetic (GK) (a necessary rule exception) charge: gravicharge (an imaginary quantity in units of +i kg, or possibly -i kg, not to be confused with mass) current: gravicurrent (an imaginary quantity in units of +i kg/s) magnet: gravimagnet monopole: gravimonopole Poynting vector P: gravitational Poynting vector P_g ohm (omega): graviohm (omega_g) permittivity (epsilon) : gravipermittivity (epsilon_g) permeability (mu) : gravipermeability (mu_g) lightspeed (c): gravispeed (c_g) impedance of the vacuum (nu): graviimpedence of the vacuum (nu_g) Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism: Maxwell's laws of gravimagnetism Gauss' Law of electric flux: Gauss' Law of gravitational flux Laplace's Law of Electrostatic potential: Laplace's Law of Gravitational Potential Similar terminology should be used when applied to the laws of Lenz, Biot-Savart, Ampere, Ohm, etc. The theory itself, the EM-GK Isomorphic Theory, can thus simply be called a theory of gravimagnetism. This approach to nomenclature puts an end to the need for all kinds of special terms and variables. Also, when the meaning is clear, one can simply dispense with the g subscripts, and thus incur no notation overhead whatsoever. Note that this approach would not work well if the isomorphism were not complete. SOME COMPUTATIONS Let's try a sample calculation using the isomorphism. The mass of the earth is m_t_earth = 5.98x10^24 kg. The radius of earth is 6378 m. The moment of inertia for a sphere of radius r and mass M is (2/5) M r. For estimating purposes, considering the iron core, we might assume the mass is located in a ring of radius 2300 km, rotating once every day, i.e. at 2*Pi*2300 km/day = 167 m/s. The gravicurrent is (5.98x10^24 kg i kg)/day = 6.92x10^41 i kg/s. Note that i here is the imaginary number (-1)^(1/2). The gravimagnetic dipole moment mu_k of the earth's gravicurrent is thus the gravicurrent times the area of the current loop, or (6.92x10^41 i kg/s)(Pi*(2300 km)^2) gives: mu_k_earth = 1.15x10^55 i kg m^2/s Let us now compute the gravimagnetic dipole moment of a spinning steel ball of radius 1 cm spinning at 30,000 rpm. The volume of the ball is 4/3 Pi (1 cm)^3 = 4.189 cm^3, so its mass is about (7.14 g/cm^3)(4.189 cm^3) = 29.9 gm = .0299 kg. This is effectively spinning at a radius of .004 m, so has a velocity of (30000*2*Pi*.4 cm)/(60 s) = 12.56 m/s. The mass turns 30000 rpm/(60 s/m) = 550 rps and thus gravicurrent of (.0299 i kg)(500/s) = 14.95 i kg/s. The gravimagnetic dipole moment is thus the gravimagnetic dipole moment mu_k of the steel ball's gravicurrent is thus that gravicurrent times the area of the gravicurrent loop, or (14.95 i kg/s)(Pi*(.004 m)^2) gives: mu_k_ball = 7.51x10^-4 i kg m^2/s To properly calculate the gravimagnetic force between the earth and spinning steel ball, we might use a computer program to fully integrate the gravimagnetic field in the presence of the steel ball considering the density of the earth at each radius. However, for the sake of a first try at estimating the gravimagnetic field force we can simply assume the earth's gravimagnetic field to be due to a gravimagnetic dipole located at the center of the earth in the plane of the equator. The EM force between two magnetic dipoles mutually aligned on their axes is: F_mu = [-3 mu0/(2 Pi)] Mu_1 Mu_2 / r^4 Note that a positive force is repelling. Two mutually aligned gravicurrent coils (rings) generate an attracting force because their fields are aligned N-S ... N-S. For convenience, let's use Jefimenko's value of mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg in order to convert the above into the isomorphic gravitational analog for the earth and ball: F_mu_g = [-3 mu_0_g/(2 Pi)] Mu_1 Mu_2 / r^4 F_mu_g = [-3 mu_0_g/(2 Pi)] mu_k_earth mu_k_ball / r^4 where Mu_1 and Mu_2 are gravimagnetic dipole moments expressed in units of [i kg/(m s)] and the separation distance r is in meters. For simplicity's sake let's assume the experiment is performed at the north pole. This gives r = 6378 m and the force is: F_mu_g = [-3 (1.037x10^-25 m/kg)/(2 Pi)] * (1.15x10^55 i kg m^2/s) * (7.51x10^-4 i kg m^2/s) / (6378 km)^4 = [4.95x10^-26 m/kg] * (1.765x10^51 kg^2 m^4/s^2) / 1.655x10^27 m^4 = .0528 N = 5.38 gf and we seem to be way off. However, if we use c_g = c we have: mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/c^2 = 9.3295973x10^-27 m/kg and the ratio of the two gravipermeabilities is (9.3295973x10^-27 m/kg)/(1.037x10^-25 m/kg) = 0.09 and we get a force of (5.38 gf)*0.09) = 0.484 gf, which is still too high. This gives an acceleration due to kinetic force of (0.484 gf)/(29.9 gm) = 0.01619 g. However, the assumptions provide only a crude estimate of the force. A careful integration of the co-gravitational field of the earth is required. Also, the approximation to the force between dipoles used here is only valid at much larger (relative) distances. It is not valid up close to the earth. A finite element approach may be the best way to get accurate results for this kind of problem. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:01:56 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 iB9N1qP5011751; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:01:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9N1oYx011731; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:01:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:01:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <1102633295.41b8d94f14d22@www.highsurf.com> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 23:01:35 +0000 From: rick@highsurf.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Modern Vimanas References: <41B72A52.9060100@rtpatlanta.com> In-Reply-To: <41B72A52.9060100@rtpatlanta.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2 X-Originating-IP: 66.135.232.201 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server26.fastbighost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - eskimo.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [32001 502] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - highsurf.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56893 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hmm... check the release date for the secret info - EOTW as we know it. Won't be enough time to put it to much use. - R. Quoting Terry Blanton : > Antigravity being tested in India? > > http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/12-04e-04.asp > > What's a Vimana? > > http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Vimanas.htm > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:10:06 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 iB9NA0P5013405; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:10:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9N9xLv013387; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:09:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:09:59 -0800 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, 9 Dec 2004 14:17:15 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is charge always conserved? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56894 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:58 PM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >The basic formula for A at a particular point, from Rindler, 2nd >edition, p. 111, or Griffiths, 3rd edition, p. 423 is just > > A = (1/4pi)integral([J]dV/r) > >where the integral is taken over all space, [J] is the retarded value of >the 4-current density, and r is the distance from the point where one is >evaluating A. Since J is time invariant in this case, [J] = J. Each >component of J is integrated separately, which means > > phi = (1/4pi) integral(rho dV/r) > >where phi = electric potential and rho = charge density. > >To look at it yet one more way, if you're looking at a case where the >current is not varying, then you're in the domain of magnetostatics and >you don't need anything beyond simple E&M to analyze it. Fancier >approaches, such as the pancaking model, must agree with a simple >analysis in simple cases. I have such uneasy feelings about the vector magnetic potential A, especially in the context of relativity, due to my lack of understanding I assume. Please excuse this momentary lapse into humor. Humor shield on. ******** If the vector magnetic potetnial were real in any sense, then it seems to me we should build a National Vector Magnetic Field Facility (VMFF). Using wire made of twisted pair superconductors, there is no limit other than financial to the intensity of the VMF that can be created by a coil of such, due to the lack of force when A is not changing. The VMF shows up in a real way quantum phenomena, so maybe unusual things would happen at the center of the coil. The facility would also have political advantages for the operators. Unlike operators of future great tokamaks that happen to not break even, the VMFF operators would have a handy excuse. "Someone changed the guage, so we dont know where the VMF went." 8^) Humor shield off. ******** If it is true that the definition: @f/@t = lim dt->0 ( f(x,y,z,t+dt) - f(x,y,z,t) )/dt holds in a vector point field, for f a vector at point (x,y,x,t), then in an FEA simulation one can simply approximate: @A/@t = (1/dt) ( A(x,y,z,t+dt) - A(x,y,z,t) ) where (1/dt is now a finite scalar and ( A(x,y,z,t+dt) - A(x,y,z,t) ) is a vector subtraction. We thus use a finite number of values for x,y,z,t to simulate the results, based on starting conditions at time 0. SIDE NOTE: To compute A(x,y,x,t), given the set of current filaments comprising the torus, we can use: A = line integral of [(mu I dL)/(4 Pi R)] where R is the distance from the current element to the point at which the vector magnetic potential is is being calculated. This sets the guage, by assuming div A = 0, but the guage is arbitrary. Consider now a toroidal coil (or just "torus") carrying constant current moving in space along its major axis, which is also the x axis, toward an electron at point (x,0,0). Since the current is constant we should be able to assume both B and E outside the torus is zero. <- O Torus cross section (x,y,z) (e-)....................... Main axis of torus <- O Torus in motion Now, since the coil approaches (x,y,z)==(x,0,0) for some fixed x, the magnitude of the magnetic vector potential A(x,0,0,t+dt) is larger than the magnitude of A(x,0,0,t). Using the definition of @A/@t above would imply that the electric field E = @A/@t imposed at (x,0,0) by the moving torus is non-zero. Now, consider a toroidal coil carrying constant current located at the origin with its major axis the x axis. An electron at point (x,0,0) has initial velocity v towards the origin. Since the current is constant we can assume E outside the torus is zero. O Torus cross section (x,y,z) (e-)...........>..........X Target "X" at origin O Since the electron at (x,y,z)==(x,0,0) approaches the origin, i.e. dx/dt = v, then x diminishes with time, and the magnitude of the magnetic vector potential A(x+v*dt,0,0,t+dt) is larger than the magnitude of A(x,0,0,t). In other words dA/dt is non-zero for the electron, even for a fixed current toroidal coil. We can not assume @A/@t is non-zero because dA/dt is non-zero? Using the definition of @A/@t = dA/dt here implies that the electric field E = @A/@t imposed at (x,0,0) by the stationary fixed current torus at the origin upon a moving charge is non-zero. Yet we see that A(x,0,0,t) = A(x,0,0,t+dt), and A(x+v*dt,0,0,t) = A(x+v*dt,0,0,t+dt), so @A/@t at (x,0,0,t) = 0, and @A/@t at (X+v*dt,0,0,t+dt) = 0. At no time should there be an E = @A/@t experienced by the electron. Yet, as we saw above, if we change reference frames to that of the electron, both dA/dt and @A/@t are non-zero. This seems to indicate that the E experienced depends on velocity relative to the source of the A. If it is true that E depends on relative velocity with respect to the source of A, then we merely aim an electron beam at target "X" and it accelerates there with no energy applied. The torus could be a circular permanent magnet (with field fully enclosed) for that matter. Alternatively, if we assume that there is only one E at a point, then all motion can not be relative, because the results of the torus moving toward the electron differ from those of the electron moving toward the torus. Any idea how is this might be simply resolved? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:39:53 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 iB9NdgP5019408; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:39:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9Ndf34019399; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:39:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:39:41 -0800 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="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:47:07 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gold (Tom) and BEC-like Fusion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iB9NddP5019384 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56895 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 2:01 PM 12/9/4, Jones Beene wrote: >I'm sure more than a few vortex readers, perhaps everyone >except Frank Z, must think that anyone who suggests that >LENR fusion could extend all the way to the "impossible" >reaction He+He+He --> C must be, well... a little >"touched"... as my dear grandmother used to say to politely >indicate a pathology far more more severe. Not necessarily. In "THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS" I wrote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "From this it is determined that the face hole will pass a sphere of radius 0.2885 Å and the tetrahedral space will accommodate a sphere of radius 0.6118 Å. However, an H2 molecule can be placed across one axis of the tetrahedron with each atom partway through a face hole. In fact, the H2 atom could pass through the face holes with only an expansion of the bond length of 2*(.3200 -.2885) = .063 Å. This is an increase in bond length of about 2.5 percent." Elem. Bond Covalent Atomic Face Hole Tetrahedral Length Radius Radius Radius Space Radius (A) (A) (A) (A) (A) Ge 2.4498 1.22 1.52 0.1944 0.5123 Pt 2.7460 1.30 1.83 0.2854 0.6417 Ni 2.4916 1.15 1.62 0.2885 0.6118 Cu 2.5560 1.17 1.57 0.3057 0.6373 Pd 2.7511 1.28 1.79 0.3083 0.6653 Au 2.8841 1.34 1.79 0.3251 0.6993 Ag 2.8894 1.34 1.75 0.3282 0.7031 Al 2.8630 1.25 1.82 0.4030 0.7744 Ce 3.6500 1.65 2.70 0.4573 0.9309 Yb 3.8800 1.74 2.40 0.5001 1.0035 Ca 3.9470 1.74 2.23 0.5388 1.0509 Pb 3.5003 1.47 1.81 0.5509 1.0051 Sr 4.3020 1.91 2.45 0.5738 1.1319 Since hydrogen has a covalent radius of 0.32 A, it appears superficially that Pd, Cu, Ni, and Pt are the only reasonable candidates for the suggested anvil/piston mechanism. However, this table is only an approximation, and a detailed analysis of the crystal structure, utilizing the Schroedinger Equation, is required. It is especially noteworthy that Pt, Cu, and Au are relatively impervious to hydrogen adsorption at standard temperatures. The best candidates capable of both trapping the H2 in a face hole and also being capable of anvil pressure on the bond appear to be Nu, Cu, and Pd, but again, detailed analysis is required. Also, the more impervious elements might become active at a high temperature, especially Pt and Cu. Note also that above Al in the table, the H atom, having a radius of 0.79 Å, appears to readily fit into the tetrahedral space without orbital deformation." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Given sufficent loading, and the presence of H2 or D2 molecules in tetrahedaral spaces, it may possible, given a sufficient electrostatic gradient, for H3+ or D3+ molecules to momentarily form. Such molecules in the confines of a tetrahedral space would be susceptable to three-way electron catalysed fusion, and thus lithium formation. Not sure how much this might assist the notion of He+He+He -> C, but it does show a potential mechanism for 3-way fusion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 15:52:37 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 iB9NqTP5022516; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:52:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iB9NqRcb022498; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:52:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 15:52:27 -0800 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: Modern Vimanas Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:52:07 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <1102633295.41b8d94f14d22@www.highsurf.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56896 X-Loop: vortex-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 Rick. Well, they're gonna need something, we just agreed to sell Pakistan a brace of F16's. What the heck, it's not like we're arming up a dictatorship teetering on the edge of islamic rule with first strike capability against the worlds largest democracy... ..oh damn, I guess we are. Freedom is on the march! K. -----Original Message----- From: rick@highsurf.com [mailto:rick@highsurf.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 6:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Modern Vimanas Hmm... check the release date for the secret info - EOTW as we know it. Won't be enough time to put it to much use. - R. Quoting Terry Blanton : > Antigravity being tested in India? > > http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/12-04e-04.asp > > What's a Vimana? > > http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Vimanas.htm > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 16:07:52 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 iBA07Qrt008574; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:07:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBA07GWY008524; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:07:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:07:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l Subject: Re: Where is LENR? Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:06:23 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-220041238155930700@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220041238155930700@earthlink.net> 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 iBA06urt008434 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56897 X-Loop: vortex-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 Frederick Sparber's message of Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:59:30 -0600: Hi, [snip] >with traditional batteries. In a tr! > ue MacGyver-like tactic of using what is abundant to serve an unconventionally useful purpose, Houston is moving with his research in a direction that will most certainly fuel the future. " Aren't there were already fuel cells that use methane directly? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 18:23:27 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 iBA2N6rt012377; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:23:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBA2MwKN012271; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:22:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:22:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B908E8.30307@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 21:24:40 -0500 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 Subject: Re: Modern Vimanas 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/56898 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Freedom is on the march! > Choir: We're marching, marching to Shibboleth, With the Eagle and the Sword! We're praising Zion 'til her death, Until we meet our last reward! Men: Our Lord's reward! Women: Zion! Oh happy Zion! O'er wrapp'd, but not detained! Men: Lion, f'rocious Lion! His beard our mighty mane! Women: At First and Main! Men: Oh, we;ll go marching, marching to Omaha, With the Buckram and the Cord! Women: You'll hear us "boom" our State! Men: Ha, ha! As we cross the final ford! Women: The flaming Ford! Choir: Zion! Oh mighty Zion! Your bison now are dust! As your cornflakes rise "Gainst the rust-red skies, Then our blood requires us must Go ... Men: Marching, marching to Shibboleth, With the Eagle and the ... Women: The Buckram and the Cord! Men: Sword! Praising Zion 'til her death! Women: Ha, ha! Men: Until we eat our last reward! Women: The flaming Ford! Choir: Zion! Oh righteous Zion! There is no one to blame! For the homespun pies 'Neath the cracking skies Shall release the fulsome rain! Tenor: Shall release! Men: Shall release! Soprano: Shall release! Women: Shall release! Choir: Shall release the vinyl rein! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 9 18:24:08 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 iBA2Nxrt012713; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:23:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBA2NrHw012674; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:23:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:23:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41B90924.8080902@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 21:25:40 -0500 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: Modern Vimanas References: <41B72A52.9060100@rtpatlanta.com> <1102633295.41b8d94f14d22@www.highsurf.com> In-Reply-To: <1102633295.41b8d94f14d22@www.highsurf.com> 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/56899 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: rick@highsurf.com wrote: > <>Hmm... check the release date for the secret info - EOTW as we know it. End of the *old* world. Out with the old, in with the new! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 06:29:44 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 iBAETYCv014421; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:29:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAETNGB014323; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:29:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:29:23 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412510132751250@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: Can Zeolites (Molecular Sieves) Replace Palladium? Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:27:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940183decd761d43293455ebe46626c7fa2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.91 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56901 X-Loop: vortex-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 Many "Natural Zeolites" exchange Lithium Cations too. http://www.gracedavison.com/eusilica/Adsorbents/product/zeolite_molecular_sieve.htm Don't know for sure about He+He+He ----> Carbon in the Arizona- New Mexico Montmorillonite Clays though. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Many "Natural Zeolites" exchange Lithium Cations too.
 
 
Don't know for sure about He+He+He  ----> Carbon    in the Arizona- New Mexico
Montmorillonite Clays though.    :-)
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 06:31:46 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 iBAEU0xQ006917; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:31:41 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAEQ9cU004903; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:26:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:26:09 -0800 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, 10 Dec 2004 05:33:23 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought Resent-Message-ID: <9CEWYB.A.gMB.AIbuBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56900 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sometimes I just don't get anything right. >The link I posted to Nimtz illustrates >how this can be done ( my own work is unpublished or >I'd link you to it instead). The key issue remains, how do we >define velocity? Original: It could be defined, for a two way data transmission system, as repeated meaningful transmission of data x over distance d, and return in average time t of transmission t of a meaningful response message f(x), as v = t/(2d). Correction: Communication velocity of a two-way data transmission system could be defined as v = t/(2d) for transmission over straight-line distance d of varied data x_i and return of a modified verifiable response message f(x_i) in average transmission-response time t, where data x_i is not transmitted until receipt of f(x_(i-1)) is verified. The average time t would have to be for a large set of data transmissions {...,x_i,...}. Achieving FTL is then the condition v > c, or t < 2d/c. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 07:22:29 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 iBAFMJx8022874; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:22:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAFMIhF022858; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:22:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:22:18 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412510142051710@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: Can Zeolites (Molecular Sieves) Replace Palladium? Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:20:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402349fea7ac6da70a99dd31a8a0955f44350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.120.166 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56902 X-Loop: vortex-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 need to redo the Microwave Oven "Over-Unity Wet Bricks" experiments that I posted several years ago. :-) Ordinary common brick were oven dried then cooled and nuked in a microwave, no heat-up occurred. When soaked in well water and nuked, the heat-up was phenomenal. Running a current through them too? http://www.scientific.net/0-87849-940-7/157.htm "1. INTRODUCTION Montmorillonite clays have been known as inorganic ion-exchange materials showing high proton conductivity. They are composed of aluminosilicate layers stacked one above the other. Each layer has a small net negative charge due to isomorphous substitution of ions in the framework. This charge is compensated by interlayer hydrated cations, known as exchangeable counter cations. It is well known that montmorillonite can accommodate various types of compounds in its interlayer spaces to give an intercalation type of inclusion compounds. A number of papers resulted from the studies of electrical properties of montmorillonite and silica gel with absorbed water [1], properties of H+ exchanged montmorillonite clays equilibrated in air to give mono- and bi-layer hydrates [2], with swelling clays [3], etc. Electrical conductivity in these materials was found to be mainly protonic. Slade et al. [4] have measured conductivities and 1HNMR relaxation times for homoionic montmorillonite clays and found that interlayer conductivity is mainly protonic, too. In order to obtain materials that can be used for various applications, catalytic reactions especially, the addition of various compounds [5] and the incorporation of metal ions into pillared montmorillonite [6] or pillared clay surface [7] have been studied. " Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

I need to redo the Microwave Oven "Over-Unity  Wet Bricks" experiments that I posted
several years ago.   :-)
 
Ordinary common brick were oven dried then cooled and nuked in a microwave, no heat-up occurred.
When soaked in well water and nuked, the heat-up was phenomenal.
 
Running a current through them too?
 

http://www.scientific.net/0-87849-940-7/157.htm

"1. INTRODUCTION Montmorillonite clays have been known as inorganic ion-exchange materials showing high proton conductivity. They are composed of aluminosilicate layers stacked one above the other. Each layer has a small net negative charge due to isomorphous substitution of ions in the framework. This charge is compensated by interlayer hydrated cations, known as exchangeable counter cations. It is well known that montmorillonite can accommodate various types of compounds in its interlayer spaces to give an intercalation type of inclusion compounds. A number of papers resulted from the studies of electrical properties of montmorillonite and silica gel with absorbed water [1], properties of H+ exchanged montmorillonite clays equilibrated in air to give mono- and bi-layer hydrates [2], with swelling clays [3], etc. Electrical conductivity in these materials was found to be mainly protonic. Slade et al. [4] have measured conductivities and 1HNMR relaxation times for homoionic montmorillonite clays and found that interlayer conductivity is mainly protonic, too. In order to obtain materials that can be used for various applications, catalytic reactions especially, the addition of various compounds [5] and the incorporation of metal ions into pillared montmorillonite [6] or pillared clay surface [7] have been studied. "

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 08:58:39 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 iBAGwSCv026995; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:58:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAGwQHB026981; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:58:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:58:26 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008801c4ded9$07b21f80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Gold (Tom) and BEC-like Fusion Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:55:18 -0800 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: <3uciI.A.hlG.yWduBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56903 X-Loop: vortex-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 writes > In "THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS" I wrote: > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > "From this it is determined that the face hole will pass a sphere of radius > 0.2885 Å and the tetrahedral space will accommodate a sphere of radius > 0.6118 Å. However, an H2 molecule can be placed across one axis of the > tetrahedron with each atom partway through a face hole. In fact, the H2 > atom could pass through the face holes with only an expansion of the bond > length of 2*(.3200 -.2885) = .063 Å. This is an increase in bond length of > about 2.5 percent." > > Elem. Bond Covalent Atomic Face Hole Tetrahedral > Length Radius Radius Radius Space Radius > (A) (A) (A) (A) (A) > Ge 2.4498 1.22 1.52 0.1944 0.5123 > Pt 2.7460 1.30 1.83 0.2854 0.6417 > Ni 2.4916 1.15 1.62 0.2885 0.6118 > Cu 2.5560 1.17 1.57 0.3057 0.6373 > Pd 2.7511 1.28 1.79 0.3083 0.6653 > Au 2.8841 1.34 1.79 0.3251 0.6993 > Ag 2.8894 1.34 1.75 0.3282 0.7031 > Al 2.8630 1.25 1.82 0.4030 0.7744 > Ce 3.6500 1.65 2.70 0.4573 0.9309 > Yb 3.8800 1.74 2.40 0.5001 1.0035 > Ca 3.9470 1.74 2.23 0.5388 1.0509 > Pb 3.5003 1.47 1.81 0.5509 1.0051 > Sr 4.3020 1.91 2.45 0.5738 1.1319 Horace, Consipuously absent from the list is W (Tungsten) which has been implicated in a number of OU experiments. Apparently W is not within the correct parameters for the AEH? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 12:50:49 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 iBAKoYCv029120; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:50:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAKoVgq029089; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:50:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:50:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:47:22 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Superluminal cavity resonances was RE: Fast-food for thought In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56904 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > Communication velocity of a two-way data transmission system could be > defined as v = t/(2d) for transmission over straight-line distance d of > varied data x_i and return of a modified verifiable response message f(x_i) > in average transmission-response time t, where data x_i is not transmitted > until receipt of f(x_(i-1)) is verified. The average time t would have to > be for a large set of data transmissions {...,x_i,...}. > > Achieving FTL is then the condition v > c, or t < 2d/c. > Here is a proposal for a natural measure of FTL messaging. I say it is natural because it does not require a response message. The relevant variables are: 1) T - communication time. The time it takes to send and receive a message. 2) d - the distance between the receiver and the sender. Each of these constitute a messages: a.Group velocity b.Phase velocity c.Shock velocity (Nagel's message) The signal speed for each is then d/Tg, d/Tp, d/Tc. One would need to build a distant receiver which is capable of interpreting all three signals. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:06:05 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 iBAL5rCv001079; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:05:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAL5pwS001045; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:05:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:05:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:02:09 -0500 Subject: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56905 X-Loop: vortex-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 I made a few typos and misused some terms. Harry ---- Here is a proposal for a natural measure of FTL messaging. I say it is natural because it does not require a response message. The relevant variables are: 1) T - communication time. The time it takes to send and receive a message. 2) d - the distance between the receiver and the sender. Each of these constitute a message: a.Group velocity b.Phase velocity c.Shock velocity (Nagel's message) The messaging speed for each is then d/Tg, d/Tp, d/Ts. One would need to build a distant receiver which is capable of interpreting all three messages. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:16:27 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 iBALGECv004853; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:16:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBALGBpI004826; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:16:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:16:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041210161314.03a08c00@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:15:59 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Science magazine comments on DoE review 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/56906 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Science commented on the DoE review, but I do not know what they said because I am not a subscriber. I got the attached Google Alert. If anyone here is a subscriber, please let us know the gist of the article. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Google Alert for: cold fusion This article appears in the following Subject Collections: Science Magazine (subscription) - USA A Department of Energy (DOE) review of "cold fusion" has generated some heat but very little light on the controversial subject. ... http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5703/1873a From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:28:42 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 iBALSZx8000523; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:28:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBALSY7E000514; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:28:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:28:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41BA075B.2D5627F@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:30:19 -0700 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: Science magazine comments on DoE review References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041210161314.03a08c00@pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56907 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: The Nov. issue has an article about ITER, but not cold fusion. I suspect the article about the DoE review is in the Dec. issue that has not arrived yet. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Science commented on the DoE review, but I do not know what they said > because I am not a subscriber. I got the attached Google Alert. If anyone > here is a subscriber, please let us know the gist of the article. > > - Jed > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Google Alert for: cold fusion > > This article appears in the following Subject Collections: > Science Magazine (subscription) - USA > > A Department of Energy (DOE) review of "cold fusion" has generated some > heat but very little light on the controversial subject. ... > > http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5703/1873a From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:39:24 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 iBALcsCv013060; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:38:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBALcfW3012926; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:38:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:38:41 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041210163539.03a02e30@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:38:07 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Science magazine comments on DoE review In-Reply-To: <41BA075B.2D5627F@ix.netcom.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041210161314.03a08c00@pop.mindspring.com> <41BA075B.2D5627F@ix.netcom.com> 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/56908 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: Edmund Storms wrote: >The Nov. issue has an article about ITER, but not cold fusion. I >suspect the article about the DoE review is in the Dec. issue that has >not arrived yet. The on-line guide tells me: "You do not have access to this item: Full Text : Seife, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY: Outlook for Cold Fusion Is Still Chilly, Science 2004 306: 1873 You are on the site via Free Public Access." If you are a print edition subscriber, I presume you can see the online edition as well. As I said, the link is: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5703/1873a - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 13:54:20 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 iBALsEx8010477; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:54:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBALsBKk010445; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:54:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:54:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:51:07 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Magnets Meddle With Melting To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iBALs8x8010420 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56909 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 don't have subscription, but I noticed another interesting headline in the current issue of Science. Could this phenomenon be used as a source of energy? Harry ------ http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/ 10 Dec. Magnets Meddle With Melting Physicists puzzle over finding that a magnetic field raises the melting point of ice.   From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:19:38 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 iBAMJRCv024395; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:19:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAMJOck024377; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:19:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:19:24 -0800 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, 10 Dec 2004 13:26:31 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gold (Tom) and BEC-like Fusion Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56910 X-Loop: vortex-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 8:55 AM 12/10/4, Jones Beene wrote: >Consipuously absent from the list is W (Tungsten) which has >been implicated in a number of OU experiments. > >Apparently W is not within the correct parameters for the >AEH? No, I simply analysed only face centered cubic (fcc) lattices because they covered what I was looking for at the time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:35:05 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 iBAMYvx8018544; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:34:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAMYtFq018524; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:34:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:34:55 -0800 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, 10 Dec 2004 13:42:15 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56911 X-Loop: vortex-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 4:02 PM 12/10/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Sorry I made a few typos and misused some terms. > >Harry > >---- > >Here is a proposal for a natural measure of FTL messaging. >I say it is natural because it does not require a response message. > >The relevant variables are: >1) T - communication time. The time it takes to send and receive a message. >2) d - the distance between the receiver and the sender. > > >Each of these constitute a message: > >a.Group velocity >b.Phase velocity >c.Shock velocity (Nagel's message) > >The messaging speed for each is then d/Tg, d/Tp, d/Ts. > >One would need to build a distant receiver which is capable >of interpreting all three messages. > >Harry You seem to have missed much of the prior discussion. None of the above velocities should average above c. The timing problem for the above leads to an alternate data path problem or a clock synchronzation problem, and neither is mentioned or solved. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:51:16 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 iBAMexCv032306; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:40:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAMes4D032251; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:40:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:40:54 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412510224015250@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, December 10, 2004 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:40:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d818b89e557c2fe6dc1ae8a6bf3e9967f250e5dc5ab6323efb350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.15.87 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56912 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: 12/10/2004 1:36:26 PM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, December 10, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 10 Dec 04 Washington, DC 1. HUBBLE: NRC CALLS FOR SENDING A SHUTTLE MISSION TO REPAIR IT. The problem was never with the space telescope. The problem from the start has been the Shuttle. Mankind's greatest scientific instrument was built under a NASA decree that anything that goes into space must go there by way of the shuttle. That meant Hubble had to be put in low-Earth orbit, which is far from ideal for observations. Moreover, Hubble was designed for routine shuttle maintenance visits. NASA said shuttle launches would be weekly, but five or six times a year was the best they could do. After Columbia, O'Keefe decided it's too dangerous for astronauts to service Hubble, we'll have to use robots. But if astronauts can't go to Hubble, how they gonna go to Mars? This week, the National Research Council said it's not likely that NASA could complete development of a robotic mission before Hubble breaks down, and called for a mission of the rebuilt shuttle to repair Hubble. Could we be seeing the influence of the astronaut lobby? Like who needs astronauts if a robot can fix Hubble? 2. SNAFLU: YOU READ THE WALL STREET JOURNAL FOR MEDICAL ADVICE? The Bush Administration announced Wednesday it intends to buy 1.2 million doses of flu vaccine from Germany. If you can't wait, the WSJ gave its list of options last week. FluMist was their top pick, but you gotta be under 50 to get it. I don't remember ever being under 50. After hand washing, WSJ lists Oscillococcinum. WSJ checked with a "research methodologist" at Sloan-Kettering. He said it probably doesn't prevent flu but may cut its duration by 6 hours. Six hours! They can tell that? WN bought a 6-dose carton, a three-day supply. Of what? Boiron, the maker, says it's from duck livers, but the homeopathic dilution is listed as 200C. That's gotta be a record. It's also impossible. Maybe they could help Balco with a homeopathic performance enhancer. 3. COLDER-THAN-EVER FUSION: THIS BOOK WON'T END THE CONTROVERSY. Several cold-fusion proponents took the trouble this week to send WN the announcement of a new book, The Rebirth of Cold Fusion: Real Science, Real Hope, Real Energy by Steven Krivit and Nadine Winocur. It was clearly timed to coincide with release of the DOE report. The book drew praise from Arthur C. Clarke, Brian Josephson, and Martin Fleischmann, among others. It's not in the bookstores here yet, but Amazon lists it. The authors are editors of New Energy Times, which calls itself "Your best source for cold fusion news and information." Krivit has a bachelor's degree in business management, Winocur maintains a private psychotherapy practice. They've got the right qualifications. 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 Dec 10 14:51:19 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 iBAMp0Cv002554; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:51:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAMoucZ002516; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:50:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:50:56 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <017801c4df0a$3e8b4c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Magnets Meddle With Melting Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:47:35 -0800 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: <8yMImD.A.Nn.OhiuBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56913 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: Harry Veeder writes, > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/ > 10 Dec. Magnets Meddle With Melting > Physicists puzzle over finding that a magnetic field raises the melting point of ice. > Could this phenomenon be used as a source of energy? Probably not unless there was substantial assymetry. After all, "pressure" (or lack thereof) can alter the melting point, but it is fully reversible with no nonreciprocal element, therefore no chance for OU. >From a previous post: "Vortexians seem to be always looking for something new which fits into the idea of nonreciprocality : such that a source of potential energy (i.e. magnet or static field) + efficient means of modulating potential energy + nonreciprocal element = OU" Of course a magnetic field could be efficiently modulated by simply spinning the magnet, but it will now help unless the is the *nonreciprocal element* in the physical property. The "information" provided by any Maxwell's Demon type-device provides one generalized notable feature: the characteristic of classical nonreciprocality and asymmetry. Devices like gyroscopes, Hall effect devices, Faraday effect devices, and microwave isolators are examples of classical nonreciprocality, but it has been difficult to fashion an energy device out of them because the asymmetry is miniscule. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 14:52:14 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 iBAMq3Cv002992; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:52:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBAMq1XG002963; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:52:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:52:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:48:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56914 X-Loop: vortex-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 at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 4:02 PM 12/10/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >> Sorry I made a few typos and misused some terms. >> >> Harry >> >> ---- >> >> Here is a proposal for a natural measure of FTL messaging. >> I say it is natural because it does not require a response message. >> >> The relevant variables are: >> 1) T - communication time. The time it takes to send and receive a message. >> 2) d - the distance between the receiver and the sender. >> >> >> Each of these constitute a message: >> >> a.Group velocity >> b.Phase velocity >> c.Shock velocity (Nagel's message) >> >> The messaging speed for each is then d/Tg, d/Tp, d/Ts. >> >> One would need to build a distant receiver which is capable >> of interpreting all three messages. >> >> Harry > > > You seem to have missed much of the prior discussion. None of the above > velocities should average above c. The timing problem for the above leads > to an alternate data path problem or a clock synchronzation problem, and > neither is mentioned or solved. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > Thank you for responding to my revised post. Synchronisation is done beforehand. e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's location. Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's location. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 15:40:04 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 iBANdhCv015973; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:39:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBANdeQ5015937; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:39:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:39:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004125102320390@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@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Science magazine comments on DoE review Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:20:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d8b12f458be12e8a96fe42d9c5baf5aa26bca2f000fc72cd8d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.15.87 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56915 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: Dec. 09. 2004 Vortex, Yes, the online Science site has the article by Seife. If you read most of Steven Krivit's New Energy Time's reporting on the DoE report, then reading the Science article would seem a simplified version. I receive the print version much later if lucky. There is also the picture of the Four Applicants for the review: Forever the target of Robert Park? : ) -ak- > [Original Message] > From: Jed Rothwell > To: > Date: 12/10/2004 1:38:54 PM > Subject: Re: Science magazine comments on DoE review >Full Text : Seife, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY: Outlook for Cold Fusion Is Still Chilly, Science 2004 306: 1873 > You are on the site via Free Public Access." > If you are a print edition subscriber, I presume you can see the online edition as well. As I said, the link is: From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 15:56:36 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 iBANuPCv021057; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:56:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBANuNKr021048; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:56:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:56:23 -0800 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, 10 Dec 2004 15:03:41 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... Resent-Message-ID: <4TbFqD.A.0IF.mejuBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56916 X-Loop: vortex-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 5:48 PM 12/10/4, Harry Veeder wrote: >Thank you for responding to my revised post. > >Synchronisation is done beforehand. >e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's location. >Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's location. Atomic clocks eh? Hard to get delta t accurate to nanoseconds or even microseconds from the difference between absolute times on two clocks. You still have no reason to expect the average communication velocity will be faster than c. Even the subject article shows that. It is of no use to measure a few photons at faster than c when most are slower than c. It is the *average* communications turn around time that is important. That's why I included it in my definition. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 10 16:48:56 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 iBB0mqx8015620; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:48:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBB0moaj015602; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:48:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:48:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 19:45:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Magnets Meddle With Melting From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <017801c4df0a$3e8b4c80$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56917 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Harry Veeder writes, > >> http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/ > >> 10 Dec. Magnets Meddle With Melting >> Physicists puzzle over finding that a magnetic field > raises the melting point of ice. > >> Could this phenomenon be used as a source of energy? > > Probably not unless there was substantial assymetry. After > all, "pressure" (or lack thereof) can alter the melting > point, but it is fully reversible with no nonreciprocal > element, therefore no chance for OU. When I read the headline I had this mind: the ambient temperature is greater than 0 deg. C, but the temperature of the ice remains at 0 deg. C just with a magnetic field. That would be most unusual, but I will have to read the paper to find out. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 13:11:16 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 iBBLB90s011859; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:11:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBBLAWg2011659; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:10:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:10:32 -0800 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: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:21:09 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412111621.09565.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56918 X-Loop: vortex-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 10 December 2004 19:03, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 5:48 PM 12/10/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >Thank you for responding to my revised post. > > > >Synchronisation is done beforehand. > >e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's location. > >Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's location. > > Atomic clocks eh? Hard to get delta t accurate to nanoseconds or even > microseconds from the difference between absolute times on two clocks. > > You still have no reason to expect the average communication velocity will > be faster than c. Even the subject article shows that. It is of no use to > measure a few photons at faster than c when most are slower than c. It is > the *average* communications turn around time that is important. That's > why I included it in my definition. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner Hello Listers I would like to say that IMHO any photons actually measured at greater that 'c' would be enough to shake the foundations of the Einstein religion to its very foundations. And I do mean .....ANY photons! Of course there is the question of using 'c' limited calibration tools. Standing Bear Off Topic There is a website around that mentions macroscopic tunneling similar to quantum tunneling in electronics. Web author claims it is possible that hardware can use this principle to send objects of any size literally out of known space to tunnel and appear somewhere else. I think where would be a very good question if that object is a ship. A passenger on that ship might like to know when and if he/she were coming home. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 16:26:44 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 iBC0Qd0s006847; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:26:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBC0Qa3o006824; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:26:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:26:36 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=6I5H9oGlkMar966ua+wI8cboNGQmpRO+CFxmEhQczdFK5607yrf0ISri05MZeTyIqbwgcWb0244XVNdQwCsizADgnR/bgNR4LdtyYuo+oRPjUHtIHLjB+dlzbzxIs9MTxF/yZqMJj5u91hl1j/TD5f3UtE25+S2OOU9R5LXqR8U= ; Message-ID: <20041212002635.8632.qmail@web12403.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:26:35 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... 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/56919 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harry Veeder wrote: > Synchronisation is done beforehand. > e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's > location. > Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's > location. Problems arise here, due to relativistic effects. If you move one of the clocks, its time will be different than that of the unmoved clock, due to its having moved at some velocity to get to its new location. It won't be off by much, but it will be enough to cause problems for ultraprecise measurements. --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 17:24:40 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 iBC1OXtH006122; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:24:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBC1OD5w006051; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:24:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:24:13 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=l5aapidpWvRe1X/VXc29shDfFuhZ/AQCtaBPrFnMH7h6I2UAWHbM8ZN8KwTuKrkcXMoHvcgpfV/pmFyl8J8cvYcNtnVO4ToS/faob3YwUgbRMk4rSbpkl3/JjhBnSmiQquPonypo62lWOoHgf9RabkCwbE3VYbeokGYwuYnrycY= ; Message-ID: <20041212012410.34456.qmail@web12404.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:24:10 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <200412111621.09565.rockcast@earthlink.net> 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/56920 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- Standing Bear wrote: > Hello Listers > I would like to say that IMHO any photons > actually measured at greater > that 'c' would be enough to shake the foundations of > the Einstein religion > to its very foundations. And I do mean .....ANY > photons! My thoughts on this would be that if some photon moves from point A to point B at a speed greater than C, then it doesn't really matter if the bulk of photons take longer to get there...if it moves FTL, then the problem is simply getting whatever is measuring to trigger off of the photons which arrive first, and reply using the same system, with a receiver at the opposite end measuring for the first, FTL photons as well. Then two way FTL communications should be possible, Feynman's path quantum mechanics notwithstanding. Personally, I find the whole business of a photon taking every available path to the target as being a little ridiculous. If I aim a laser pointer at the wall, it is obvious which way the photons are going. They are not going to go to the far reaches of the universe, then travel back in time by just the right amount to get to the spot on the wall and make it 'average out' to c. If you can't measure these, but must just assume that they are their because some probability mathematics says so, then I question why everyone is so against something which, although it cannot be measured directly by currently known means, is a lot more sensible than most of QM, the idea of an absolute frame of reference. Read about advanced/retarded waves for some more 'good stuff'. As I understand it, the problem arose from some infinities showing up in the math of photons being emitted from a source, had to do with the recoil effect on the emitter. So, to solve this, it was proposed that two waves are involved, not just one, a retarded wave which moves from emitter to absorber, and an 'advanced' wave which moves from absorber to emitter, but in time-reversed manner. When I first heard this, my first thought was, well, lets just say it would give this email close to an R rating. Now it is interesting that the whole issue of causality is under severe threat by these theories, and everyone feels its ok. But whenever someone brings up FTL communication, which according to relativity should threaten causality, everyone balks. Why? As near as I can tell, it is because true FTL communication would allow us to determine if causality-violating things actually do take place, which further could imply that the unobservable elements of QM become observable, and thus face potential refutation. If you get real, useful FTL, you risk losing a good chunk of both relativistic theory and QM. --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 17:28:16 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 iBC1S9tH007428; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:28:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBC1S8A3007406; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:28:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:28:08 -0800 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: <200412111621.09565.rockcast@earthlink.net> References: <200412111621.09565.rockcast@earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:27:52 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... 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/56921 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >Standing Bear posted > > >Off Topic > There is a website around that mentions macroscopic tunneling similar >to quantum tunneling in electronics. Web author claims it is possible that >hardware can use this principle to send objects of any size literally out of >known space to tunnel and appear somewhere else. I think where would >be a very good question if that object is a ship. A passenger on that >ship might like to know when and if he/she were coming home. IMHO, this isn't off topic at all. It has been asserted that tunneling can lead to fusion. If anyone has any insights into how this might be accomplished, I'd like to hear about it. As I have mentioned previously, Dr. Misho Kaku has gone on extensively about using the power of a galaxy to send someone through a worm hole. However, as one of my engineer friends pointed out, the aforementioned holes are about big enough to accommodate a subatomic particle. IMHO, the problem isn't putting someone through this comic meat grinder, it's putting them back together again. With regard to going over C, IMHO, the biggest problem is measuring it. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 18:13:09 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 iBC2Cs0s006260; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:12:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBC2Cpuj006242; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:12:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:12:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=n8ee9PI0ZrTpPZty3dxNXc8w77T17t7JZ1zpfbjs/vC3Lex2rhjgyygVJldKvdCn90xfQGXRdjCLXMJkjEQeB9GfxF+yhndEEpg6anK5we8pv+hoWN57S2gud6wLG+KMe/+23sw68oeM7iJiTT7/mC3ZSUPIdY2sp46P2bRQGDs= ; Message-ID: <20041212021249.66374.qmail@web12405.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:12:49 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Superluminal and relativity 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/56922 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: Hello all, The recent discussions of FTL signalling and its repercussions is interesting to me, and is something which has troubled my mind for many years. After studying special relativity, particularly the implications of relativity of simultaneity and the rejection of absolute separation of past and future for spatially displaced observers, and how all this relates to objects moving with speeds greater than c, I feel some new thought on this is needed. By now we all know about the 'twin paradox' and Dingle's questioning of the validity of special relativity on grounds that equivalence of all frames of reference should make both twins be younger and older at the same time when they meet up later on, and the subsequent explanation provided by conventional physics as to why one is truly younger and one is truly older. The issue gets a little more complex if we change the setting a bit. Consider a particle which is created without experiencing acceleration. Say, a precursor particle exists, and undergoes decay into daughter particles, one of which is moving at nearly c upon creation, it did not accelerate there. As far as this particle is concerned, it did not feel any acceleration whatsoever, it is merely there. It also does not know that it is moving at a highly relativistic speed. Let us call this particle A. Now A is moving along at 0.99c with respect to an observer, call it O. O was moving at the same speed as the precursor particle which created A. We can't say that O's frame is at rest, due to relativity. But we can illuminate things a bit with careful use of 'with repect to', abbreviated WRT. Let us say that A emits a particle B which moves at -0.99c WRT A, as seen by O. Let us restrict ourselves to a 1+1 universe with only X and T coordinates. In these conditions, B is now moving at the same speed as O...it has come to a 'stop'. B turns around, and moves back to A at speed slighly greater than 0.99c WRT O, to overtake and meet back up with A. A will see, due to the relativistic solution to the twin paradox, that B is younger than himself...or will he? If everyone meets up in the end to compare notes, things might not look right. According to O, left behind at the precursor point, A suddenly appeared and was moving at 0.99c, and thusly aging much slower than O due to clock retardation. A then emitted B, which slowed to rest WRT O, and thus began aging faster than A. B then accelerated back up to overtake and merge with A again. B should be older than A, according to O, unless the time spend at a speed greater than A's to overtake cancels the effect out. Does it? I don't know, it would probably take a good bit of spacetime-diagramming to know precisely. It would have to have B aging so slowly during the overtake that A would age enough to be truly older than B upon rearrival. A on the other hand, sees B move away from himself, and thus age much slower. B then turns around, and accelerates to overtake and merge with A. A should always see B to age less than himself, and on the overtake, B should be seen to age MUCH less. So what happens? Do things during the critical overtake arrange themselves such that according to both O and A, B is younger than A? Or do O and A disagree? You begin to get a picture of how complex the issues are. What happens if we have a 1+1 spacetime with a topology such that the X direction loops back upon itself? Meaning, go in the X (or -X) direction long enough, and you end up back where you started. If you do this, you never have to have any overtake to let A and B meet back up, it just happens because of the way spacetime is topologically conditioned. I am not talking of a gravitational 'warp' of some kind, just a closed universe. Some will likely argue that GR is required to understand this...I don't know. It would seem that A could continue on its merry way, only to eventually meet back up with B. Since B was seen from A to move away at relativistic speed, A should see B is younger than himself. However, according to O, B slowed down, and thus A should be the younger one, for he was moving much faster than B was. Who is right? Well, I suppose you could argue that since the topology loops back on itself that according to A, B changed direction, and so did O. But they would always be moving relativistically WRT A, and thus should appear younger. B (or O) will see that A changed direction. Thus, A should be youngest according to both, since A was always moving at relativistic speed. In the conventional twin paradox, we have one twin who can be argued to have taken the TRULY longer path through spacetime, and thus be TRULY younger. But in this case of looped topology, you can't really say that. The whole thing is symmetric from either point of view. Anyone have any thoughts on this? How is this solved? CAN it be solved? One way would be to define some frame of reference (not necessarily A's or B's or O's) to be absolute, and then the symmetry is automatically broken. But of course, this is in violation to the postulates of special relativity, and is said to be 'unnecessarily complex'. One wonders what is more complex... --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 11 19:30:30 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 iBC3UJ0s028917; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:30:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBC3UH56028843; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:30:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 19:30:17 -0800 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, 11 Dec 2004 18:37:35 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravimagnetism Resent-Message-ID: <1u3-CC.A.fCH.Jt7uBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56923 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Correction follows. I posted the following table of the EM-GK Isomorphism, Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg c c_g = c Table 3: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table The value of mu_g_0 is wrong, and is still based on Jefimenko's estimate of the speed of gravity c_g. Nothing like cut-paste to make errors. The corrected table follows. Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 9.329597x10^-27 m/kg c c_g = c Table 3: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 05:02:42 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 iBCD2atH013782; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:02:37 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCD2VQM013739; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:02:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:02:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004120121213870@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: Gravity & Oscillating Charge Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 06:01:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94045a5d2f5300e77076b72a05102d6afe0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.254 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56924 X-Loop: vortex-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 Horace Heffner wrote: > > Jefimenko demonstrates that B, and thus K, are > merely computed quantities, secondary quantities that necessarily follow > from the only true causes, the interaction of charge upon charge or mass > upon mass. This provides strong evidence for the "real" existence of K, as > "real" as B, i.e. that an (apparent) K can be observed experimentally to > the same extent B can, though it is much more difficult to observe due to > the extreme orders of magnitude involved. In other words, if causal > electromagnetism is correct, then the causal gravity is also necessarily > correct. The isomorphism holds by necessity because the full set of > postulates have already been experimentally verified. However, if it turns > out that causal electromagnetism is incorrect, and B exists in a real > sense, then it does not follow that K can (any longer) be assumed to exist > on the basis that it is merely a computed quantity, like energy. > > B and E are variable when the velocity of the observer is taken into > account. This magnitude dependence on observer velocity is fully accounted > for by causality treatment, because the relative velocity of the observer > merely changes the apparent retardation. This aspect even more fully > justifies Jefimenko's treatment of B as an artifact of charge motion. > The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark or electron inertial mass) oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the electron-positron. This suggests that charge q is a time-variant property where the current loops (particles) act as a resonant LC "Tank Circuit" where L= 2(pi)R*mu-o and C = 2(pi)R*epsilon-o. The Displacement Current I = C dV/dt. Thus the energy E "periodically stored"in the inductance (of space)= 1/2 LI^2 and that in the capacitance (of space) = 1/2 CV^2. >From this, one can conclude that particles contribute both a (Relativistically Invariant) oscillating electrostatic charge q = CV =1.602e-19 Coulombs, as well as an oscillating Magnetic Dipole Field that act as point poles that exert a relativistically dilated gamma (gamma = 3.26e18 for the quark and 2.0e21 for the electron) 1/R^2 field of force on one another the same as an oscillating dumb-bell or radio antenna. IOW, there is a "Hypocharge" of q/gamma = 7.8e-41 Coulombs for the electron-positron, and 4.9e-38 Coulombs for each of the three quarks in a proton-antiproton. Hence the Magnetic Gravity Force Fg between like particles = 1.0e-7* (qc/gamma)^2/R^2 newtons, but, the Undilated Electrostatic Force, Fes = kq^2/R^2 is 42 orders of magnitude greater for the electrons and 37 orders of magnitude greater for the quarks. Since our Electromagnetic World is in a different reference frame, only the particles "see" the gravity force. AFAIK one can only calculate the Gravity Field Properties. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> Jefimenko demonstrates that B, and thus K, are
> merely computed quantities, secondary quantities that necessarily follow
> from the only true causes, the interaction of charge upon charge or mass
> upon mass.  This provides strong evidence for the "real" existence of K, as
> "real" as B, i.e. that an (apparent) K can be observed experimentally to
> the same extent B can, though it is much more difficult to observe due to
> the extreme orders of magnitude involved.  In other words, if causal
> electromagnetism is correct, then the causal gravity is also necessarily
> correct.  The isomorphism holds by necessity because the full set of
> postulates have already been experimentally verified.  However, if it turns
> out that causal electromagnetism is incorrect, and B exists in a real
> sense, then it does not follow that K can (any longer) be assumed to exist
> on the basis that it is merely a computed quantity, like energy.
>
> B and E are variable when the velocity of the observer is taken into
> account.  This magnitude dependence on observer velocity is fully accounted
> for by causality treatment, because the relative velocity of the observer
> merely changes the apparent retardation.  This aspect even more fully
> justifies Jefimenko's treatment of B as an artifact of charge motion.
>
The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark or electron inertial mass)
oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the electron-positron.
 
This suggests that charge q is a time-variant property where the current loops (particles) act as a resonant
LC "Tank Circuit" where L= 2(pi)R*mu-o and C = 2(pi)R*epsilon-o.
The Displacement Current  I = C dV/dt.  Thus the energy E "periodically stored"in the inductance (of space)= 1/2 LI^2 and
that in the capacitance (of space) = 1/2 CV^2.
 
From this, one can conclude that particles contribute both a (Relativistically Invariant)  oscillating electrostatic charge q = CV 
=1.602e-19 Coulombs, as well as an oscillating Magnetic Dipole Field that act as point poles that exert a relativistically
dilated gamma (gamma = 3.26e18 for the quark and 2.0e21 for the electron) 1/R^2 field of force on one another the same
as an oscillating dumb-bell or radio antenna.
 
IOW, there is a "Hypocharge" of q/gamma = 7.8e-41 Coulombs for the electron-positron, and
4.9e-38 Coulombs for each of the three quarks in a proton-antiproton.
 
Hence the Magnetic Gravity Force Fg between like particles = 1.0e-7* (qc/gamma)^2/R^2   newtons,
but, the Undilated Electrostatic Force, Fes = kq^2/R^2 is  42 orders of magnitude greater for the electrons
and 37 orders of magnitude greater for the quarks.
 
Since our Electromagnetic World is in a different reference frame, only the particles "see"
the gravity force. AFAIK one can only calculate the Gravity Field Properties.  :-)
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 05:38:26 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 iBCDcJ0s008554; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:38:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCDcHE0008531; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:38:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:38:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412012123651460@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" Cc: "Colin Quinney" Subject: Re: Gravity & Oscillating Charge Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 06:36:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b094c132607de67bf1c6e2c41c2b064f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.20 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56925 X-Loop: vortex-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 For the adventurous the dilated quark frequency is about 3.1 MegaHz and the dilated electron frequency is 8.5 Hz. Easy to cob up a current loop "Oscillating Hertzian Dipole" for these frequencies to see if they attract or repel the earth. Or make a pair of them to see how much "gravity-like force" they exert on one another (same reference frame). Robert Forward told me he was in contact with a group doing such an experiment in the early 1980s when he was beating the bushes on a contract he had with NASA to look for new propulsion technology. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

For the adventurous the dilated quark frequency is about 3.1 MegaHz and
the dilated electron frequency is 8.5 Hz.
 
Easy to cob up a current loop "Oscillating Hertzian Dipole" for these frequencies to
see if they attract or repel the earth. Or make a pair of them to see how much
"gravity-like force" they exert on one another (same reference frame).
 
Robert Forward told me he was in contact with a group doing such an experiment in the early 1980s
when he was beating the bushes on a contract he had with NASA to look for
new propulsion technology.
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 10:21:48 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 iBCILhtH021255; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 10:21:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCILdUf021217; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 10:21:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 10:21:39 -0800 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, 12 Dec 2004 09:28:57 -0900 To: "vortex-l" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravity & Oscillating Charge Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56926 X-Loop: vortex-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 6:01 AM 12/12/4, Frederick Sparber wrote: >The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark >or electron inertial mass) >oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the electron-positron. > Do you have a reference on this? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 11:32:52 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 iBCJWY0s029583; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:32:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCJWPcD029524; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:32:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:32:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:32:22 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: test message To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <4eb934fa48.4fa484eb93@ncf.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004) Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-language: en Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en Priority: normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56927 X-Loop: vortex-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 vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 11:40:12 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 iBCJdn0s000571; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCJdkO9000513; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:39:39 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: unsubscribe To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <495694c924.4c92449569@ncf.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: en Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-Accept-Language: en Priority: normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56928 X-Loop: vortex-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 vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 11:46:00 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 iBCJjn0s002296; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:45:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCJjk0K002265; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:45:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:45:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:45:45 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: subscribe To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <49baf4f056.4f05649baf@ncf.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004) Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-language: en Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en Priority: normal Resent-Message-ID: <6_Hep.A.Vj.p_JvBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56929 X-Loop: vortex-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 vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 12:19:52 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 iBCKJi0s013889; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:19:44 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCKJgYX013871; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:19:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:19:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412012191815190@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: Gravity & Oscillating Charge Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:18:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404968dccd7588d911645cc4361a180d68350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.126 Resent-Message-ID: <6-uG3D.A.rYD.dfKvBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56930 X-Loop: vortex-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 is derived simply by: c/2(pi)R Where R = kq^2/E David Bergman and cohorts have a similar model (later), but, we are at odds on several points. http://www.commonsensescience.org. Frederick > [Original Message] > From: > To: vortex-l > Date: 12/12/04 12:21:41 PM > Subject: Re: Gravity & Oscillating Charge > > At 6:01 AM 12/12/4, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > >The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark > >or electron inertial mass) > >oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the electron-positron. > > > > > Do you have a reference on this? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 14:02:46 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 iBCM2gtH020282; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:02:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCM2fti020262; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:02:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:02:41 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:02:32 EST Subject: Re: Gravity & Oscillating Charge To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8_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/56931 X-Loop: vortex-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_2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/12/2004 1:22:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark > >or electron inertial mass) > >oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the > electron-positron. > > > Don't forget the Compton frequency of the electron. It is close to the numbers you mention. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html Frank Z --part1_2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/12/2004 1:22:= 48 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:

The "Trapped Photon Energy Loop= s or Disks" that make up a particle (quark
>or electron inertial mass)
>oscillates at 1.0e25 Hz for the quark, and 1.7e22 Hz for the electron-po= sitron.
>


Don't forget the Compton frequency of the electron.  It is close to the= numbers you mention.

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

Frank Z --part1_2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 14:14:00 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 iBCMDn0s021937; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:13:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCMDlIk021896; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:13:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:13:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <12f.524c8de1.2eee1c8f@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:13:35 EST Subject: Fwd: Gravity & Oscillating Charge To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_12f.524c8de1.2eee1c8f_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/56932 X-Loop: vortex-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_12f.524c8de1.2eee1c8f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_12f.524c8de1.2eee1c8f_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <1a9.2d311069.2eee1927@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:59:03 EST Subject: Re: Gravity & Oscillating Charge To: fjsparber@earthlink.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_12f.524c8de1.2eee1927_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 --part2_12f.524c8de1.2eee1927_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/12/2004 3:20:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes: > >>The "Trapped Photon Energy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark > >>or electron inertial mass) > I did a similar analysis. No one including IE would publish it. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html Frank Z --part2_12f.524c8de1.2eee1927_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/12/2004 3:20:= 22 PM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:

>>The "Trapped Photon Ene= rgy Loops or Disks" that make up a particle (quark
>>or electron inertial mass)


I did a similar analysis.  No one including IE would publish it.

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

Frank Z --part2_12f.524c8de1.2eee1927_boundary-- --part1_12f.524c8de1.2eee1c8f_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 15:36:07 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 iBCNZv0s015149; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:35:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBCNZt1Y015138; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:35:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:35:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <023501c4e0a2$affe0300$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <2b.683ac4e7.2eee19f8@aol.com> Subject: OT : Gravity & Oscillating Charge Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:31:21 -0800 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/56933 X-Loop: vortex-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 Z writes, > Don't forget the Compton frequency of the electron. > It is close to the numbers you mention. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html Nice start to this chapter, Frank. I have taken the liberty of rewording it slightly and adding a few short ;-) comments (after all, this is Sunday, when the merger of science and spirituality are often the strongest "memes" in the local aether, even on the Left Coast) . And surmising that more than a few vortexians may have "inadvertantly" missed their morning sermon, here is your recompense : The idea that an unseen force imparts structure to the material world has been around since antiquity. Some of the earliest references to this idea are found in the Hindu scriptures. These scriptures were originated by the ancient Indus Valley civilization at about 3,000 BC. The concept of the Brahman is described in these scriptures. The Brahman is the hidden power that is latent in all things. This single divinity has dual aspects: two names from the Upanishads are "Atman" or "Universal Spirit," and Brahman, "the Power" ... corresponding, of course, to the Christian "Holy Spirit" and "the Father." Westerners, of course, had to do the East one-better, so we added a third (local) component. This borrowing of ideas is a common theme in both religion and the secular tradition. As a youth, I was an often unwilling subject to a weekly "positive thinking" type of lecture which stressed that we must develop both the "desire" and the "motivation"... really the same idea as Atman and Brahman, but in a more personal format. Later references to this concept were developed in ancient Greece at about 500 BC. The Greek philosopher Heraclitus spoke of the concept of the Logos, which of course is taken up in the Bible as "the Word". In fact the name "Bible" itself is derived from the idea of Heraclitus, not John by-way-of Philos, who borrowed it without much attribution. According to Heraclitus, the Logos is the source of all order, hidden in a deeper reality, a doctrine taken up by Philo, a central figure in Judaism, about 10 AD. To Philo the Logos was the mind of the universe. Modern secularism, on the other hand, has taken the reductionist approach, saying basically that we can find ultimate reality if we can just find the smallest subparticle. But modern secularism is the epitome of "Reductio ad absurdum" in so many ways that is alwasy brings out a humorous vein. Taking reductionism a step further beyond neo-Darwinism, Kurt Vonnegut has proposed through his alter ego, Kilgore Trout, that water is the one and only true God. All biological life is composed predominantly of water, of course, which uses mankind as its most prolific, if not profligate, vehicle to get from here to there. This not-so-facetious example of reductionism-gone-mad, as it invariably does, underscores the major pitfall of depending too greatly on physical reality as demonstrative of metaphysical meaning. Reductionist points of view may serve as limited models which must be orchestrated upwardly into an implicit whole, with hope of pinpointing the synergy that derives. It must be realized that reductionism is an auxiliary tool, not an end in itself, not a competing technique but a complementary one. We want to avoid the situation wherein "greenness disintegrates," as Hofstadter refers to the obsequious pursuit of finer perspective by the reductionist. Consciousness, through a spiritual skeptic's eyes, can be the unanticipated result of an organism having reached a critical mass in the accumulation of neural cells, with the assumption that such accumulation came about only as a result of competitive survival pressures. It is equally justifiable for the mystic to see the accumulation of neural cells as an inevitable consequence of organic chemistry being imperceptively pushed towards a preexistent ideal form, all of those dead-end streets that were not successful being only indicative of one thing: God need not be all-powerful or all-knowing in the kind of time-delineated assessment on which secualrism depends. The universe is so incredibly vast in the present tense and even more overwhelming in its perpetual repetition, that there is plenty of room for both a minimal and awesome presence to coexist - a force that ordains, not in megalomaniacal haste, but in millineal meticulousness, whose most important ally is timelessness. There may be lack of conclusive objective proof for either God or no-God, but there are many platforms for interpretation. If choices had to made on scientific proof alone, one might be aesthetically inclined to accept no-God for reasons of economy. But the aesthetics of economy do not even come close to offsetting personal experience and inner conscience as a determinant. The inner perception of divinity is what Rudolph Otto called the "numinous," or "mysterium tremendum," and is not just a realization, but can be a truthfulness more significant than life itself. This perception often follows from an event that is both non-rational and inexplicable, but so overwhelming that it can mold a lifetime of devotion. The most apt description of personal divine revelation is not just "ecstasy," which sounds quite enticing, but "metanoia" - the ecstasy that radically changes one's life. A recognition of this not uncommon happenstance, which becomes life's metaphysical initiation rite, is described in such mystical terminology as "receiving the Holy Spirit," "shaktipat" (kundalini), or being "born again." Though widely discussed, it is far from a universal encounter, and is often feigned by those who want to be part of a particular group - though it has been consistently asserted by most religions to be universal in its potential realization. Of course there will be an inevitable hostile reaction to all claims of mystical insight or communication, no matter how generally shared. Anything remotely desirable, with elitist connotations, and not subject to scientific scrutiny - and most particularly if requiring the "surrender" of anything so treasured as one's ego - will be adamantly scorned by many cynics. It is not surprising, therefore, that there are absurd attempts by cynic's to categorize personal revelation as being a type of psychotic episode related to the hallucinatory drug experience. The nature of personal revelation is such that objective analysis is not feasible, and it must be taken at face value or ignored, but it abandons all principles of serious inquiry to challenge this awareness with puerile "guilt by association" maneuvering. Those few who have experienced and described both phenomena, the hallucinatory drug experience and transcendental religious awakening, see some small or crude correspondence, and indeed some parallel mental engrams may be involved. But the ultimate paranoia of the psychedelic experience is far from the persistent ecstasy of religious awakening. If widespread personal inclinations point towards God, and science is ambivalent, it is easy to tailor scientific ambivalence to fit needs, and that is what theology should be about. Ambivalence implies that evidence is scattered on both sides of the issue, so by emphasizing the relevant and discounting the inconsequential, science can be made as useful to the theologian as it has been to the agnostic. This is not superficial rationalization in the disparaging sense, for there is a justifiable expectation of utility in ascribing discretionary causation to unknowable events, and this is the pragmatic usefulness from which truth proceeds. Most importantly, if the preponderance of pragmatic consideration favors the idea of spiritual intelligence, even if the empirical evidence is inconclusive, then science should be enlisted to help if it cannot remain silent, which it has adequately demonstrated that it cannot and will not do. The bottom line of the metaphysical equation will always be assessed by utility - the transactional relevance that such beliefs exert on the conduct of individuals and society as a whole. That concludes this Sunday's sermonette. Stay tuned next week, or adjust your spam filter accordingly. Pastor Rod Flash Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 17:20:00 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 iBD1IR0s014053; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:19:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD1IOpo014031; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:18:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:18:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:13:55 -0500 Subject: this is a test message From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56934 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: test message From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 17:44:05 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 iBD1gYtH000931; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:43:56 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD1gSMX000905; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:42:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:42:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:37:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20041212002635.8632.qmail@web12403.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56935 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle Mcallister at kyle_mcallister@yahoo.com wrote: > Harry Veeder wrote: > >> Synchronisation is done beforehand. >> e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's >> location. >> Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's >> location. > > Problems arise here, due to relativistic effects. If > you move one of the clocks, its time will be different > than that of the unmoved clock, due to its having > moved at some velocity to get to its new location. It > won't be off by much, but it will be enough to cause > problems for ultraprecise measurements. > > --Kyle Ok, 1) The precision required will decrease as the communication distance between the sender and the receiver is increased. 2) The data can be corrected for relativistic effects. Harry (PS. Sorry if this is a repeat...I have had trouble posting to the list.) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 17:44:50 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 iBD1hHtH001076; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:44:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD1hGM8001052; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:43:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:43:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:38:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Corrections! was Re: Superluminal... From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56936 X-Loop: vortex-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 at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 5:48 PM 12/10/4, Harry Veeder wrote: > >> Thank you for responding to my revised post. >> >> Synchronisation is done beforehand. >> e.g. Synchronise two clocks at the sender's location. >> Then move one of the clocks to the receiver's location. > > > Atomic clocks eh? Hard to get delta t accurate to nanoseconds or even > microseconds from the difference between absolute times on two clocks. > > You still have no reason to expect the average communication velocity will > be faster than c. Even the subject article shows that. It is of no use to > measure a few photons at faster than c when most are slower than c. It is > the *average* communications turn around time that is important. That's > why I included it in my definition. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > My expectation is that group and phase forms can affect a distant receiver before the shock form arrives. It would amount to communication of energy without momentum. In other words, communication without 'bullets'. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 19:08:04 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 iBD36U0s011346; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:07:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD36Sou011336; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:06:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:06:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1e6.30842e27.2eee6126@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:06:14 EST Subject: off topic: HD flat screen television To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e6.30842e27.2eee6126_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/56937 X-Loop: vortex-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_1e6.30842e27.2eee6126_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I been looking at flat screen HD TVs for a while. The prices are coming down. Perhaps they will come down to the point where I can afford one in the next few years. I am perplexed. I have a first class FCC license and am thoroughly versed on standard TV. I see flat screen TV with 1040 and 480 resolution and 620 x 480 resolution. What is the difference? I see liquid crystal projection TV's. I know of the older ones with the three over driven tubes. They did not last long. What do we know about liquid crystal projection? Is it any good? I see expensive plasma TVs. Are they worth the extra cost? Do they last? I see liquid crystal flat screens. Is this technology better or worse? Finally I see flat screens with built in standard NSTV tuners. I see them with built in DVD drives. I see none with built in HD tuners. Why not? If I were to pay $1,000 for a TV I want the HD tuner built in. It reminds me of the day when we had to install FM converter boxes in our autos. Any reason for this? Perplexed. Frank Z --part1_1e6.30842e27.2eee6126_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I been looking at flat screen HD TV= s for a while.  The prices are coming down.  Perhaps they will com= e down to the point where I can afford one in the next few years.  I am= perplexed.  I have a first class FCC license and am thoroughly versed=20= on standard TV. 

I see flat screen TV with 1040 and 480 resolution and 620 x 480 resolution.&= nbsp; What is the difference?  I see liquid crystal projection TV's.&nb= sp; I know of the older ones with the three over driven tubes.  They di= d not last long.  What do we know about liquid crystal projection? = ; Is it any good?  I see expensive plasma TVs.  Are they worth the= extra cost?  Do they last? I see liquid crystal flat screens.  Is= this technology better or worse?

Finally I see flat screens with built in standard NSTV tuners.  I see t= hem with built in DVD drives.  I see none with built in HD tuners. = ; Why not?  If I were to pay $1,000 for a TV I want the HD tuner built=20= in.  It reminds me of the day when we had to install FM converter boxes= in our autos.  Any reason for this?

Perplexed.

Frank Z --part1_1e6.30842e27.2eee6126_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 19:43:21 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 iBD3fm0s022752; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:43:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD3fkmC022730; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:41:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:41:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41BD0F07.2080909@cox.net> Disposition-Notification-To: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:39:51 -0700 From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." Organization: ISUS User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: off topic: HD flat screen television References: <1e6.30842e27.2eee6126@aol.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030100040003070607000300" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56938 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --------------030100040003070607000300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From what I've seen Texas Instruments DLP (tiny movable mirrors) projectors are the best bet. The UHP mercury lamps are expensive, though ($400, ultra high pressure mercury arc lamps from Philips). The plasma displays I've seen had severe screen burn-in problems, and the dot pitch was quite coarse. LCD's I have no opinion on except that for computer displays where they are great. Soon organic LED displays may be unrolled (literally). I'll wait to see what they're like. Go to Las Vegas or look at the NASDAQ building in New York City to see some wondrous displays of red-green-blue LED's -- overall brighter than the sun -- but, alas, they cost millions to tens of millions, but then, when you receive your royalties from your free energy devices, that won't matter. How about just filling your living room wall with red-green-blue LED's :-) . Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > I been looking at flat screen HD TVs for a while. The prices are > coming down. Perhaps they will come down to the point where I can > afford one in the next few years. I am perplexed. I have a first > class FCC license and am thoroughly versed on standard TV. > > I see flat screen TV with 1040 and 480 resolution and 620 x 480 > resolution. What is the difference? I see liquid crystal projection > TV's. I know of the older ones with the three over driven tubes. > They did not last long. What do we know about liquid crystal > projection? Is it any good? I see expensive plasma TVs. Are they > worth the extra cost? Do they last? I see liquid crystal flat > screens. Is this technology better or worse? > > Finally I see flat screens with built in standard NSTV tuners. I see > them with built in DVD drives. I see none with built in HD tuners. > Why not? If I were to pay $1,000 for a TV I want the HD tuner built > in. It reminds me of the day when we had to install FM converter > boxes in our autos. Any reason for this? > > Perplexed. > > Frank Z --------------030100040003070607000300 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >From what I've seen Texas Instruments DLP (tiny movable mirrors)  projectors are the best bet.
The UHP mercury lamps are expensive, though ($400, ultra high pressure mercury arc lamps from Philips).

The plasma displays I've seen had severe screen burn-in problems, and the dot pitch was quite
coarse.  LCD's I have no opinion on except that for
computer displays where they are great.

Soon organic LED displays may be unrolled (literally).  I'll wait to see what they're like.

Go to Las Vegas or look at the NASDAQ building in New York City to see some wondrous displays
of red-green-blue LED's -- overall brighter than the sun -- but, alas, they cost millions to tens of millions,
but then, when you receive your royalties from your free energy devices, that won't matter.

How about just filling your living room wall with red-green-blue LED's  :-) .


Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona

FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote:
I been looking at flat screen HD TVs for a while.  The prices are coming down.  Perhaps they will come down to the point where I can afford one in the next few years.  I am perplexed.  I have a first class FCC license and am thoroughly versed on standard TV. 

I see flat screen TV with 1040 and 480 resolution and 620 x 480 resolution.  What is the difference?  I see liquid crystal projection TV's.  I know of the older ones with the three over driven tubes.  They did not last long.  What do we know about liquid crystal projection?  Is it any good?  I see expensive plasma TVs.  Are they worth the extra cost?  Do they last? I see liquid crystal flat screens.  Is this technology better or worse?

Finally I see flat screens with built in standard NSTV tuners.  I see them with built in DVD drives.  I see none with built in HD tuners.  Why not?  If I were to pay $1,000 for a TV I want the HD tuner built in.  It reminds me of the day when we had to install FM converter boxes in our autos.  Any reason for this?

Perplexed.

Frank Z

--------------030100040003070607000300-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 20:33:12 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 iBD4VitH010865; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:33:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD4VgoG010840; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:31:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:31:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004121133301560@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: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:30:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a126ab0a27db7b9a25a110b45854ec5c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.229 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56939 X-Loop: vortex-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. The classical repulsive coulomb barrier force equation F = Z1*Z2 * kq^2/R^2 doesn't take into account the magnetic strong force associated with the number of quarks in a given nucleus. For instance when two protons with three quarks (loops or disks) each with a magnetic field of nearly 1.0e15 Tesla (falling off as 1/x^3 along the line of the axis, 1/R^4 force?) the (repulsive charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio (if aligned to attract) is 2*Z/6 at a given separation. OTOH, for two deuterons the (repulsive charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio is 2*Z/14 not counting the antineutrino in each. How would this work for three BEC helium nuclei with 3*Z/42? :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Jones.
 
The classical repulsive coulomb barrier force equation F = Z1*Z2 * kq^2/R^2 doesn't take
into account the magnetic strong force associated with the number of quarks in
a given nucleus.
 
For instance when two protons with three quarks (loops or disks) each with a magnetic
field of nearly 1.0e15 Tesla (falling off as 1/x^3 along the line of the axis, 1/R^4 force?)
the (repulsive charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio (if aligned to attract) is  2*Z/6 at a given separation.
 
OTOH, for two deuterons the (repulsive charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio is 2*Z/14
not counting the antineutrino in each.
 
How would this work for three BEC helium nuclei with 3*Z/42?  :-)
 
Frederick
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 22:09:42 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 iBD68FtH001387; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:09:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD68AI9001345; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:08:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:08:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <027001c4e0d9$751ee2e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-22004121133301560@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:03:24 -0800 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/56940 X-Loop: vortex-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, > OTOH, for two deuterons the (repulsive charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio is 2*Z/14 not counting the antineutrino in each. > How would this work for three BEC helium nuclei with 3*Z/42? :-) Well, Fred, they look pretty doggone close, don't they? What you seem to be saying is - that in terms of the relative repulsive force which is felt in condensed matter at picometer distance, which when overcome will lead to fusion, the "net" force between three helium nuclei is actually no greater at all than what would be felt by two deuterons, no? One might further opine that if BEC-like cold fusion does occur in condensed matter, one might well be advised to use He rather than D2 because He is "always" a boson, while D2 is only bosonic during the time that its electron is not closely bound, which one can assume has some positive value ...that is, assuming that one can load He in such a way (ion implantation) that 3 atoms are usually present in a single vacancy. Not to mention costs less...and if your experiment does not work, you can inhale it and sing like Roy Orbison, or else fill party balloons.... Jones Overheard at the Palladium, a former CF lab, now a Karaoke bar with a helium tank... tastes great!! no, less filling tastes great!! no, less filling tastes great!! no, less filling tastes great!! no, less filling From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 12 23:19:18 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 iBD7HmtH015426; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:19:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBD7Hh6t015389; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:43 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041211371713100@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" , "r-george" Subject: www.d2fusuion.com Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d8e153dc7c105c7c45d56f1218b3ee935487b2572753744e27350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.15.69 Resent-Message-ID: <_hLph.A.ZwD.XIUvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56941 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: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII December 12, 2004 Vortex, After a long absence, I received this message from Russ George: He also attended the ICCF-11. Following the DoE report, Russ is getting numerous contacts from inquiring venture capitalists. Well, well! perhaps the long dry spell on cf is ending. I am sure these inquiries are happening to other notables in cf research. Nobody is talking much. Russ George's website is a makeover of an older website he ran for several years. He was involved with Stringham's Sonofusion, later with witnessing Arata & Zhang's DS cathode experiment in Japan, Induced Les Case's Pd catalyst experiment to be repeated at SRI, and other SRI replication efforts. Didn.t get much credit for all this though. With CF seemingly dried up recently, he turned his attention to CO2 remediation and was somewhat busy in that field. Now, with the DoE report out and inquiries being made, his "new" fusion website has appeared. -ak- ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Message
December 12, 2004
 
Vortex,
 
After a long absence, I received this message from Russ George: He also attended the ICCF-11.
<Check out my revised web page for more. 
 
Following the DoE report, Russ is getting numerous contacts from inquiring venture capitalists. Well, well! perhaps the long dry spell on cf is ending. I am sure these inquiries are happening to other notables in cf research. Nobody is talking much.
Russ George's website is a makeover of an older website he ran for several years. He was involved with Stringham's Sonofusion, later with witnessing Arata & Zhang's DS cathode experiment in Japan, Induced Les Case's Pd catalyst experiment to be repeated at SRI, and other SRI replication efforts. Didn.t get much credit for all this though.
With CF seemingly dried up recently, he turned his attention to CO2 remediation and was somewhat busy in that field.
Now, with the DoE report out and inquiries being made, his "new" fusion website has appeared.
 
-ak- 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:21:05 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 iBDEJctH016780; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:20:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDEJauR016758; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:19:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:19:36 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:19:27 EST Subject: Re: off topic: HD flat screen television To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_bf.4c9ded0e.2eeefeef_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <2DcYFC.A.uFE.4TavBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56942 X-Loop: vortex-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_bf.4c9ded0e.2eeefeef_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/12/2004 10:45:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, hoyt-stearns@cox.net writes: > but then, when you receive your royalties from your free energy devices, > that won't matter. > A while back we all believed that. Now the best we can hope for is not to be ridiculed. Frank Z --part1_bf.4c9ded0e.2eeefeef_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/12/2004 10:45= :45 PM Eastern Standard Time, hoyt-stearns@cox.net writes:

but then, when you receive your= royalties from your free energy devices, that won't matter.


A while back we all believed that.  Now the best we can hope for is not= to be ridiculed.

Frank Z --part1_bf.4c9ded0e.2eeefeef_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 06:37:35 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 iBDEa80s021351; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:37:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDEa6lx021341; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:36:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:36:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412113133439130@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: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:34:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94045d96f784a29f8859f7f8c462b0fd1a7350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.67 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56943 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > Frederick Sparber writes, > > > OTOH, for two deuterons the (repulsive > charge)/(n*quark-magnetic force) ratio is 2*Z/14 not > counting the antineutrino in each. > > > How would this work for three BEC helium nuclei with > 3*Z/42? :-) > > > Well, Fred, they look pretty doggone close, don't they? > I would say so. > > What you seem to be saying is - that in terms of the > relative repulsive force which is felt in condensed matter > at picometer distance, which when overcome will lead to > fusion, the "net" force between three helium nuclei is > actually no greater at all than what would be felt by two > deuterons, no? > Yes, but if the quarks (current loops or disks) are "Hertzian Dipoles" oscillating at 1.0e25 Hz the magnetic force should be 1/R^2 making it greater (attracting) than the repulsive coulomb force if the (solenoids-like) alignment is favorable. OTOH, like mini-bar magnets under BEC conditions they should align to attract as opposed to Hot Fusion conditions that randomizes the alignment. > > One might further opine that if BEC-like cold fusion does > occur in condensed matter, one might well be advised to use > He rather than D2 because He is "always" a boson, while D2 > is only bosonic during the time that its electron is not > closely bound, which one can assume has some positive value > ...that is, assuming that one can load He in such a way (ion > implantation) that 3 atoms are usually present in a single > vacancy. > Okay. > > Not to mention costs less...and if your experiment does not > work, you can inhale it and sing like Roy Orbison, or else > fill party balloons.... > Or Wayne Newton? :-) > Frederick > Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 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 iBDEvY0s028420; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:58:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDEvVj0028390; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:57:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:57:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041213095330.029af7c0@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:56:14 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: TEET foundation awards Iwamura, Yamada and Mizuno 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/56944 X-Loop: vortex-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 is a message from Akito Takahashi.] Dear JCF members and related colleagues: On 10th December 2004, the TEET (Thermal and Electronic Energy Technology) Foundation which is a Toyota Family company had the 11th Minoru Memorial Symposium with ceremony giving scholarship-awards to 10 researchers in the field of four categories, 1) new hydrogen energy (condensed matter nuclear science), 2) semiconductors for energy application, 3) electricity generation by low and medium difference of temperature, 4) fuel cells and secondary butteries. For the category 1), three JCF members, namely, Dr. Yasuhiro Iwamura (MHI), Prof. Hiroshi Yamada (Iwate University) and Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno (Hokkaido University) were awarded research scholarships with 1 M Yen [$10,000] per person. Their research titles are as follows: Dr. Yasuhiro Iwamura: Study on nuclear transmutation effects by deuterium permeation through multi-layered Pd complex. Prof. Hiroshi Yamada: Study on excess energy production and transmutation in PdDx with absorption and de-sorption by electric current. Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno: Hydrogen production from organic compound liquid by discharge electrolysis Especially, nuclear transmutation studies by Iwamura et al., Yamada et al. and Mizuno et al. are now being seriously acknowledged by evaluators of the TEET Foundation who are highly respected scientists in Japan. Akito Takahashi akito@sutv.zaq.ne.jp From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 07:12:01 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 iBDFAWtH032338; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:11:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDFAVjJ032322; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:10:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:10:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-22004121131494160@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: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:09:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940f5a38a81a5d32e60722b6329d623e2e9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.191 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56945 X-Loop: vortex-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 Something to mull over, Jones. http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html "The dual to the Hertzian dipole is our fourth case, a sinusoidally excited current loop. A current loop is characterized by its "moment," which is the product of the current it carries times its amplitude. Looking at figure 2, we see that the electric and magnetic fields for a sinusoidally driven infinitesimal current loop mirror those for the Hertzian dipole. Here, the near field magnetic field exhibits 1/r3 behavior, while the near-field electric strength falls off as 1/r2. In the far field, both E and H exhibit 1/r behavior. Their ratio, which is the wave impedance, is the characteristic impedance of the surrounding medium, just as it is for the Hertzian dipole. " Force at far = 1/r^2 ?? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Something to mull over, Jones.
 
 
"The dual to the Hertzian dipole is our fourth case, a sinusoidally excited current loop. A current loop is characterized by its "moment," which is the product of the current it carries times its amplitude. Looking at figure 2, we see that the electric and magnetic fields for a sinusoidally driven infinitesimal current loop mirror those for the Hertzian dipole. Here, the near field magnetic field exhibits 1/r3 behavior, while the near-field electric strength falls off as 1/r2. In the far field, both E and H exhibit 1/r behavior. Their ratio, which is the wave impedance, is the characteristic impedance of the surrounding medium, just as it is for the Hertzian dipole. "
 
Force at far = 1/r^2  ??
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 08:20:53 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 iBDGJoov025357; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:20:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDGJirQ025146; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:19:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:19:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003601c4e12e$e1272240$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , "vortex-l" References: <410-22004121131494160@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:14:52 -0800 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: <1kvAuC.A.yIG.gEcvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56946 X-Loop: vortex-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, > http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html "The dual to the Hertzian dipole is our fourth case, a sinusoidally excited current loop. A current loop is characterized by its "moment," which is the product of the current it carries times its amplitude. Looking at figure 2, we see that the electric and magnetic fields for a sinusoidally driven infinitesimal current loop mirror those for the Hertzian dipole. Here, the near field magnetic field exhibits 1/r3 behavior, while the near-field electric strength falls off as 1/r2. In the far field, both E and H exhibit 1/r behavior. Their ratio, which is the wave impedance, is the characteristic impedance of the surrounding medium, just as it is for the Hertzian dipole. " EXCELLENT, Fred. This is all starting to fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. I had a hunch we would find power laws in there somewhere. The near field of the "exciton," if that is the active unit for some forms of LENR, has a pulsating magnetically confined component which is effectively exponential to the far field. So when we intensify the near field with resonant effects at the precise terahertz frequency of it kinetic vibration, then we get not just the added field but the cubic equivalent of its normally calculated strength? Cold fusion, even without BEC-like effects, is looking more and more like micro-ICF- which is to say, the inertial confinement fusion of excitons. Or stated another way, one gets the BEC-like effects only at the point of maximum internal compression of the terahertz pulsations. Not much of a time interval, but is it long enough for fusion? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 08:38:28 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 iBDGb0ov005112; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:38:21 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDGawJD005092; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:36:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:36:58 -0800 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, 13 Dec 2004 07:42:52 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: TEET foundation awards Iwamura, Yamada and Mizuno Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56947 X-Loop: vortex-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 9:56 AM 12/13/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >[Here is a message from Akito Takahashi.] >Especially, nuclear transmutation studies by Iwamura et al., Yamada et al. >and Mizuno et al. are now being seriously acknowledged by evaluators of the >TEET Foundation who are highly respected scientists in Japan. For this reason alone Japan will probably trump the US very badly in the LENR business. Maybe they take the issues more seriously due to the high population density in relation to natural resources. It could be they have a much better eye for business than US scientists. Unlike the DOE, when looking at unexplainable data, they must sense that the value of research is not just based on consensus opinion of scientific merit, fear of a large probability of failure to advance, but rather the probability of success multiplied by the potential economic and social value. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 09:48:47 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 iBDHkwWY016127; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:48:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDHkqr6016086; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:46:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:46:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41BDD574.4000103@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:46:28 -0500 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: TEET foundation awards Iwamura, Yamada and Mizuno References: In-Reply-To: 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/56948 X-Loop: vortex-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: >For this reason alone Japan will probably trump the US very badly in the >LENR business. > I'm betting on the Chinese with their new-found hunger for energy. Their research seems directed at controllable energy production. Interesting that one of their primary researchers, Xing Li, rhymes with Ming Li, the antigravity researcher. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 10:02:25 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 iBDI0vov004531; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:02:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDI0qgN004488; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:00:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:00:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041213125907.02a12b20@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:59:17 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: New Energy Foundation funds LENR-CANR Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_9528406==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <97Gln.A.CGB.UjdvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56949 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_9528406==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed One of the last messages Ed Storms and I received from Gene Mallove was on April 19, 2004: "Our fund-raising has been progressing. I am delighted to tell you that within the next 60 days, New Energy Foundation will be sending you a grant of $10,000, which is be assigned to the work that you are doing in maintaining and organizing www.LENR-CANR.org . . ." Ed responded for both of us: "Gene you are a gentleman and a scholar. Your gift is greatly appreciated and will be put to good use in the manner you stipulate." After Gene was killed, I heard nothing for a while (quite understandably). I thought the arrangements had fallen through. However, Christy Frazier and others at the Foundation carried on, and I am happy to announce that they came through with the grant. Happy -- but also sad, of course, at this bittersweet fulfillment of Gene's ceaseless efforts on behalf of the field. It makes me all the more determined to work hard and use the money effectively to promote the field and to republish accurate information about it. The New Energy Foundation stipulated, ". . . this grant will be used for office rent, general expenses, and Internet fees related to the upkeep of the site." Ten thousand dollars should cover our expenses for about a year and a half. We have also received generous contributions via the "Click and Pledge" screen on the website, including contributions from many of the people in this forum. We would like to thank you all again for your support. - Jed --=====================_9528406==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" One of the last messages Ed Storms and I received from Gene Mallove was on April 19, 2004:

"Our fund-raising has been progressing. I am delighted to tell you that within the next 60 days, New Energy Foundation will be sending you a grant of $10,000, which is be assigned to the work that you are doing in maintaining and organizing www.LENR-CANR.org . . ."

Ed responded for both of us: "Gene you are a gentleman and a scholar. Your gift is greatly appreciated and will be put to good use in the manner you stipulate."

After Gene was killed, I heard nothing for a while (quite understandably). I thought the arrangements had fallen through. However, Christy Frazier and others at the Foundation carried on, and I am happy to announce that they came through with the grant. Happy -- but also sad, of course, at this bittersweet fulfillment of Gene's ceaseless efforts on behalf of the field. It makes me all the more determined to work hard and use the money effectively to promote the field and to republish accurate information about it.

The New Energy Foundation stipulated, ". . . this grant will be used for office rent, general expenses, and Internet fees related to the upkeep of the site." Ten thousand dollars should cover our expenses for about a year and a half. We have also received generous contributions via the "Click and Pledge" screen on the website, including contributions from many of the people in this forum. We would like to thank you all again for your support.

- Jed
--=====================_9528406==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 11:17:00 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 iBDJFXov030271; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:16:55 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDJFSoF030215; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:15:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:15:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009b01c4e147$76c3fd60$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <41BDD574.4000103@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: TEET foundation awards Iwamura, Yamada and Mizuno Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:10:51 -0800 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: <4qE_tD.A.DYH.QpevBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56950 X-Loop: vortex-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'm betting on the Chinese with their new-found hunger for energy. > Their research seems directed at controllable energy production. I'm with you Terry. I think the old saw of "necessity" being the "mother of invention" is not just a good observation but almost a law. And for the Chinese mentality, anytime you marry... and they will marry into our "alternative energy" family big time, you get not only the "mother of invention", but the grandmother, several dozen cousins twice-removed, and every bastard that saw you sneaking out the backdoor ;- 0 (that would be a "generic you", of course).... Our best move (the "West" in general) ? Well, that comes from another old saw, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" but out mainstream science establishment would rather eat bean-curds than that... so its up to us perpmos. ... anybody up for learning Mandarin? (or, what is the language of science in China these days ?) Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 11:44:06 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 iBDJgUWY006023; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:43:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDJgSvi005991; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:42:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:42:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:27:06 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: book list 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/56951 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: Do any of you people have any suggestions for additions to this list. http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Books/ . I can think of a few that I don't think should be there, Bearden's book comes to mind. I wonder if they have a link to the LENR-CANR website. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 12:10:45 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 iBDK9Eov017204; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:10:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDK9COf017186; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:09:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:09:12 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:04:32 -0500 Subject: Re: TEET foundation awards Iwamura, Yamada and Mizuno From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <0LEx3.A.aME.obfvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56952 X-Loop: vortex-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 at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > At 9:56 AM 12/13/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> [Here is a message from Akito Takahashi.] > >> Especially, nuclear transmutation studies by Iwamura et al., Yamada et al. >> and Mizuno et al. are now being seriously acknowledged by evaluators of the >> TEET Foundation who are highly respected scientists in Japan. > > For this reason alone Japan will probably trump the US very badly in the > LENR business. Maybe they take the issues more seriously due to the high > population density in relation to natural resources. It could be they have > a much better eye for business than US scientists. Unlike the DOE, when > looking at unexplainable data, they must sense that the value of research > is not just based on consensus opinion of scientific merit, fear of a large > probability of failure to advance, but rather the probability of success > multiplied by the potential economic and social value. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > When science ran away from oppressive religion she went to bed with the military-industrial complex. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 12:37:33 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 iBDKa4ov025822; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:37:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDKa2Ai025783; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:36:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:36:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <103.5688792e.2eef5725@aol.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:35:49 EST Subject: Fwd: BEC & Three Helium Fusion To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_103.5688792e.2eef5725_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <9AuKMB.A.zSG.y0fvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56953 X-Loop: vortex-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_103.5688792e.2eef5725_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_103.5688792e.2eef5725_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <1d4.31959126.2eef56f9@aol.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:35:05 EST Subject: Re: BEC & Three Helium Fusion To: fjsparber@earthlink.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_103.5688792e.2eef56f9_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 --part2_103.5688792e.2eef56f9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/13/2004 9:38:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes: > Yes, but if the quarks (current loops or disks) are "Hertzian Dipoles" > oscillating at 1.0e25 Hz > Electrons are Hertzian Dipoles oscillating at the Compton frequency 1 x 10e20 hertz. The wave is held in place by changes in characteristic impedaince. The idea applies to all waves in simple harmonic motion, not just electromagnetic waves. Frank Z --part2_103.5688792e.2eef56f9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/13/2004 9:38:= 36 AM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:

Yes, but if the quarks (current= loops or disks) are  "Hertzian Dipoles"
oscillating at 1.0e25 Hz


Electrons are Hertzian Dipoles oscillating at the Compton frequency 1 x 10e2= 0 hertz.  The wave is held in place by changes in characteristic impeda= ince.  The idea applies to all waves in simple harmonic motion, not jus= t electromagnetic waves.

Frank Z --part2_103.5688792e.2eef56f9_boundary-- --part1_103.5688792e.2eef5725_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 13:12:54 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 iBDLBdov003600; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:12:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBDLBc9L003586; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:11:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:11:38 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041213160845.02a11070@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:10:12 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Jed's new office number Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <4qtZIC.A.43.JWgvBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56954 X-Loop: vortex-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 somewhat off-topic perhaps, but my new office telephone number is: 770-456-5324 - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 18:27:11 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 iBE2PiSp031789; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:27:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBE2PMmD031693; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:25:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:25:22 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001201c4e183$f54c4c00$90017841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: TEET Foundation Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:23:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E151.AA255370"; 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/56955 X-Loop: vortex-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_000E_01C4E151.AA255370 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E151.AA255370" ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E151.AA255370 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankAll of the predictions about Japan and China overwhelming the USA = in technology are coming true.. WHY.. the least of which is the smooth passage by our US Congress of = the $ 132 Billion tax reduction package just passed... errr.. that = should read special interest tax reduction Home Depot was granted a waiver from paying import duties and taxes on = ceiling fans manufactured in China. It is not enough the cost of production of the fans prohibit US = manufacturers from competing.. it destroys the will of US manufacturers = to compete when our own nation uses our money to compete against us. Old tale from Texas about a yankee came thru town, sheriff arrested him = for driving 25 mph in a 30 mph zone. Yankee asked what the fine would be.. sheriff told him , no fine.. we = are going to execute you at dawn. OH please asked the Yankee.. is there some recourse.. YEP> stated the sheriff.. you have a choice.. execution OR you can = fight the dog. I'll fight the dog ..screamed the Yankee !!. Sreriff buried the Yankee up to his neck in the back yard of the = jail..turned a huge Rottweiler loose. The dog ran at the Yankee.. the Yankee moved his head as the dog ran by = . The Yankee bit the dog on the hind leg. The sheriff walked over a kicked the Yankee in the head and shouted.. Fight fair Yankee ! With Congress passing bills like the Tax reduction package .. the US = manufacturers don't even have the option of fighting.. much less fair. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E151.AA255370 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
All of the predictions about Japan and China=20 overwhelming the USA in technology are coming true..
 
WHY.. the least of which is the smooth passage = by =20 our US Congress of the $ 132 Billion tax reduction package just = passed... errr..=20 that should read special interest tax reduction
 
Home Depot was granted a waiver from paying = import=20 duties and taxes on ceiling fans manufactured in China.
It is not enough the cost of production of the = fans=20 prohibit US manufacturers from competing.. it destroys the will of US=20 manufacturers to compete when our own nation uses our money to compete = against=20 us.
 
Old tale from Texas about a yankee came thru = town,=20 sheriff arrested him for driving 25 mph in a 30 mph zone.
Yankee asked what the fine would be.. sheriff = told him ,=20 no fine.. we are going to execute you at dawn.
OH please asked the Yankee.. is there some=20 recourse..
YEP> stated the sheriff.. you have a = choice..=20 execution   OR you can fight the dog.
I'll fight the dog ..screamed the Yankee=20 !!.
Sreriff buried the Yankee up to his neck in = the back=20 yard of the jail..turned a huge Rottweiler loose.
The dog ran at the Yankee.. the Yankee moved = his head as=20 the dog ran by . The Yankee bit the dog on the hind leg.
The sheriff walked over a kicked the Yankee in = the head=20 and shouted..
Fight fair Yankee !
With Congress passing bills like the Tax = reduction=20 package .. the US manufacturers don't even have the option of fighting.. = much=20 less fair.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E151.AA255370-- ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E151.AA255370 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000d01c4e183$f4b51510$90017841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E151.AA255370-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 13 21:49:09 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 iBE5lfSp022000; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:49:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBE5leQp021989; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:47:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:47:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:43:14 -0500 Subject: Magnetic effects seen in water From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iBE5kHSp021711 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56956 X-Loop: vortex-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://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/12/4/1 Magnetic effects seen in water 6 December 2004 Physicists in Japan have discovered that the melting point of water increases slightly in a strong magnetic field. Hideaki Inaba and colleagues at Chiba University found that it increases by 5.6 millikelvin for ordinary water in a field of 6 Tesla, and by 21.8 millikelvin for heavy water (J. Appl. Phys. 96 6127). Water has many unusual properties: it has relatively high melting and boiling points for a small molecule, and the liquid state can also be denser than the solid state. These properties are thought to arise from the 3D network of hydrogen bonds in the molecule. Recently, it was discovered that the near infrared spectrum and refractive index of water can be affected by a strong magnetic field. Some researchers have suggested that the magnetic field somehow strengthens hydrogen bonds, but the exact mechanism behind these results remains a mystery. Inaba and co-workers measured the melting temperatures of ordinary water and heavy water - in which the hydrogen atoms are replaced by deuterium - with a highly sensitive differential scanning calorimeter (DSC). The changes in the melting points observed with the DSC were proportional to the square of the magnetic field, and also about three orders of magnitude larger than those calculated using the so-called magneto-Clapeyron equation. "Since water is diamagnetic, it should not be affected by a magnetic field," Inaba told PhysicsWeb. "We believe that the thermal motion of the partially charged atoms in the water gives rise to a Lorentz force when a magnetic field is applied. By suppressing the thermal motion, the Lorentz force makes the hydrogen bonds stronger, which could account for the increase in the melting points." The Chiba team now plans to investigate the effect of magnetic fields on phase transitions in other diamagnetic materials including gallium, indium, mercury and benzene. About the author Belle Dumé is Science Writer at PhysicsWeb From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 09:55:03 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 iBEHrXSp032050; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:54:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEHrRM6032013; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:53:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:53:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:48:37 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4E1C2.15B7F960" 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/56957 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4E1C2.15B7F960 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The next message, not this one, should be more on-topic. It will be a = mini-essay entitled "Beyond Cold Fusion and the Hydrino". But when = trying to find some past research and related material, I came across = this little bit of humor in my "drafts" box, which now has 378 = unfinished thoughts in it (so adjust your spam filters accordingly). The main premise of the on-topic next posting (not this off-topic one) = is that CANR-LENR and the hydrino are dual aspects of a deceivingly = complicated subject, which can be called a "simplex" (a subject which = has been oversimplified so successfully in the past that we tend to = minimalize its true complexity "on the next lower scale"). Ironically = the subject is one which mainstream science thought they had totally = mastered 50 years ago.That subject, of course, being the simplest, and = at the same time, the most complicated of all matter - the hydrogen = atom/molecule. Ah... life is seldom as uncomplicated as we fervently desire it to be. = Even now in 2004, I can't get my voice telephone fixed (its been = "occasionally" but not always "out" for 2 weeks despite having DSL work = perfectly). If it had just failed, they could fix it, but since it = didn't fail, they can't fix it. Now that is the kind of logic that Harry = Tuttle can appreciate. And that is why humans were compelled to invent "nostalgia." It was a = psychological imperative. But it is almost an act of supreme hubris for = us human mental-midgets to think that something which comprises most of = the known universe, hydrogen, could really be 'that' simple (Bohr atom, = etc.). Oh sure, one has to get down to the minute details, down to a = picometer geometry really, in order to appreciate the ever-unraveling = complexity of hydrogen. Maybe the Lamb shift should have given us a hint = as to what was in store, that Shrodinger was a gross-generalization. = Even the great Dane himself, a product of another era, had little clue = about the unraveling, which is just now beginning... but that is to be = the subject of the second part of this posting. For now, some culture = commentary. Speaking of the formerly simple, now unraveling in its complexity, here = is some slightly risqu=E9 humor to start off your day. It is a tribute = to "nostalgia" but in the way that only your worst enemy would wish on = you. To paraphrase Neal Stephenson and other culture bloggers: It wasn't that = long ago that in order to connect you brand-spanking new "major = appliance" purchase (you remember the one - that amazingly advanced '386 = PC which cost more than your Chevrolet, with less raw MIPs than your = average teen now has to tote around his "itunes" on these days).... = anyway to connect that awe-inspiring new device (now a door stop in your = garage) to any outside source of information (sorry, this was before the = WWW... we're talking a BBS, which probably had Usenet if you were = lucky), you would be compelled to go through this bazzaro mating-ritual = kind of thing, requiring you to pick up the phone, dial the other = computer's number (often a long distance # ), listen for the first hint = of an excruciatingly annoying dissonant rasping, and then quickly slam = the handset down into the rubber cups of your very expensive new, big as = a shoe-box, hi-tek modem (they practically give them away these days). = At least the voice lines worked back then. If your aim was accurate, this now-comic contraption would wrap one of = its neoprene lips around the earpiece and the other succulent lip around = the telephone's mouthpiece, consummating a kind of cyber-esques = soixante-neuf, shuddering eventually, as it was suddenly possessed by = the spirit of a distant cyber-lover, and begin to hammer out with = incredible deliberation, a (usually) rather garbled messages in courier = font, which no self-respecting IBM selectric would touch with a ten bite = pole. After which, you could calculate that... with amortization, etc. = the message cost you about $64 and change. But, of course, you had just = scored the latest news about the upcoming '486 .... Ah.... in short, = your had the "bug" way back then, in more ways than one... beyond even = the Harry Tuttle variety, but you were at least glad to get a = voyeuristic little bit of titillation from watching the modem = sex-ritual, coz' you wife has frozen up her available sockets when you = decided to blow the family surplus on the wrong kind of box, so brother, = all you got left is them down-home "Core Dumped Blues"...=20 Well, my terminal's all locked up, can't get no Mail,=20 can't recall the last time Gopher didn't fail=20 ...Got stacks in my 'structs, arrays in my queues,=20 ...Got the Segmentation violation: Core dumped blues. Now, that is anti-nostalgia, or the way it actually was, not the way we = might desire or wish it had been - in order that we could "wax = nostalgic" when the brand new Dell does something similar, but several = layers deeper in the works, so it is much more difficult to find the = "bug" nowadays ). Jones Where is Harry Tuttle when we need him? ... still in the duct-work? ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4E1C2.15B7F960 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The next message, not this one, should be more on-topic. It = will be a=20 mini-essay entitled "Beyond Cold Fusion and the Hydrino". But when = trying=20 to find some past research and related material, I came across this = little bit=20 of humor in my "drafts" box, which now has 378 unfinished thoughts in it = (so=20 adjust your spam filters accordingly).
 
The main premise of the on-topic next posting (not this off-topic = one) is=20 that CANR-LENR and the hydrino are dual aspects of a = deceivingly=20 complicated subject, which can be called a "simplex" (a subject which = has been=20 oversimplified so successfully in the past that we tend to minimalize = its true=20 complexity "on the next lower scale"). Ironically the subject is = one which=20 mainstream science thought they had totally mastered 50 years ago.That = subject,=20 of course, being the simplest, and at the same time, the most = complicated of all=20 matter - the hydrogen atom/molecule.
 
Ah... life is seldom as uncomplicated as we fervently desire it to = be. Even=20 now in 2004, I can't get my voice telephone fixed (its been = "occasionally" but=20 not always "out" for 2 weeks despite having DSL work perfectly). If it = had just=20 failed, they could fix it, but since it didn't fail, they can't fix it. = Now that=20 is the kind of logic that Harry Tuttle can appreciate.
 
And that is why humans were compelled to invent = "nostalgia." It=20 was a psychological imperative. But it is almost an act of supreme = hubris for us=20 human mental-midgets to think that something which comprises most = of the=20 known universe, hydrogen, could really be 'that' simple (Bohr atom, = etc.).=20 Oh sure, one has to get down to the minute details, down to a picometer=20 geometry really, in order to appreciate the ever-unraveling = complexity=20 of hydrogen. Maybe the Lamb shift should have given us a hint as to what = was in=20 store, that Shrodinger was a gross-generalization. Even the great = Dane=20 himself, a product of another era, had little clue about the = unraveling,=20 which is just now beginning... but that is to be the subject of the = second part=20 of this posting. For now, some culture commentary.
 
Speaking of the formerly simple, now unraveling in its complexity, = here is=20 some slightly risqu=E9 humor to start off your day. It is a tribute to = "nostalgia"=20 but in the way that only your worst enemy would wish on you.
 
To paraphrase Neal Stephenson and other culture bloggers: It wasn't = that=20 long ago that in order to connect you brand-spanking new "major = appliance"=20 purchase (you remember the one - that amazingly advanced '386 = PC which=20 cost more than your Chevrolet, with less = raw MIPs than your=20 average teen now has to tote around his "itunes" on these days).... = anyway to=20 connect that awe-inspiring new device (now a door stop in your = garage) to=20 any outside source of information (sorry, this was before the = WWW... we're=20 talking a BBS, which probably had Usenet if you were lucky), you = would be=20 compelled to go through this bazzaro mating-ritual kind of thing, = requiring=20 you to pick up the phone, dial the other computer's number (often a long = distance # ), listen for the first hint of an excruciatingly annoying = dissonant=20 rasping, and then quickly slam the handset down into the rubber cups of = your=20 very expensive new, big as a shoe-box, hi-tek modem (they = practically give=20 them away these days). At least the voice lines worked back then.
 
If your aim was accurate, this now-comic contraption would wrap one = of its=20 neoprene lips around the earpiece and the other succulent lip around the = telephone's mouthpiece, consummating a kind of cyber-esques = soixante-neuf,=20 shuddering eventually, as it was suddenly possessed by the spirit of a = distant=20 cyber-lover, and begin to hammer out with incredible deliberation, a = (usually)=20 rather garbled messages in courier font, which no = self-respecting IBM=20 selectric would touch with a ten bite pole. After which, you could = calculate=20 that... with amortization, etc. the message cost you about $64 and = change. But,=20 of course, you had just scored the latest news about the upcoming '486 = ....=20 Ah.... in short, your had the "bug" way back then, in more ways than = one...=20 beyond even the Harry Tuttle variety, but you were at least glad to = get a=20 voyeuristic little bit of titillation from watching the modem = sex-ritual, coz'=20 you wife has frozen up her available sockets when you decided to blow = the family=20 surplus on the wrong kind of box, so brother, all you got left is = them=20 down-home "Core Dumped Blues"...
 
Well, my terminal's all locked up, can't get no = Mail,=20
can't recall the last time Gopher didn't fail
...Got stacks in = my=20 'structs, arrays in my queues,
...Got the Segmentation violation: = Core=20 dumped blues.
 
Now, that is anti-nostalgia, or the way it = actually was,=20 not the way we might desire or wish it had been - in order that we = could=20 "wax nostalgic" when the brand new Dell does something similar, but = several=20 layers deeper in the works, so it is much more difficult to find the = "bug"=20 nowadays ).
 
Jones
 
Where is Harry Tuttle when we need him? ... still = in the=20 duct-work?
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C4E1C2.15B7F960-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 11:14:59 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 iBEJDPSp032721; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:14:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEJDNiS032700; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:13:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:13:23 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041221418115340@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:OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:11:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940f49ad1e93e2f9210cdaf61384c4839a9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.121 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56958 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > The next message, not this one, should be more on-topic. It > will be a mini-essay entitled "Beyond Cold Fusion and the Hydrino". > In anticipation of this blockbuster: :-) The magnetic field calculator in the GSU link shows that a quark (energy loop or disk) with a radius of 4.6e-18 meters and a displacement current of 1.66e6 amperes has a B field of 2.26e17 Tesla at it's center which tapers off (by 1/R^3) to 2.26e7 Tesla at 1.0e-14 meters, and 0.000149 Tesla at the 5.3e-11 meter Bohr Radius. With three quarks (energy loops or disks) working together, the B field from the proton is 3 times this at the data points. OTOH, the electron (energy loop or disk) with a radius of 2.81e-15 meters and a displacement current of 2,719 amperes has a B field of 6.07e11 Tesla at it's center tapering off to 1.2e10 Tesla at 1.0e-14 meters, but still strong (0.09 Tesla) or 911 gauss at the 5.3e-11 meter Bohr radius. http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/curloo.html#c1 If the magnetic field of the electron repels the proton field or balances the 8.0e-8 newton attractive electrostatic force between the electron and proton, how can you get a fractional orbit electron? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Jones Beene wrote:
 
>
> The next message, not this one, should be more on-topic. It
> will be a  mini-essay entitled "Beyond Cold Fusion and the Hydrino".
>
In anticipation of this blockbuster:  :-)
 
The magnetic field calculator in the GSU link shows that a quark (energy loop or disk)  with a radius of 4.6e-18 meters and
a displacement current of 1.66e6 amperes has a B field of  2.26e17 Tesla at it's center
which tapers off (by 1/R^3) to 2.26e7 Tesla at 1.0e-14 meters, and 0.000149 Tesla at the 5.3e-11 meter Bohr Radius.
With three quarks (energy loops or disks) working together, the B field from the proton is 3 times this at
the data points.
 
OTOH, the electron (energy loop or disk) with a radius of 2.81e-15 meters and a displacement current of
2,719 amperes has a B field of 6.07e11 Tesla at it's center tapering off to 1.2e10 Tesla at 1.0e-14 meters,
but still strong (0.09 Tesla) or 911 gauss at the 5.3e-11 meter Bohr radius.
 
 
 
If the magnetic field of the electron repels the proton field or balances  the 8.0e-8 newton attractive electrostatic force
between the electron and proton, how can you get a fractional orbit electron?
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 11:55:55 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 iBEJsQCS024958; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:55:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEJrnV1024754; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:53:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:53:49 -0800 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: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:52:08 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56959 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones. You write: >Where is Harry Tuttle when we need him? ... still in the duct-work? Oh, he's around, but in hiding. There are times when the Thanatos rules the hearts of the troops of primates, and you know it's been 2000 years and they still haven't taken that poor fellow down from the sticks they nailed him to. Sometimes it's best just to hide and wait for the killing of the good to stop. That said, the last time ole Tuttle made an appearance, this Internet thing was the result. I look forward to seeing him again some time in the years ahead. Eventually the primates will weary of killing themselves, and Eros will make her shy smile shine again. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 12:43:18 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 iBEKfmCS010956; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:43:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEKflaM010937; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:41:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:41:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 07:40:17 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-220041221418115340@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220041221418115340@earthlink.net> 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 iBEKeMCS010413 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56960 X-Loop: vortex-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 Frederick Sparber's message of Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:11:53 -0600: Hi Fred, [snip] >If the magnetic field of the electron repels the proton field or balances the 8.0e-8 newton attractive electrostatic force >between the electron and proton, how can you get a fractional orbit electron? [snip] I think the problem here is the assumption that the magnetic field interaction between proton and electron is responsible. It isn't. Clearly the primary balancing force is the centrifugal force, or if you will, the interaction of the charged electron with it's own magnetic field (which I suspect is the same thing, because the magnetic field energy and the kinetic energy of the electron are one and the same thing. Furthermore, centrifugal force derives directly from kinetic energy, hence from the self magnetic field). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 13:43:20 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 iBELfqaC015535; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:43:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBELfoAK015518; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:41:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:41:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006e01c4e225$12682920$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , "vortex-l" References: <410-220041221418115340@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Re:OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:37:11 -0800 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/56962 X-Loop: vortex-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 asks, > If the magnetic field of the electron repels the proton field or balances the 8.0e-8 newton attractive electrostatic force between the electron and proton, how can you get a fractional orbit electron? Because the magnetic field "alone" is not what balances (neutralizes) the attractive force of the nucleus? That is a little too glib. But if one assumes that the magnetic field alone, or as expressed in spin or a centrifugal component, is enough from the start, then yes one will end up using certain assumptions which do indeed "make" it seem to balance out ;-) And certainly the magnetic field does some of the job. According to Mills and I think he is correct on this one point, there is also a "gluon-like" particle within the orbit which mediates the attractive force, somewhat as in the nucleus. But I do understand that Fred's version of string theory doesn't recognize the need for a gluon either. We are free to disagree on that. According to Mills, this "mediator" particle is a photon in multiples of 27.2 (13.6) eV, but one does not have to accept that either. Because it, whatever "it" is, it appears instanly and almost magicly when an electron is being caputred by a free proton... to me this means that it comes directly from Dirac's sea. But that is way beyond anything in CQM. Which is a good thing. This so-called photon may not even be a photon at all, but instead may consist of pairs of particles, perhaps they are even paired "light leptons" of mass/energy about 3.4 eV (which in the absence of the normal electron will mutually anhilate to give, firstly the 6.8 eV bonding energy of Ps and then in higher multiples, all the other common emissions of hydrogen. 3.4 eV is very tightly woven into alpha. It is a bit ironic that FS came up with the more general "light lepton" notion, but has now abandoned it entirely in his string theory. Then again, maybe he is correct. He is certainly correct in saying that is difficult - OK impossible to get "shrinkage" below some high level, and perhaps that is the first level. If that is the case, then once a hydrino is formed, it will either 1) Stay immobilized as a hydride in the catalyst where it is formed, or 2) Reinflate to normal endothemically, or 3) Collapse all at once with no added input Mills doesn't believe in 2 and 3, but again, it is certainly logical that anyone can accept his fine experimental work while acknowledging that he got some of the theory wrong. Admittely I am a comparative loggerhead in nuclear theory compared to Mills or Fred, so this version may be only an aethetically pleasing hypothesis that pays homage to Dirac -nevertheless the idea of numerous pairs of 3.4 eV light-leptons operated as mediators is compelling for other reasons that transcend mathematics. And, as to the mathematics, the two perspectives do not jibe with each other anyway, so pending that day.... let's test all the options. Plus, unlike Mills, many of us fence-straddlers, Fred included are more than willing to change opinions within microseconds of "seeing the light", so to speak. Having invested an inordinate amount of time with his book, which though inspired with many glimpses of the truth (like the notion of the captured particle), to me it seems to be the most brilliant failed-effort of recent time. OTOH, his experimental results are as solid or better than anything in the LENR world. That is despite a partially flawed theory, and despite his stubborness not to use deuterium, and despite his stubborness not to acknowledge other hypotheses. Basically, his experimental work is better than anything in LENR because he has the had the financial resources to do it right. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 13:52:04 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 iBELo4Bn002097; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:51:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBELo1uQ002053; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:50:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:50:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20041214163933.02055a58@pop.theworld.com> X-Sender: mica@pop.theworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:42:55 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Cold Fusion in 'Car and Driver' Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <87vPyD.A._f.IA2vBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56963 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nice quote on cold fusion in 'Car and Driver', 2005. Given that many types of patients afflicted with malignant cancer CAN be cured today, cold fusion acceptance is coming closer. Full quote at the COLD FUSION TIMES "Other alternatives lie in the future, with hydrogen, ..... Until a miracle breakthrough in technology appears - which is possible- the fuel cell floats in the netherworld of technology like cold fusion and a cure for cancer." Car and Driver, January 2005, Brock Yates, 'Doomsayers proliferate as oil tops $50 a barrel' ===================================================== The COLD FUSION TIMES - the Uncensored cold fusion web site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:30:23 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBEMSpBn016140; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:30:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEMSnIf016107; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:28:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:28:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: BEC-like Fusion Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:27:09 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <43qur0l68ijv4klp9hf391aq6296r469c1@4ax.com> References: <005e01c4de1a$ce535420$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <005e01c4de1a$ce535420$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> 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 iBEMREBn015601 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56964 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones Beene's message of Thu, 09 Dec 2004 10:13:37 -0800: Hi, [snip] >It is only a matter of time before cryogenics enters the >cutting edge of LENR experimentation, and in anticipation of >that, here is a somewhat surprising suggestion. > >Forget deuterium. Use helium instead. We already have BEC's made from pure Helium, i.e superfluid helium, and no fusion is in evidence. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 14:51:18 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 iBEMnpaC001803; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:51:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBEMnkLC001761; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:49:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:49:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41BF6DF0.1060103@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:49:20 -0500 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: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... References: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$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/56965 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Where is Harry Tuttle when we need him? Caught and sequestered by the Government and forced to complete the horrendous backlog of 27B stroke 6 documents. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 15:15:33 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 iBENE6aC008214; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:15:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBENE5k1008193; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:14:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:14:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00aa01c4e231$f2e84640$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005e01c4de1a$ce535420$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <43qur0l68ijv4klp9hf391aq6296r469c1@4ax.com> Subject: Re: BEC-like Fusion Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:09:22 -0800 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/56966 X-Loop: vortex-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 writes, > We already have BEC's made from pure Helium, i.e superfluid helium, and no fusion is in evidence. No, of course not.... fusion would require perhaps another 100,000 atm of applied pressure... but , fortunately, it is that very pressure (in the absence of full cryogenics) which first gives us the BEC-like state anyway ... picoseconds before the fusion event; in a rapidly pulsating "exciton;" therefore it is not two different processes. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 15:30:57 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 iBENTWaC012222; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:30:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBENTVR8012207; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:29:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:29:31 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00b401c4e234$1c60cfe0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <41BF6DF0.1060103@rtpatlanta.com> Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:24:50 -0800 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/56967 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: T.B: > Caught and sequestered by the Government and forced to complete the horrendous backlog of 27B stroke 6 documents. Even a useless-trivia expert had to look that one up - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/quotes From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 17:09:50 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 iBF188Bn014289; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:09:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBF183Yj014229; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:03 -0800 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, 14 Dec 2004 16:14:15 -0900 To: "vortex-l" From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: BEC & Three Helium Fusion Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56968 X-Loop: vortex-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 you guys can believe most any number of things before breakfast! At 8:09 AM 12/13/4, Frederick Sparber wrote: >Something to mull over, Jones. > >http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html > >"The dual to the Hertzian dipole is our fourth case, a sinusoidally >excited current loop. A current loop is characterized by its "moment," >which is the product of the current it carries times its amplitude. >Looking at figure 2, we see that the electric and magnetic fields for a >sinusoidally driven infinitesimal current loop mirror those for the >Hertzian dipole. Here, the near field magnetic field exhibits 1/r3 >behavior, while the near-field electric strength falls off as 1/r2. In the >far field, both E and H exhibit 1/r behavior. Their ratio, which is the >wave impedance, is the characteristic impedance of the surrounding medium, >just as it is for the Hertzian dipole. " > >Force at far = 1/r^2 ?? Actually it says 1/r behavior at far field. It is repeated other places, so it doesn't look like a typo. Fig. 3 shows far field in this case to begin at r/lambda = 5 to 10. At 8:14 AM 12/13/4, Jones Beene wrote: >EXCELLENT, Fred. This is all starting to fit together like a >jigsaw puzzle. I had a hunch we would find power laws in >there somewhere. You need look no further if the force and thus available energy that can be obtained from the oscillating source is 1/r in nature. For example, you could place a 10 GHz dipole in the center of a 3 meter radius sphere. Lambda = c/nu = 3 cm. Far field by the definition thus begins at 10 lambda = 30 cm. Suppose the total radiation from the dipole measured at a spherical surface of 30 cm radius were P=10 watts. At 3 meters radius we would expect the power density to be reduced by a factor of 1/10 over that produced at 30 cm, but the area is 100 times as large, so we get 10 times the power, or 100 watts. All you have to do is cover the surface of the 3 m diameter sphere with 3 cm antennae connected to rectifiers and you have a COP of 10, less deductions for rectification efficiency, etc. If you want a space drive just remove half the outer sphere, and replace it with a 30 cm radius reflector that reflects the radiation beck to the 3 m radius hemisphere. Since the pressure exerted on the outer 3 m sphere is 10 times that exerted on the 30 cm reflector, you have an inertial space drive. All pretty darn handy, free energy plus a warp drive all at the same time! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 18:00:20 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 iBF1wcBn000960; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:59:59 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBF1wb6d000948; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:58:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:58:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <12a.5299b135.2ef0f444@aol.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:58:28 EST Subject: Re: BEC-like Fusion To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_12a.5299b135.2ef0f444_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/56969 X-Loop: vortex-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_12a.5299b135.2ef0f444_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/2004 5:30:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au writes: > We already have BEC's made from pure Helium, i.e superfluid helium, and no > fusion is in evidence. > > True something is missing. I have no comment, just a disclosure on what it is. Frank Z --part1_12a.5299b135.2ef0f444_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/14/2004 5:30:= 55 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au writes:

We already have BEC's made from= pure Helium, i.e superfluid helium, and no fusion is in evidence.



True something is missing.  I have no comment, just a disclosure on wha= t it is.

Frank Z --part1_12a.5299b135.2ef0f444_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 18:03:31 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 iBF21xBn002196; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:03:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBF21vo0002163; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:01:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:01:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41BF9B85.5090801@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:03:49 -0500 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: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... References: <003801c4e205$2470c2a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <41BF6DF0.1060103@rtpatlanta.com> <00b401c4e234$1c60cfe0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> In-Reply-To: <00b401c4e234$1c60cfe0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <9l3dLB.A.vh.Us5vBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56970 X-Loop: vortex-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: >Even a useless-trivia expert had to look that one up - >http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/quotes > Not if you own the Criterion Collection three DVD set including the "94 minute cut . . . including all the changes Gilliam refused to make . . ." "Brazil" had a happy ending (by Terry.) - Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 18:03:52 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 iBF22PaC026522; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:03:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBF22MIu026495; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:02:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:02:22 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <13c.899ab7d.2ef0f525@aol.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:02:13 EST Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_13c.899ab7d.2ef0f525_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/56971 X-Loop: vortex-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_13c.899ab7d.2ef0f525_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/14/2004 3:43:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au writes: > which I suspect is the same thing, because the magnetic field energy and > the kinetic energy of the electron are one and the same thing. Not quite so. The gravitiomagnetic field carries the momentum (MV). The electromagnetic field carries the inductive energy. see http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter6.html The various fields are bundled into the structure of matter at the elastic limit of space. Frank Z --part1_13c.899ab7d.2ef0f525_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/14/2004 3:43:= 54 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au writes:

which I suspect is the same thi= ng, because the magnetic field energy and the kinetic energy of the electron= are one and the same thing.


Not quite so.  The gravitiomagnetic field carries the momentum (MV).&nb= sp; The electromagnetic field carries the inductive energy. see

http://www.ang= elfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter6.html

The various fields are bundled into the structure of matter at the elastic l= imit of space.


Frank Z

 --part1_13c.899ab7d.2ef0f525_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 14 19:00:39 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 iBF2x9aC012514; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:00:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBF2x8iu012505; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:59:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:59:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 21:54:29 -0500 Subject: More on magnetism and ice From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56972 X-Loop: vortex-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 this is the SCIENCE magazine story on magnetism and the melting temperature of ice. I found it here: http://bric.postech.ac.kr/biotrend/science/science_view.php?nNum=94067 Harry ----------- Magnets Meddle With Melting 2004-12-13 In a strong magnetic field, ice melts at a higher temperature than normal, a team of physicists has discovered. The effect is tiny--no household magnet is going to stave off the thawing of your freezer contents in a power failure - but is still a thousand times more than theory predicts. With water, water everywhere, one might be forgiven for thinking that scientists unraveled all its secrets long ago. But water "is a system full of surprises," says Caltech physicist Kenneth Libbrecht. The latest of those surprises comes from Hideaki Inaba and his colleagues at Chiba University in Chiba, east of Tokyo, who studied the effect of strong magnetic fields on the melting point of ice. Using a refined version of a technique called differential scanning calorimetry, the team monitored the temperature difference between the sample and a reference material as the pair were slowly warmed. As the ice started to melt, it absorbed energy, giving rise to a telltale temperature difference flagging the melting point. In the presence of a strong 6 Tesla magnetic field--about four or five times stronger than the magnetic field inside a standard hospital MRI scanner--the team found that ice's melting point increased by 5.6 millikelvin, they report in the 1 December issue of Applied Physics. This result was a surprise: thermodynamic theory predicts a shift a thousand times smaller. Inaba believes the answer may lie in the magnetic field's influence on the vibration and rotation of water molecules, which he argues stabilizes the ice and hikes the temperature needed to melt it. "It looks like an interesting result, and is worth trying to understand," says Libbrecht. Inaba's work follows the recent discovery by Seiichiro Nakabayashi and his colleagues at Saitama University in Japan that water's ability to bend light is also influenced by powerful magnetic fields. The two effects may well be related, speculates Inaba. Now the researchers need to come up with a theory that explains them both, says Libbrecht. "Until you have some theory to pin on it, you just put it on the wild-and-interesting-phenomena shelf," he says. --ANDREW WATSON From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 08:24:41 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 iBFGMtvw002390; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:24:15 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFGMmFR002287; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:22:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:22:48 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VCkw5wvjtTHLQmIXfjAKgDMNBY84c7ISHv8FqZwnFiwJlUn3seeVJQf9WNAo8XFr; Message-ID: <410-220041231515213280@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: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times.... Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:21:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940106d767ddee5d9d25d0dc4a1794efc71350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.125 Resent-Message-ID: <-b45IB.A.jj.WTGwBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56973 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > According to Mills and I think he is correct on this one > point, there is also a "gluon-like" particle within the > orbit which mediates the attractive force, somewhat as in > the nucleus. But I do understand that Fred's version of > string theory doesn't recognize the need for a gluon either. > We are free to disagree on that. > Well, go ahead and disagree. :-) A sneaky coupling mechanism allows energy sharing between (energy loops or disks) as borne out by K electron capture, and the binding energy by the quarks in a nucleus, where the electron energy loop gains as much as 50 MeVor more and shrinks into the nucleus simultaneously creating a neutrino-antineutrino pair, hence turning a proton into neutron. momentum mvr = n * hbar and energy is conserved in this coupling process. Where else can the energy to do this come from? I see no reason why the same process couldn't be involved with Mills' Hydrino (quasi-neutron?) state. I think this known as mutual induction (between turns or loops). http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/faraday.pdf > > According to Mills, this "mediator" particle is a photon in > multiples of 27.2 (13.6) eV, but one does not have to accept > that either. Because it, whatever "it" is, it appears > instantly and almost magically when an electron is being > captured by a free proton... to me this means that it comes > directly from Dirac's sea. But that is way beyond anything > in CQM. Which is a good thing. > Particle, or magnetic field effect/s? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Jones Beene wrote:
>
> According to Mills and I think he is correct on this one
> point, there is also a "gluon-like" particle within the
> orbit which mediates the attractive force, somewhat as in
> the nucleus. But I do understand that Fred's version of
> string theory doesn't recognize the need for a gluon either.
> We are free to disagree on that.
>
Well, go ahead and disagree.  :-)
A sneaky coupling mechanism allows energy sharing between (energy loops or disks) as borne
out by K electron capture, and the binding energy by the quarks in a nucleus,
where the electron energy loop gains as much as 50 MeVor more and shrinks  into the nucleus
simultaneously creating a neutrino-antineutrino pair, hence turning a proton into neutron.
momentum mvr = n * hbar and energy is conserved in this coupling process.
Where else can the energy to do this come from?
I see no reason why the same process couldn't be involved with Mills' Hydrino (quasi-neutron?) state.
I think this known as mutual induction (between turns or loops).
 
>
> According to Mills, this "mediator" particle is a photon in
> multiples of 27.2 (13.6) eV, but one does not have to accept
> that either. Because it, whatever "it" is, it appears
> instantly and almost magically when an electron is being
> captured by a free proton... to me this means that it comes
> directly from Dirac's sea. But that is way beyond anything
> in CQM. Which is a good thing.
>
Particle, or magnetic field effect/s?
 
Frederick
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 09:30:56 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 iBFHT9vw002531; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:30:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFHT6hN002488; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:29:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:29:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <68.4b158110.2ef1ce55@aol.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:28:53 EST Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times....with old pictures To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_68.4b158110.2ef1ce55_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/56974 X-Loop: vortex-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_68.4b158110.2ef1ce55_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >From my collection of technological artifacts. The first picture is of my Radiola 17, Made in 1926. The dial has a mark on it for station KDKA. Type tuned radio frequency. The 4 pin triode tube says repaired at McKeys Rock in 1931. It still operates after a minor repair. Not only does it not have transistors it does not have any electrolytic capacitors. I added a small one to cut down on the buzz. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/radio.gif The second picture is of a circuit breaker I removed from the old Seward Station. Patent 1901. MFG 1911, installed 1920. Abandoned in place 1975. Removed by Frank Z in 2004. The wooden sign above it says 440 VAC. Note the carbon contact attached to its arcing contact. The arcing contact and live electrical components are exposed to the operator. I gave a second set to the Discovery museum in Johnstown. There are a few more of these left waiting for the wrecking ball. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/breaker.gif Frank Z --part1_68.4b158110.2ef1ce55_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From my collection of technological= artifacts.  The first picture is of my Radiola 17,
Made in 1926.  The dial has a mark on it for station KDKA.  Type t= uned radio frequency.  The 4 pin triode tube says repaired at McKeys Ro= ck in 1931.  It still operates after a minor repair.  Not only doe= s it not have transistors it does not have any electrolytic capacitors. = ; I added a small one to cut down on the buzz.

http://www= .angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/radio.gif

The second picture is of a circuit breaker I removed from the old Seward Sta= tion.  Patent 1901.  MFG 1911, installed 1920.  Abandoned in=20= place 1975.  Removed by Frank Z in 2004.  The wooden sign above it= says 440 VAC.  Note the carbon contact attached to its arcing contact.=   The arcing contact and live electrical components are exposed to the=20= operator.  I gave a second set to the Discovery museum in Johnstown.&nb= sp;  There are a few more of these left waiting for the wrecking ball.=20=

http://w= ww.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/breaker.gif


Frank Z --part1_68.4b158110.2ef1ce55_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 10:25:58 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 iBFIOMvw028282; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 10:25:42 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFIOIA2028234; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 10:24:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 10:24:18 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041215182249.20744.qmail@web81109.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 10:22:49 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: "Bare Proton" excess energy? new study To: nm@gifnet.org Cc: 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/56975 X-Loop: vortex-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 possibility that a "bare proton" created in our 3-space is somehow able to attract virtual particles in quanta of 3.4 eV (and multiples) directly from Dirac's sea, resulting in excess energy, is fascinating. It could help to explain what is going on with some of many reported excess-energy phenomena involving bare protons, especially Langmuir's torch and the recent MAHG of Nicholas Moller. http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/ In October in the J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 16 7017-7023 (2004) Experimental observation of an atomic hydrogen material with H–H bond distance of 150 pm "suggesting metallic hydrogen" (according to them) was reported by Badiei and Holmlid of Göteborg University, Sweden. This may or may not be further evidence of the main point of this post, but should be mentioned in case the authors mis-interpreted their own work. Abstract - with (alternative) commentary. A phase of hydrogen called Rydberg matter (RM) is formed in ultra-high vacuum by desorption of hydrogen from an alkali. The RM atoms are released with a surprising amount of energy - 9.4 eV, which is over double the IP (ionization potential) of the alkali in which had been immobilized, and after deducting the energy of the laser photons which released them there appears to be a net gain of around 3.4 eV per atom. The authors of this experiment, OTOH, went into it looking for evidence of metallic H, and consequently they believe from the results that this energy is evidence of the bond energy of a metallic phase of atomic hydrogen, using the results by Chau et al (2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 245501) They could be correct, but this result also can be reinterpreted to fall in-line with some recent suggestions about possible excess energy methodology in Langmuir's torch, and in the Moller Atomic Hydrogen Generator, which is based on years of careful investigation by Moller into the details of Langmuir's torch, even going so far as to dig-up Langmuir's typewritten correspondence with Bohr from the archives in Denmark. This torch was a big-deal back then, way ahead of its time. Much of the reported excess energy related "bare protons" (or for that matter, "bare deuterons" in the interfacial layer of a CF electrode) could be related to the simple presence of the proton charge being able to attract an opposite charge from Dirac's sea of negative energy, specifically from "virtual positronium". The virtual Ps has a liftime which is fleeting in our 3-space and does not have time to annihilate, BUT before fading into the reciprocal space which is Dirac's sea, it does have time enough to become disrupted and to leave behind half or all of its binding energy of 6.8 eV, which is likely to be in the form of light-lepton pairs of net mass/energy of 6.8 eV. or 3.4V each, in my view. Anytime one sees "peaks" in the spectroscopy of hydrogen plasmas at these two levels, particularly the lower one, this could possibly be indicative of an energy "extraction" from Dirac's sea, at least in this hypothesis. Unfortunately, this explanation is also effectively indistinguishable from saying that the energy comes from "ZPE" except that here it is quantized, so it can be traced to a source. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 13:46:49 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 iBFLjBvw014512; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:46:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFLj8R9014487; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:45:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:45:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041215214233.006ad5a4@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: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:42:33 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, rowepaul@gis.net From: Grimer Subject: Re: "Bare Proton" excess energy? new study Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id iBFLhivw013969 Resent-Message-ID: <4XjZaD.A.RiD.jBLwBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56976 X-Loop: vortex-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 seems to me that this backs up what Paul Rowe has been saying for many years now. Since I believe Rowe has really "conjured" H out of the aether, I find no difficulty in believing this too. We will no doubt eventually end up with a situation where these things are much easier to achieve than anyone has ever imagined. Grimer At 10:22 am 15-12-04 -0800, you wrote: >The possibility that a "bare proton" created in our >3-space is somehow able to attract virtual particles >in quanta of 3.4 eV (and multiples) directly from >Dirac's sea, resulting in excess energy, is >fascinating. > >It could help to explain what is going on with some of >many reported excess-energy phenomena involving bare >protons, especially Langmuir's torch and the recent >MAHG of Nicholas Moller. >http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/ > >In October in the J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 16 >7017-7023 (2004) Experimental observation of an atomic >hydrogen material with H–H bond distance of 150 pm >"suggesting metallic hydrogen" (according to them) was >reported by Badiei and Holmlid of Göteborg University, >Sweden. > >This may or may not be further evidence of the main >point of this post, but should be mentioned in case >the authors mis-interpreted their own work. > >Abstract - with (alternative) commentary. A phase of >hydrogen called Rydberg matter (RM) is formed in >ultra-high vacuum by desorption of hydrogen from an >alkali. The RM atoms are released with a surprising >amount of energy - 9.4 eV, which is over double the IP >(ionization potential) of the alkali in which had been >immobilized, and after deducting the energy of the >laser photons which released them there appears to be >a net gain of around 3.4 eV per atom. The authors of >this experiment, OTOH, went into it looking for >evidence of metallic H, and consequently they believe >from the results that this energy is evidence of the >bond energy of a metallic phase of atomic hydrogen, >using the results by Chau et al (2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. >90 245501) > >They could be correct, but this result also can be >reinterpreted to fall in-line with some recent >suggestions about possible excess energy methodology >in Langmuir's torch, and in the Moller Atomic Hydrogen >Generator, which is based on years of careful >investigation by Moller into the details of Langmuir's >torch, even going so far as to dig-up Langmuir's >typewritten correspondence with Bohr from the archives >in Denmark. This torch was a big-deal back then, way >ahead of its time. > >Much of the reported excess energy related "bare >protons" (or for that matter, "bare deuterons" in the >interfacial layer of a CF electrode) could be related >to the simple presence of the proton charge being able >to attract an opposite charge from Dirac's sea of >negative energy, specifically from "virtual >positronium". > >The virtual Ps has a liftime which is fleeting in our >3-space and does not have time to annihilate, BUT >before fading into the reciprocal space which is >Dirac's sea, it does have time enough to become >disrupted and to leave behind half or all of its >binding energy of 6.8 eV, which is likely to be in the >form of light-lepton pairs of net mass/energy of 6.8 >eV. or 3.4V each, in my view. > >Anytime one sees "peaks" in the spectroscopy of >hydrogen plasmas at these two levels, particularly the >lower one, this could possibly be indicative of an >energy "extraction" from Dirac's sea, at least in this >hypothesis. Unfortunately, this explanation is also >effectively indistinguishable from saying that the >energy comes from "ZPE" except that here it is >quantized, so it can be traced to a source. > >Jones > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 14:20:09 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 iBFMIf7X016782; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:20:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFMIdA1016760; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:18:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:18:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041215171513.02944068@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:17:04 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: OFF TOPIC Star wars rides again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <_tf55.A.0FE._gLwBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56977 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yee haw!!! - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - New York Times, December 15, 2004 Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in Failure By DAVID STOUT WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - An important test of the United States' emerging missile-defense system ended in an $85 million failure early today as an interceptor rocket failed to launch as scheduled from the Marshall Islands, the Pentagon said. A target rocket carrying a mock warhead was successfully launched from Kodiak, Alaska. But the interceptor, which was to have gone aloft 16 minutes later and picked off the target 100 miles over the earth, automatically shut down instead because of "an unknown anomaly," the Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency said. Despite the disappointment, today's event was not a total failure, said Richard A. Lehner, an agency spokesman. He said "quite a bit" had been learned from the aborted test, which he called "a very good training exercise." He noted that the rocket that failed to rise can be used later. The target rocket landed in the ocean some 3,000 miles from Kodiak, he said. . . . From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 15:45:49 2004 Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBFNiJ7X013185; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:45:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBFNiG0X013168; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:44:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:44:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000c01c4e2ff$c8624dc0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: star wars rides again Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:42:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2CD.6672A920"; 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/56978 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4E2CD.6672A920 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2CD.66742FC0" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2CD.66742FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankJed, .. Ya gotta believe it's possible to hit a missile with a = missile, even Gene Autry could draw and shoot so fast his bullet hit the = bullet fired by the bad guy.. didn't you watch it happen in the movies? = If you saw Gene Autry do it.. it happened!! That shouldn't be any more difficult to believe than what you saw when = the twin towers disintergrated in perfect lockstep.. a miracle they = didn't tip over but collapsed floor by floor. We saw it happen on = television.. the REAL thing.. Pay no attention to the structural = engineer with the math to demonstrate there is NO way for the structural = integrity of the tower to fail in such a perfect way, I don't care what = arguments are used for the superb steel core making such a collapse = impossible.. everybody knows it happened just like it showed on TV. So why can't a missile shoot down a missile regardless of trajectory and = speed.. Gene Autry knows best and a few more dollars spent to prove it = makes sense to any defense contractor, just ask a terrorist that uses = fertilizer. Or.... errr.. BS !! its all the same.. ask a Texan. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2CD.66742FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Jed, .. Ya gotta believe it's possible to hit = a missile=20 with a missile, even Gene Autry could draw and shoot so fast his bullet = hit the=20 bullet fired by the bad guy.. didn't you watch it happen in the movies? = If you=20 saw Gene Autry do it.. it happened!!
That shouldn't be any more difficult to = believe than=20 what you saw when the twin towers disintergrated in perfect lockstep.. a = miracle=20 they didn't tip over but collapsed floor by floor. We saw it happen on=20 television.. the REAL thing.. Pay no attention to the structural=20 engineer with the math to demonstrate there is NO way for the = structural=20 integrity of the tower to fail in such a perfect way, I don't care = what=20 arguments are used for the superb steel core making such a collapse = impossible..=20 everybody knows it happened just like it showed on TV.
So why can't a missile shoot down a missile = regardless=20 of trajectory and speed.. Gene Autry knows best and a few more dollars = spent to=20 prove it makes sense to any defense contractor, just ask a terrorist = that uses=20 fertilizer.    Or.... errr.. BS !! its all the same.. ask = a=20 Texan.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2CD.66742FC0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2CD.6672A920 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c4e2ff$b100e420$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2CD.6672A920-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 16:07:33 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBG067vw004474; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:07:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBG065SP004462; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:06:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:06:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=V3V90UQogK2BSp00/jHlrVZxSShbXrmd7hEZJQhZVjXwo87AR+ae3/172vWzg8kgWMZG82JOV2Fb5/EwNi9xVIRPAN+EOHZHB6+9QuBiIimJGoPkGyJxtgPp5ec1W2EunofTDSbcmmDmZ5UZVgf1WhsJrw87G95lAS7lsH4hcQ8= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:04:36 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: star wars rides again In-Reply-To: <000c01c4e2ff$c8624dc0$0100007f@xptower> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <000c01c4e2ff$c8624dc0$0100007f@xptower> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56979 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: first off, teh second tower to go DID break a bit, and ive seen home video of a friend that matches. now, WHY it did it, who knows. also, the missile defense shield is feasible. look at patriot. and it hasnt failed yet. they just kept aborting the tests due to weather. that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no need for it. On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:42:08 -0600, RC Macaulay wrote: > Jed, .. Ya gotta believe it's possible to hit a missile with a missile, even > Gene Autry could draw and shoot so fast his bullet hit the bullet fired by > the bad guy.. didn't you watch it happen in the movies? If you saw Gene > Autry do it.. it happened!! > That shouldn't be any more difficult to believe than what you saw when the > twin towers disintergrated in perfect lockstep.. a miracle they didn't tip > over but collapsed floor by floor. We saw it happen on television.. the REAL > thing.. Pay no attention to the structural engineer with the math to > demonstrate there is NO way for the structural integrity of the tower to > fail in such a perfect way, I don't care what arguments are used for the > superb steel core making such a collapse impossible.. everybody knows it > happened just like it showed on TV. > So why can't a missile shoot down a missile regardless of trajectory and > speed.. Gene Autry knows best and a few more dollars spent to prove it makes > sense to any defense contractor, just ask a terrorist that uses fertilizer. > Or.... errr.. BS !! its all the same.. ask a Texan. > > 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 Wed Dec 15 17:24:00 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 iBG1MWN6014729; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:23:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBG1MUm5014710; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:22:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:22:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C0E3C8.2030603@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 20:24:24 -0500 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: OFF TOPIC Keeping up with the times....with old pictures References: <68.4b158110.2ef1ce55@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <68.4b158110.2ef1ce55@aol.com> 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/56980 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > The second picture is of a circuit breaker I removed from the old > Seward Station. Patent 1901. MFG 1911, installed 1920. Abandoned in > place 1975. Removed by Frank Z in 2004. The wooden sign above it > says 440 VAC. Note the carbon contact attached to its arcing > contact. The arcing contact and live electrical components are > exposed to the operator. I gave a second set to the Discovery museum > in Johnstown. There are a few more of these left waiting for the > wrecking ball. > > http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/breaker.gif Kewl! It looks like it has both inductive and thermal trips. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 19:44:03 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 iBG3gbN6027710; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:43:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBG3gEw9027222; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:42:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:42:14 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000c01c4e320$ff837380$0c027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Star wars ride again Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:40:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2EE.B46B9620"; 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/56981 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4E2EE.B46B9620 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2EE.B46D1CC0" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2EE.B46D1CC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankSome people in this group are simply too observant..like leaking = pen. You noticed the video showed a slight "tilt" as the 2nd tower = began to collapse. Just my point.. IF.. the twins came down as witnessed = ..AND.. the explanation was that the fire section imploded ..WHICH IN = TURN.. permitted the weight of the above structure to fall on the lower = section ... causing a " domino effect"... this explanation begs more = questions than it answers.. BECAUSE.. the tilting of one tower changes = the dynamics of the imploding sections from tower one to tower two... = hmmm.. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2EE.B46D1CC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Some people in this group are simply too = observant..like=20 leaking pen. You noticed the video showed a  slight "tilt" as = the 2nd=20 tower began to collapse. Just my point.. IF.. the twins came down = as=20 witnessed ..AND.. the explanation was that the fire section imploded = ..WHICH IN=20 TURN.. permitted the weight of the above structure to fall on the lower=20 section ... causing a " domino effect"... this explanation begs = more=20 questions than it answers.. BECAUSE.. the tilting of one tower changes = the=20 dynamics of the imploding sections from tower one to tower two...=20 hmmm..
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C4E2EE.B46D1CC0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2EE.B46B9620 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c4e320$ff02f8e0$0c027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C4E2EE.B46B9620-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 21:55:36 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 iBG5s4ZF008766; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:55:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBG5rv2B008683; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:53:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:53:57 -0800 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, 15 Dec 2004 21:00:14 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: star wars rides again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56982 X-Loop: vortex-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 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote: >...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no >need for it. You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 15 23:08:21 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 iBG76bZF032416; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:08:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBG76Y0p032382; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:06:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:06:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:01:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Star wars ride again From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000c01c4e320$ff837380$0c027841@xptower> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="MS_Mac_OE_3186007284_3039859_MIME_Part" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56983 X-Loop: vortex-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 message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3186007284_3039859_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I am no expert, but I suspect that by the 1960's many skyscrapers were being engineered so they could be easily and neatly demolished. Evidently the floors of the towers were designed to fall like dominoes if the vertical loading exceeding some critical value. Harry RC Macaulay at walhalla@cvtv.net wrote: Some people in this group are simply too observant..like leaking pen. You noticed the video showed a slight "tilt" as the 2nd tower began to collapse. Just my point.. IF.. the twins came down as witnessed ..AND.. the explanation was that the fire section imploded ..WHICH IN TURN.. permitted the weight of the above structure to fall on the lower section ... causing a " domino effect"... this explanation begs more questions than it answers.. BECAUSE.. the tilting of one tower changes the dynamics of the imploding sections from tower one to tower two... hmmm.. Richard --MS_Mac_OE_3186007284_3039859_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: Star wars ride again I am no expert, but I suspect that by the 1960's many skyscrapers were bein= g
engineered so they could be easily and neatly demolished.  
Evidently the floors of the towers were designed to fall like dominoes if <= BR> the vertical loading exceeding some critical value.

Harry

RC Macaulay at walhalla@cvtv.net wrote:

Some people in this group are simply too o= bservant..like leaking pen. You noticed the video showed a  slight &quo= t;tilt" as the 2nd tower began to collapse. Just my point.. IF.. the tw= ins came down as witnessed ..AND.. the explanation was that the fire section= imploded ..WHICH IN TURN.. permitted the weight of the above structure to f= all on the lower section ... causing a " domino effect"... this ex= planation begs more questions than it answers.. BECAUSE.. the tilting of one= tower changes the dynamics of the imploding sections from tower one to towe= r two... hmmm..
Richard

--MS_Mac_OE_3186007284_3039859_MIME_Part-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 07:39:07 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 iBGFbgZF003234; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:39:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGFbe4h003217; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:37:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:37:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041216102427.02a0ecc8@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:35:27 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Book almost finished 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/56984 X-Loop: vortex-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 been slaving away at this book, "Cold Fusion and Future." I think it is just about finished, although the final decision will be made by Soo. I am hoping to make one final big push this weekend. My daughter is coming home from college today, and I plan to meet her at the station, thrust a manuscript into her hands, and tell her to get to work proofreading. (My wife has other plans for her -- something about Christmas shopping.) If anyone would like to assist, I would be grateful. It is difficult to spot errors in text that you have read dozens of times before. You tend to overlook them. For example I just found this sentence: "A space elevator is long cable, made of carbon filament, running from the ground straight up to a satellite in geostationary earth orbit . . ." It is missing an "a": "A space elevator is a long cable . . ." (I tend to leave out words such as "a" and "the," perhaps under the influence of Japanese. I thought I did that only in writing, but now that I use voice input extensively, I see that I really talk that way.) Anyway, contact me if you would like a copy now. I have two versions in Acrobat format: a 6 MB low resolution copy, and a 17 MB high-resolution copies suitable for printing. I printed a black-and-white copy at Office Depot for $12, plus $3 to bind it. Unfortunately, a color copy costs a small fortune.I am beginning to think it was not such a great idea to include all these color figures and graphs. I have no plans to print hardcopy versions, or sell the book, although Soo is anxious to do that. I think it costs too much to print copies, and I do not think there is any market for a book about cold fusion. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 09:16:01 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 iBGHEZN6000400; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:15:56 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGHEUsG000362; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:14:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:14:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=F+sr0e2yZdA/8lOSNQN+AGok5kYIFTXti3sSnX7o346MQN2BwjPtH61PQBo/OZydxq0sLRLiUJufkIWGEehdLHewA9t7I0Dk2qAYvCm5liGfJa6P7BKqo6QihNeHzi0ZzzL/TXSODJr1tnI0UhlhWik5ifb3lPp/izEjdiDJjx0= ; Message-ID: <20041216171257.7373.qmail@web54502.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:12:57 -0800 (PST) From: Merlyn Subject: Re: star wars rides again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1622837727-1103217177=:1806" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56985 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --0-1622837727-1103217177=:1806 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Actually, I think the shortest distance is for them to shoot over England. Merlyn Horace Heffner wrote: At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote: >...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no >need for it. You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free! --0-1622837727-1103217177=:1806 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Actually, I think the shortest distance is for them to shoot over England.
Merlyn

Horace Heffner <hheffner@mtaonline.net> wrote:
At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote:
>...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no
>need for it.


You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in
Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the
missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile
defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner




Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free! --0-1622837727-1103217177=:1806-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 09:47:34 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 iBGHk5N6009478; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:47:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGHjx9Y009416; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:45:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:45:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=n+g8VoKH/+gh6r89TsvCW13dfh7cvICzgkC4jamYgtqICbX4BmtAHqZ2zIBAQReYsQvEr+ZfJU+k6JAbJiVo9zHYfLXviyiBbNkMY3yjuS9TReWWPABdta99lJBGCRGI02toKtWL+1o/xLeGdS0hhdKVc4uklxdlg0fWxJg8m88= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:44:32 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: star wars rides again In-Reply-To: <20041216171257.7373.qmail@web54502.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 References: <20041216171257.7373.qmail@web54502.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra6.eskimo.com id iBGHiaN6009012 Resent-Message-ID: <9qOWPC.A.ETC.WncwBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56986 X-Loop: vortex-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, nk has missiles capable of hitting alaska and the west coast. check a map... On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:12:57 -0800 (PST), Merlyn wrote: > Actually, I think the shortest distance is for them to shoot over England. > Merlyn > > Horace Heffner wrote: > At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote: > >...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no > >need for it. > > > You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in > Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the > missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile > defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^) > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > > > Merlyn > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > ________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free! ________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free! > > -- 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 Dec 16 09:56:52 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 iBGHtYZF022053; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:56:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGHtWn5021976; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:55:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:55:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005d01c4e397$c7bdfb60$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: Heavy duty denial Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:50:49 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005A_01C4E354.B93F2DE0" 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/56987 X-Loop: vortex-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_005A_01C4E354.B93F2DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One of the "hottest" cold topics these days in condensed matter research = is the "heavy fermion". Heavy fermion superconductivity normally occurs = at very low temperature, but perhaps it does not require pure = cryogenics, and perhaps it can also occur (even more robustly) at high = effective pressure, but less-cold actual temperature. The term "heavy fermion" is used in condensed matter physics to describe = metallic materials having very large electronic mass enhancement arising = from an antiferromagnetic interaction between conduction electrons and = local magnetic moments residing on a sublattice of atoms in the metal.=20 http://www.physics.fsu.edu/PhysicsNewsletter/Spring00/Heavy.htm Now to me that sounds a LOT like what is going on in some kinds of LENR. = Antiferromagnetic interaction is often seen in hydrogen bonded = structures.=20 Is this observation on an overlap into LENR only an over-generalization = of heavy fermion dynamics, or are those guys in total denial of the = extent of their work ? Plus this could be the hydrogen correlate of BEC-like deuterium fusion. = Plenty of studies have found excess heat anomalies in palladium using = hydrogen, as well as deuterium, even though the pathways may be slightly = different. Given that the deuteron has both bosonic properties (its = nucleus) and fermionic properties (the whole atom), we could be = breaching some interesting new approaches to LENR. And there is little = doubt among many open-minded observers that there is some connection = between high temperature superconductivity and LENR effects. In the Dec. 16 issue of "Nature", a team of physicists from Rice and = elsewhere (Richard should be pleased to see Rice in the news) offers an = explanation of the way quantum effects could create some of these = strange properties that in heavy fermion materials. I think that they = are just scratching the surface of a very "heavy" sub-field. "Our findings represent a clear-cut advance in the understanding of the = electron's organizing principle in quantum-critical matters," said = theoretical physics Qimiao Si, a paper co-author "The work could be = important to the physics of a broad range of materials, including = high-temperature superconductors and carbon nanotubes.=20 Note: The good professor Si somehow failed to mention LENR in that = "broad range.". Imagine that ! A physics professor who once again = overlooks LENR.... The new research reported in "Nature" bolsters the growing theoretical = and experimental work in a new subfield of condensed matter physics = known as "correlated electron physics." The impetus for correlated = electron physics is the fact that the standard theory of metals cannot = explain the electronic workings of materials that contain "correlated," = or strongly interacting electrons. Sounds to me like they are coming at the whole phenomenon of the Hydrino = and BEC-like fusion, a.k.a. LENR, from another perspective, and blindly = one must add....=20 Oh well, Rice's loss could be the "cold fusioneers" gain. But then = again, once someone in the marginalized LENR camp does prove the certain = reality of LENR (it has already been proven many times over, all that is = lacking now is a self-powered demo, the *undeniable* proof) then at that = point, it should surprise no one if some of these professorial-types = don't immediately jump out of the wood-work claiming to have known it = all along. A few of them are no doubt even deep-closet lurkers on vortex = (who may have enlisted their lowest performing grad student to sign up = with Bill B, so as to remain anonymous until the proper time .... Jones ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C4E354.B93F2DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
One of the "hottest" cold topics these days in condensed matter = research is=20 the "heavy fermion". Heavy fermion superconductivity normally occurs at = very low=20 temperature, but perhaps it does not require pure cryogenics, and = perhaps it=20 can also occur (even more robustly) at high effective pressure, but = less-cold actual temperature.
 
The term "heavy fermion" is used in condensed matter physics to = describe=20 metallic materials having very large electronic mass enhancement arising = from an=20 antiferromagnetic interaction between conduction electrons and local = magnetic=20 moments residing on a sublattice of atoms in the metal.
= http://www.physics.fsu.edu/PhysicsNewsletter/Spring00/Heavy.htm
=
 
Now to me that sounds a LOT like what is going on in some kinds of = LENR.=20 Antiferromagnetic interaction is often seen in hydrogen bonded = structures.=20
 
Is this observation on an overlap into LENR only an = over-generalization of=20 heavy fermion dynamics, or are those guys in total denial of the extent = of their=20 work ?
 
Plus this could be the hydrogen correlate of BEC-like = deuterium=20 fusion. Plenty of studies have found excess heat anomalies in palladium = using=20 hydrogen, as well as deuterium, even though the pathways may be slightly = different. Given that the deuteron has both bosonic properties (its = nucleus) and=20 fermionic properties (the whole atom), we could be breaching some = interesting=20 new approaches to LENR. And there is little doubt among many=20 open-minded observers that there is some connection between high=20 temperature superconductivity and LENR effects.
 
In the Dec. 16 issue of "Nature", a team of physicists from Rice = and=20 elsewhere (Richard should be pleased to see Rice in the news) offers an=20 explanation of the way quantum effects could create some of these = strange=20 properties that in heavy fermion materials. I think that they are just=20 scratching the surface of a very "heavy" sub-field.
 
"Our findings represent a clear-cut advance in the understanding of = the=20 electron's organizing principle in quantum-critical matters," said = theoretical=20 physics Qimiao Si, a paper co-author  "The work could be important = to the=20 physics of a broad range of materials, including high-temperature=20 superconductors and carbon nanotubes.
 
Note: The good professor Si somehow failed to mention LENR in that = "broad=20 range.". Imagine that ! A physics professor who once again overlooks=20 LENR....
 
The new research reported in "Nature" bolsters the growing = theoretical and=20 experimental work in a new subfield of condensed matter physics known as = "correlated electron physics."  The impetus for correlated electron = physics=20 is the fact that the standard theory of metals cannot explain the = electronic=20 workings of materials that contain "correlated," or strongly interacting = electrons.
 
Sounds to me like they are coming at the whole phenomenon of the = Hydrino=20 and BEC-like fusion, a.k.a. LENR, from another perspective, and blindly = one must=20 add....
 
Oh well, Rice's loss could be the "cold fusioneers" gain. But then = again,=20 once someone in the marginalized LENR camp does prove the certain = reality=20 of LENR (it has already been proven many times over, all that is = lacking=20 now is a self-powered demo, the *undeniable* proof) then at that = point, it=20 should surprise no one if some of these professorial-types don't = immediately=20 jump out of the wood-work claiming to have known it all along. A few of = them are=20 no doubt even deep-closet lurkers on vortex (who may have enlisted their = lowest=20 performing grad student to sign up with Bill B, so as to remain = anonymous until=20 the proper time ....
 
Jones
------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C4E354.B93F2DE0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 12:44:24 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 iBGKgpQP030325; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:44:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGKg7Ji029912; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:42:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:42:07 -0800 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: star wars rides again Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:40:03 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56988 X-Loop: vortex-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. >From my perspective, living in NYC, you seem a little overconcerned. First, if you had an ICBM with a nuke, would you launch at Anchorage or Seattle? Not to mention, what would be the point of it? He's got a return address, you know, and last time I checked we've got a collection of WMD's unmatched by anyone on the planet. For what it's worth, an old friend of mine worked on one of the negotiating committees that we use to deal with NK, and when I put this to him, he laughed and said "Keith, NK was so full of s**t I needed waders just to get into my office. All they want is some oil and food so the entire regime doesn't collapse on itself. This whole stink has been caused by us cutting that off. It is the morally correct thing to do so, as the regime really is monstrously oppressive, but please don't expect waves of missles to come flying out of Pyongyang anytime soon." Secondly, and you knew I was coming to this (grin), I've seen 21st century combat up close and personal ( it tooks weeks for the smell of dead bodies and burnt drywall to clear here ). I'm not sure how the (nonfunctioning) missle defense system was supposed to help us there. This problem with transnational terrorism is going to get worse if we continue to fight it like the cold war. Their effectiveness has a lot more to do with our leadership failures than their great strength and cunning. K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 1:00 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: star wars rides again At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote: >...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no >need for it. You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 13:23:55 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 iBGLMPB1004948; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:23:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGLMNtD004923; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:22:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:22:23 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=Yfn1711Bt4tKtRq31IYjkZvLfVyn2lZ60rXWqjSf6B4wHp9NYgSdvAT/Oh8mIKl6peJkX7rEXotMGXCgYLApgAxfNjJt1VL4RwbtNXp3VFT7eXrdiakttOApW0RFoEeW/fucL7t+yXf0JG15w49srabSjhnlTb7PStcKyTrehno= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:20:51 -0700 From: leaking pen Reply-To: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: star wars rides again In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: Resent-Message-ID: <-oo68B.A.1MB.PyfwBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56989 X-Loop: vortex-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, trust me, they can hit into western nevada. and why hit alaska instead? howsabout the military research facilities, the oil facilities, and the fact that if they hit a military target, and not a population center, in a bonafide act of war, no other country will strike them. if they hit LA, the entire island, nk and sk both, would glow for a million years under the combined arsenal of a dozen countries. and also, if they hit a military target, we here in teh us wouldnt dare hit a population center in reataliation. the rest of the world would strike US, and we would know it. On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:40:03 -0500, Keith Nagel wrote: > Hey Horace. > > From my perspective, living in NYC, you seem a little > overconcerned. First, if you had an ICBM with a nuke, > would you launch at Anchorage or Seattle? Not to > mention, what would be the point of it? He's got > a return address, you know, and last time I checked > we've got a collection of WMD's unmatched by anyone > on the planet. For what it's worth, an old friend of > mine worked on one of the negotiating committees that > we use to deal with NK, and when I put this to him, > he laughed and said "Keith, NK was so full of s**t > I needed waders just to get into my office. All they > want is some oil and food so the entire regime doesn't > collapse on itself. This whole stink has been caused > by us cutting that off. It is the morally correct thing to > do so, as the regime really is monstrously oppressive, > but please don't expect waves of missles to come flying out > of Pyongyang anytime soon." > > Secondly, and you knew I was coming to this (grin), > I've seen 21st century combat up close and personal > ( it tooks weeks for the smell of dead bodies and > burnt drywall to clear here ). I'm not sure how the > (nonfunctioning) missle defense system was supposed > to help us there. This problem with > transnational terrorism is going to get worse if > we continue to fight it like the cold war. Their > effectiveness has a lot more to do with our leadership > failures than their great strength and cunning. > > K. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] > Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 1:00 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: star wars rides again > > At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote: > >...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no > >need for it. > > You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, in > Alaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad the > missle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missile > defense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^) > > 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 Thu Dec 16 13:45:25 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 iBGLhnQP024221; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:45:10 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGLhjEp024181; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:43:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:43:45 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C2017B.7080709@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:43:23 -0500 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: star wars rides again 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/56990 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: leaking pen wrote: >terry, trust me, they can hit into western nevada. and why hit alaska >instead? howsabout the military research facilities, the oil >facilities, and the fact that if they hit a military target, and not a >population center, in a bonafide act of war, no other country will >strike them. if they hit LA, the entire island, nk and sk both, would >glow for a million years under the combined arsenal of a dozen >countries. and also, if they hit a military target, we here in teh us >wouldnt dare hit a population center in reataliation. the rest of the >world would strike US, and we would know it. > > >On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:40:03 -0500, Keith Nagel wrote: > > >>Hey Horace. >> >>From my perspective, living in NYC, you seem a little >>overconcerned. >> No, that was Keith "Blue State" Nagel. I'm Terry "Red State" Blanton. But! Now that you have brought me into the fray . . . the range of Taepo-dong 2 is a gross extrapolation and would likely self destruct on launch: http://www.fas.org/main/article_archive.jsp?formAction=295&articleId=26 and even if it could carry the 1000 kg payload described here: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/missile/td-2.htm I seriously doubt that NK has developed a weapon capable of missile launch survival even if it is small enough to be carried on TD-2. What *does* worry me is the massing of Chinese troups on the NK border. Our hawkbilled president just might pull a Milo Minderbinder and hire China to fight NK for us. However. That NK leader with the bad "do" *does* need a haircut . . . just below his chin. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 13:57:09 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 iBGLteQP030735; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:57:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBGLtdWg030717; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:55:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:55:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C2044A.7060309@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:55:22 -0500 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: star wars rides again Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <0SR4B.A.5fH.bRgwBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56991 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: leaking pen wrote: >actually, part one was aimed at you, part two at him. but hey. and >yes, theyve done succesful test launches into the ocean showing they >can hit a mark at that distance. no, i dont have links. > They have launched a Taepo-dong 1 which has a 1500 km range . . . a glorified SCUD. I am not aware of a successful TD-2 launch. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 16 18:25:14 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 iBH2Ni9E015952; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:25:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBH2Ndti015910; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:23:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:23:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=pxrV9bQsUH6JHw+TlmCCgjd+wRpI/bEKo+u6RE9njho/1JgRlPHdXM8nOoFVtmzWoA5yQE5Zhqi1fAPzzbw3uHFyfZqJrVEbwoNWRoRU9R+1IgP5W/DuUDDYcSvG0vM7YvfbGVxZkNukELUl95jDZ0O6cW7Kyt66rf5Px2IlgOY= ; Message-ID: <20041217022208.8466.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:22:08 -0800 (PST) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Colloidal Palladium role in cold fusion? 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/56992 X-Loop: vortex-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 new to the cold fusion field but just glanced at a good primer by Ed Storms http://www.lenr-canr.org/StudentsGuide.htm Just a few questions I have... Is palladium as an electrode essential for cold fusion experiments? What about the possibility of producing water that has palladium colloids, or minute deposits of palladium made as colloidal palladium water by high voltage arc methods? I've been into the silver colloidal water thing for a couple of years and just made a couple of batches to get over a cold. Silver has amazing germicidal qualities and is non toxic for drinking purposes. I understand that silver is the only metal that will easily produce colloids by simply sending a direct DC current through water using pure silver electrodes, and it is very reactive, but by keeping the current under one milliamp between electrodes, the preferable smaller colloids are produced without excessive black deposits of silver oxide(?) forming on the positive terminal. I am told that it is the positive terminal that outputs the metal into the water as a colloid.( For low voltage DC regimens) In later experiments for other purposes I wanted to made a water that would be slightly magnetic, so I tried the same low voltage DC technique with magnetic Canadian coins of nickel. This did not work, and I was informed then that only silver will work with that DC low voltage method, and for production of other colloidal waters, high voltage arcing methods must be used. Typically an AC neon transformer is used to produce an underwater arcing between electrodes from what I understand. Now I have become interested in making some gold colloidal water, which uses are questionable for ingestion, but it is said to be useful for mental clarity. I have these huge induction coils that produce a very good DC induction arc so I wish to employ that method of arcing to produce the gold colloids. Since I am going to try doing this, it also occured to me that it might be useful to produce some palladium colloidal water for electrolysis experiments. I tried this with silver water, but all it did was gradually make silver deposits on the electrodes, and precipitated black deposits taken out of the solution at the bottom of the water; and the gold color of the solution gradually diminished, implying the the DC potential difference of electrodes has taken the silver colloids out of the solution, also implying that it must be a predominantly ionic colloidal deposit made by that low voltage method. If the same thing were to occur with a palladium colloidal solution; would this not be a method to "electroplate" a small amount of palladium of the electrodes themselves, if they were not themselves palladium? Might this not be useful for producing electrodes with a small amount of palladium imbedded into them? Palladium sheet itself seems to be fairly expensive, probably a hundred dollars for a couple of square inches at best. But I noticed I could obtain a foot of wire for the same cost at Surepure Chemetals http://www.surepure.com/products.php?ID=1&subCat=10 Dont know if it would be worth my while to try making a palladium colloidal solution, or whether if it is even possible, as my chemistry knowledge is null. It probably has a lot to do with valences of metal atoms, and whether they can be reactive enough to produce colloids, I dont know, but I thought I would throw out the idea to vortex list to see if I get any comments on this from others far more knowledgable on the subject. Following is a post to a gold colloidal list; cg_exchange@yahoogroups.com : describing my proposed DC induction arc methoid for producing colloids... The way I will first try this is unconventional. I plan to instead use a DC induction arc. If this fails I have NST's at my disposal. I am open to any comments on the issue of DC vs AC. In my early experimentation with the ordinary methods of making silver colloidal water with troy once bars immersed in distilled water, I tried AC with that method and obtained no results, DC is essential in that process, but I understand that high voltage AC with an arcing process also produces good results. This induction arc method may be beyond the scope of most experimentors because of the size of the inductors needed to procure a decent induction arc, but I will also make a suggestion for those wishing to pursue the matter, but first I should determine whether it will work. It is my belief that air core inductors should produce the best induction arc. The induction arc is actually a high voltage method although relatively low DC voltages can be inputed into the coil. Many years ago I built an unconventional copper magnetic motor somewhat based on the Newman machine. I used 4 huge coils of copper wire to do this. The primary problem with the machine construction wise was that horrendous induction arcs occured on the commutator when the polarity of the coils was shut down so it could be reversed. The rotating commutator actually encouraged this induction arc formation. This was because when the DC circuit is broken, the faster the speed of the breaking contacts, the higher the voltage that is generated on the induction arc. The coils I used were massive, some 9 miles of 23 gauge wire on a spool weighing 80 lbs, having 1000 ohms and 60 henry inductance. 440 AC from a step up transformer can be safely rectified to DC and passed through the 1000 ohm coils. One can easily procure a steady arc of 1/8 inch by just breaking the connection and gradually moving the break apart. However if one makes a break with great speed of separation, arcs longer then 1/8 inch result. The greater the effort to break the connection on the DC current, the faster the magnetic field collapses on itself, and this is the mechanism that creates a higher voltage then what the source is inputing. These DC induction arcs are very self sustaining, and actually probably represent an AC riding on the DC signal at presumably a high frequency. This superior continuity of the arc is the reason I wish to try DC, instead of AC high voltage for the arc, since apparently the method for making colloids at high voltage involves passing the arc through water, and keeping an arc going through water is a difficult proposition I would imagine. Perhaps some others more experienced on this matter can make a comment on whether they have difficulties on keeping an underwater arc going. As I have indicated, the more one tries to break the induction arc, the faster the magnetic field collapses on itself, and the higher the self generated voltage obtained form the collapsing magnetic field. Whether in fact the magnetic field collapses in a miniscule amount of time, and then reasserts itself in space by the field again expanding should be determined by scopings of an adjacent inductor over the coils pole, to see in fact if the suspected frequency of the AC signal riding on the DC can be scoped out. I know from past experience that these induction arcs cause massive radio interference, the process emits an electromagnetic wave. At one time I had accidently produced a singing arc, that emited a sort of high pitched weird musical note, but efforts to reproduce that effect failed. They actually have speakers that produce music from a vibrating arc, so those things are possible, but off topic for this discourse. Since the best induction arc is made with the highest relative motion of electrode breaking, I plan on having the water fall by gravity through the separated electrodes. Thus a moving water sample might achieve the same idea as moving electrodes to make a higher voltage at the induction arc. To accomplish this I will make 5 gallons at a time, placed in a holding container with a spout that leaks the water out 5 gallons per run. It may take many runs to accomplish a batch. I will also see if a cold temperature of the water is beneficial, as electrolysis experiments suggest that a wide variance of conductivity is achieved by temperature differences. The thought that air core inductors might provide a better induction arc is based on the fact that air core inductors have a magnetic field widely distributed in space, thus a higher speed of collapse, thus a higher voltage to enable the induction arc. Although we might achieve the needed high inductance with a ferromagnetic core, the magnetic field is then not widely distributed in space,it is confined to the low reluctance pathway of the metal if the core is close looped as in a transformer core; therefore the speed of the magnetic field collapse should not be as great. As an alternative to the large copper coils, I have a spool of steel tie ribbon, where I have noted that induction arcs can also be obtained from that coil. This is similar to what is used on a loaf of bread, to tie the bag closed at the end. My steel coil is ~ 2 henry @ 1500 ohms, obtained many years ago from factory employment. This may turn out to be a cheaper buy for those wishing to explore the induction arc method. It is thought that perhaps because the inductor wire is steel, this might aid in achieving a higher inductance, but I will try both copper and steel inductors and report back on the feasibility of using steel coils. Sincerely Harvey D Norris ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 04:19:22 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 iBHCHj9E011843; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:19:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHCHaqb011771; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:17:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 04:17:36 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jFmBzmuaQxsmR4UPlOtB/NUWLKZ8e+4XYgBWDEx4qG5TqpOahJh5qqItPl22i0TN; Message-ID: <410-2200412517111556210@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: Turkey Waste Remediates Nuclear Waste! Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:15:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403b3775af26993ce04bb0759239821034350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.216 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56994 X-Loop: vortex-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 Turkey droppings fuel power plant http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/16/energy.environment.turkeys.reut/index.html NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Turkey leftovers will take on a whole new use after a Minnesota company finishes construction of a power plant fired by the birds' droppings. "It may not be the total answer to relieving the United States' addiction to foreign oil, but the plant will burn 90 percent turkey dung and create clean power for 55,000 homes. Three poultry litter plants have already been built in England, but the Benson, Minnesota-based facility will be the first large-scale plant of its type in the U.S. and the largest in the world, according to operator Fibrominn, a subsidiary of power plant builder Homeland Renewable Energy, LLC of Boston. Turkey dung is prized over pig excrement and cow chips. "Poultry litter is drier material, so it burns better, and there's a lot of it," said Charles Grecco, of HH Media, LLC, an investment bank that helped arrange $202 million in financing for the plant. The 55-megawatt plant will burn 700,000 tons of dung a year and produce fertilizer as a by-product, a process that will keep phosphorus and nitrates found in the raw litter from seeping into water supplies, said Grecco. No extra amounts of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide would be emitted than would be naturally emitted as the dung decomposes, said Grecco. Utility Xcel has agreed to purchase the turkey power, said company spokesman Ed Legge. Under 1994 Minnesota state legislation, Xcel is required to buy a small amount of power made from biomass in exchange for clearance to store spent nuclear fuel outside its Red Wing nuclear plant in Minnesota. Fibrowatt, LLC, a Philadelphia-based developer, which is mostly owned by Homeland Renewable Energy, is pursing other plants in poultry-growing U.S. states." 55-megawatta is a lot of kilowatt-hours anally. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Turkey droppings fuel power plant
 

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Turkey leftovers will take on a whole new use after a Minnesota company finishes construction of a power plant fired by the birds' droppings.

"It may not be the total answer to relieving the United States' addiction to foreign oil, but the plant will burn 90 percent turkey dung and create clean power for 55,000 homes.

Three poultry litter plants have already been built in England, but the Benson, Minnesota-based facility will be the first large-scale plant of its type in the U.S. and the largest in the world, according to operator Fibrominn, a subsidiary of power plant builder Homeland Renewable Energy, LLC of Boston.

Turkey dung is prized over pig excrement and cow chips.

"Poultry litter is drier material, so it burns better, and there's a lot of it," said Charles Grecco, of HH Media, LLC, an investment bank that helped arrange $202 million in financing for the plant.

The 55-megawatt plant will burn 700,000 tons of dung a year and produce fertilizer as a by-product, a process that will keep phosphorus and nitrates found in the raw litter from seeping into water supplies, said Grecco.

No extra amounts of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide would be emitted than would be naturally emitted as the dung decomposes, said Grecco.

Utility Xcel has agreed to purchase the turkey power, said company spokesman Ed Legge. Under 1994 Minnesota state legislation, Xcel is required to buy a small amount of power made from biomass in exchange for clearance to store spent nuclear fuel outside its Red Wing nuclear plant in Minnesota.

Fibrowatt, LLC, a Philadelphia-based developer, which is mostly owned by Homeland Renewable Energy, is pursing other plants in poultry-growing U.S. states."

55-megawatta is a lot of kilowatt-hours anally.   :-)

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 05:42:04 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 iBHDeS9E018078; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:41:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHDeN1I018021; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:40:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:40:23 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001201c4e43d$c00b98e0$72027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Turkey in the straw Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:38:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E40B.74E93430"; 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/56995 X-Loop: vortex-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_000E_01C4E40B.74E93430 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E40B.74E93430" ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E40B.74E93430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankFred's post on the power plant fueled by turkey droppings gave me a = chuckle. I stand amazed at the ability of Boston's finest to make money = showing people the way to the post office. After running the numbers on = the cost vs operation there is NO WAY to ever make a profit..SO.. there = has to be another form of incentive.. err.. meaning government subsidy. = Which only goes to prove that it depends on who's doing the dealing.. = Enron or Boston. And Baron keeps saying Texas is part of some world oil conspiracy. Everybody in Texas knows Santa Ana won the war of 1836, it just took 160 = years for it to dawn. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E40B.74E93430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Fred's post on the power plant fueled by = turkey=20 droppings gave me a chuckle. I stand amazed at the ability of Boston's = finest to=20 make money showing people the way to the post office. After running the = numbers=20 on the cost vs operation there is NO WAY to ever make a profit..SO.. = there has=20 to be another form of incentive.. err.. meaning government subsidy. = Which only=20 goes to prove that it depends on who's doing the dealing.. Enron or=20 Boston.
And Baron keeps saying Texas is part of some = world oil=20 conspiracy.
Everybody in Texas knows Santa Ana won the war = of 1836,=20 it just took 160 years for it to dawn.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C4E40B.74E93430-- ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E40B.74E93430 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000d01c4e43d$bf7c0310$72027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C4E40B.74E93430-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 07:46:17 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 iBHFik9E014697; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:46:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHFifi2014663; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:44:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:44:41 -0800 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: Superluminal Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:43:08 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4E44F.1B262CD4" X-UoB-Sender: R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56996 X-Loop: vortex-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 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_01C4E44F.1B262CD4 Content-Type: text/plain Dear Vortex/Freenrg, Sorry I have not been able to pick up the thread fully of Horace's(?) article. I have written a short letter which is right at the start of my thoughts on the subject and it may get to the nub of the matter... It's not quite fully polished or finished yet and a few typos ('to' instead of 'two') I don't have time to correct just yet. I will try to stay around a bit longer. I'm sorry if I didn't answer any questions last time but may go and pull them out retrospectively. It's Christmas time and I won't be in much at the uni. and I like the free net connectivity here. I will upload this stuff to the university website if it is any good or leads somewhere, also once it is fixed and I can upload stuff again. http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/home.htm or more directly http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/Superluminal_Letter.pdf All the best, Happy holidays and peace to all, whoever you worship, Remi. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E44F.1B262CD4 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Vortex/Freenrg,

Sorry I have not been able to pick up the thread = fully of Horace's(?) article. I have written a short letter which is right at the start of = my thoughts on the subject and it may get to the nub of the matter... It's not quite fully polished or finished yet and a few typos ('to' instead of 'two') I don't have time to correct just = yet.

 

I will try to stay around a bit longer. I'm sorry if = I didn't answer any questions last time but may go and pull them out retrospectively. It's Christmas time and I won't be in much at the uni. and I like the free net connectivity here.

 

I will upload this stuff to the university website = if it is any good or leads somewhere, also once it is fixed and I can upload = stuff again.

 

http://www.corn-w= all.freeserve.co.uk/home.htm

or more directly

 

ht= tp://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/Superluminal_Letter.pdf

 

All the best, Happy holidays and peace to all, = whoever you worship,

Remi.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E44F.1B262CD4-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 07:46:18 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 iBHFikhs028520; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:46:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHFifWl028486; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:44:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:44:41 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004401c4e44e$aa5e3820$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041217022208.8466.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Colloidal Palladium role in cold fusion? Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 07:39:57 -0800 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/56997 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harvey, > Is palladium as an electrode essential for cold fusion > experiments? You can start with a premise that NO single feature is essential. Cold Fusion occurs sometimes with no power added to a loaded electrode but also with no real electrode; and in both light water and heavy water; and/or the gas phase of either. There is a wealth of information in the LENR-CANR archives, but since you are likely to be a person who prefers experiment over online research, why not start from the other end, and ask yourself, what resources can I put together to recognize cold fusion - i.e. am I going to learn calorimetrry, or can I built an dedicated instrument like a spectrometer? I mention spectrometry/spectroscopy because it has been used extensively by R. Mills in his work, with convincing results, but there is a huge gap in the use of spectroscopy in LENR, and given that the two fields may be related, that is a gap which could be filled by some enterprising experimenter. Plus spectroscopy is amenable to home-built meters; and best of all, NIST even has a program to supply the necessary semiconductors. http://physics.nist.gov/Divisions/Div841/Gp1/xuv.detectors/xuv.detectors.html Here is a source of the colloid. http://www.purestcolloids.com/mesopalladium.htm For instance, starting with the simplest kind of testing, it is possible that the LENR reaction will occur in a Pd-colloid under irradiation at a specific frequency, perhaps in a microwave oven. It is possible that this reaction, in addition to excess heat, will release photons in spectra where they are not expected, like the ultraviolet or soft x-rays. Since the LENR reaction often "continues" for a time period after irradiation, testing is simplified. Good luck, Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 08:02:13 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 iBHG0h9E021746; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:02:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHG0gls021719; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:00:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:00:42 -0800 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: RESEND, ascii, Superluminal Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:59:19 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UoB-Sender: R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id iBHFxJ9E021215 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56998 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (resend as plain text) Dear Vortex/Freenrg, Sorry I have not been able to pick up the thread fully of Horace's(?) article. I have written a short letter which is right at the start of my thoughts on the subject and it may get to the nub of the matter... It's not quite fully polished or finished yet and a few typos ('to' instead of 'two') I don't have time to correct just yet.   I will try to stay around a bit longer. I'm sorry if I didn't answer any questions last time but may go and pull them out retrospectively. It's Christmas time and I won't be in much at the uni. and I like the free net connectivity here.   I will upload this stuff to the university website if it is any good or leads somewhere, also once it is fixed and I can upload stuff again.   http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/home.htm or more directly   http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/Superluminal_Letter.pdf   All the best, Happy holidays and peace to all, whoever you worship, Remi. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 17 11:44:34 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 iBHJh6hs007991; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:44:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBHJh4lB007970; Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:43:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:43:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-2200412517194239270@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, December 17, 2004 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:42:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d892cb535fd5e38ed30c238325379aa612c6b317bf5bc479bb350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.9.161 Resent-Message-ID: <11G_PC.A.e8B.IbzwBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/56999 X-Loop: vortex-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: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 12/17/2004 10:25:16 AM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, December 17, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 17 Dec 04 Washington, DC 1. MISSILE DEFENSE: EXPLAIN TO ME AGAIN WHY THEY WERE TESTING IT? The Missile Defense Agency said this week's flop would not affect the decision to declare the system operational. In the previous test, two years ago, the kill vehicle failed to separate from the booster. That was unfortunate, but MDA said it didn't affect the "success rate" because the interceptor never reached the "endgame" http://www.aps.org/WN/WN02/wn121302.cfm. This week, the Missile Defense Agency tried again. This time the interceptor failed to make it out of the silo. In April, a GAO report said the tests were not realistic. The MDA director, General Kadish, director explained, "you can't operationally test the system until you put it in place" http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn043004.cfm. So what's the problem? There are now 6 interceptors in place in Ft. Greely, AK, just hanging out waiting to be tested operationally. 2. NASA: THE SEARCH IS ON FOR SOMEONE TO REPLACE SEAN O'KEEFE. General Kadish is said to be high on the list. Under O'Keefe, top NASA positions were often filled by military men, but competition is stiff. Although several former astronauts are rumored to on the list, the front runner is thought to be Bob Walker, a former Member of Congress who was chair of the House Science Committee. He predicted the space station would produce a Nobel Prize, backed cold fusion, and introduced his Hydrogen Futures Act, which in the initial version violated the First Law of Thermodynamics. He is now the Chairman of Wexler & Walker, a Washington lobbying firm tied to science and space interests. A member of the President's Moon-Mars commission, Walker has no science background, but then neither does O'Keefe, who has just accepted the job of Chancellor of Louisiana State University. He says he took it for the money. 3. THE HUBBLE FACTOR: O'KEEFE SHOULD BE GIVEN A MEDAL OF FREEDOM. O'Keefe bore none of the blame for the Columbia accident, but it led to the Hubble problem. The Columbia review called for using the ISS as safe haven in case of a shuttle problem, but that's not practical for a shuttle flight to the Hubble orbit. While O'Keefe pushed hard for the President's Moon-Mars plan, he decided Hubble should go. O'Keefe is going instead. It's time to start over. Put the shuttles in museums, and drop the ISS in the Philippine Trench, but take care of Hubble till it can be replaced. In the meantime, if Tenet is awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom after telling the President that weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are a "slam-dunk," why not give one to O'Keefe? 4. TARGETED PRAYER: "PRAYER WARRIORS" ARE LINKED BY THE INTERNET. On ABC World News Tonight with Peter Jennings there was a report about Christian prayer teams organized over the internet from the World Prayer Center in Colorado Springs. By praying in unison for specific targets they say the effect is multiplied. They could pray for Missile Defense. It will have as much effect as a test. 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 Sat Dec 18 00:56:25 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 iBI8stf7014576; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:56:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBI8rSTN013971; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:53:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:53:28 -0800 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, 17 Dec 2004 23:59:49 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: RESEND, ascii, Superluminal Resent-Message-ID: <6L_tmB.A.MaD.HA_wBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57000 X-Loop: vortex-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 6:59 AM 12/17/4, R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk wrote: > >I will upload this stuff to the university website if it is any good or >leads somewhere, also once it is fixed and I can upload stuff again. > >http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/home.htm >or more directly > >http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/Superluminal_Letter.pdf The problem with obtaining interference patterns at a distant location appears to me to be at least in part a problem of attenuation. When a member of an entangled pair of photons interacts with matter, especially in a potentially polarizing interaction, the photons lose entanglement. An entangled photon that goes through a polarizing filter, for example, loses any prior entanglements. The attenuation problem is thus two-fold. First, photons are just plain lost to absorbtion. Secondly, of the small percentage that arrives, many have lost entanglement and thus act randomly. For these reasons, it is necessary to do coincidence counting to establish the inerference pattern and this requires an alternative channel. If this alternative channel can communicate faster than light, then no other channel is needed. It appears that using intermediary photon-atom entanglement at Bob's (receiving) location does not circumvent this problem, and in fact complicates things because then even coincidence counting is no longer reliable. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 04:51:17 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 iBICnpf7001863; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:51:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBICmUPW001426; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:48:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:48:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 07:48:11 EST Subject: Merry Christmass..I played you a nice Christmass Jingle To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c.3a9be2f8.2ef5810b_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <-tLQ3D.A.OW.dcCxBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57001 X-Loop: vortex-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_c.3a9be2f8.2ef5810b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It is the best I can do. Enjoy. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/sounds/jingle.mid Frank Z --part1_c.3a9be2f8.2ef5810b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It is the best I can do.  Enjo= y.

http://www= .angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/sounds/jingle.mid

Frank Z --part1_c.3a9be2f8.2ef5810b_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 10:57:12 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 iBIItff7018146; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:57:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBIItcIh018125; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:55:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:55:38 -0800 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: OFF TOPIC Star wars rides again Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:57:44 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041215171513.02944068@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041215171513.02944068@pop.mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412181357.44246.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57002 X-Loop: vortex-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 Wednesday 15 December 2004 17:17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Yee haw!!! > > - Jed > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > New York Times, December 15, 2004 > > Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in Failure > > By DAVID STOUT > > WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - An important test of the United States' emerging > missile-defense system ended in an $85 million failure early today as an > interceptor rocket failed to launch as scheduled from the Marshall Islands, > the Pentagon said. > > A target rocket carrying a mock warhead was successfully launched from > Kodiak, Alaska. But the interceptor, which was to have gone aloft 16 > minutes later and picked off the target 100 miles over the earth, > automatically shut down instead because of "an unknown anomaly," the > Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency said. > > Despite the disappointment, today's event was not a total failure, said > Richard A. Lehner, an agency spokesman. He said "quite a bit" had been > learned from the aborted test, which he called "a very good training > exercise." He noted that the rocket that failed to rise can be used later. > The target rocket landed in the ocean some 3,000 miles from Kodiak, he > said. . . . Hello again listers, Again the government insistance on rocketry to do what a laser can do much better leads to only further expensive futility. The only upside of this is the fact that those officials only plan to defend the highest govenment political centers with these failed antimissile systems. It is claimed that no money exists to do more. Maybe after a war actually happens and our incompetant and corrupt leadership is the first to be wiped out, we can then get down to the business of really protecting us. Lasers are the only way to go. They are efficiently re-usable. If a shot misses, charge it up and fire it again. Firing at the speed of light, few shots should miss when using proper radar targeting; the target will not have time to react when the firing sequence from initial target-lock to fire-for-effect to target-strike is in the order of microseconds. Unless the whole project is a sham and the funds expended for it a known scam. But that would mean the employees on the project would all be fools or liars.......all of them. It would also mean that the government, not wanting to be embarrased, would hide all the details that it could under a blanket of 'information classification'; and would try to persecute anyone who said anything about it. We have a window of opportunity of only a few years before enough small countries have missile technologies and nuclear warhead technologies that it will be quite likely that we will be attacked by one of the more insane among them. Best we put our money into technologies that have shown a tendancy to work and work well. We have on the one hand lasers that can shoot down artillery shells and missiles of many sizes at many trajectories and incident velocities and do it cheaply, just a few thousand dollars a shot.......or less with an upgraded free electron laser! One the other hand there are the missiles that fail more often than not and may never prove to be dependable except for one notable feature, mainly that every shot from a missile will cost you and me many millions of dollars. Lasers can be quickly re-charged. Missiles take time. Lots of time! And when they fail, they often take the launch pads with them. It can take years to rebuild launch pads. Maybe our enemies will wait........ haw....haw....haw! Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 18 11:31:29 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 iBIJU3ob017877; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:31:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBIJTplu017817; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:29:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:29:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <30D2.C45249F0@ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 20:28:19 -0700 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: Colloidal Palladium role in cold fusion? References: <20041217022208.8466.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57003 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harvey, I made a few comments in the text. Regards, Ed Storms Harvey Norris wrote: > > Hi all... > I'm new to the cold fusion field but just glanced at a > good primer by Ed Storms > http://www.lenr-canr.org/StudentsGuide.htm > Just a few questions I have... > Is palladium as an electrode essential for cold fusion > experiments? No, but it has been given the greatest study. > What about the possibility of producing water that has > palladium colloids, or minute deposits of palladium > made as colloidal palladium water by high voltage arc > methods? This is called palladium-black and can be made using several different methods. Some produce active material and some do not. I've been into the silver colloidal water > thing for a couple of years and just made a couple of > batches to get over a cold. Silver has amazing > germicidal qualities and is non toxic for drinking > purposes. I understand that silver is the only metal > that will easily produce colloids by simply sending a > direct DC current through water using pure silver > electrodes, and it is very reactive, but by keeping > the current under one milliamp between electrodes, the > preferable smaller colloids are produced without > excessive black deposits of silver oxide(?) forming on > the positive terminal. I am told that it is the > positive terminal that outputs the metal into the > water as a colloid.( For low voltage DC regimens) Silver colloid can be retained by the solution only because a small fraction of the AgO colloidal particles are neutral so that they do not plate out on the electrodes. However, most particles have a charge and plate on both electrodes, producing a growing deposit that is very complex. When ingested, the AgO forms AgCl, which provides a buffered, low concentration of Ag+ ions, which are the actual active component. Ag+ at too high a concentration forms metallic silver in contact with tissue so that formation of this compound is essential to carry the correct concentration throughout the body without loss of Ag+ and graying of tissue that might be in contact. In > later experiments for other purposes I wanted to made > a water that would be slightly magnetic, so I tried > the same low voltage DC technique with magnetic > Canadian coins of nickel. This did not work, and I was > informed then that only silver will work with that DC > low voltage method, and for production of other > colloidal waters, high voltage arcing methods must be > used. Typically an AC neon transformer is used to > produce an underwater arcing between electrodes from > what I understand. Now I have become interested in > making some gold colloidal water, which uses are > questionable for ingestion, but it is said to be > useful for mental clarity. I have these huge induction > coils that produce a very good DC induction arc so I > wish to employ that method of arcing to produce the > gold colloids. Since I am going to try doing this, it > also occured to me that it might be useful to produce > some palladium colloidal water for electrolysis > experiments. I tried this with silver water, but all > it did was gradually make silver deposits on the > electrodes, and precipitated black deposits taken out > of the solution at the bottom of the water; and the > gold color of the solution gradually diminished, > implying the the DC potential difference of electrodes > has taken the silver colloids out of the solution, > also implying that it must be a predominantly ionic > colloidal deposit made by that low voltage method. If > the same thing were to occur with a palladium > colloidal solution; would this not be a method to > "electroplate" a small amount of palladium of the > electrodes themselves, if they were not themselves > palladium? Might this not be useful for producing > electrodes with a small amount of palladium imbedded > into them? Yes, and this and other methods have been tried with mixed success. Palladium sheet itself seems to be fairly > expensive, probably a hundred dollars for a couple of > square inches at best. But I noticed I could obtain a > foot of wire for the same cost at > Surepure Chemetals > http://www.surepure.com/products.php?ID=1&subCat=10 > > Dont know if it would be worth my while to try making > a palladium colloidal solution, or whether if it is > even possible, as my chemistry knowledge is null. It > probably has a lot to do with valences of metal atoms, > and whether they can be reactive enough to produce > colloids, I dont know, but I thought I would throw out > the idea to vortex list to see if I get any comments > on this from others far more knowledgable on the > subject. Following is a post to a gold colloidal list; > cg_exchange@yahoogroups.com : describing my proposed > DC induction arc methoid for producing colloids... > > The way I will first try this is unconventional. I > plan to instead use a DC induction arc. If this fails > I have NST's at my disposal. I am open to any comments > on the issue of DC vs AC. In my early experimentation > with the ordinary methods of making silver colloidal > water with troy once bars immersed in distilled water, > I tried AC with that method and obtained no results, > DC is essential in that process, but I understand that > high voltage AC with an arcing process also produces > good results. This induction arc method may be beyond > the scope of most experimentors because of the size of > the inductors needed to procure a decent induction > arc, but I will also make a suggestion for those > wishing to pursue the matter, but first I should > determine whether it will work. > > It is my belief that air core inductors should produce > the best induction arc. The induction arc is actually > a high voltage method although relatively low DC > voltages can be inputed into the coil. Many years ago > I built an unconventional copper magnetic motor > somewhat based on the Newman machine. I used 4 huge > coils of copper wire to do this. The primary problem > with the machine construction wise was that horrendous > induction arcs occured on the commutator when the > polarity of the coils was shut down so it could be > reversed. The rotating commutator actually encouraged > this induction arc formation. This was because when > the DC circuit is broken, the faster the speed of the > breaking contacts, the higher the voltage that is > generated on the induction arc. The coils I used were > massive, some 9 miles of 23 gauge wire on a spool > weighing 80 lbs, having 1000 ohms and 60 henry > inductance. 440 AC from a step up transformer can be > safely rectified to DC and passed through the 1000 ohm > coils. One can easily procure a steady arc of 1/8 inch > by just breaking the connection and gradually moving > the break apart. However if one makes a break with > great speed of separation, arcs longer then 1/8 inch > result. The greater the effort to break the connection > on the DC current, the faster the magnetic field > collapses on itself, and this is the mechanism that > creates a higher voltage then what the source is > inputing. These DC induction arcs are very self > sustaining, and actually probably represent an AC > riding on the DC signal at presumably a high > frequency. This superior continuity of the arc is the > reason I wish to try DC, instead of AC high voltage > for the arc, since apparently the method for making > colloids at high voltage involves passing the arc > through water, and keeping an arc going through water > is a difficult proposition I would imagine. Perhaps > some others more experienced on this matter can make a > comment on whether they have difficulties on keeping > an underwater arc going. > > As I have indicated, the more one tries to break the > induction arc, the faster the magnetic field collapses > on itself, and the higher the self generated voltage > obtained form the collapsing magnetic field. Whether > in fact the magnetic field collapses in a miniscule > amount of time, and then reasserts itself in space by > the field again expanding should be determined by > scopings of an adjacent inductor over the coils pole, > to see in fact if the suspected frequency of the AC > signal riding on the DC can be scoped out. I know > from past experience that these induction arcs cause > massive radio interference, the process emits an > electromagnetic wave. At one time I had accidently > produced a singing arc, that emited a sort of high > pitched weird musical note, but efforts to reproduce > that effect failed. They actually have speakers that > produce music from a vibrating arc, so those things > are possible, but off topic for this discourse. > > Since the best induction arc is made with the highest > relative motion of electrode breaking, I plan on > having the water fall by gravity through the separated > electrodes. Thus a moving water sample might achieve > the same idea as moving electrodes to make a higher > voltage at the induction arc. To accomplish this I > will make 5 gallons at a time, placed in a holding > container with a spout that leaks the water out 5 > gallons per run. It may take many runs to accomplish a > batch. I will also see if a cold temperature of the > water is beneficial, as electrolysis experiments > suggest that a wide variance of conductivity is > achieved by temperature differences. > > The thought that air core inductors might provide a > better induction arc is based on the fact that air > core inductors have a magnetic field widely > distributed in space, thus a higher speed of collapse, > thus a higher voltage to enable the induction arc. > Although we might achieve the needed high inductance > with a ferromagnetic core, the magnetic field is then > not widely distributed in space,it is confined to the > low reluctance pathway of the metal if the core is > close looped as in a transformer core; therefore the > speed of the magnetic field collapse should not be as > great. > > As an alternative to the large copper coils, I have a > spool of steel tie ribbon, where I have noted that > induction arcs can also be obtained from that coil. > This is similar to what is used on a loaf of bread, to > tie the bag closed at the end. My steel coil is ~ 2 > henry @ 1500 ohms, obtained many years ago from > factory employment. This may turn out to be a cheaper > buy for those wishing to explore the induction arc > method. It is thought that perhaps because the > inductor wire is steel, this might aid in achieving a > higher inductance, but I will try both copper and > steel inductors and report back on the feasibility of > using steel coils. > > Sincerely Harvey D Norris > > ===== > Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 08:14:51 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 iBJGDLXN008485; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:14:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJGDGce008435; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:13:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:13:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C5A91A.8040502@rtpatlanta.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:15:22 -0500 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 Subject: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime 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/57004 X-Loop: vortex-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://reuters.myway.com/article/20041217/2004-12-17T200534Z_01_N17264117_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-ARMS-MISSILE-KOREA-DC.html< I don't think NK's alleged ballistic weapons are any more of a threat to the US than our missile defense system is to their missiles. :-) Bluff and counter bluff. I don't, however, enjoy a game of poker where I'm one of the stakes. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 08:41:46 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 iBJGeLXN015609; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:41:42 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJGcwnY015204; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:38:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:38:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003801c4e5e8$8f54f6e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: OFF TOPIC: Sunday Sci-Sermonette Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:34:06 -0800 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/57005 X-Loop: vortex-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 foray into the hazy interface between science and religion, beware... If you are of a "certain age", then you probably have a famous"intro" already etched into memory - in neurons adjoining "in the beginning". Can't you (almost) hear the distinctive voice of Rod Serling from beyond the grave... "there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone..." Is that Rod's spirit, somehow speaking into your mind's ear; and even if not, just how is memory of things long past related to the soul-concept and its ability to transfer information non-physically, whether it be it about Serling, or simply about survival? Among "Science Magazine's "The Top Ten Science Breakthroughs of 2004" and coming in at "only" Number Three is "the story that wasn't"... a.k.a. "the cloning of human embryos." Imagine that. Cloning humans these days won't even make you runner-up in the rankings of any given year ! Ha ! Actually cloning humans is not exactly what happened in Korea, but leave it to the atheistic far-left AND the religious far-right to put their own reactionary spin on anything that touches on the concept of soul. Some of these special-interest spins are almost comical in intensity. The implications of this story may appear to threaten the core of some beliefs, but in reality, should not threaten anyone with half a brain, or a soul. "Science" magazine later clarified the story to say that although other mammals have been cloned, the South Korean scientist's work was the first to demonstrate a technique which could work with human cells for other purposes than propagation. Hwang's research was not an attempt to genetically duplicate a human, but was rather aimed at creating an adequate supply of embryonic stem cells for research purposes. Neither side took much notice of that. The lines had already been drawn, and the religious far-right had already decided that it would rather protect the unborn than relieve the misery of those already born but afflicted with disease - (according to the spin of the atheistic far-left) which disease which now will be cured through stem cell research (at least now that Hwang has somewhat negated Bush, the puppet of the far-right (according to the other camp) and his pre-emptive strike against stem cell technology). This story has brought out the worst of both extremes - the atheists and the religious far-right. Check out this little bit of over-stepping: "The fact it can be done begins to move us away from some of the mysteries surrounding human beings; things like the existence of a soul, which frankly is pure imagination," a British researcher glibly told the BBC News... or try this one: "Award should go instead to the so-called "creation scientists" (is that a self-contradiction in terms, or what) for discovering that all previous science is false; and in fact the world is little more than a giant ant farm amusement box, created 6000 years ago by a cloud dwelling egomaniac, who likes to play tricks like making rocks appear older than they are". But even if it had been a successful cloning experiment for propagation, which it was not, does that step (which will happen, if it hasn't already) even hint at disproving the idea of a "non-physical continuance" (i.e. the legacy which is soul) ? Well that really depends on how carefully one chooses words. The reason that successful cloning would potentially shed any at light all on the idea of the soul is that soul was formerly (pre-Sheldrake) the one thing which was said by religions to make us uniquely human, and was given to us by God (or for some agnostics and Buddhists it is a product of an evolutionary process which is god-like). Despite any similarity between a soul and an evolved Morphogenetic Field, our soul didn't need to "evolve," even if we did - or so say other spiritualists, who accept some science but not all. This is hard to distinguish from the Sci-Fi related notion that soul migrated to earth from elsewhere (with of without the cosmic road map supplied by a higher power). So instead of only two camps, two very divergent camps on this issue, there are at least seven or eight possibilities regarding a non-physical identity and recurrent legacy and vis-a-vis a creator: 1) Soul was given to a previously soul-less creature by God the standard view of organized religion a) Only appears in a human once (Western view) b) Appears cyclically with accumulating baggage (East) 2) No soul at all and no God, pure animal existence But even some agnostics accept the reality of soul 3) Soul, derived by natural process (the meme-soul) a) Step-wise progression, lower animals having substantial soul b) Critical mass reached for humans, lower animals having no comparative higher level soul 4) Soul as a universal feature, having migrated here from elsewhere a) Under the guidance of God b) By itself 5) God as being the accumulation of all-souls a) Soul preexisting but evolving rapidly (reincarnation) b) Everything is derived from laws, nothing pre-existent There is overlap here, but consequently, because of this complexity nothing that can be said which is going to please everyone. We share almost 99% of our genes with apes and chimps, but some of those on the far-right want to believe that these "relatives" have zero soul, except maybe the meme-type of transference (related to "form" not morality), in the tradition of Sheldrake. In effect, this is one reason why the reality of "evolution" is so painful to some, at least those of limited intelligence. They have yet to figure out how to deal with the idea that man evolved, much less than how soul could do something similar. And even if soul did "evolve" like the physical counterpart, that fact itself does not also imply that apes have 99% of a human soul... Or perhaps more importantly to some of those who are also card-carrying NRA members it does threaten the prospect that their favorite game quarry will now be off-limits.... such as, say the magnificent elk having 87.23% of a soul. They don't mind shooting a beautiful mature animal, even though they do not need it for sustenance, yet they will not allow stem cells to be extracted from a fetus, to advance the state of medicine. The logic astounds. If one really wants to refine the concept of a non-physical continuance or legacy, and even find some physical evidence (over and above Sheldrake) then - first and foremost, we need to get a handle on the concept of "paradigm shift," and particularly on the more basic question of our "true" identity. Are we human beings who have evolved the ability to have a spiritual experience, OR are we spiritual beings who are confined to an animalistic existence, OR are we a bit of both (or neither)? And most importantly for the future, would we (if we are spiritual beings) benefit from a better engineered "vehicle" - whether it be from genetics OR a combination of mechanical components with a mechanical brain (AI computer) more on that provocative idea later. One can think of paradigm-shift as a change from one way of thinking to another; but the concept has become far more versatile than that. True, it is a revolution, a transformation, a sort of metamorphosis but not just limited to a "way of thinking." The concept of paradigm shift also applies to the underlying mechanics of transformation, and how it is driven by gradual agents of change to suddenly become different in all respects from what existed before - the "tipping point" or "critical mass" are two other ways of expressing the concept. Similarly, agents of change are driving a new paradigm shift today. The signs are all around us - the computer, the internet, and most important to those "select" individuals who may be reading this - alternative energy and especially "infinite energy" of the LENR or ZPE variety. Jed Rothwell's new book, and the highly speculative final chapters, got me thinking about the future and how LENR combined with advancements in personal computer and wireless communication have and will continue to impact both personal and business environments, but on a grander scale and as a catalyst for paradigm-shift in our real identity. As a society we are shifting from a mechanistic, exploitive manufacturing, dependent industrial society to an organic, service based, self-sufficient, information centered society, and increases in technology will continue to advance but at an ever-increasing rate. It will be mind-boggling. Change is inevitable. It's the only true constant. And that applies to our own evolution as a species. I will do Rothwell one better with the prediction that within a short period after widespread LENR implementation, some of us (all voluntary) will poised to enter the 22 Century as a new species, either as a genetically refined elite, not too different physically OR in a more mechanical appearance. And yes, the AI super-computer which controls any mechanical implementation will be equipped with a "soul" receptacle, and this will be "after" that technology has been actually proven to be able provide all the features needed for the type of continuance we seek. In conclusion, for millions of years we have been evolving and will continue to do so, but now at an increasing rate. Change is difficult, and most humans naturally resist change; however, a process has been set in motion which is now poised to actually change our true identity. And, unlike drama, the process is unstoppable, despite the heroics of any future Neo, Morpheus, and Trinity. The soul is a cultural construct. That is unquestionable. It may or may not have been implemented on another (higher) level, but for some purposes that is irrelevant. It has societal benefits as long as people believe in it. When people stop believing, it will either be refined or dropped, but they will never stop believing because it is a form of identity and continuance, which will always be beneficial. >From a personal standpoint, I can't imagine why cloning has much bearing on the concept of soul. The threat to religion goes way beyond cloning. The human body is a vessel that creates a space for the soul, but there could eventually be a better vehicle of our own creation, whether it be composed of carbohydrates (through cloning) or advance materials (through manufacturing). If that is the case, then we will be compelled to redefine the God-concept in an alternative way: as cyclical, epochal, ever-advancing, recurring - as more than the sum of all present souls, but less than the many superlatives that some would like to burden the concept with. At that point the method by which the physical body is created- whether in factories, beakers, body shops, or booty calls- may well have no bearing on the resulting product. Fifteen years ago, I became very enamored with this idea that evolution was pointing the way for us humans to shed a biological identity in favor of "manufactured" identity... BUT that such a paradigm-shift did not at all require society to change its spiritual orientation much, as reactionary observers might imply. I have a 500 page manuscript to prove it, which was presented to practically every publisher in New York. I have a nice pile of rejection letters somewhere, and most of them are surprisingly complementary. But all say the same thing - where is the market for this concept - there is no target audience as it offends almost every "sensibility" - or "Sci-Fi readers don't buy philosophy." Here is a few paragraphs from one of the chapters, shortened from 25 pages to one: Pure Thought, Human Brains and "Artificial" Intelligence Of course machines can think They just don't - yet And perhaps when they can, they will choose not to; just like us. -Oliver Selfridge What is really so special about the thinking ability of an exceptional human? Until the advent of electronics, the most compelling reason to be precise in defining intelligence was pedantic, but with the introduction of advanced computers, it seems that vanity has become a revealing issue. It is clear that very shortly in time, IQ testing of the Binet variety will not provide humans with any advantage. Realizing this growing capability of machines, a few humans have exerted great effort in the past decade to try to erect a contrived barrier that would somehow "sanctify" only one kind of intelligence. The sanctification of a particular class of thinker goes beyond the limits of science, of course, but more alarmingly, it obscures the profound and consequential question: our true essence and identity. A crucial debate in twenty-first century morality will likely center on whether our future as thinking beings is irrevocably tied to the continued adaptability of an animal species; or alternatively whether technology will deliver us from that organic heritage, should it ever become unquestionably advantageous, in "our" broader identity as "sentient beings". We can scarcely afford to limit our options in this regard, given the demonstrable frailty of biological life in the face of cosmological whim.. Intelligence is certainly more than problem solving and more than admirable emotional ability combined with problem solving. The capability to observe and generalize, to form analogies, to think symbolically, to be creative, and to communicate ideas orally and visually all signify aspects of intellect. The psychologist J.P. Guilford cataloged 120 different types of responses that are associated with intellectual ability. If one could weight these factors properly, it might be possible to arrive at an adequate but overly complex method for certifying intelligence. Howard Gardner has systematically grouped intelligence into seven broad types, which has helped to structure the objective indicia. A most simplified but adequate definition has been suggested by Christopher Evans, that being the ability of a system to adjust to a changing world. A similar conclusion is Jeremy Campbell's notion of "worldliness." Yet these simple definitions may themselves be unnecessarily subjective. Defining any reasonably broad term can involve a certain amount of semantic recursion, and intelligence and information are reflexive words that can be mutually dependent upon each other for meaning. Any system that utilizes information in a goal-directed way has some claim to intelligence - and even the "goal" part of the equation is only important to demonstrate that the information, the critical element, has objective significance. Using self-contained information to alter a future state, particularly for gain (either individual gain or group-oriented gain), is the key to intelligence. But information perceived and retained, even if it is not used immediately, can also signify a latent level of intelligence. Everything gets back to "information" as a generic basis. Information has both epistemological and theological connotations, as it conveys the substance, more so than the details, of relationships from an accumulated past. Information should be distinguished from mere data - which is temporal, random, unorganized and sterile - rather, it connotes essence, record, symbol, and generalization. It is from an overly narrow perspective that data-information has been argued to useless without the subjective concept of "meaning." >From this viewpoint, Theodore Roszak asserts that "ideas create information," but there is a more inclusive level of understanding that goes the other way. In an expansive field-delineated sense, information can be seen as an end into itself, its own idea, incorporating both data and "virtual" meaning - suggestive, even, of a free-floating agency without other participation as in the meme-ideal. The 'virtual meaning" implicit in information is not only potential meaning but the ability to self-generate individual collaborators, information accumulators, over time. It will be used in this broad context throughout this analysis. The difference in perspective on the nature of information adds a new dimension to the famous solipsism of Bishop Berkeley - the one which suggested that the falling tree makes no sound if there is no human present to hear it. The pragmatist maintains that the falling tree creates an objective flurry of vibrations at acoustic frequencies, even if there is no human present to confirm a subjective sound, for several related reasons. Most obviously, it would be extreme conceit to suppose that all sentient forms, seen or unseen could be identified, if not nullified by one narrow class of observer, Homo sapiens. For the traditionalist, moreover, it negates most perceptions of divinity to suggest that "some" intelligence is not always present, as the good Bishop was aware. Secondly, despite the fact that subatomic events are minutely altered by the very act of perception (the basis of an extended uncertainty principle which is multiplied to theatrical proportions by philosophical discourse), the effect is trivial and statistically correctable to an accuracy exceeding instrumentation. Physical activity at the lowest level, where atoms bump into atoms, has a large scale continuity that is assumptive of perception rather than independent of perception). Otherwise, there would be numerous unacceptable consequences- such as lapses of cause and effect which would be quite glaring in a predominantly deterministic universe. If lapses exist, they are isolated and probably nonrandom. A few observers have argued that reality cannot exist independently from the observer based upon an exaggerated if not mocking interpretation of quantum uncertainty - aware that like atheists they can tarnish the majority opinion with little risk of being disproven. The 4D approach to the nature of information, presented here, compounds the analysis by asserting that as events recur and accumulate past a critical level, a degree of retentiveness becomes intrinsic; that is, a field emanates and propagates its own vitality. This outlook suggests that habitual activity becomes a tentative subfield which is self-perpetuating to a degree through correlation effects, having the capacity over extended duration to organize and induce its own image into its proximity. Information, then, is both virtual intelligence and causative, as it is capable of stimulating self-referential changes in 3D reality which can eventually engender a physical information accumulator. .... more later Jones Oh. And one further ironic thing about Rod Serling and his legacy, which will live-on for a long time and has already been reincarnated in such writers as Stephen King, soul or no soul. In his last interview, four months before his untimely death (from a heavy cigarette habit) Serling was asked about the soul, life after death ,and reincarnation. He said, "I don't believe in reincarnation. That's a cop-out. . . . I anticipate death will be a totally unconscious void in which you float through eternity with no particular consciousness of anything." BTW there is enough trivia about Serling for two books. Harlan Ellison, Stephen King, Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson, Sidney Sheldon and J. Michael Straczynski all wrote episodes for him. The opening and closing music was done by The Grateful Dead. His cast of actors who would often work for union minimums include: Robert Redford, Ron Howard, William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, Carol Burnett, Charles Bronson, Dennis Hopper, Robert Duvall, Julie Newmar, Burt Reynolds, Martin Balsam, Art Carney, James Coburn, Peter Falk, Buster Keaton, Jack Klugman, Cloris Leachman, Lee Marvin, Burgess Meredith, John Astin, Roddy McDowell, Vera Miles, Mickey Rooney and Jonathan Winters.... to name but a few. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 08:43:16 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 iBJGfqXN016057; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:43:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJGeUhI015676; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:40:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:40:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C5AEEA.2BC73131@ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:40:10 -0700 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime References: <41C5A91A.8040502@rtpatlanta.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <15HTOC.A.40D.-7axBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57006 X-Loop: vortex-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 think you all are missing the point of the missile defense system. It is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now. In addition, it is a means to keep some of the companies who support Bush et al. alive and profitable. As always, justification for a government action is camouflaged by an argument that can be sold to the American people, rather like the Iraq invasion. Ed Terry Blanton wrote: > > >http://reuters.myway.com/article/20041217/2004-12-17T200534Z_01_N17264117_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-ARMS-MISSILE-KOREA-DC.html< > > I don't think NK's alleged ballistic weapons are any more of a threat to > the US than our missile defense system is to their missiles. :-) > > Bluff and counter bluff. I don't, however, enjoy a game of poker where > I'm one of the stakes. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 08:46:06 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 iBJGic5H006573; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:45:58 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJGgoXr005998; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:42:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:42:50 -0800 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 Cc: vortex-l Subject: Re: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:41:11 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: <4mbbs09uevh9ptdpue89on36c19502d9jb@4ax.com> References: <41C5A91A.8040502@rtpatlanta.com> In-Reply-To: <41C5A91A.8040502@rtpatlanta.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 iBJGfS5H005644 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57007 X-Loop: vortex-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 Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:15:22 -0500, you wrote: > >http://reuters.myway.com/article/20041217/2004-12-17T200534Z_01_N17264117_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-ARMS-MISSILE-KOREA-DC.html< > >I don't think NK's alleged ballistic weapons are any more of a threat to >the US than our missile defense system is to their missiles. :-) > >Bluff and counter bluff. I don't, however, enjoy a game of poker where >I'm one of the stakes. --- You're not. ;) -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 09:38:22 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 iBJHanXN031318; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:38:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJHamFP031294; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:36:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:36:48 -0800 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, 19 Dec 2004 08:43:12 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57008 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:15 AM 12/19/4, Terry Blanton wrote: >Bluff and counter bluff. I don't, however, enjoy a game of poker where >I'm one of the stakes. You may not be, but, being in Alaska I am a take, or shoudl I say steak? 8^) BTW, during the Cuban missile crisis I hear it was suggested Alaskans might want to leave because Alaska was not defensable. There is more defense here now, but missiles remain a problem. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 10:58:26 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 iBJIusXN019598; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:58:16 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJIurPp019587; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:56:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:56:53 -0800 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: OFF TOPIC: Sunday Sci-Sermonette Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:55:12 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <003801c4e5e8$8f54f6e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57009 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Whew! Jones is rocking and rolling this morning, I suspect something stronger than wheaties is at work here ... You deserve some kind of stab at discussion for all this. Cloning as a technology would seem to shed little or no light on this soul concept. A clone is just an artificial twin; natural twins have existed since time began and as we see, despite identical hardware the software can be markedly different. That said, I think that it will amaze near-future genetic researchers just how much of our behavior is due to the hardware. It is only in this way that modern science can be thought to be eroding the notion of a soul, in that it can separate out the effects of the programming from the physical mechanism. People seem unduly bothered by the whole clone business; I think outside of a few specialized industries cloning will have little effect on our culture. About the only really troubling application for cloning is also the most tantalizing, as a source for spare parts. A clone may not make your soul distributed and physically immortal, but it'll go a long way towards keeping you functioning in later life. I think the reluctance to cloning is a sales problem, and I have a modest proposal to encourage those of the "cloud dwelling egomaniacal" persuasion that cloning can be of signal benefit to religion and mankind. It is said by the fundamentalists that all will be resolved when Jesus returns to earth in a physical form. Yet, it's been 2000+ years, and no word yet. Perhaps the problem is one of lack of will on our part. Maybe it's like the monolith from 2001, a challenge of knowledge. So here's the proposal. It is claimed by the Church that relics of the saints have been preserved in various forms, hair, digits, various internal organs, etc. So it seems possible that some samples of Jesus's DNA could be recovered from the Shroud of Turin or some such thing. Now some of the relics are just pig femurs and such, but surely at least one will pan out and we'll have some Jesus DNA. Now we set to work, and implement the biblical prediction of the Second Coming. But ours will be far better. Not only will we be able to reproduce Jesus "to spec", even including a reproduction of the virgin birth, but we can MASS PRODUCE Jesus by cloning! Imagine making the notion of a personal Jesus more than just an exercise of faith, but a physical reality! Immediately most major problems of man are solved. Hunger? Just grab your neighborhood Jesus and have him whip up some loaves and fishes. Need to cross a river or ocean? Jesus water taxi! The UN could send a small army of Jesii into troubled places for peace keeping missions, who better than the Prince of Peace himself? BTW, is the plural of Jesus, Jesii? Just trying to get my nomenclature straight here. As far as this list is concerned, I'm not too sure about the energy aspects of Jesus, but it's said that he had a halo and glowed which suggests at least some sort of Cherenkov radiation, so perhaps there are nuclear reactions that Jesus can catalyze. We'll know soon enough when we have enough Jesii to experiment with. I could go on at length about this, but hey please join in yourself with more suggestions. Anyway, you can bet W. isn't going to be too thrilled when the real McCoy comes knocking en masse on the Whitehouse door ( lots of embarrassing questions to answer and dead children to explain ) but the Chinese will certainly see the benefit here despite being Buddhists and help us out. Then we could really kick out the jams and get Jesus into every home, heck I'm imagining a big Wal-Mart floor display of various models of Jesus for those everyday low prices. Big discounts right before Christmas. Cloning is not only a good thing, God requires us to pursue it so as to make real the biblical prediction of the Second Coming. So how about it, Red? Or is it the case that having a real physical Jesus around to tell you what he really thinks about your behavior just a bit too uncomfortable? Something to think about... ...and, Merry Christmas everyone! K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 11:34 AM To: vortex Subject: OFF TOPIC: Sunday Sci-Sermonette Another foray into the hazy interface between science and religion, beware... If you are of a "certain age", then you probably have a famous"intro" already etched into memory - in neurons adjoining "in the beginning". Can't you (almost) hear the distinctive voice of Rod Serling from beyond the grave... "there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone..." Is that Rod's spirit, somehow speaking into your mind's ear; and even if not, just how is memory of things long past related to the soul-concept and its ability to transfer information non-physically, whether it be it about Serling, or simply about survival? Among "Science Magazine's "The Top Ten Science Breakthroughs of 2004" and coming in at "only" Number Three is "the story that wasn't"... a.k.a. "the cloning of human embryos." Imagine that. Cloning humans these days won't even make you runner-up in the rankings of any given year ! Ha ! Actually cloning humans is not exactly what happened in Korea, but leave it to the atheistic far-left AND the religious far-right to put their own reactionary spin on anything that touches on the concept of soul. Some of these special-interest spins are almost comical in intensity. The implications of this story may appear to threaten the core of some beliefs, but in reality, should not threaten anyone with half a brain, or a soul. "Science" magazine later clarified the story to say that although other mammals have been cloned, the South Korean scientist's work was the first to demonstrate a technique which could work with human cells for other purposes than propagation. Hwang's research was not an attempt to genetically duplicate a human, but was rather aimed at creating an adequate supply of embryonic stem cells for research purposes. Neither side took much notice of that. The lines had already been drawn, and the religious far-right had already decided that it would rather protect the unborn than relieve the misery of those already born but afflicted with disease - (according to the spin of the atheistic far-left) which disease which now will be cured through stem cell research (at least now that Hwang has somewhat negated Bush, the puppet of the far-right (according to the other camp) and his pre-emptive strike against stem cell technology). This story has brought out the worst of both extremes - the atheists and the religious far-right. Check out this little bit of over-stepping: "The fact it can be done begins to move us away from some of the mysteries surrounding human beings; things like the existence of a soul, which frankly is pure imagination," a British researcher glibly told the BBC News... or try this one: "Award should go instead to the so-called "creation scientists" (is that a self-contradiction in terms, or what) for discovering that all previous science is false; and in fact the world is little more than a giant ant farm amusement box, created 6000 years ago by a cloud dwelling egomaniac, who likes to play tricks like making rocks appear older than they are". But even if it had been a successful cloning experiment for propagation, which it was not, does that step (which will happen, if it hasn't already) even hint at disproving the idea of a "non-physical continuance" (i.e. the legacy which is soul) ? Well that really depends on how carefully one chooses words. The reason that successful cloning would potentially shed any at light all on the idea of the soul is that soul was formerly (pre-Sheldrake) the one thing which was said by religions to make us uniquely human, and was given to us by God (or for some agnostics and Buddhists it is a product of an evolutionary process which is god-like). Despite any similarity between a soul and an evolved Morphogenetic Field, our soul didn't need to "evolve," even if we did - or so say other spiritualists, who accept some science but not all. This is hard to distinguish from the Sci-Fi related notion that soul migrated to earth from elsewhere (with of without the cosmic road map supplied by a higher power). So instead of only two camps, two very divergent camps on this issue, there are at least seven or eight possibilities regarding a non-physical identity and recurrent legacy and vis-a-vis a creator: 1) Soul was given to a previously soul-less creature by God the standard view of organized religion a) Only appears in a human once (Western view) b) Appears cyclically with accumulating baggage (East) 2) No soul at all and no God, pure animal existence But even some agnostics accept the reality of soul 3) Soul, derived by natural process (the meme-soul) a) Step-wise progression, lower animals having substantial soul b) Critical mass reached for humans, lower animals having no comparative higher level soul 4) Soul as a universal feature, having migrated here from elsewhere a) Under the guidance of God b) By itself 5) God as being the accumulation of all-souls a) Soul preexisting but evolving rapidly (reincarnation) b) Everything is derived from laws, nothing pre-existent There is overlap here, but consequently, because of this complexity nothing that can be said which is going to please everyone. We share almost 99% of our genes with apes and chimps, but some of those on the far-right want to believe that these "relatives" have zero soul, except maybe the meme-type of transference (related to "form" not morality), in the tradition of Sheldrake. In effect, this is one reason why the reality of "evolution" is so painful to some, at least those of limited intelligence. They have yet to figure out how to deal with the idea that man evolved, much less than how soul could do something similar. And even if soul did "evolve" like the physical counterpart, that fact itself does not also imply that apes have 99% of a human soul... Or perhaps more importantly to some of those who are also card-carrying NRA members it does threaten the prospect that their favorite game quarry will now be off-limits.... such as, say the magnificent elk having 87.23% of a soul. They don't mind shooting a beautiful mature animal, even though they do not need it for sustenance, yet they will not allow stem cells to be extracted from a fetus, to advance the state of medicine. The logic astounds. If one really wants to refine the concept of a non-physical continuance or legacy, and even find some physical evidence (over and above Sheldrake) then - first and foremost, we need to get a handle on the concept of "paradigm shift," and particularly on the more basic question of our "true" identity. Are we human beings who have evolved the ability to have a spiritual experience, OR are we spiritual beings who are confined to an animalistic existence, OR are we a bit of both (or neither)? And most importantly for the future, would we (if we are spiritual beings) benefit from a better engineered "vehicle" - whether it be from genetics OR a combination of mechanical components with a mechanical brain (AI computer) more on that provocative idea later. One can think of paradigm-shift as a change from one way of thinking to another; but the concept has become far more versatile than that. True, it is a revolution, a transformation, a sort of metamorphosis but not just limited to a "way of thinking." The concept of paradigm shift also applies to the underlying mechanics of transformation, and how it is driven by gradual agents of change to suddenly become different in all respects from what existed before - the "tipping point" or "critical mass" are two other ways of expressing the concept. Similarly, agents of change are driving a new paradigm shift today. The signs are all around us - the computer, the internet, and most important to those "select" individuals who may be reading this - alternative energy and especially "infinite energy" of the LENR or ZPE variety. Jed Rothwell's new book, and the highly speculative final chapters, got me thinking about the future and how LENR combined with advancements in personal computer and wireless communication have and will continue to impact both personal and business environments, but on a grander scale and as a catalyst for paradigm-shift in our real identity. As a society we are shifting from a mechanistic, exploitive manufacturing, dependent industrial society to an organic, service based, self-sufficient, information centered society, and increases in technology will continue to advance but at an ever-increasing rate. It will be mind-boggling. Change is inevitable. It's the only true constant. And that applies to our own evolution as a species. I will do Rothwell one better with the prediction that within a short period after widespread LENR implementation, some of us (all voluntary) will poised to enter the 22 Century as a new species, either as a genetically refined elite, not too different physically OR in a more mechanical appearance. And yes, the AI super-computer which controls any mechanical implementation will be equipped with a "soul" receptacle, and this will be "after" that technology has been actually proven to be able provide all the features needed for the type of continuance we seek. In conclusion, for millions of years we have been evolving and will continue to do so, but now at an increasing rate. Change is difficult, and most humans naturally resist change; however, a process has been set in motion which is now poised to actually change our true identity. And, unlike drama, the process is unstoppable, despite the heroics of any future Neo, Morpheus, and Trinity. The soul is a cultural construct. That is unquestionable. It may or may not have been implemented on another (higher) level, but for some purposes that is irrelevant. It has societal benefits as long as people believe in it. When people stop believing, it will either be refined or dropped, but they will never stop believing because it is a form of identity and continuance, which will always be beneficial. >From a personal standpoint, I can't imagine why cloning has much bearing on the concept of soul. The threat to religion goes way beyond cloning. The human body is a vessel that creates a space for the soul, but there could eventually be a better vehicle of our own creation, whether it be composed of carbohydrates (through cloning) or advance materials (through manufacturing). If that is the case, then we will be compelled to redefine the God-concept in an alternative way: as cyclical, epochal, ever-advancing, recurring - as more than the sum of all present souls, but less than the many superlatives that some would like to burden the concept with. At that point the method by which the physical body is created- whether in factories, beakers, body shops, or booty calls- may well have no bearing on the resulting product. Fifteen years ago, I became very enamored with this idea that evolution was pointing the way for us humans to shed a biological identity in favor of "manufactured" identity... BUT that such a paradigm-shift did not at all require society to change its spiritual orientation much, as reactionary observers might imply. I have a 500 page manuscript to prove it, which was presented to practically every publisher in New York. I have a nice pile of rejection letters somewhere, and most of them are surprisingly complementary. But all say the same thing - where is the market for this concept - there is no target audience as it offends almost every "sensibility" - or "Sci-Fi readers don't buy philosophy." Here is a few paragraphs from one of the chapters, shortened from 25 pages to one: Pure Thought, Human Brains and "Artificial" Intelligence Of course machines can think They just don't - yet And perhaps when they can, they will choose not to; just like us. -Oliver Selfridge What is really so special about the thinking ability of an exceptional human? Until the advent of electronics, the most compelling reason to be precise in defining intelligence was pedantic, but with the introduction of advanced computers, it seems that vanity has become a revealing issue. It is clear that very shortly in time, IQ testing of the Binet variety will not provide humans with any advantage. Realizing this growing capability of machines, a few humans have exerted great effort in the past decade to try to erect a contrived barrier that would somehow "sanctify" only one kind of intelligence. The sanctification of a particular class of thinker goes beyond the limits of science, of course, but more alarmingly, it obscures the profound and consequential question: our true essence and identity. A crucial debate in twenty-first century morality will likely center on whether our future as thinking beings is irrevocably tied to the continued adaptability of an animal species; or alternatively whether technology will deliver us from that organic heritage, should it ever become unquestionably advantageous, in "our" broader identity as "sentient beings". We can scarcely afford to limit our options in this regard, given the demonstrable frailty of biological life in the face of cosmological whim.. Intelligence is certainly more than problem solving and more than admirable emotional ability combined with problem solving. The capability to observe and generalize, to form analogies, to think symbolically, to be creative, and to communicate ideas orally and visually all signify aspects of intellect. The psychologist J.P. Guilford cataloged 120 different types of responses that are associated with intellectual ability. If one could weight these factors properly, it might be possible to arrive at an adequate but overly complex method for certifying intelligence. Howard Gardner has systematically grouped intelligence into seven broad types, which has helped to structure the objective indicia. A most simplified but adequate definition has been suggested by Christopher Evans, that being the ability of a system to adjust to a changing world. A similar conclusion is Jeremy Campbell's notion of "worldliness." Yet these simple definitions may themselves be unnecessarily subjective. Defining any reasonably broad term can involve a certain amount of semantic recursion, and intelligence and information are reflexive words that can be mutually dependent upon each other for meaning. Any system that utilizes information in a goal-directed way has some claim to intelligence - and even the "goal" part of the equation is only important to demonstrate that the information, the critical element, has objective significance. Using self-contained information to alter a future state, particularly for gain (either individual gain or group-oriented gain), is the key to intelligence. But information perceived and retained, even if it is not used immediately, can also signify a latent level of intelligence. Everything gets back to "information" as a generic basis. Information has both epistemological and theological connotations, as it conveys the substance, more so than the details, of relationships from an accumulated past. Information should be distinguished from mere data - which is temporal, random, unorganized and sterile - rather, it connotes essence, record, symbol, and generalization. It is from an overly narrow perspective that data-information has been argued to useless without the subjective concept of "meaning." >From this viewpoint, Theodore Roszak asserts that "ideas create information," but there is a more inclusive level of understanding that goes the other way. In an expansive field-delineated sense, information can be seen as an end into itself, its own idea, incorporating both data and "virtual" meaning - suggestive, even, of a free-floating agency without other participation as in the meme-ideal. The 'virtual meaning" implicit in information is not only potential meaning but the ability to self-generate individual collaborators, information accumulators, over time. It will be used in this broad context throughout this analysis. The difference in perspective on the nature of information adds a new dimension to the famous solipsism of Bishop Berkeley - the one which suggested that the falling tree makes no sound if there is no human present to hear it. The pragmatist maintains that the falling tree creates an objective flurry of vibrations at acoustic frequencies, even if there is no human present to confirm a subjective sound, for several related reasons. Most obviously, it would be extreme conceit to suppose that all sentient forms, seen or unseen could be identified, if not nullified by one narrow class of observer, Homo sapiens. For the traditionalist, moreover, it negates most perceptions of divinity to suggest that "some" intelligence is not always present, as the good Bishop was aware. Secondly, despite the fact that subatomic events are minutely altered by the very act of perception (the basis of an extended uncertainty principle which is multiplied to theatrical proportions by philosophical discourse), the effect is trivial and statistically correctable to an accuracy exceeding instrumentation. Physical activity at the lowest level, where atoms bump into atoms, has a large scale continuity that is assumptive of perception rather than independent of perception). Otherwise, there would be numerous unacceptable consequences- such as lapses of cause and effect which would be quite glaring in a predominantly deterministic universe. If lapses exist, they are isolated and probably nonrandom. A few observers have argued that reality cannot exist independently from the observer based upon an exaggerated if not mocking interpretation of quantum uncertainty - aware that like atheists they can tarnish the majority opinion with little risk of being disproven. The 4D approach to the nature of information, presented here, compounds the analysis by asserting that as events recur and accumulate past a critical level, a degree of retentiveness becomes intrinsic; that is, a field emanates and propagates its own vitality. This outlook suggests that habitual activity becomes a tentative subfield which is self-perpetuating to a degree through correlation effects, having the capacity over extended duration to organize and induce its own image into its proximity. Information, then, is both virtual intelligence and causative, as it is capable of stimulating self-referential changes in 3D reality which can eventually engender a physical information accumulator. .... more later Jones Oh. And one further ironic thing about Rod Serling and his legacy, which will live-on for a long time and has already been reincarnated in such writers as Stephen King, soul or no soul. In his last interview, four months before his untimely death (from a heavy cigarette habit) Serling was asked about the soul, life after death ,and reincarnation. He said, "I don't believe in reincarnation. That's a cop-out. . . . I anticipate death will be a totally unconscious void in which you float through eternity with no particular consciousness of anything." BTW there is enough trivia about Serling for two books. Harlan Ellison, Stephen King, Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson, Sidney Sheldon and J. Michael Straczynski all wrote episodes for him. The opening and closing music was done by The Grateful Dead. His cast of actors who would often work for union minimums include: Robert Redford, Ron Howard, William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, Carol Burnett, Charles Bronson, Dennis Hopper, Robert Duvall, Julie Newmar, Burt Reynolds, Martin Balsam, Art Carney, James Coburn, Peter Falk, Buster Keaton, Jack Klugman, Cloris Leachman, Lee Marvin, Burgess Meredith, John Astin, Roddy McDowell, Vera Miles, Mickey Rooney and Jonathan Winters.... to name but a few. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 11:14:17 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 iBJJCt5H019778; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:14:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJJCqII019754; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:12:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:12:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008701c4e5fe$1093ebc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: magnetic vector potential Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:08:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0084_01C4E5BB.01FB2DA0" 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/57010 X-Loop: vortex-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_0084_01C4E5BB.01FB2DA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As I recall there were recently a number of vortexians who doubted that = the vector potential can be put to any practical use. Here is some = interesting work, which George Holz is involved with: http://jlnlabs.imars.com/vpexp/ I struggled for a while to imagine how one could possibly exploit this. = No claim is made for it being OU now. That probably awaits the advent of = RTSC. But even then, is there an implementation that outputs electric = current? Imagine 6 pairs of these coils surrounding another toroid - which can be = a one turn conductor... or 6 of these around a ferrite forming a "unit" and imagine 6 of those = units around a one turn wire connected to load. Frank Grimer's = coils-within-coils, ad infinitum... Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0084_01C4E5BB.01FB2DA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As I recall there were recently a number of vortexians who = doubted=20 that the vector potential can be put to any practical use. Here is some=20 interesting work, which George Holz is involved with:
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/vpexp/<= /A>
 
I struggled for a while to imagine how one could possibly exploit = this. No=20 claim is made for it being OU now. That probably awaits the advent of = RTSC. But=20 even then, is there an implementation that outputs electric = current?
 
Imagine 6 pairs of these coils surrounding another toroid - which = can be a=20 one turn conductor... or
 
6 of these around a ferrite forming a "unit" and imagine 6 of = those=20 units around a one turn wire connected to load. Frank Grimer's=20 coils-within-coils, ad infinitum...
 
Jones
------=_NextPart_000_0084_01C4E5BB.01FB2DA0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 11:23:46 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 iBJJMC5H022594; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:23:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJJM9Z3022560; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:22:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:22:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008d01c4e5ff$5abd67c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: Sunday Sci-Sermonette Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:17:16 -0800 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/57011 X-Loop: vortex-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, >" It is claimed by the Church that relics of the saints have been preserved in various forms, So it seems possible that some samples of Jesus's DNA could be recovered from the Shroud of Turin... we'll have some Jesus DNA. Now we set to work, and implement the biblical prediction of the Second Coming. But ours will be far better. Not only will we be able to reproduce Jesus "to spec", even including a reproduction of the virgin birth, but we can MASS PRODUCE Jesus by cloning!" My, my... speaking of spiked Wheaties.... OTOH, demonstrating once again that there is nothing new under the sun, check out "The Jesus Thief " by JR Lankford. and he was not the first. http://ship-of-fools.com/Myths/08Myth.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 11:30:17 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 iBJJT0XN027259; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:30:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJJSxg0027241; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:59 -0800 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: magnetic vector potential Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:27:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" 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: <008701c4e5fe$1093ebc0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57012 X-Loop: vortex-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 discussing this on a private list, but George hit on the same problem and posted publically about it. A torroid is a leaky animal, especially an air core one, which is what this resolves too when you saturate it with a big impulse as described and shown in the scope shots. That leakage flux will readily interact with the nail, hence the results as shown. The effect on dielectrics is hardly surprising either, given the strong electric fields caused by time changing flux. I'm just not seeing the anomaly here, excepting the laser experiment which needs to be replicated. If that proves reproducible then they might really have something... K. -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 2:08 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: magnetic vector potential As I recall there were recently a number of vortexians who doubted that the vector potential can be put to any practical use. Here is some interesting work, which George Holz is involved with: http://jlnlabs.imars.com/vpexp/ I struggled for a while to imagine how one could possibly exploit this. No claim is made for it being OU now. That probably awaits the advent of RTSC. But even then, is there an implementation that outputs electric current? Imagine 6 pairs of these coils surrounding another toroid - which can be a one turn conductor... or 6 of these around a ferrite forming a "unit" and imagine 6 of those units around a one turn wire connected to load. Frank Grimer's coils-within-coils, ad infinitum... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 13:49:14 2004 Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBJLnCjO008664; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:49:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJLmiLx008622; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:48:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:48:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra7.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C5F8B1.9050805@eskimo.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:54:57 -0800 From: Robert Brady User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Off Topic -- Big Bang Simulator Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010401070603040000090804" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57013 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. --------------010401070603040000090804 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit *I have packaged the simulator in a setup file and changed its location. For those wondering what this is all about: * * I built a Big Bang Simulator which, as it turns out, points toward many of the ideas of Le Sage. Of note, the experiment supports the idea that:* * "Random matter in a random energy field will self organize."* * The simulator shows that all the attributes of gravity are naturally created. * * * * It also suggests that a phase for the universe after expansion could occur whereby all matter disassociates because of the loss of gravity.* * * *I have placed a setup file and a paper on my website at http://www.eskimo.com/~rebdrady/bbang.msi * *If you have any trouble downloading the file or opening it, please let me know. Also I would like your comments if you have any.* * * <>*Robert E. Brady* *Sammamish**, **Washington**** 425-392-5059 * * * --------------010401070603040000090804 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have packaged the simulator in a setup file and changed its location.  For those wondering what this is all about:


    I built a Big Bang Simulator which, as it turns out, points toward many of the ideas of Le Sage.  Of        
    note, the experiment supports the idea that:

          “Random matter in a random energy field will self organize.”

    The simulator shows that all the attributes of gravity are naturally created. 

 

    It also suggests that a phase for the universe after expansion could occur whereby all matter
    disassociates because of the loss of gravity.

 

I have placed a setup file and a paper on my website at http://www.eskimo.com/~rebdrady/bbang.msi

If you have any trouble downloading the file or opening it, please let me know.  Also I would like your comments if you have any.

 

<>Robert E. Brady
Sammamish, Washington
425-392-5059

 

--------------010401070603040000090804-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 14:40:31 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 iBJMd1XN028949; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:40:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJMcxpC028929; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:38:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:38:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=U/Eb1zJfQdDAIfogIB+PLlEMYR2ewygIo7wD/yyYRlqir0IECcMd5TbZIgcmb5DMMS8v9IbtT7SvgIOq3/lMP+PZ4gTrI6UWfXoRv5poEGBuzWNVn80T4EYQGKX9ZtW4EsK8sP1A8qnxjC69uOZCrHbeiYxj12RZnDEB/dXU+t0= ; Message-ID: <20041219223731.78648.qmail@web51707.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:37:31 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <4mbbs09uevh9ptdpue89on36c19502d9jb@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/57014 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- John Fields wrote: > On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:15:22 -0500, you wrote: > > >I'm one of the stakes. > > --- > You're not. ;) Heck, a TD-1 could hit me with a little luck and a Cuban launch site. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 15:21:54 2004 Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBJNLmjO016170; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:21:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBJNLlw6016161; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:21:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:21:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra7.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C60B0E.4080709@eskimo.com> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:13:18 -0800 From: Robert Brady User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Off Topic -- Big Bang Simulator References: <41C5F8B1.9050805@eskimo.com> In-Reply-To: <41C5F8B1.9050805@eskimo.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040109070205040304080909" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57015 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. --------------040109070205040304080909 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Brady wrote: > *I have packaged the simulator in a setup file and changed its > location. For those wondering what this is all about: > * > > * > I built a Big Bang Simulator which, as it turns out, points toward > many of the ideas of Le Sage. Of > note, the experiment supports the idea that:* > > * "Random matter in a random energy field will self organize."* > > * The simulator shows that all the attributes of gravity are > naturally created. * > > * Sorry to give everyone a bad address again due to typo. It is > corrected below > * > > * It also suggests that a phase for the universe after expansion > could occur whereby all matter > disassociates because of the loss of gravity.* > > * * > > *I have placed a setup file and a paper on my website at > http://www.eskimo.com/~rebrady/bbang.msi > * > > *If you have any trouble downloading the file or opening it, please > let me know. Also I would like your comments if you have any.* > > * * > > <>*Robert E. Brady* > *Sammamish**, **Washington**** > 425-392-5059 > * > > * * > --------------040109070205040304080909 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Brady wrote:

I have packaged the simulator in a setup file and changed its location.  For those wondering what this is all about:


    I built a Big Bang Simulator which, as it turns out, points toward many of the ideas of Le Sage.  Of        
    note, the experiment supports the idea that:

          “Random matter in a random energy field will self organize.”

    The simulator shows that all the attributes of gravity are naturally created. 

 Sorry to give everyone a bad address again due to typo.  It is corrected below

    It also suggests that a phase for the universe after expansion could occur whereby all matter
    disassociates because of the loss of gravity.

 

I have placed a setup file and a paper on my website at http://www.eskimo.com/~rebrady/bbang.msi

If you have any trouble downloading the file or opening it, please let me know.  Also I would like your comments if you have any.

 

<>Robert E. Brady
Sammamish, Washington
425-392-5059

 


--------------040109070205040304080909-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 19 17:06:48 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 iBK15LXN014903; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:06:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBK15Foo014858; Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:05:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:05:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002c01c4e62f$c02f6740$2a027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Sunday sci-sermonette Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:03:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01C4E5FD.75056170" 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: <4oLZGB.A.GoD.KVixBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57016 X-Loop: vortex-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_0028_01C4E5FD.75056170 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0029_01C4E5FD.75056170" ------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C4E5FD.75056170 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankThoughtful and provocative post by Jones.=20 Greek... physce. the soul. Meaning even the brilliant ancients = recognized the concept. Science... the astounding speed of the advancement of science is only = matched by the greater speed of growth of government inertia. The = question becomes not how to apply advanced science , but how to hold = onto what we have. Russia held the lead in Physics for decades. Were = they able to translate this technology into what Jones has described as = the future? No, the Russian Empire imploded upon itself. The noise = created by their fall will pale in comparison to the implosion coming in = China that can be timed to coincide with the money crash in the USA. Literature... King James bible version of the birth of our Lord Jesus = Christ as written in Luke chapter 2 verses 1 to 20 ( the Christmas story = ) translated from the Greek and Hebrew is considered the most perfect = English prose ever written, exceeding Abraham Lincoln's letter ( now = displayed at Oxford as an example of English) to the mother of five sons = killed in the Civil war. Why waste time reading Stephen King novels. Religion... every band of people in recorded history left some = indication of their concept of religion including atheists and satanic = cults. Religions... are the most dangerous of human practices. A personal belief system is personal... a story comes to mind. In the = early west a doctor traveling by horseback came upon an indian youth = severely wounded. The doctor stopped and attended his wounds, although = the youth was terrified of the " white ". Further down the road the = doctor was confronted by the youth's warrior father. The warrior's creed = was to kill " whites". He asked the doctor.. why did you help the youth = and the doctor replied.. I have been given the gift of healing, my dream = spirit compels me to serve the needs of the sick. The warrior spared the = life of the doctor because he fully understood the meaning of a dream = spirit. Although we cannot measure it or touch it, human kindness, like = utter depravity's evil is real. You may not be able to define it , but = you recognize its presence. Even a uneducated warrior indian understood = the concept. How this concept can escape the intellectual in the = academic world is baffling to me. At the end of the discussion... there remains only two camps, as the = Bible so reads ;=20 To those that believe..its true.. to those that don't.. its not. People tend to complicate the scripture when its simplicity eludes the = wise because of its foolishness. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C4E5FD.75056170 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Thoughtful and provocative post by Jones. =
 
Greek... physce. the soul. Meaning even the = brilliant=20 ancients recognized  the concept.
 
Science... the astounding speed of the = advancement of=20 science is only matched by the greater speed of growth of government = inertia.=20 The question becomes not how to apply advanced science , but how to hold = onto=20 what we have. Russia held the lead in Physics for decades. Were they = able to=20 translate this technology into what Jones has described as the future? = No, the=20 Russian Empire  imploded upon itself. The noise created by their = fall will=20 pale in comparison to the implosion coming in China that can be timed to = coincide with the money crash in the USA.
 
Literature... King James bible version of = the birth=20 of our Lord Jesus Christ as written in Luke chapter 2 verses 1 = to=20 20 ( the Christmas story )  translated from the Greek and=20 Hebrew is considered the most perfect English prose ever written, = exceeding=20 Abraham Lincoln's letter ( now displayed at Oxford as an example of=20 English) to the mother of five sons killed in the Civil war. Why = waste time=20 reading Stephen King novels.
 
Religion... every band of people in recorded = history=20 left some indication of their concept of religion = including atheists and=20 satanic cults.
 
Religions... are the most dangerous of human=20 practices.
 
A personal belief system is personal...  = a story=20 comes to mind. In the early west a doctor traveling by horseback came = upon an=20 indian youth severely wounded. The doctor stopped and attended his = wounds,=20 although the youth was terrified of the " white ". Further down the road = the=20 doctor was confronted by the youth's warrior father. The warrior's creed = was to=20 kill " whites". He asked the doctor.. why did you help the youth and the = doctor=20 replied.. I have been given the gift of healing, my dream spirit = compels me=20 to serve the needs of the sick. The warrior spared the life of the = doctor=20 because he fully understood the meaning of a dream spirit. Although = we=20 cannot measure it or touch it, human kindness, like utter depravity's=20 evil is real. You may not be able to define it , but you recognize = its=20 presence. Even a uneducated warrior indian understood the concept. How = this=20 concept can escape the intellectual in the academic world is baffling to = me.
 
At the end of the discussion... there remains = only two=20 camps, as the Bible so reads ; 
To those that believe..its true.. to those = that don't..=20 its not.
 
People tend to complicate the scripture when = its=20 simplicity eludes the wise because of its foolishness.
 
Richard
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C4E5FD.75056170-- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C4E5FD.75056170 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002701c4e62f$bf939c70$2a027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C4E5FD.75056170-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 03:55:47 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 iBKBtdC0023383; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:55:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKBtYwk023344; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:55:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 03:55:34 -0800 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: RE: RESEND, ascii, Superluminal Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:55:27 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-UoB-Sender: R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57017 X-Loop: vortex-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 Horace, Thanks for the response. This is my initial foray into the area. I disagree about the polarizing beam splitter - it transmits, not absorbs. Losses and attenuation can be minimised. Yes signal will be subject to noise but this can be error corrected out. As long as some signal get through with recognisable humps and troughs then we can discern the bittage (to coin a term) of the signal. Remi. -----Original Message----- From: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com [mailto:vortex-l-request@eskimo.com] On Behalf Of hheffner@mtaonline.net Sent: 18 December 2004 09:00 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: RESEND, ascii, Superluminal At 6:59 AM 12/17/4, R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk wrote: > >I will upload this stuff to the university website if it is any good or >leads somewhere, also once it is fixed and I can upload stuff again. > >http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/home.htm >or more directly > >http://www.corn-wall.freeserve.co.uk/Superluminal_Letter.pdf The problem with obtaining interference patterns at a distant location appears to me to be at least in part a problem of attenuation. When a member of an entangled pair of photons interacts with matter, especially in a potentially polarizing interaction, the photons lose entanglement. An entangled photon that goes through a polarizing filter, for example, loses any prior entanglements. The attenuation problem is thus two-fold. First, photons are just plain lost to absorbtion. Secondly, of the small percentage that arrives, many have lost entanglement and thus act randomly. For these reasons, it is necessary to do coincidence counting to establish the inerference pattern and this requires an alternative channel. If this alternative channel can communicate faster than light, then no other channel is needed. It appears that using intermediary photon-atom entanglement at Bob's (receiving) location does not circumvent this problem, and in fact complicates things because then even coincidence counting is no longer reliable. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 04:00:56 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 iBKC0kC0025149; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:00:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKC0hrM025114; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:00:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:00:43 -0800 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: Christmas Hols Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:00:24 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4E68B.7D35C518" X-UoB-Sender: R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57018 X-Loop: vortex-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 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_01C4E68B.7D35C518 Content-Type: text/plain Sorry chaps and chapessess, Gonna have to unsubscribe because I just won't be in to read the list messages. When I get back there will be probably hundreds which will take our exchange server (snore!) about an hour to sort out with all the uni. traffic. Bye bye, Remi. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E68B.7D35C518 Content-Type: text/html

Sorry chaps and chapessess,

Gonna have to unsubscribe because I just won't be in to read the list messages. When I get back there will be probably hundreds which will take our exchange server (snore!) about an hour to sort out with all the uni. traffic.

 

Bye bye,

Remi.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E68B.7D35C518-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 04:14:38 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 iBKCEPC0031128; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:14:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKCEMoj031098; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:14:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:14:22 -0800 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, 20 Dec 2004 03:22:07 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: RESEND, ascii, Superluminal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57019 X-Loop: vortex-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 2:55 AM 12/20/4, R.O.Cornwall@brighton.ac.uk wrote: >Dear Horace, >Thanks for the response. This is my initial foray into the area. I disagree >about the polarizing beam splitter - it transmits, not absorbs. Losses and >attenuation can be minimised. Yes signal will be subject to noise but this >can be error corrected out. As long as some signal get through with >recognisable humps and troughs then we can discern the bittage (to coin a >term) of the signal. >Remi. I suggest that before going to the trouble to apply "bittage" to your signal you simply try to get your interference pattern at a distance. It's the only prudent thing to do financially speaking. You'll save a lot of money when you find out it isn't there. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 04:34:41 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 iBKCYUC0004455; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:34:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKCYSYj004436; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:34:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 04:34:28 -0800 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, 20 Dec 2004 03:42:13 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57020 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:08 AM 12/19/4, Jones Beene wrote: >As I recall there were recently a number of vortexians who doubted that >the vector potential can be put to any practical use. If you are talking about what I wrote then you completely overlooked the significance. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 05:49:08 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 iBKDmtC0004091; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 05:48:55 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKDmqU0004065; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 05:48:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 05:48:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> From: "Blanton, Terry [RTPXCHG]" To: "'vortex-l@eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57021 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile defense system. It is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. China knows it is ineffective. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 06:28:23 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 iBKESAC0017419; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:28:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKES81g017403; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:28:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:28:08 -0800 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:27:46 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> In-Reply-To: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.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 iBKERxC0017330 Resent-Message-ID: <54B9lC.A.yPE.4FuxBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57022 X-Loop: vortex-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, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: > >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile >defense system. It >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." > >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. >China knows it is ineffective. --- And will watch as it's made effective? -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 06:33:53 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 iBKEXnN1010390; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:33:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKEXTu9010289; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:33:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:33:29 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041220093244.029d9470@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:33:30 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: OFF TOPIC Funny quote 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/57023 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 you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate." - Henry J. Tillman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 07:41:25 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 iBKFf8C0014559; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:41:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKFf6t2014547; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:41:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:41:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:42:02 -0700 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57024 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Fields wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: > > > > >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile > >defense system. It > >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." > > > >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. > >China knows it is ineffective. > > --- > And will watch as it's made effective? Yes, because Chine is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to taking. We are giving China the ability to develop its manufacturing infrastructure by going into debt to buy its products. When we run out of money in a few more years and need to use military power to keep China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. Ed > > -- > John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 08:14:31 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 iBKGELC0027683; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:14:21 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKGEIUt027649; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:14:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:14:18 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004e01c4e6ae$75f05840$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:10:43 -0800 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: <3Oi74D.A.6vG.ZpvxBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57025 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 Heffner scolds, > >As I recall there were recently a number of vortexians who doubted that > >the vector potential can be put to any practical use. > If you are talking about what I wrote then you completely overlooked the > significance. No, I wasn't referring to any particular posting... but, then again, that doesn't mean that I didn't also overlook something quite significant. It seems that a lot of potentially significant information gets overlooked, if only because there is too much of both the good and bad variety for any one person to deal with and digest at any given moment. Speaking of which, I stumbled across this little gem from Robert Stirniman, posted about 6 years ago: Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The interaction energy of the internal magnetic field with the magnetic moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice ions and superconducting condensate wave function to move together vortically within the range of the coherent length and results in an induced precession of the angular momentum of the lattice ions." And quoting from their third paper: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the lattice ions, which must execute coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity." And, "It is shown that the coherent alignment of lattice ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric field." The full post is: http://www.padrak.com/agn/WALLACE.html The interesting thing is the bit about the lattice ions. And assuming that "some" of the strange effect (in the previous thread ) is actually due to the magnetic vector potential and not solely to stray flux as Keith suggests, then it raises some antigravity issues: Wouldn't it be nice to have a nice little toroid of BISCO or some other HTSC which one could surround with six pairs of these coils to chill and pulse, in order to generate (hopefully) a robust MVP but without any recirculating current in the HTSC. Put the whole contraption on a scale, and weigh. Jones Oh. Be sure to place the whole experiment in a strong metal cage so that it doesn't fly through the roof of your garage... ;-) BTW, why wouldn't the HTSC also recirculate the MVP with no diminution over time, just like the EMF? That would be how one could theoretically supass the 2-3% weight loss previously seen by Li and Podkletnov. Perhaps their problem of not getting more AG effect was that SC current actually overrides and cancels some of the MVP ? Remember that genius who claimed to have invented an antigraivty device, but oops, he can't demonstrate it to the public because he lost it when it went sailing through the ceiling of his lab into space ? I hope that wan't Wallace, was it? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 08:47:46 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 iBKGlVC0006076; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKGlTre006067; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:29 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=BZPzsy7Av7iwY17oKLjkYR+JsQ4DNn0+xFIgbCXtTcoN46+MlQ75Kbd9BvBdlMwRXN/vZ6YupOPZoV/q/1+fhpfqB6QgorYMeiEiU7ddDEM6BjqjAjyg32O7/ljjNlNiDWrFghM3gUm/L+jeujZx8vahHJQDS0EimOjppvRv9Ms= ; Message-ID: <20041220164721.67676.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:21 -0800 (PST) From: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <004e01c4e6ae$75f05840$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/57026 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 think it ws back in about 2000 or so that I came across the website of the ATG group that had developed the little nested toroid experiment. Don't recall the name of the fellow I corresponded with briefly, but I spent maybe 3 weeks trying to replicate their set-up and claims. It was with some extreme initial excitement that I was able to get some small paper punch discs and little masses of both plastic and metal to pop up into the air! I had used the same toroid diameters, roughly the same power input, etc. My suspicion began when I found that BOTH the large and small toroid "holes" would eject little masses equally. Hmmmmm. I then set the unit on its side, and suspended tiny bits of stuff by thread right in the aperture of either end, but not touching the windings. At very close spacing, I could get a tiny quick nudge, but not much more. Then, I painted some epoxy in a thin coating on the toroids, to "pot" the windings firmly in place. The effect disappeared entirely. What seems to have been happening was the applied current impulse was mechanically shocking the windings, and this acoustic energy was being transferred to objects laying on the windings, and/or the air in the hole! I wrote to the fellow at the ATG address, and we banterd it about for a while, but I had pretty well convinced myself at that point. I noticed that it wasnt long after that the info they had on their site was pulled down. I wonder if it was the same folks who re-posted it more recently, and or who got JLN interested. To any who try this out, I would suggest you try some potting of the windings to reduce the ampere force mechanical impulse. Then compare results... Best NR --- Jones Beene wrote: > Horace Heffner scolds, > > > >As I recall there were recently a number of > vortexians > who doubted that > > >the vector potential can be put to any practical > use. > > > If you are talking about what I wrote then you > completely > overlooked the > > significance. > > No, I wasn't referring to any particular posting... > but, > then again, that doesn't mean that I didn't also > overlook > something quite significant. It seems that a lot of > potentially significant information gets overlooked, > if only > because there is too much of both the good and bad > variety > for any one person to deal with and digest at any > given > moment. > > Speaking of which, I stumbled across this little gem > from > Robert Stirniman, posted about 6 years ago: > > Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The > interaction > energy of the internal magnetic field with the > magnetic > moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice ions > and > superconducting condensate wave function to move > together > vortically within the range of the coherent length > and > results in an induced precession of the angular > momentum of > the lattice ions." And quoting from their third > paper: > "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the > carriers of > quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs > but the > lattice ions, which must execute coherent localized > motion > consistent with the phenomenon of > superconductivity." And, > "It is shown that the coherent alignment of lattice > ion > spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic > field, and > in the presence of a time-dependent applied > magnetic vector > potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric > field." > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 10:20:57 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 iBKIKoN1030592; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:20:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKIKmOo030571; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:20:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:20:48 -0800 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: magnetic vector potential Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:20:39 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <20041220164721.67676.qmail@web60303.mail.yahoo.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57027 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: Hey Nick. I'm still of the opinion that leakage flux is the causative agent here, at least for the conductive material being moved by the coils. I can see your explaination would make sense for the lesser magnitude effect seen with the non-conductors, although I would expect some effect due to the electric fields generated by the time changing flux. When you say the effect dissapeared when you potted the coils, do you mean all effects or just the dielectric effect? Thanks for the experiment report, BTW. K. -----Original Message----- From: Nick Reiter [mailto:avalonbiker@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:47 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential Gentlemen, I think it ws back in about 2000 or so that I came across the website of the ATG group that had developed the little nested toroid experiment. Don't recall the name of the fellow I corresponded with briefly, but I spent maybe 3 weeks trying to replicate their set-up and claims. It was with some extreme initial excitement that I was able to get some small paper punch discs and little masses of both plastic and metal to pop up into the air! I had used the same toroid diameters, roughly the same power input, etc. My suspicion began when I found that BOTH the large and small toroid "holes" would eject little masses equally. Hmmmmm. I then set the unit on its side, and suspended tiny bits of stuff by thread right in the aperture of either end, but not touching the windings. At very close spacing, I could get a tiny quick nudge, but not much more. Then, I painted some epoxy in a thin coating on the toroids, to "pot" the windings firmly in place. The effect disappeared entirely. What seems to have been happening was the applied current impulse was mechanically shocking the windings, and this acoustic energy was being transferred to objects laying on the windings, and/or the air in the hole! I wrote to the fellow at the ATG address, and we banterd it about for a while, but I had pretty well convinced myself at that point. I noticed that it wasnt long after that the info they had on their site was pulled down. I wonder if it was the same folks who re-posted it more recently, and or who got JLN interested. To any who try this out, I would suggest you try some potting of the windings to reduce the ampere force mechanical impulse. Then compare results... Best NR --- Jones Beene wrote: > Horace Heffner scolds, > > > >As I recall there were recently a number of > vortexians > who doubted that > > >the vector potential can be put to any practical > use. > > > If you are talking about what I wrote then you > completely > overlooked the > > significance. > > No, I wasn't referring to any particular posting... > but, > then again, that doesn't mean that I didn't also > overlook > something quite significant. It seems that a lot of > potentially significant information gets overlooked, > if only > because there is too much of both the good and bad > variety > for any one person to deal with and digest at any > given > moment. > > Speaking of which, I stumbled across this little gem > from > Robert Stirniman, posted about 6 years ago: > > Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The > interaction > energy of the internal magnetic field with the > magnetic > moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice ions > and > superconducting condensate wave function to move > together > vortically within the range of the coherent length > and > results in an induced precession of the angular > momentum of > the lattice ions." And quoting from their third > paper: > "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the > carriers of > quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs > but the > lattice ions, which must execute coherent localized > motion > consistent with the phenomenon of > superconductivity." And, > "It is shown that the coherent alignment of lattice > ion > spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic > field, and > in the presence of a time-dependent applied > magnetic vector > potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric > field." > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 10:31:38 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 iBKIVRN1002886; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:31:28 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKIVQt2002869; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:31:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:31:26 -0800 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: magnetic vector potential Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:31:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <004e01c4e6ae$75f05840$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57028 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: Hey Jones, you write: >Remember that genius who claimed to have invented an >antigraivty device, but oops, he can't demonstrate it to the >public because he lost it when it went sailing through the >ceiling of his lab into space ? I hope that wan't Wallace, >was it? That would be JR Searl. Wallace was by all accounts an eccentric but competant worker. There were issues surrounding replication of his work but given the complexity and small magnitude of the effect I wouldn't be discouraged. It may well be that the theoretical work of Fontana ( done to explain Podkletnov's work ) will vindicate Wallace in the end. BTW, what happened to Robert Stirniman? Last time I corresponded with him was years ago, and I don't think his old email works anymore. ??? K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 10:39:05 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 iBKIcrC0015320; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:38:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKIcpaN015304; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:38:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:38:51 -0800 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:38:32 -0600 Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc Message-ID: <9q5es0hi1qpibmqbrsk6alitp3ehaf7dbo@4ax.com> References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.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 iBKIcnC0015266 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57029 X-Loop: vortex-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, 20 Dec 2004 08:42:02 -0700, you wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: >> >> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: >> >> > >> >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile >> >defense system. It >> >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." >> > >> >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. >> >China knows it is ineffective. >> >> --- >> And will watch as it's made effective? > >Yes, because Chine is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to >taking. We are giving China the ability to develop its manufacturing >infrastructure by going into debt to buy its products. When we run out >of money in a few more years and need to use military power to keep >China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need >the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. >The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer >holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. --- I agree. It seems we've decided to become denizens of the swamp, but I was disagreeing with Terry about the deployment being premature, in that even if it is ineffective now, as its efficacy improves and is proven through testing, it will provide another more or less real deterrent to military "adventures" with the US as a target. However, with one in four of us Earthlings being Chinese, I wonder whether it'll matter much if/when push comes to shove... -- John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:08:46 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 iBKJ8NC0027352; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:08:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKJ8GST027309; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:08:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:08:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=pvP/NxTw6MLiVEXGxCZWnpxO2N4gK6Qtku/iQ241aiLjvMdttUEdIhouxR0z5nAz9ltMGOebFvX/4/zvRmfiqMT/IgsXMAZZjn2sxB380NKb90EBzDALjLdyQjlOtsSrarLSM1/9vZOvjjR+18cGwylTXjMXcSMOSNNFTzsx7KM= ; Message-ID: <20041220190802.47955.qmail@web60304.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:08:02 -0800 (PST) From: Nick Reiter Subject: RE: magnetic vector potential 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/57030 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: Keith, After I potted the unit, as I recall, I lost the effect on all materials. As metals go, I had tried little niblets, BBs and rods of copper, aluminum, and bismuth. Now I DID NOT try a long rod suspended horizontally through the holes of a horizontal facing toroid pair, howevah. I agree that leakage flux could be a major artifact. It makes sense. I tried to get a pair of internally polarized NdFeB ring magnets made once. (It was an attempt to produce a permanent magnet version of said "A-Field" or vector potential toroids) Turned out wicked good, but there were still irregular outbreaks of maybe 300 to 500 gauss from the ring surface here and there, due to uneven-ness of the magnetizer windings. So yeah, with hand wound toroids there is potential for leakage. I would guess that if one could up the permeability of the torus material, leakage would diminish - but do they make such a ferrite? Fast yet furious; with low hysteresis, yet the permeability of "moo" metal? Moo. nr --- Keith Nagel wrote: > Hey Nick. > > I'm still of the opinion that leakage flux is > the causative agent here, at least for the > conductive > material being moved by the coils. I can see > your explaination would make sense for the lesser > magnitude effect seen with the non-conductors, > although I would expect some effect due to the > electric fields generated by the time changing > flux. When you say the effect dissapeared when > you potted the coils, do you mean all effects > or just the dielectric effect? > > Thanks for the experiment report, BTW. > > K. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick Reiter [mailto:avalonbiker@yahoo.com] > Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:47 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential > > > Gentlemen, > > I think it ws back in about 2000 or so that I came > across the website of the ATG group that had > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:11:34 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 iBKJBOC0028491; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:11:24 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKJBLlB028462; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:11:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:11:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C72434.CABFC529@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:33:14 -0700 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> <9q5es0hi1qpibmqbrsk6alitp3ehaf7dbo@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57031 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Fields wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:42:02 -0700, you wrote: > > > > > > >John Fields wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile > >> >defense system. It > >> >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." > >> > > >> >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. > >> >China knows it is ineffective. > >> > >> --- > >> And will watch as it's made effective? > > > >Yes, because Chine is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to > >taking. We are giving China the ability to develop its manufacturing > >infrastructure by going into debt to buy its products. When we run out > >of money in a few more years and need to use military power to keep > >China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need > >the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. > >The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer > >holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. > > --- > I agree. It seems we've decided to become denizens of the swamp, but > I was disagreeing with Terry about the deployment being premature, in > that even if it is ineffective now, as its efficacy improves and is > proven through testing, it will provide another more or less real > deterrent to military "adventures" with the US as a target. > > However, with one in four of us Earthlings being Chinese, I wonder > whether it'll matter much if/when push comes to shove... I agree, it will not matter much. The world has changed so that using nuclear weapons, except by terrorists, no longer makes sense. Cooperations do not care who wins, just so they make money. In the future, most decisions will be made on this basis. Only when the natives become restless will this approach briefly change. In the future, governments by the people in the US will be only a dream of the young because whomever has the most money will be able to use the tools of advertising to get the voters to support whatever they want. Because the Chinese, in collaboration with the major cooperations, will eventually have the money and will have purchased the mass media, the average person in the US will do what the owners want, buy what they want, and support policies they want. Military force will no longer be needed, at least in the First World. The Third World will be encouraged to fight each other so that the manufactures of weapons will have a buyer. Its amazing how fast a cynical nature has gone from being considered a defect of old age to being just a simple extrapolation of common-place observation. Ed > > -- > John Fields From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:36:45 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 iBKJaaN1023893; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:36:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKJaXaq023867; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:36:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:36:33 -0800 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:36:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57032 X-Loop: vortex-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 Ed + John. Ed writes: >Yes, because China is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to >taking. Exactly; but doesn't this solve the problem? Red seems not to understand that when our government borrows money to pay for things rather than tax, what it is doing is selling the country to foreign investors. In this case, it's the Chinese who are buying our T-Bills. As you say, this process is accellerating. When the crunch you predict occurs, China will own truly substantial portions of America, so bombing us would make about as much sense as a landlord bombing his apartment complex to force the tenants to pay their back rent. I'm not sure why W. is so anxious to sell off America, perhaps he sees it as a bad investment? Maybe he knows something we don't. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:38:37 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 iBKJcTN1024520; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:38:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKJcRsc024479; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:38:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:38:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007c01c4e6ca$fb650360$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <20041220190802.47955.qmail@web60304.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: magnetic vector potential Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:34:52 -0800 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/57033 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 would guess that if > one could up the permeability of the torus material, > leakage would diminish - but do they make such a > ferrite? Fast yet furious; with low hysteresis, yet > the permeability of "moo" metal? maybe? http://www.inframat.com/nano.htm Hey, speaking of potting the windings. Has anyone actually just "buried" the windings in core powder before pressing? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 11:40:41 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 iBKJeXN1025319; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:40:33 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKJeVjH025290; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:40:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:40:31 -0800 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: magnetic vector potential Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:40:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <20041220190802.47955.qmail@web60304.mail.yahoo.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57034 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 Nick. You write: >So yeah, with hand wound toroids >there is potential for leakage. I would guess that if >one could up the permeability of the torus material, >leakage would diminish - but do they make such a >ferrite? Fast yet furious; with low hysteresis, yet >the permeability of "moo" metal? Moo. Sure, but no matter the ferrite you'll have substantial leakage flux. It's because the experiment seems to require you to saturate the core, at least from what I can see from the scope shots. Very little leakage would occur if the core weren't saturated. I would suggest to the ATG group that if they measure the force exerted on the rod, it would be practically nothing up to the point where the core begins to saturate, then it would increase rapidly. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 15:37:58 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 iBKNbi4M029260; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:37:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBKNbgmZ029247; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:37:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:37:42 -0800 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: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:45:26 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravimagnetics, dark energy, dark matter Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57035 X-Loop: vortex-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 gravity, gravitons, had a speed c_g less than the speed of light c, and gravity began with the big bang, then objects exceeding c_g at the time of the big bang could outrun gravity itself. It seems reasonable that c_g >= c. Even if in all cases c_g >= c, objects near the speed of c or even just distant from the center of the universe, i.e. the origin of the big bang, would have a diminished gravitational attraction to the center of mass of the universe because of retardation. Retardation is the delay of effect due to transit time, in this case the transit time of gravitons. For distant objects, created at the time of the big bang, the gravitons from much of the universe are in transit, while for objects nearer the center of the universe a higher proportion of gravitons have completed their force transfer. Then net result is an apparent force accelerating objects that are further away from the center of the universe. This is not a true force, but rather an effect producing a force less than the expected gravitational force. The diminuation is proportional to the distance between bodies. This means a quantum treatment of gravity provides a possiblity other than either an ever expanding universe or an ultimately collapsing universe. That possibility is that matter sufficiently far away will not return to a big crunch, while other matter closer to the origin of the big bang may crunch. Gravimagnetics also provides a similar and at least partial explanation for dark matter. The gravimagnetic force, a 1/r^4 force, is powerful for objects close together. Ordinary orbital mechanics applied to close objects with similar spin axes will overestimate the mass involved, as compared to distant interactions of the same bodies. These are two sides of the same coin, depending on which mass information is obtained and relied upon first. The result is either apparent dark energy or dark matter, depending on the initial basis for determining the mass. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 18:13:58 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 iBL2DpoU011357; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:13:51 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBL2DnHZ011333; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:13:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:13:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <374a4516-877f-41e9-9b4f-edca6acf584d> Message-ID: <006001c4e702$ab6e7430$d859ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:13:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: <_oNN6.A.BxC.cb4xBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57036 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Storms wrote: > > John Fields wrote: > > > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: > > > > > > > >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile > > >defense system. It > > >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." > > > > > >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the irrational. > > >China knows it is ineffective. > > > > --- > > And will watch as it's made effective? > > Yes, because Chine is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to > taking. We are giving China the ability to develop its manufacturing > infrastructure by going into debt to buy its products. When we run out > of money in a few more years and need to use military power to keep > China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need > the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. > The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer > holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. To regard what is happening as a cold war is a misnomer; it is commerce, the action of a market economy, now being played out on a global scale with an intensity and speed without precedent in history. The US abandonment of manufacturing expertise began after WW2 with Deming's visit to Japan and the introduction of statistical quality control. The knowledge of how to do low cost, high quality mechanized production is no longer the property of any country; it can be done anywhere there is the will to do it. Territorial wars over natural resources are a bit obsolete, but we may see wars over water in this century. The idea of the US nuking China's commercial production is a bit absurd. Anyone with a new awareness of China should get a copy of "1421 The Year China Discovered America" and also dig into the 1421 website, with Google as your guide. Also get a copy of "The Genius of China" to get a perspective on how far China's technology was in advance of Europe's in early times. In the 1400s China dominated its world as the US does now, and set out to bring the whole world into its tribute system. They launched an immense fleet of exploration which mapped the world with accurate longitude -- before the Harrison chronometers -- including the Americas and Antartica. When the fleets came home they found the emperor deposed and the mandarin bureaucracy turned inward, erasing a great achievement and setting the stage for China's decline as a world power. China and India are awakening to industrial status and the relative dominance of the US and Europe will wane as these nations adapt our own discoveries. Toynbee decades ago documented the challenge and response of governements to a changing world. The war in Iraq is but one episode; it remains to be seen how all this plays out. Flailing about and demonizing Bush, Islam, or "THEM" of any color or persuasion will not help; it only blinds the protester. Remember that all this ebb and flow of economic fortune has played out in the US since our founding and development as the largest free market economy in the world. It is now gone global, and there is no going back; the US has not been self sufficient sine the '30s. One of the basic charactersitics of humans is to divide the world into US and THEM on any pretext. Meanwhile remember the Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". Mike Carrell > > Ed > > > > -- > > John Fields > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 18:29:03 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 iBL2SqqE025303; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:28:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBL2So6Q025277; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:28:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:28:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001601c4e704$c37581c0$cf037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: NK could test TD-2 anytime Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:28:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4E6D2.78591080" 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=0.2 required=4.0 tests=HTML_50_60,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/57037 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4E6D2.78591080 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4E6D2.785A9720" ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4E6D2.785A9720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankKeith wrote I'm not sure why W. is so anxious to sell.. Maybe he = knows something we dont. I have pondered that question since year 2001. Perhaps we have 2 = Republican parties..=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4E6D2.785A9720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Keith wrote I'm not sure why W. is so anxious = to sell..=20 Maybe he knows something we dont.
 
I have pondered that question since year 2001. = Perhaps=20 we have 2 Republican parties..
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C4E6D2.785A9720-- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4E6D2.78591080 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001101c4e704$c2e74b80$cf037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C4E6D2.78591080-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 18:30:46 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 iBL2UYqE026085; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:30:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBL2UXK8026074; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:30:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:30:33 -0800 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: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:30:44 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: On the Chinese 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/57038 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians, I've been reading various posts on China, and have decided to make a few comments. I was shopping for a set of pump pliers. I purchased a Chinese made set but they slipped when a grasped a nut. I subsequently returned them and purchased an American made set. I picked up a Chinese made shower head, then I saw an American made one at a cheaper price, you know which one I purchased. The Fair Tax people say that implementing their system will make us more competitive. so much for the mythos of the invincible Chinese. BTW, have any of you people heard that W's uncle owns a golf course in China? That would give new meaning to inside connections, eh? Keith posted >Hey Ed + John. > >Ed writes: >>Yes, because China is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to > >taking. > > it's the Chinese who are buying our T-Bills. As you >say, this process is accellerating. When the crunch you predict >occurs, China will own truly substantial portions of America, so bombing >us would make about as much sense as a landlord bombing his apartment >complex to force the tenants to pay their back rent. I'm not My comment: Good point Keith. Perhaps there is a method to the Globalist's madness. Post: >China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need >the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. >The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer >holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. My comment: I don't know any other way to get a cutting edge system working other than to build a model and test it. --- I agree. It seems we've decided to become denizens of the swamp, but I was disagreeing with Terry about the deployment being premature, My comment: Is that the Fever Swamp, where all the conspiracy theorists live, that Hugh Hewitt is always talking about? However, with one in four of us Earthlings being Chinese, I wonder whether it'll matter much if/when push comes to shove... My Comment: I think that the Chinese are good people, their government, OTOH is another matter, remember Tibet! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 18:49:02 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 iBL2mqb0031594; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:48:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBL2ml6S031547; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:48:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:48:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C78F4D.435DAC9A@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:28:31 -0700 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: NK Could Test TD-2 Anytime References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> <006001c4e702$ab6e7430$d859ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <1yki2B.A.2sH.P84xBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57039 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: > > Ed Storms wrote: > > > > John Fields wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:48:27 -0500, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Dr. Storms wrote: "I think you all are missing the point of the missile > > > >defense system. It > > > >is to defend us from China in 10 years, not NK now." > > > > > > > >Possibly, however the premature deployment will inhibit only the > irrational. > > > >China knows it is ineffective. > > > > > > --- > > > And will watch as it's made effective? > > > > Yes, because Chine is gaining more by buying the US in contrast to > > taking. We are giving China the ability to develop its manufacturing > > infrastructure by going into debt to buy its products. When we run out > > of money in a few more years and need to use military power to keep > > China from taking over countries in its part of the world, we will need > > the missile defense to keep China from implementing a counter threat. > > The world is not what it seems to be because our government no longer > > holds truth in high regard. The Cold War is not over. > > To regard what is happening as a cold war is a misnomer; it is commerce, Yes, I agree. However. commerce is only the method. it is not the goal. As you note, Mike, China has always had big plans, which were frequently interrupted by internal conflict. This interruption might happen again, similar to what happened to Russia. Nevertheless, the goal of China is to dominate, which is a good position that the US used to its advantage while it could. The difference between the Cold War and now is the difference between how money is made. During the Cold War, corporations made money by telling people they had to pay high taxes to allow the corporations to defend us against a weak and inefficient foe, as it turned out. This time they make their money by telling us to buy the cheapest goods and encourage companies to go overseas so that such goods are available. I remember the times ads encouraged people to buy AMERICAN rather than Japanese. Where are these ads now? The idea that neutral commerce is driving the system is nonsense. Why would a government enact laws and policy that would obviously weaken it and drive the country into the hands of another country? Wars are normally fought by governments to prevent this result. Why do you suppose our government is not waging such a fight - other than obvious stupidity? Ed the > action of a market economy, now being played out on a global scale with an > intensity and speed without precedent in history. The US abandonment of > manufacturing expertise began after WW2 with Deming's visit to Japan and the > introduction of statistical quality control. The knowledge of how to do low > cost, high quality mechanized production is no longer the property of any > country; it can be done anywhere there is the will to do it. Territorial > wars over natural resources are a bit obsolete, but we may see wars over > water in this century. The idea of the US nuking China's commercial > production is a bit absurd. > > Anyone with a new awareness of China should get a copy of "1421 The Year > China Discovered America" and also dig into the 1421 website, with Google as > your guide. Also get a copy of "The Genius of China" to get a perspective on > how far China's technology was in advance of Europe's in early times. In the > 1400s China dominated its world as the US does now, and set out to bring the > whole world into its tribute system. They launched an immense fleet of > exploration which mapped the world with accurate longitude -- before the > Harrison chronometers -- including the Americas and Antartica. When the > fleets came home they found the emperor deposed and the mandarin bureaucracy > turned inward, erasing a great achievement and setting the stage for China's > decline as a world power. > > China and India are awakening to industrial status and the relative > dominance of the US and Europe will wane as these nations adapt our own > discoveries. Toynbee decades ago documented the challenge and response of > governements to a changing world. The war in Iraq is but one episode; it > remains to be seen how all this plays out. Flailing about and demonizing > Bush, Islam, or "THEM" of any color or persuasion will not help; it only > blinds the protester. Remember that all this ebb and flow of economic > fortune has played out in the US since our founding and development as the > largest free market economy in the world. It is now gone global, and there > is no going back; the US has not been self sufficient sine the '30s. One of > the basic charactersitics of humans is to divide the world into US and THEM > on any pretext. > > Meanwhile remember the Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". > > Mike Carrell > > > > > Ed > > > > > > -- > > > John Fields > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 20 20:12:59 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 iBL4Cob0026124; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:12:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBL4CllC026094; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:12:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:12:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00c301c4e712$d0586ca0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <9C9B02646C2290458C35331EEB192522012061B6@rtpatl30.rtpatlanta.com> <41C6F2CA.3C106773@ix.netcom.com> <006001c4e702$ab6e7430$d859ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: China 1421 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:09:05 -0800 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/57040 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell writes, > Anyone with a new awareness of China should get a copy of "1421 The Year China Discovered America" and also dig into the 1421 website, There is local (SF Bay area) connection to this story : http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/7792971.htm?1c Supposedly one of the pre-Colombian Chinese Junks was found way up river from the San Francisco, but I doubt that this particular piece of evidence will pan out. It is way too far up the river for an ocean-going vessel to navigate, but who knows. According to my sailing friends, the winds and currents would make it very easy to sail to California in junk-type boats from China but extremely difficult to return. They would have to return by Hawaii, across the widest part of the Pacific - but not impossible by any means. Coincidentally the junk was found near "gold country" which makes one think it arrived in the gold rush era, but the boat appears much older. It is said that even before the first Chinese came over to work the mines and build the railway, that this area was already going by the name of "gold mountain" in China, so maybe they did beat the 49ers by 400 years and already knew where the gold was. If this relic does turn out to be one of those junks, there will be a lot of experts "eating crow." But, then again, we are living in "interesting times," curse or no, and many experts in other fields will be dining thusly. Funny how with a slightly different socio-political backdrop, the world as we know it could be completely different. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 07:12:12 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 iBLFC6AY025229; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:12:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLFC46M025214; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:12:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:12:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041221100938.029eda10@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:12:06 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Announcing A New Book At 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/57041 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: Announcing A New Book "Cold Fusion And The Future," by Jed Rothwell, published by LENR-CANR.org, December 2004, 186 pages. The reality of cold fusion is growing and has spawned a series of books that describe the phenomena in ways a general reader can appreciate. This is the latest entry. It shows how this controversial energy source might change our future. The book describes how many nightmare problems that seem beyond any present solution, such as global warming, invasive species, and providing clean drinking water and sanitation to billions of poor people, may be remedied with cold fusion combined with other technologies. The future might be better than you think. This book is not copyright. It is distributed for free at LENR-CANR.org, here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf (6 MB) If you would like to print a copy, we suggest you download the high-resolution version: http://lenr-canr.org/ColdFusionAndTheFuturehires.pdf (17 MB) We will have a small number of printed paperback copies with color figures available for sale in January 2005, for $25 each. For information please contact JedRothwell@mindspring.com The publishers would greatly appreciate any comments readers may wish to make. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 09:25:12 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 iBLHP4b0011739; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:25:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLHOXcG011460; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:24:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:24:33 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:24:21 EST Subject: Re: On the Chinese To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_f5.4736eba6.2ef9b645_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 Resent-Message-ID: <7GeOMB.A.8yC.QxFyBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57042 X-Loop: vortex-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_f5.4736eba6.2ef9b645_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/20/2004 9:31:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, temalloy@metro.lakes.com writes: > My Comment: > I think that the Chinese are good people, their government, OTOH is > another matter, remember Tibet! > > I agree. I know a few who have returned from China with a wife. They have never been so happy. Frank Z --part1_f5.4736eba6.2ef9b645_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/20/2004 9:31:= 08 PM Eastern Standard Time, temalloy@metro.lakes.com writes:

My Comment:
I think that the Chinese are good people, their government, OTOH is
another matter, remember Tibet!



I agree.  I know a few who have returned from China with a wife.

They have never been so happy.

Frank Z --part1_f5.4736eba6.2ef9b645_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 13:32:39 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 iBLLWUb0031947; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:32:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLLWSBn031926; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:32:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:32:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.1.20041221213228.0208a760@pop3.newnet.co.uk> X-Sender: lawrence@pop3.newnet.co.uk X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:32:37 +0000 To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" From: Stephen Lawrence Subject: Efficient clothes drier uses De-humidifier? 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/57043 X-Loop: vortex-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 'texians, I wanted to run this idea past the list... The traditional tumble (clothes) drier uses heated air to increase the rate at which the water in the clothes evaporates. But another approach might be to make the air as DRY as possible. The question is, does one use significantly less energy, per amount of water evaporated, by drying the air, or by heating it (or a combination of the two)? I would have thought that most of the energy required to heat air is actually the energy required to heat the water held in the air as humidity. An advantage might be that clothes could be dried at much lower temperatures (good for fragile clothes) -- a problem would be obtaining a sufficiently fast supply of dry air. Stephen R. Lawrence. From: Stephen Lawrence, 8 Supanee Court, French's Road, Cambridge, England, CB4 3LB. Tel/Fax +44 1223 564373 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 14:02:09 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 iBLM1vb0010150; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:01:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLM1tt5010123; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:01:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:01:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <147.3ba2edb3.2ef9f745@aol.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:01:41 EST Subject: Fwd: Jeds vision as expressed in his book is to limited. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9f745_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/57044 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_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9f745_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9f745_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:33:47 EST Subject: Jeds vision as expredded in his book is to limited. To: vortel-l@eskimo.com, jedrothwell@mindspring.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9d49b_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 --part2_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9d49b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en I have read Jed=E2=80=99s book. It points to a bright new future of possibi= lities. =20 Jed paints a futuristic scenario of where cold fusion technology will lead.= =20 I believe that Jed=E2=80=99s predictions are far to limited. Jed predictio= ns only=20 deal with only the nuclear aspects of heat production. My work has lead me=20= to=20 believe that cold fusion is one aspect of a phenomena that will allow man to= =20 directly control the each of the four natural forces. The phenomena I am=20 speaking about is the quantum transition. During the quantum transition all= of the=20 natural forces interact strongly. The understanding of the nature of the=20 quantum transitional will allow man to exploit this strong interaction. He= will=20 be able to control each of the forces within his macroscopic low energy=20 machinery. My theorem is the starting point. It restates Planck's theorem= in=20 terms of the path of the quantum transition. Znidarsic's theorem is: "The m= otion=20 constants converge in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimensional=20 frequency of one megahertz meter." I see the following. Control of the gravitational field. Gravitomagnetic propulsion that will=20 take us to the stars. The adjustment of inertial mass. The possibility of= =20 squeezing space with an artificial gravitational field. Communications. Communications involving the other force fields. =20 Gravitational communications that propagate through matter with no need for=20= communication=20 satellites. The ability to use non-electromagnetic fields to see deeply int= o=20 the earth and other planets. Control of the nuclear forces. Heat production. Production of synthetic=20 elements. Nuclear waste reduction. Edison saw the electric motor and the electric light as coming from the=20 control of the electromagnetic field. He did not foresee the MRI, the moder= n=20 computer, the INTERNET, and many more things. There is no way we can forese= e that=20 technologies that will arise when man is able to extend his control to all o= f=20 the natural forces. We must never forget great ability presents=20 opportunities for great abuse. Frank Znidarsic=20 MAIN MENU=20 --part2_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9d49b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en I have read Jed=E2=80=99s book.&nbs= p; It points to a bright new future of possibilities.  Jed  paints= a futuristic scenario of where cold fusion technology will lead.  I be= lieve that Jed=E2=80=99s predictions are far to limited.   Jed pre= dictions only deal with only the nuclear aspects of heat production.  M= y work has lead me to believe that cold fusion is one aspect of a phenomena=20= that will allow man to directly control the each of the four natural forces.=   The phenomena I am speaking about is the quantum transition.  Du= ring the quantum transition all of the natural forces interact strongly.&nbs= p; The understanding of the nature of the quantum transitional  will al= low man to exploit this strong interaction.  He will be able to control= each of the forces within his macroscopic low energy machinery.  My th= eorem is the starting point.   It restates Planck's theorem in ter= ms of the path of the quantum transition. Znidarsic's theorem is:  "The= motion constants converge in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dime= nsional frequency of one megahertz meter."

I see the following.

Control of the gravitational field.  Gravitomagnetic propulsion that wi= ll take us to the stars.   The adjustment of inertial mass. =20= The possibility of squeezing space with an artificial gravitational field.
Communications. Communications involving the other force fields.  Gravi= tational communications that propagate through matter with no need for commu= nication satellites.  The ability to use non-electromagnetic fields to=20= see deeply into the earth and other planets.

Control of the nuclear forces.  Heat production.  Production of sy= nthetic elements.  Nuclear waste reduction.

Edison saw the electric motor and the electric light as coming from the con= trol of the electromagnetic field.  He did not foresee the MRI, the mod= ern computer, the INTERNET, and many more things.  There is no way we c= an foresee that technologies that will arise when man is able to extend his=20= control to all of the natural forces.  We must never forget great abili= ty presents opportunities for great abuse.


Frank Znidarsic

MAIN MENU --part2_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9d49b_boundary-- --part1_147.3ba2edb3.2ef9f745_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 14:21:37 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 iBLMLTAY032697; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:21:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLMLRw2032675; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:21:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:21:27 -0800 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, 21 Dec 2004 13:29:16 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravimagnetics and quantum gravity Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57045 X-Loop: vortex-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 EM-GK isomorphism of gravimagnetics is complete, thus it extends to all the way to the quantum world. The mediator of the gravitational force, the messenger graviton, i.e. virtual graviton, is the analog of the vitual photon. Unlike the photon, and like the virtual photon, the virtual photon carries no gravitational charge. An interesting thing then is the momentum carrying analog to the photon itself. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 15:00:34 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 iBLN0Ib0003666; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:00:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBLN0E2j003620; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:00:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:00:14 -0800 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, 21 Dec 2004 14:07:59 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravimagnetics and quantum gravity Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57046 X-Loop: vortex-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 EM-GK isomorphism of gravimagnetics is complete, thus it extends all the way to the quantum world. The mediator of the gravitational force, the messenger graviton, i.e. virtual graviton, is the analog of the vitual photon. Unlike the photon, and like the virtual photon, the virtual graviton carries no gravitational charge. An interesting thing then is the graviton, the momentum carrying analog to the photon itself. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 16:45:16 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 iBM0j5b0014726; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:45:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM0j3c5014706; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:45:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:45:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001901c4e7bf$76a52240$0500a8c0@nixlaptop> From: "Nick Palmer" To: References: <5.1.1.6.1.20041221213228.0208a760@pop3.newnet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Efficient clothes drier uses De-humidifier? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:44:52 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response 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 Resent-Message-ID: <-zvp-B.A.ulD.POMyBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57047 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: More years ago than I care to remember, I thought that clothes could be dried more efficiently using a vacuum pump to evaporate the water.I don't know for certain if it would use less energy - I suspect it would Nick Palmer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 17:01:37 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 iBM11Sb0019145; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:01:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM11Q2r019126; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:01:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:01:26 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:58:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Efficient clothes drier uses De-humidifier? From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001901c4e7bf$76a52240$0500a8c0@nixlaptop> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57048 X-Loop: vortex-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 washer and dryer have different reasons for being. The former is truly a labour saving device because it reduces TOIL. The later is driven by a desire for speed and a lack of space for living. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 20:52:26 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 iBM4qJAY032681; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:52:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM4qH9r032664; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:52:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:52:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=rjkI3gZI+b6gg7fOkNzy87hXtMBgE6ksK4RCznr3mDsnArcyXZIi1fA3J2WJhouTjiGXTSv0Xi/TVSY8UGD3y5XNy677k0Y2djp+RPU75CxvaGXdBvqLv+hf5Jx/9V4yJFT35eWkSwgZnDC1wYpUliJaKn85rQGhyIDW+zWBbes= ; Message-ID: <20041222045215.39983.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:52:15 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Toroid experiments 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/57049 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 guys, Back when ATG initiated all of this, based on some conjecture proposed by Rick Anderson, I did my own experiments with this. I even went so far as to have rapidly-shipped to me the exact cores used in their experiments, same ferrite composition, same size. Used everything the same, got the same effects they did. I found later that coating the windings with polyurethane varnish stopped the paper-moving effect. I later also found that the moving up and down of the coils was likely due to the toroids behaving as 1-turn solenoids and interacting with the vertical component of the earth's magnetic field. Positioning magnets of large field area around this device would make it do things differently. These brief pulses introduced to the coils will produce a leaky field, as the core is saturated, as pointed out by Keith. Jean-Louis checked for magnetic field in the center of the toroid when it was connected to straight DC. This is not conclusive for the case of capacitor discharge transients. Also, the changing magnetic field will likely produce a rather healthy E field at right angles to the B field (through the toroid 'hole' and around) and this could have a nice effect on dielectrics. Also note that Jean-Louis set up a sort of charge detector there, and it detected establishment of charge in the center of the toroids. As to the question of whether or not a metal object will be pulled into the center and suspended there, I don't think this is likely given the asymmetrical nature of the setup, and the brief transients used. It is not going to 'stay there' like it would for a DC field, it will be shot through. I built a few variants of 'coil guns' before, and they do this same thing, regardless of whether or not the projectile is magnetic or not...if it is conducting, it will work. I'm not saying this should not be investigated, far from it. I think it should, and I fully support Jerry Bayles and Jean-Louis going further with this. But for the time being, it looks as if it can be explained conventionally. I hope there is something else. I've always had a funny feeling about toroids, that there is something there, if only we can 'get at it'. This is one of the reasons I rarely post my experimentation. I usually end up figuring out how the conventional stuff explained the effect perfectly. But...the search for the elusive unconventional stuff is damn fun! --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 21:58:28 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 iBM5wJAY016832; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:58:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM5wH8l016797; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:58:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:58:17 -0800 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, 21 Dec 2004 21:06:07 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Resent-Message-ID: <4JFSjB.A.ZGE.4zQyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57050 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gravimagnetics is forced into the quantum world by the fact the smallest angular momentum is h/(4*pi) and the smallest increment of angular momentum is h/(2*P). In that gravimagnetics defines the electromagnetic force and gravimagnetic force as independent entities in separate dimensions, the unification of the two fields is only through the embodiment of both charge and gravitational charge within some individual particles. The Bohr magneton, q_e * h/(4*Pi*m), thus establishes the link between the two quantum universes. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 22:31:32 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 iBM6U0B2025064; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:31:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM683Z2020042; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:08:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:08:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041221220955.02836cb0@mail.dlsi.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:10:36 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Fwd: Re: Announcing A New Book At 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/57051 X-Loop: vortex-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've just skimmed through the whole thing this evening. I'll read it in >greater detail when I have more time. You've done an awesome job, I'm so >glad you have done this. There's nobody else in the world who can put >these pieces together and convey them as you've done. > >I'll be putting a link on my website for this as well as your blurb in my >next newsletter. > >Nice work and thank you for contributing to the level of knowledge and >understanding of this field. > >Steve From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 22:48:37 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 iBM6mUAY029004; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:48:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM6mTol028988; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:48:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:48:29 -0800 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, 21 Dec 2004 21:56:19 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Desiderata Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57052 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: Desiderata Go placidly amid the noise and haste and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit. If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter; for always there will be greater and lessor persons than yourself. Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time. Exercise caution in your business affairs; for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; for many persons strive for high ideals; and everywhere life is full of heroism. Be yourself. Especially, do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love, for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is perennial as the grass. Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentile with yourself. You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore, be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace with your soul. With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be Happy. Found in Old Saint Paul's Church, Baltimore, Dated 1692 Happy Holidays From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 23:45:24 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 iBM7j83n011197; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:45:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM7j5FM011173; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:45:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:45:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:45:30 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: the old Parksie is back 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/57053 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 just read last week's What's New. Parksie is back on his soapbox, opinionated, and unrepentant as ever. Attacking things that conflict with Parksie's Pet Paradigms, such as CF, prayer, and testing the missile defense system. In all fairness to the good doctor, we agree on a number of things. The ISS is possibly the biggest porkbarrel project in history, dwarfing even his pet project, hot fusion. We also agree on fixing the Hubble telescope. Well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 21 23:53:50 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 iBM7rjds016545; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:53:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM7rhso016524; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:53:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:53:43 -0800 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: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:54:09 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Gravimagnetics and quantum gravity Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <232BZB.A.DCE.HgSyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57054 X-Loop: vortex-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; >The EM-GK isomorphism of gravimagnetics is complete, Hum, what does that mean? >thus it extends to all >the way to the quantum world. The mediator of the gravitational force, the >messenger graviton, i.e. virtual graviton, is the analog of the vitual >photon. Do you know of an instrument to detect gravitrons? What is the difference between a regular and a virtual one? How do they relate to String Theory? >Unlike the photon, and like the virtual photon, the virtual photon >carries no gravitational charge. what is the difference between a regular photon and a virtual one? >An interesting thing then is the momentum carrying analog to the photon itself. AFLIK, the photon has no mass, ergo no momentum, is that correct? AFLIK, GR presupposes that there is no difference between acceleration and gravity, some theoreticians, in particularly Dewey Larson have questioned this. I'm sure that Parksie would be unhappy about the likes of me questioning GR. Oh dear, not I not going be be able to sleep, ZZZ. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 01:34:55 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 iBM9YjgZ010583; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:34:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBM9YhBt010567; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:34:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:34:43 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41C93F95.3080909@ihug.co.nz> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:34:13 +1300 From: John Berry User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Toroid experiments References: <20041222045215.39983.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041222045215.39983.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> 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/57055 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: But if real, how do you explain the laser beam being bent? Kyle Mcallister wrote: >Hi guys, > >Back when ATG initiated all of this, based on some >conjecture proposed by Rick Anderson, I did my own >experiments with this. I even went so far as to have >rapidly-shipped to me the exact cores used in their >experiments, same ferrite composition, same size. Used >everything the same, got the same effects they did. > >I found later that coating the windings with >polyurethane varnish stopped the paper-moving effect. >I later also found that the moving up and down of the >coils was likely due to the toroids behaving as 1-turn >solenoids and interacting with the vertical component >of the earth's magnetic field. Positioning magnets of >large field area around this device would make it do >things differently. > >These brief pulses introduced to the coils will >produce a leaky field, as the core is saturated, as >pointed out by Keith. Jean-Louis checked for magnetic >field in the center of the toroid when it was >connected to straight DC. This is not conclusive for >the case of capacitor discharge transients. Also, the >changing magnetic field will likely produce a rather >healthy E field at right angles to the B field >(through the toroid 'hole' and around) and this could >have a nice effect on dielectrics. Also note that >Jean-Louis set up a sort of charge detector there, and >it detected establishment of charge in the center of >the toroids. > >As to the question of whether or not a metal object >will be pulled into the center and suspended there, I >don't think this is likely given the asymmetrical >nature of the setup, and the brief transients used. It >is not going to 'stay there' like it would for a DC >field, it will be shot through. I built a few variants >of 'coil guns' before, and they do this same thing, >regardless of whether or not the projectile is >magnetic or not...if it is conducting, it will work. > >I'm not saying this should not be investigated, far >from it. I think it should, and I fully support Jerry >Bayles and Jean-Louis going further with this. But for >the time being, it looks as if it can be explained >conventionally. I hope there is something else. I've >always had a funny feeling about toroids, that there >is something there, if only we can 'get at it'. > >This is one of the reasons I rarely post my >experimentation. I usually end up figuring out how the >conventional stuff explained the effect perfectly. >But...the search for the elusive unconventional stuff >is damn fun! > >--Kyle > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. >http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 04:26:01 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 iBMCPqgZ024011; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:25:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMCPod0023995; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:25:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:25:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=MeMCyUwRbCS1gzim43aFxNPXsMFRas0ld+XFcYPWL4UsfMyPEmmQjEqC4I7JszdF; Message-ID: <410-2200412322112416970@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: Magnetic Biasing of BEC Helium? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 05:24:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94094ec4f28545cbd54c57aaa3587008b03350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.128 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57056 X-Loop: vortex-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 Hey Jones. Given that each of the three helium nuclei (and their electrons) have a magnetic dipole moment (whether steady-state or oscillating at 10e20 to 10e25 Hz) they should align like compass needles along the field lines in a strong magnetic field such as that provided by a Current Loop or Solenoid: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/curloo.html Solenoid: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html#c1 This has possibilities for Deuterium-Loaded Pd rods, liquids or gases. No? Is the earth's B field doing this to helium to form carbon/hydrocarbons deep down? 3 He ----> C etc. As stated earlier the ratio of the coulomb repulsion force to the combined attractive B field force of the "Energy Loops/quarks" of two helium nuclei is 4/28 as opposed to 2/14 for two deuterons, but 2/6 for two protons indicating that if aligned with their electrons between them, they should "Fuse" easier than two protons. Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Hey Jones.
 
Given that each of the three helium nuclei (and their electrons) have a magnetic dipole moment
(whether steady-state or oscillating at 10e20 to 10e25 Hz) they should align like compass needles
along the field lines in a strong magnetic field  such as that provided by a Current Loop or Solenoid:
 
 
Solenoid:
 
 
This has possibilities for Deuterium-Loaded Pd rods, liquids or gases.  No?
 
Is the earth's B field doing this to helium to form carbon/hydrocarbons deep down? 3 He ---->  C etc.
 
As stated earlier the ratio of the coulomb repulsion force to the combined attractive B field force of the
"Energy Loops/quarks" of two helium nuclei is 4/28 as opposed to 2/14 for two deuterons, but
2/6 for two protons indicating that if aligned with their electrons between them, they should "Fuse" easier than
two protons.
 
Frederick
 
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 05:07:52 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 iBMD7kXb023357; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 05:07:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMD7drZ023339; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 05:07:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 05:07:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NToIU1mpXWABjEZcUS6PCA+L3EJi9cj/nlW+eauhreOEfEYzvbvSuxHHL+BzQjHv; Message-ID: <410-22004123221267390@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: Will Cold Fusion Legitimize String Theory? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 06:06:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c1325193528496209dbd4de7449a9553350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.170 Resent-Message-ID: <53g0BC.A.nsF.bGXyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57057 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: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII An interesting presentation of String Theory on PBS last night. Rewarding to see that the "Energy Circle or Disk" Model is in lock-step with it. OTOH, the establishment wags say that " there is no known experiment to prove it, thus it is more of a philosophy than a science". The Laws of Physics determined by Popular Vote? :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

An interesting presentation of String Theory on PBS last night.
 
Rewarding to see that the "Energy Circle or Disk" Model is in lock-step with it.
 
OTOH, the establishment wags say that " there is no known experiment to prove
it, thus it is more of a philosophy than a science".
 
The Laws of Physics determined by Popular Vote?    :-)
 
Frederick
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 06:29:25 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 iBMETEgZ028547; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 06:29:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMET9tx028464; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 06:29:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 06:29:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <75.3b23e9d5.2efadea7@aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:28:55 EST Subject: Fwd: Will Cold Fusion Legitimize String Theory? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_75.3b23e9d5.2efadea7_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/57058 X-Loop: vortex-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_75.3b23e9d5.2efadea7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_75.3b23e9d5.2efadea7_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <7f.53f23223.2efadda6@aol.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:24:38 EST Subject: Re: Will Cold Fusion Legitimize String Theory? To: fjsparber@earthlink.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_75.3b23e9d5.2efadda6_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6808 --part2_75.3b23e9d5.2efadda6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 8:08:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes: > An interesting presentation of String Theory on PBS last night. > > Rewarding to see that the "Energy Circle or Disk" Model is in lock-step with > it. > > OTOH, the establishment wags say that " there is no known experiment to > prove > it, thus it is more of a philosophy than a science". > > The Laws of Physics determined by Popular Vote? :-) > > Frederick > I saw it. Cold fusion is a low energy phenomena. String theory is a high energy theory. They do not apply to the same phenomena. I believe that string theory has to do with elementary particles and cold fusion has to do with the quantum transition. Two different things. Frank Z --part2_75.3b23e9d5.2efadda6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/22/2004 8:08:= 32 AM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber@earthlink.net writes:

An interesting presentation of=20= String Theory on PBS last night.
 
Rewarding to see that the "Energy Circle or Disk" Model is in lock-step with= it.
 
OTOH, the establishment wags say that " there is no known experiment to prov= e
it, thus it is more of a philosophy than a science".

The Laws of Physics determined by Popular Vote?    :-)
 
Frederick


I saw it.  Cold fusion is a low energy phenomena.  String theory i= s a high energy theory.  They do not apply to the same phenomena. = I believe that string theory has to do with elementary particles and cold f= usion has to do with the quantum transition.
Two different things.

Frank Z --part2_75.3b23e9d5.2efadda6_boundary-- --part1_75.3b23e9d5.2efadea7_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 07:32:41 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 iBMFWTgZ017140; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMFWSXX017125; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:28 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 06:40:08 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) Resent-Message-ID: <90w0hB.A.hLE.LOZyBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57059 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4) SOME BASIC ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO GRAVITONS In a quantum mechanics (QM) approach to gravity it is assumed that gravity, like the other forces, is carried by a messenger particle. This messenger particle is commonly called a graviton. If gravitons carry the gravitational force then numerous questions and conflicts arise. If gravitons can interact with gravitons, as is typically thought of messenger particles, i.e. carry the gravitational force between themselves, then black holes would not be detectable in any way, even by their gravitational mass, because gravity itself could not escape them. If gravitons travel through space, then Einstein's General Relativity (GR) theory, which shows gravity to be a side effect of the warping of space-time in the vicinity of mass, implies gravitons can not escape black holes for the same reason that photons can not, because space-time is too warped for them to escape. For these reasons, either GR is wrong or the QM approach to gravity is wrong, or gravitons do not travel through space-time as we know it, but rather through some other dimension or dimensions unrelated to space and time, but yet connecting all particles in space-time. The existence of such dimensions outside of space-time yet connecting every point of space-time would additionally help explain quantum entanglement, whereby information can be exchanged across the universe seemingly instantaneously. PHOTONS, ENERGY AND MASS Photons are today not thought to carry mass. However, it seems there is good reason to question this view. Energy and mass are involved in all photon exchanges. The universe may or may not spontaneously create mass and therefore energy from the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a given reference frame in this universe mass and energy must remain in the balance E/m = c^2. That is because photons carry momentum, and momentum corresponds to energy. By Plank's law, photons carry energy E: E = h*nu = h(c/lambda) and momentum p = h/lambda so photons always carry momentum and energy in the ratio E/p = h(c/lambda)/(h/lambda) = c Assume a photon is created by a nuclear event, where mass (delta m) is converted to energy at the exchange rate of E = (delta m) c^2, thus there is a loss of mass: (delta m) = E/c^2. This photon is thought, by conventional theory, to carry no mass, only the momentum p = E/c. However, to conserve momentum, a photon absorbed by a target mass must impart to the target mass an additional kinetic energy (delta K) corresponding to the change in velocity of the target due to the momentum change of the impacted mass, and if energy is conserved then (delta K)=E. However, by the special theory of relativity, that results in a corresponding increase in apparent mass of the absorbing body by the ratio (delta K)/c^2 = (delta m). So we have the mass (delta m) back! The photon carried mass (delta m) from one body to another. Therefore, in our rest frame, *both* mass and energy are conserved in such a photon exchange, as is the ratio E/m = c^2. The strange thing is that photons clearly carry mass from one place to another, i.e. do mass exchange in the end result, yet are thought to have no mass. Further, it is well known (from the lensing effects of stars) that photons are bent by gravity in an amount exactly equal to the amount a mass carrying body would be bent. It is said this proves space is warped about gravitational bodies, in that the supposedly mass-free photon travels the same path as a high speed mass carrying particle. It seems far more logical that the photon has mass, that gravitons act upon photons. Photons are trapped in a black hole by gravity. Strange that a photon traveling directly away from a black hole, a singularity, supposedly reverses course upon itself, retracing its path right back to the black hole! If this is because space is warped, how is it the photon has a path to retrace at all, and how is it that velocity c is maintained? Photons are thought to have no mass because the magnitude of their relativistic "momenergy" is zero, and this can only happen if their mass is zero. However, this approach to relativity does not consider the possibility that gravitational mass and inertial mass are not one and the same. A possible resolution of the apparent paradox is that the photon carries gravitational mass, i.e. a gravitational charge, and yet carries zero inertial mass. The EM fields of the photon carry no net inertia. They do not self-interact because they travel at velocity C, thus virtual photons cannot achieve self-force exchange within the waveform required to resist acceleration to c. This does not mean the photon carries no mass or momentum. Then there is the principle issue of quantum gravity - the notion that gravity is exchanged by gravitons. If gravity is force exchange by gravitons, then the notion of warped space (in addition) provides a double apparent force, thus things are out of kilter. Is it graviton exchange that pulls the photon back to the black hole? If so, then the photon is capable of graviton exchange, and thus has mass. If it is not capable of graviton exchange, how is it that the photons are trapped by gravity, especially those on a course directly away from a singularity? It seems reasonable that some of the dark matter of the universe might be photons. They are only "dark" because they are not hitting our eyes. The kinetic pressure of photons should cause the universe to expand more rapidly, especially at the periphery, than predicted by mass gravitational and momentum considerations only. The effect in the center of the universe would be to create more apparent mass than expected, thought the mass density of photons in the vacuum of the universe would be exceedingly small. PHOTONS, GRAVITY, AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY AND MOMENTUM To consider issues of conservation of energy and momentum we might engage in a thought experiment because a single inconsistency, a single violation of a law, invalidates the law. Suppose we are in a space ship near a black hole. Further suppose that, through very advanced technology, the space ship is able to skim a laser beam near the surface of the black hole in just such an orbit that it returns to the ship. Though the space-time metric does not allow such an orbit for matter, it does permit such an orbit for photons. We obtain thrust upon emitting the beam, and further by absorbing it upon its return. This thrust is due to the well known photon carried momentum. Further, due to our advanced technology, we can perfectly reflect or re-emit the beam, and continually repel ourselves from the black hole without the use of significant further energy. What is strange about all this? It is the lack of effect upon the black hole itself. Since (if) the photons have no gravitational mass, there is no gravitational attraction to the black hole, no mechanism of force on the black hole itself. This violates conservation of momentum, and thus conservation of energy as well. The photons change direction without a counter-force, thus violating Newton's laws. The photons, having no gravitational mass, neither warp space in the vicinity of the black hole nor exchange gravitons with the black hole. Let us assume for a moment that the photons merely bend about the black hole due to the warping of space, and that somehow space itself provides a mechanism for transmitting the counter-force to the black hole. If this is the case, then that force upon the black hole is indistinguishable from gravity itself, and thus *is* gravity. If the force between photons and mass precisely follows the gravitational rule, on both the photon and the mass, then how is it that force is distinguishable from gravity itself? Further, the photons carry and deliver mass. Is it not reasonable to assume they "have" mass? If photons do have mass then there is a seeming paradox that they can accelerate in zero time to speed c. However, as the mysteries of quantum mechanics and messenger particles go, this is not much of a paradox. Other than the fact we can not apply the formula m' = m * gamma to the photon, there is no reason that the photon can not still have zero rest mass, as the mass carried from place to place is incremental to and embodied in the masses which exchange the photon, not in the photon itself except during its journey. Inertial mass may in fact be separate and distinct from gravitational mass, and the instantaneous acceleration of the photon may indeed provide proof of that fact. When the photon is at "rest" it has already transferred its mass-energy to the body which has absorbed it. When in motion it has only one velocity, namely c. Its mass and energy is determined by the rest frame from which it is observed. Further, it may be questioned as to whether the photon actually has a journey, since in its reference frame the journey takes zero time. The path of its journey is thus laid out fully in advance of or at least at the moment of departure, and exists for the photon as a singularity in time. For the photon there is no oscillation, no frequency, no Newtonian effects, no process, no wavelength, merely an event. If time dilation is real, then the effects of gravity and every other form of possible interaction on a photon's set path must thus be worked out in, exist in, an instant. Gravity exchanges with the photon must exist in a framework independent of space-time. Similar truths would have to exist for the graviton if relativistic effects apply to the graviton. These strange qualities it seems makes photons and gravitons more alike than not alike, though to some extent they may in part exist in separate universes. The graviton must be incapable of exchanging gravity with itself, and must, when considered in the context of general relativity, exist at least partly outside of space-time. Despite the unfathomable nature of existence, in our limited framework of understanding, it seems more reasonable and consistent than not to assume that the photon has gravitational mass. However, assuming the contrary is also exciting, in that, as demonstrated by the above thought experiment, it opens the door to the possibilities of free energy and reaction mass free propulsion, since conservation of energy and momentum are no longer inviolable laws. CAUSALITY AND JEFIMENKO'S GRAVITY In establishing his correspondence between gravity and the electromagnetic field, based primarily on causality and the effects of retardation, Jefimenko, in *Causality, Electromagnetism, and Gravity*, creates the correspondence of G to -1/(4*Pi*epsilon_g_0) to -mu_g_0*c^2/(4*Pi). The term epsilon_g_0 here is the gravitational equivalent to the electrostatic permittivity of the vacuum epsilon_0, and mu_g_0 is the equivalent to the magnetic permeability of the vacuum mu_0, as will be explained below. Jefimenko's version of EM fully accounts for causality, i.e. the fact that a cause at a distance d can not precede the effect by time delta t which is less than d/c (or d/c_g in the case of gravity.) Jefimenko shows that causality justifies invention of the co-gravitational field K, analogous to B. This will be shown below to make a full gravitational-electromagnetic field isomorphism possible. Jefimenko demonstrates that B, and thus K, are merely computed quantities, secondary quantities that necessarily follow from the only true causes, the interaction of charge upon charge or mass upon mass. This provides strong evidence for the "real" existence of K, as "real" as B, i.e. that an (apparent) K can be observed experimentally to the same extent B can, though it is much more difficult to observe due to the extreme orders of magnitude involved. In other words, if causal electromagnetism is correct, then the causal gravity is also necessarily correct. The isomorphism holds by necessity because the full set of postulates have already been experimentally verified. However, if it turns out that causal electromagnetism is incorrect, and B exists in a real sense, then it does not follow that K can (any longer) be assumed to exist on the basis that it is merely a computed quantity, like energy. B and E are variable when the velocity of the observer is taken into account. This magnitude dependence on observer velocity is fully accounted for by causality treatment, because the relative velocity of the observer merely changes the apparent retardation. This aspect even more fully justifies Jefimenko's treatment of B as an artifact of charge motion. In Jefimenko's text the world of gravity and electromagnetism are maintained as separate worlds, and merely corresponded to each other. Jefimenko thus uses epsilon_0 in the gravity context to mean -1/(4*Pi*G), and mu_0 to mean -4*Pi*G/c^2. He also uses c to mean the speed of propagation of gravity. Here use the new notation epsilon_g_0 to mean the permittivity of space to gravity, mu_g_0 to mean permeability of space to co-gravity, and c_g to mean the speed of gravity propagation. So far there is really no change with the view of Jefimenko, only an extended notation. There are some immediate advantages to this notation, however. First it provides corresponding constants which could have been nicely used in the EM to gravity correspondences on page 104 of Jefimenko's book: *Causality, Electromagnetism, and Gravity*. Namely we could have the new Table 1, shown below. Electric Gravitational q m E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 mu_0 mu_g_0 Table 1: Initial Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table However, this is still not ideal. We have a problem with signs, as it appears did Jefimenko, but which he remedies by placing minus signs in the corresponding formulae. The problem lies in the fact that, to maintain the convention that a positive force is repelling, we end up with sign problems between the force equations: Fg = G*(m1*m2/r) for gravity and Fe = k*(q1*q2/r^2) = (1/(4*Pi*epsilon_0))(q1*q2/r^2) for the Coulomb force. Jefimenko fixes this problem by making his epsilon_g_0 and mu_g_0 negative. Thus, in effect he has the gravitational equivalent to the above: Fg = G*(m1*m2/r) = (-1/(4*Pi*epsilon_g_0))*(m1*m2/r^2) His gravitational permittivity and co-gravitational permeability thus end up negative in order to preserve the correct sign on force. This eventually causes problems. An example is the Poynting vector correspondence: S = (1/mu_0) E x B vs the Jefimenko gravitational version: P = (c^2/(4*Pi*G)) K x g = (1/mu_g_0) K x g Note that Jefimenko here reverses K and G instead of using an arbitrarily placed minus sign. It appears that there is a handy way out of this lack of true isomorphism. That solution is to specify the sign of the mass charge in terms of i = (-1)^(1/2), the imaginary number i. Charge has sign, so why not mass? This then makes the isomorphism complete. We now have epsilon_g_0 = 1/(4*Pi*G) mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/(c_g)^2 and all the formulae then exactly correspond, including signs. The disadvantage to this approach is that the imaginary number i must be carried throughout the gravitational field units. Perhaps this is really an unexpected advantage though. Gravitational fields are imaginary, electromagnetic are real. There is then some hidden meaning to this? One is that the two worlds ARE for the most part disconnected. We have in fact an indication of field *dis-unification*. Additionally we have that anti-gravitational matter, if it exists as implied by symmetry, would then carry sign (-i). SPEED OF GRAVITY Jefimenko adapts his theory to account for general relativistic effects by adjusting the speed of gravity. He notes (p. 135 ff.) that to account for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, that the speed of propagation of gravity must be about 0.3 c. We thus have c_g = 0.3 * c and we know that (c_g)^2 * epsilon_g_0 * mu_0_1 = 1 thus (0.09 c^2) * epsilon_g_0 * mu_0_1 = 1 and we also have mu_0 = (4/0.9)*Pi*G/c^2 We now have the full correspondence: Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg c c_g = = 8.99x10^7 m/s (Jefimenko's estimate) Table 2: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table where we now (roughly) know epsilon_g_0, mu_g_0, and c_g, and gravitational mass is expressed in terms of imaginary units i. J_g is mass current. Inertial mass everywhere in relativistic cases is the relativistic mass m0*gamma. We have a complete field isomorphism. This isomorphism implies both a connection, as well as disconnection, between the electromagnetic and gravitational fields. We have achieved a form of "field dis-unification." The existence of i in some resulting equations distinctly and permanently isolates the purely gravitational fields and masses from electromagnetic components. We also now have computed fundamental constants: c_g, epsilon_g_0, and mu_g_0, as they must be according to Jefimenko's theory. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 07:32:57 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 iBMFWmgZ017359; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMFWiid017325; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:32:44 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 06:40:22 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 2) Resent-Message-ID: <-1W_BB.A.pOE.bOZyBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57060 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 2) THE PROPOSED ISOMORPHISM IS NOT LIMITED TO JEFIMENKO'S VISION OF EM Any complete theory of electromagnetism, including electromagnetism within the framework of relativity, can be used to create an isomorphism between electromagnetism and gravity, provided B in the theory is not real in the sense it is simply a byproduct of the other laws of the electromagnetic theory, and the electromagnetic vector potential function can be be derived from the (retarded) motion of charge. Jefimenko showed that the law of causality, if postulated, ensures that B meets this criteria. It is suggested here that the subject isomorphism can be established by first measuring or establishing the rate of propagation of gravity, c_g. We then can compute the permeability of space to co-gravity: mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/(c_g)^2 and the permittivity of space to gravity: epsilon_g_0 = 1/(4*Pi*G). It is expected that c_g = c when full relativistic effects are applied, though, the ratio c/c_g is likely to change within close range to massive objects, due to the fact gravity and electromagnetism operate in separate spatial dimensions. We now establish the isomorphism by applying the following rules to every electromagnetic law in order to obtain corresponding gravitational laws. Replace c, mu_0 and epsilon_0 with corresponding terms c_g, mu_g_0, and epsilon_g_0 above. Co-gravity K is defined as the gravitational equivalent to (corresponds under the isomorphism to) B, the magnetic field intensity B. Gravity g is defined as the gravitational equivalent of the electrostatic field E. Wherever charge is used, gravitational mass (gravitational charge) is substituted, with the sign of the charge removed (if ordinary matter is involved, i.e. not anti-gravitational matter) and replaced by the imaginary number i. J_g is the mass current vector corresponding to current density vector J. When special relativity is included, we then have the full correspondence: Electric Gravitational q m * i E g B K J J_g epsilon_0 epsilon_g_0 = 1.192602x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 mu_0 mu_g_0 = 9.329597x10^-27 m/kg c c_g = c Table 3: Gravity-electromagnetism Isomorphism Correspondence Table NOTATION AND NOMENCLATURE RELATED TO GRAVITATION The EM-GK isomorphism provides analogs to a vast quantity of physical laws, formulae and terms. This can cause much confusion in the process of attempting to assign names and symbols the gravitational analog items. To be consistent, and end terminology confusion, when discussing or expanding the isomorphism proposed here between the electromagnetic (EM) and gravikinetic (GK) fields, when referring to a gravitational feature the analogous term borrowed from the EM universe should be prefixed with "gravi" to indicate that that analogous feature is in the GK universe. If it is not appropriate to prefix a term with "gravi" then it can be preceded with the adjective "gravitational". Under the proposed EM-GK isomorphism every variable, every formula, every unit in EM has a corresponding value, a gravitational analog. The formulas and variables from the EM world should be used faithfully, and simply subscripted where necessary with a g to designate the GK analog. The exceptions to these rules are the variables g, and G, and co-gravitational field K, which is hereby now called the gravimagnetic field K, which are symbols that already have specific meanings. Based on the above principles, the following are sample correspondences: electrostatic field E: gravitational field g magnetic field B: gravimagnetic field K electromagnetic (EM) : gravikinetic (GK) (a necessary rule exception) charge: gravicharge (an imaginary quantity in units of +i kg, or possibly -i kg, not to be confused with mass) current: gravicurrent (an imaginary quantity in units of +i kg/s) magnet: gravimagnet monopole: gravimonopole Poynting vector P: gravitational Poynting vector P_g ohm (omega): graviohm (omega_g) permittivity (epsilon) : gravipermittivity (epsilon_g) permeability (mu) : gravipermeability (mu_g) lightspeed (c): gravispeed (c_g) impedance of the vacuum (nu): graviimpedence of the vacuum (nu_g) Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism: Maxwell's laws of gravimagnetism Gauss' Law of electric flux: Gauss' Law of gravitational flux Laplace's Law of Electrostatic potential: Laplace's Law of Gravitational Potential Similar terminology should be used when applied to the laws of Lenz, Biot-Savart, Ampere, Ohm, etc. The theory itself, the EM-GK Isomorphic Theory, can thus simply be called a theory of gravimagnetism. This approach to nomenclature puts an end to the need for all kinds of special terms and variables. Also, when the meaning is clear, one can simply dispense with the g subscripts, and thus incur no notation overhead whatsoever. Note that this approach would not work well if the isomorphism were not complete. SOME COMPUTATIONS Let's try a sample calculation using the isomorphism. The mass of the earth is m_t_earth = 5.98x10^24 kg. The radius of earth is 6378 m. The moment of inertia for a sphere of radius r and mass M is (2/5) M r. For estimating purposes, considering the iron core, we might assume the mass is located in a ring of radius 2300 km, rotating once every day, i.e. at 2*Pi*2300 km/day = 167 m/s. The gravicurrent is (5.98x10^24 kg i kg)/day = 6.92x10^41 i kg/s. Note that i here is the imaginary number (-1)^(1/2). The gravimagnetic dipole moment mu_k of the earth's gravicurrent is thus the gravicurrent times the area of the current loop, or (6.92x10^41 i kg/s)(Pi*(2300 km)^2) gives: mu_k_earth = 1.15x10^55 i kg m^2/s Let us now compute the gravimagnetic dipole moment of a spinning steel ball of radius 1 cm spinning at 30,000 rpm. The volume of the ball is 4/3 Pi (1 cm)^3 = 4.189 cm^3, so its mass is about (7.14 g/cm^3)(4.189 cm^3) = 29.9 gm = .0299 kg. This is effectively spinning at a radius of .004 m, so has a velocity of (30000*2*Pi*.4 cm)/(60 s) = 12.56 m/s. The mass turns 30000 rpm/(60 s/m) = 550 rps and thus gravicurrent of (.0299 i kg)(500/s) = 14.95 i kg/s. The gravimagnetic dipole moment is thus the gravimagnetic dipole moment mu_k of the steel ball's gravicurrent is thus that gravicurrent times the area of the gravicurrent loop, or (14.95 i kg/s)(Pi*(.004 m)^2) gives: mu_k_ball = 7.51x10^-4 i kg m^2/s To properly calculate the gravimagnetic force between the earth and spinning steel ball, we might use a computer program to fully integrate the gravimagnetic field in the presence of the steel ball considering the density of the earth at each radius. However, for the sake of a first try at estimating the gravimagnetic field force we can simply assume the earth's gravimagnetic field to be due to a gravimagnetic dipole located at the center of the earth in the plane of the equator. The EM force between two magnetic dipoles mutually aligned on their axes is: F_mu = [-3 mu0/(2 Pi)] Mu_1 Mu_2 / r^4 Note that a positive force is repelling. Two mutually aligned gravicurrent coils (rings) generate an attracting force because their fields are aligned N-S ... N-S. For convenience, let's use Jefimenko's value of mu_g_0 = 1.037x10^-25 m/kg in order to convert the above into the isomorphic gravitational analog for the earth and ball: F_mu_g = [-3 mu_0_g/(2 Pi)] Mu_1 Mu_2 / r^4 F_mu_g = [-3 mu_0_g/(2 Pi)] mu_k_earth mu_k_ball / r^4 where Mu_1 and Mu_2 are gravimagnetic dipole moments expressed in units of [i kg/(m s)] and the separation distance r is in meters. For simplicity's sake let's assume the experiment is performed at the north pole. This gives r = 6378 m and the force is: F_mu_g = [-3 (1.037x10^-25 m/kg)/(2 Pi)] * (1.15x10^55 i kg m^2/s) * (7.51x10^-4 i kg m^2/s) / (6378 km)^4 = [4.95x10^-26 m/kg] * (1.765x10^51 kg^2 m^4/s^2) / 1.655x10^27 m^4 = .0528 N = 5.38 gf and we seem to be way off. However, if we use c_g = c we have: mu_g_0 = 4*Pi*G/c^2 = 9.3295973x10^-27 m/kg and the ratio of the two gravipermeabilities is (9.3295973x10^-27 m/kg)/(1.037x10^-25 m/kg) = 0.09 and we get a force of (5.38 gf)*0.09) = 0.484 gf, which is still too high. This gives an acceleration due to kinetic force of (0.484 gf)/(29.9 gm) = 0.01619 g. However, the assumptions provide only a crude estimate of the force. A careful integration of the co-gravitational field of the earth is required. Also, the approximation to the force between dipoles used here is only valid at much larger (relative) distances. It is not valid up close to the earth. A finite element approach may be the best way to get accurate results for this kind of problem. NEWTON'S LAWS Equations involving a single mass term, like Newton's description of inertia: F = m*a would seem, under the rules of the isomorphism, to produce an imaginary force ... if the m were a gravitational mass. The m must therefore be an inertial mass component of the affected body, it must be "real" and thus associated with an electrostatic field. A mechanism for producing such a force has long been theorized. That mechanism is due to the need for charged particle, e.g. the electron, to have a finite radius. If the electron did not have a finite radius, its field would contain an infinite energy and mass. Given that the electron has a finite radius, it must be composed of multiple mass portions, a mass portion associated with charge, and a mass portion associated with maintaining the structural integrity of the electron. Further, since the electron has a finite size, movement of one portion of the electron is "sensed" by other portions only in a delayed or "retarded" fashion. This delay results in a net self-force on the electron during acceleration, and thus increased inertia. The electromagnetic self-force accounts for most of the inertia of the electron. Exactly what percentage depends on the distribution of charge in the electron waveform. There possibly can be an inertial component to the gravitational mass or there must be some other component of the electron with inertial mass, as well as the electromagnetic inertial mass, if the full inertia of the electron is to be explained. (see papers by Ibbotson.) This is especially true for heavier leptons. MORE ON MASS COMPONENTS To summarize the conceptualization presented here thus far in a variation of Jefimenko's vision of gravity and electromagnetism, called here the EM-GK Isomorphism Theory, or more simply the theory of "gravimagnetism", charged particles have both an electromagnetic mass and a gravitational mass component. It is not fully justified as to whether fields have or not have a gravitational mass component. Inertia, however, is in the electron principally a function of the electromagnetic component of mass, and is due to the self-force of a charged particle when it accelerates. That self-force is due to the finite size of the charge, and the delay of force from one part of the charge to other parts over a finite distance. Inertial mass and gravitational mass are differing things with differing causes. The causes are charge and gravitational charge respectively. It is of interest that electromagnetic retarded self-forces in the electron were used to predict m=m0*gamma before relativity was even invented. It seems that the two kinds of mass are only correlated in our minds, and by their fixed proportion in the environments where we have done gravitational experiments. If gravity and light exist in isomorphic yet partially independent worlds, and if inertia is primarily a result of an electromagnetic (and strong force or other field) self-force of matter upon its own waveform, then by that isomorphism the gravitational portion of mass may itself have an analogous inertia which exists purely in the dimensions occupied by gravitons. There are thus two components to mass, the inertial mass component and the gravitational charge component. The fact the photon carries no inertial mass, even though it carries momentum, seems to dispel the notion that gravitational charge carries inertial mass. Gravity can not act upon the gravitational field carriers, but thus far might possibly be considered to act upon the electromagnetic field, i.e. upon virtual photons, and certainly upon photons. Otherwise, black holes could not exist. If gravitons affected gravitons, black holes would cease to exert gravitational forces. If gravitons did not affect electromagnetic fields, then it appears at fist consideration that photons would not be prevented from exiting black holes, and black holes would not exist. However, if gravitational charge exists entirely separate from electrostatic charge, then this may not be so. Much more on this below. If this conceptualization, The EM-GK Isomorphism Theory, is even roughly correct, then attempts at artificial gravity and electrogravity and even a fully unified field theory are likely to fail. The exciting thing, though, is that inertial mass might be manipulated to some degree by electromagnetics, and that has significant implications for both space travel and energy generation. MASS HALOS We will now dispel the possibility that electromagnetic fields carry a gravitational component, i.e. that gravitons act upon virtual photons or that electromagnetic fields carry gravitational mass. In other words, it will be shown that under the EM-GK Isomorphism, virtual photons can not carry a gravitational charge. When a pair of nearby charged particles are viewed from a distant perspective, they form a dipole field that dissipates in a 1/r^3 manner. Their fields are said to "superposition" and thus cancel. However, if fields carry a mass component, an imaginary gravitational mass component that is, this component will not superposition. The gravitational component terms will add independently, irrespective of the polarity of charges generating a super positioned field, because they each are positive and contain the factor i. We thus end up with a mass flow about any neutral mass equivalent to the mass of the electrostatic field that would exist if all the charges in that neutral mass were of the same polarity. Electrostatic fields are said to consist of virtual photon flows. According to the theory being advanced here, these virtual photons must at all points have an electromagnetic inertial mass component, and thus carry momentum, but lacking any imaginary portion, they cannot carry any gravitational component. Let us now assume for a while that electromagnetic fields have mass. A difference in charge might be viewed as a difference in time's arrow. Positive charge might absorb virtual photons and negative charge emit virtual photons, or vice versa. If not, and virtual photons have polarity, then there is a mass flow away and only away from any mass. Otherwise, there are matching mass flows into and out of any neutral mass. In either case, any mass has a large mass halo. The virtual photons flowing from neutral matter carry the vibrational energy signature of the emitting sources in addition to the momenta and presently assumed mass of the virtual photons. We will now attempt to quantify the size of the mass halo which must exist if electromagnetic fields carry gravitational mass, i.e. carry an imaginary portion under the proposed theory. The majority of the ordinary matter of interest here is composed of charged particles, i.e. either quarks having -1/3 or +2/3 the charge of an electron, or electrons themselves. Up quarks carry +2/3 q_e, or 2/3 the charge of an electron but opposite in sign. Down quarks carry 1/3 q_e. Even neutrons carry charged quarks, so must be accounted for in the tabulation of components of a mass halo. For purposes of computing the mass halo density, we are interested in knowing the density of absolute charge in matter, not net charge. Protons carry two up quarks and one down quark, thus carry a total of absolute charge of 4/3 q_e. Neutrons carry two down quarks and one up quark, and thus have no net charge, yet carry an absolute charge of 4/3 q_e. If we assume roughly 1.1 neutrons per proton in the matter of interest, then we have an average absolute charge density of: rho_c = ( 1.1*(4/3 q_e) + (4/3 q_e) + q_e)/(1.1 m_n + m_p + m_e) rho_c = 1.732x10^8 coul/kg The mass of the earth is 5.975x10^24 kg, so the earth carries an absolute charge of about 1.0375x10^33 coulombs. The mass of the sun is about 1.98x10^30 kg, so it carries an absolute charge of 3.43x10^38 coulombs. Given an electrostatic field E from charge q, at radius r we have: E = q/(4 Pi e_0 r^2) and thus the energy density rho_energy is given by: rho_energy = (e_0/2) E^2 = q^2/(32 Pi^2 e_0 r^4) and given that the energy is equal to m*c^2, we have rho_mass = rho_energy/c^2 so: rho_mass = q^2/(32 Pi e_0 c^2 r^4) and thus the density of mass in the mass halo is proportional to 1/r^4. Using 4 Pi r^2 dr as a volume element, we integrate to obtain total halo mass in a region: m_halo = integral of q^2/(8 Pi e_0 r^2 c^2) and the mass of the halo from r_1 to r_2 is given by: m_halo = (q^2/(8 Pi e_0 c^2) (1/r1 - 1/r2) and integrating from r1 to infinity we thus have total external halo mass m_t: m_t = (q^2/(8 Pi e_0 c^2)) (1/r1) Using 1.21x10^17 coulombs for the earth, and a radius of 3.185x10^6 m, and making the very imperfect assumption that all the charge is located at the center of the earth, we obtain a minimum external mass halo for the earth of: m_t_earth = (1.0375x10^33 C)^2/(8 Pi e_0 c^2) (1/(6.371x10^6 m)) m_t_earth = 8.45x10^51 kg m_t_earth / m_earth = (8.45x10^51 kg)/(5.975x10^24 kg) = 1.41x10^27 This is an enormous halo mass. We have not considered yet the ratio of the inertial mass portion to the gravitational mass portion. If here is any validity to this theory at all, then it is clear that the gravitational portion of the mass of the electromagnetic field must be very small indeed, much much less than 10^-27 of the total inertial mass of the electromagnetic field. Otherwise orbital mechanics applied to earth satellites would very quickly show us some gravitational anomalies. The apparent mass of the earth would increase with radius, and this would cause precession of the perigee. The mass halo also has implications to the quantity of recession of the perihelion of Mercury, and thus to the velocity of gravity that Jefimenko selected. It is further notable that the proportions of gravitational and inertial masses in electromagnetic fields need not be the same as that for ordinary matter. However, it would seem that the gravitational component of mass in an electromagnetic field can not be zero, else black holes can not exist. This seems to represent a crisis to the theory. There is a possible resolution to this crisis. Our initial assumption that electromagnetic fields carry gravitational mass was wrong. Electromagnetic field forces are carried by "virtual photons" and if virtual photons do not interact with gravitons then the need for the huge mass of the mass halo disappears. The implications of this fact are significant. Even though light itself can not escape black holes, electromagnetic fields can! Back holes might carry signatures of the angular momentum of their mass constituents in the form of massive magnetic fields. They can carry a net electrostatic charge that affects neighboring space. It is only when electromagnetic fields break free of inertial mass, i.e. are photons, that they carry the ability to interact with gravitons. Electromagnetic fields can only break free in the form of photons. Considering that quantum entanglement between the mass carrying particle and the photon it creates can exist, it is perfectly logical that such a space-time independent link exists via the graviton dimensions between the originating gravitational mass and the gravitational charge associated with an entangled photon. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 07:33:21 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 iBMFXCXb023502; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMFX6ET023426; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:06 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 06:40:39 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 3) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57061 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 3) GRAVITATIONAL ZPE Gravitons may be assumed to be entities which isomorphically exist in a set of dimensions in part independent from their cousins the photons. Gravitons thus have their own independent but isomorphic constant speed c_g which is meaningful in the graviton-visible universe. The full extent of the isomorphism requires significant effort to reveal the full ramifications. However, when phenomena exist in the electromagnetic universe it is reasonable to expect analogous phenomena in the gravitational universe, and further for these phenomena to interact to some extent in the combined universe. The thermal motions of small charge pieces of mater in the universe is said by some to create zero point energy (ZPE) which accounts for the Zitterbewegung of matter. There must then be a gravitational equivalent to ZPE, a gravity wave equivalent to the zero point field (ZPF), due to the thermal vibration of matter throughout the universe. It is therefore a logical conclusion that the ZPF, with its cubical energy distribution by frequency, has two components, an electromagnetic component, and a gravitational component, though the gravitational component may be so small as to be undetectable. However, it may be that there exists a 1/r^3 distribution dipole field, both electromagnetic and gravitational, which also has a 1/r^3 energy to frequency distribution, that is in fact detectable close to large masses. EVIDENCE FOR EXISTENCE OF THE GRAVIMAGNETIC FIELD The existence of the gravimagnetic field is demonstrated by the precession of the equinoxes, the precession of the earth itself. The direction of the local gravimagnetic field is in the direction of the mean axis of orientation of the earth. The precession of the earth is due to the fact that the earth's axis is not oriented in the direction of the local gravimagnetic field, which is principally generated by the moon, sun, local stars, and the galactic core. Since the spinning earth represents a gravi-dipole, it has a gravimagnetic field. The earth's gravimagnetic field is not oriented in the direction of the local gravimagnetic field, and thus there is torque upon the earth that causes it to precess. This precession results in, is, the precession of the equinoxes. Careful three body analysis of the earth-moon-sun system, accounting for retardation, provides the same results as that obtained by use of gravimagnetics concepts. However, there are minor anomalies in the precession of the equinoxes. Analysis of these anomalies from the gravimagnetics perspective may provide evidence for motions of black holes in the vicinity. RATIO OF INERTIAL MASS TO GRAVITATIONAL MASS It sometimes is noted as strange that inertial mass and gravitational mass are equal. The EM_GK Isomorphic Theory shows that this coincidence is one of our own making, and thus an illusion. The kg weight and kgf force unit are related so nicely only by the fact that we live on earth, and that earth is fairly spherical, so g_earth is fairly constant at the surface. If our physicist ancestors lived on a planet where g was 3 times that of earth, the kgf would be 3 times as large and after setting that standard, i.e a kg weight being 3 times ours, the G they would subsequently discover or determine would be larger by a factor of 9 (than the G we earthlings "discovered") in order to compensate for that choice of definition of units of weight, i.e. gravitational mass. What is actually constant in our comparatively low gravity environment is the ratio of inertial mass to gravitational mass. Our perception that the two masses (actually mass and weight) are equal then is flawed, but our earthling determined value of G compensates for this. Under the EM-GK isomorphic theory of gravity proposed, what is important is that some particles, like the photon, consist of quantized chunks of gravitational mass and quantized chunks of inertial mass which are bound together. If there is only one chunk of each, or a fixed ratio of such chunks, then the ratio of the two kinds of mass must always be constant, unless changed by relativistic effects involving differing messenger particle velocities. An increase in the ratio of inertial mass to gravitational mass would appear to be a slowing of time, because all physical clocks, having higher inertial mass, would appear to be slow. ANTI-MASS RADIATING BLACK HOLES If both positive charge mass (units of +i kg) and negative charge mass (units of -i kg), i.e. anti-mass, exist, and two particles carrying opposite mass charges are matter and antimatter to each other, then an amazing phenomenon can possibly happen if and when a black hole singularity becomes massive enough. The black hole can radiate mass having the opposite mass charge from that which the black holes has. In other words, when a black hole gets large enough it should spew forth at near light speed large amounts of matter that is anti-mass to the mass of which the black hole is made. As the gravitational field strength in a locality grows, so then does the probability that a mass-anti-mass pair fluctuating in and out of the vacuum can be permanently separated by that gravitational field. The particle having the same mass charge as the black hole quickly disappears into the singularity, or some approximation thereof. The anti-mass particle, however, is immediately blown out of the black hole with enormous energy. The event horizon for the anti-mass particle does not exist. Such an event does not just happen at an event horizon, but rather throughout a spherical volume about the singularity. The larger the singularity, the more anti-mass flow that can be expected out of the black hole, because the flow grows as the 3/2 power of the mass of the black hole. This is a fairly scary concept, because it means that once a critical mass is formed, a black hole can explode continuously in size without boundaries. It can suck up all the matter the vacuum can feed it. Its event horizon then grows at an exponential rate, as does its mass and rate of anti-mass radiation. Fortunately, this is not a likely possibility, because the gravicharge of the photon is very small, thus the quantum of gravitational charge must correspond to a small energy. Anti-gravitational matter it seems should be more commonplace. One possibility (other than denial of the proposed EM-GK isomorphism) that precludes this scenario is that matter and antimatter particles must all have identical mass charge signs. This is a very reasonable possibility. If mass-anti-mass pairs formed from the vacuum, they would not need a black hole to proliferate. They would self-repel. So, a more logical possibility then is that if anti-mass particle pairs exist, then, when they are created by vacuum fluctuations, their matter-anti-matter particles have differing electrostatic charges, but the same (negative) gravitational mass-charge sign. In this way such particles can quickly annihilate and return to the vacuum from which they spring with far less frequency than pairs having positive and negative mass charges. This also to some extent gets us around the problem of the expected cominality of an exponentially exploding event horizon radius. The black holes have to become large enough that tidal forces separate the pairs despite their enormous electrostatic attraction. It does not eliminate the possibility that black holes above *some* large limit in mass will radiate near light-speed anti-mass particles. The reason for this is that when a particle pair separates within a fixed radius shell, and thus separate in a direction along a tangent to that shell, both particles are accelerated outward away from the black hole, and indefinitely separate, provided the tidal force that separates them (they each lie on separate diverging radii) is large enough. We thus see that the neighborhood in the locality of huge black holes could be filled with objects made of anti-mass, including anti-mass black holes (anti-mass attracts itself). Such a neighborhood would appear to gradually take on an increasingly weaker gravitational constant. Some visible (or even invisible) bodies consisting a mostly anti-mass would take on maverick motional characteristics. All highly speculative, yet all a direct and immediate consequence of the EM-GK Isomorphism Theory. Various particles are suggested by the resulting symmetries, including gravimonopoles. GRAVIMAGNETICS, DARK MATTER, AND DARK ENERGY If the messenger particle of gravity, gravitons, had a speed c_g less than the speed of light c, and gravity began with the big bang, then objects exceeding c_g at the time of the big bang could outrun gravity itself. It seems reasonable that c_g >= c. Even if in all cases c_g >= c, objects near the speed of c or even just distant from the center of the universe, i.e. the origin of the big bang, would have a diminished gravitational attraction to the center of mass of the universe because of retardation. Retardation is the delay of effect due to transit time, in this case the transit time of gravitons. For distant objects, created at the time of the big bang, the gravitons from much of the universe are in transit, while for objects nearer the center of the universe a higher proportion of gravitons have completed their force transfer. Then net result is an apparent force accelerating objects that are further away from the center of the universe. This is not a true force, but rather an effect producing a force less than the expected gravitational force. The diminution is proportional to the distance between bodies. This means a quantum treatment of gravity provides a possibility other than either an ever expanding universe or an ultimately collapsing universe. That possibility is that matter sufficiently far away will not return to a big crunch, while other matter closer to the origin of the big bang may crunch. Gravimagnetics also provides a similar and at least partial explanation for dark matter. The gravimagnetic force, a 1/r^4 force between gravimagnetic dipoles, is powerful for objects close together. Ordinary orbital mechanics applied to close objects with similar spin axes will overestimate the mass involved, as compared to distant interactions of the same bodies. These are two sides of the same coin, depending on which mass information is obtained and relied upon first. The result is either apparent dark energy or dark matter, depending on the initial basis for determining the mass. GRAVIMAGNETICS AND QUANTUM GRAVITY The EM-GK isomorphism of gravimagnetics is complete, thus it extends all the way to the quantum world. The mediator of the gravitational force, the messenger graviton, i.e. virtual graviton, is the analog of the vitual photon. Unlike the photon, and like the virtual photon, the virtual graviton, commonly just called a graviton, carries no gravitational charge. An interesting thing then is the possibility of a real graviton, the momentum carrying mass charge carrying analog to the photon itself. Gravity waves of a generally unexpected kind may indeed be generated and sensed then at much higher frequencies than anticipated. Gravimagnetics is forced into the quantum world by the fact the smallest angular momentum is h/(4*pi) and the smallest increment of angular momentum is h/(2*P). In that gravimagnetics defines the electromagnetic force and gravimagnetic force as independent entities in separate dimensions, the unification of the two fields is only through the embodiment of both charge and gravitational charge within some individual particles. The Bohr magneton, (q_e/m)* h/(4*Pi), thus establishes the link between the two quantum universes. POSSIBLE FUTURE RESEARCH Under this theory, the proven lack of gravitational mass in electromagnetic fields, the lack of interaction between the messenger particles of gravity, the virtual graviton, and virtual photons, resolves long standing issues regarding the theory of the zero point field (ZPF). It has been a matter of controversy (see papers by Puthoff and Ibbotson referring the the SED theory) as to whether the ZPF is carried by virtual or real photons. Further, a long standing objection to the ZPF concept has been that, to maintain an energy/mass ratio of c^2 the density rho of the ZPF in the vacuum would be astronomical in size if the cutoff frequency of the cubic energy distribution occurs at a Plank wavelength. This theory clearly resolves these issues by showing that no such high rho is required provided the ZPF is carried by virtual photons. Further, if a means can be found to interact with the colossal ZPF virtual photon flow, enormous amounts of inertial reaction mass is available from the vacuum. Also of immediate interest is that existing gravitational computations may be off due to a failure to consider the effects of the gravimagnetic field K, which is a dipole field and thus diminishes as 1/r^3. Rotating satellites in polar orbits, or in orbits contrary to the earth's rotation, though in exactly the same orbits altitude wise, should experience slightly differing apparent values of g, thus their orbital parameters should differ slightly. Rates of precession of rotating bodies can be used to directly compute the value of the co-gravitational field K. Precession of a spinning body in space, in varying orientations, can be used to compute the local gravimagnetic field K. Also of possible interest is determination of the magnitude of the gravimagnetic field of the Milky Way galaxy, plus influence from the closest great attractor, etc. Since much of the mass of the galaxy is located at the center, much of it in black holes and neutron stars, it is not possible to estimate the gravimagnetic dipole moment of the galaxy center. This quantity must be directly measured. The ambient gravimagnetic field K may be of use in interstellar or even interplanetary journeys. The gravimagnetic force could explain, to some extent, dark matter and dark energy. Bodies in the solar system and in galaxies like our Milky way, tend to rotate in similar directions and in planes orthogonal to the rotation axes. Adjacent magnets with parallel axes repel each other. Unlike the magnetic field, the gravimagnetic field proposed in the EM-GK theory has the imaginary term i, thus the direction of the gravimagnetic force is reversed from that of the magnetic field. Bodies located in a plane, which also have mutually aligned spin axes, and thus also similar spin directions, attract. The gravimagnetic force, a 1/r^4 force between such rotating bodies, thus adds to the ordinary gravitational force. If we do not account for the gravimagnetic force, when examining the motions of near bodies, we will overestimate the mass of the bodies. As we then examine the motions of bodies far away from such mass, as the distance to those bodies increases, we will see an unexplained diminution of the expected force. We will see "dark energy". If we determine the mass of a collection of rotating bodies bodies from far away from each other, like the ends of the arms of a galaxy, then as we examine the motions of bodies in a dense mass center, like the center of the galaxy, we will see the increased effect of the gravimagnetic force, and thus assume there exists some unaccounted for "dark matter" in the vicinity. The gravimagnetic force may help to explain the arms of the galaxy, and the tendency for the unexplained nearly uniform rotation speed of the arms, and even the spiral shape of the Milky Way. The as a galaxy evolves, the gravimagnetic force helps to agglutinate the arms, to create them and hold them together. An arm then, like some long molecular string, acting like a whip, would tend to rotate about a galaxy as an entity, bending backwards at the tip, which is dragged along at increased speed in its orbit by the gravimagnetic force. Much work is needed to accomodate the three additional dismensions of space required to build a proper general relativistic theory including both gravity and electromagnetism. CONCLUSION There remains much work to do to consider the ramifications of the EM-GK isomorphism presented here, and its logical consequences. Inconsistencies with reality are likely. However, the mathematical nature of the isomorphism of fields that can be formed is provable based on various palatable premises, and a natural consequence of the nature of space and time, thus this gives some credence to deduced consequences. Innumerable electromagnetic equations can now be directly applied to gravitational calculations. Each of Maxwell's laws, for example, have a now precisely defined gravitational equivalent. The practical consequences of this could be significant. Also important is the fact that many attempts to fully unify gravity and electromagnetism may be in vain, as their domains do not fully intersect. The theory indicates the principle available paths to obtaining powerful space drives and heavy lifters via electromagnetic means is via the electromagnetic modification of inertial mass or (by some unknown means) gaining a purchase on the vacuum. The gravimagnetic field might be of practical use, but its use appears very limited as a primary locomotion means compared to possible uses of the vacuum, the zero point field. The proposed isomorphism is indeed a very simple and minor advance, if that, and yet it seems strangely powerful. The proposed EM-GK isomorphic theory was built on the retardation theory published by Jefimenko. However, Jefimenko did not establish a true isomorphism, so had to manually tweak the signs of various formulae to get things right. Further, Jefimenko had no means from his theory to discover that virtual photons carry no gravitational charge, and that photons do carry gravitational charge, nor a means to recognize that additional unfolded dimensions are required to describe gravity. He had no means of discovering an answer to the old problem as to why the zero point field is not massive in a gravitational sense. Jefimenko had no means to instantly recognize that Newton's F = m*a describes something principally in the world of electromagnetism, that inertia is principally electromagnetic, or at least not gravity related. The symmetries provided by the proposed EM-GK isomorphism suggest the possibilities of many new particles, and possibly a great expansion to the field of relativity, which Jefimenko's work does not fully embrace. Further suggested are implications to the mechanics of black holes, the possible existence of negative gravitational charge matter spewing forth from large black holes. The theory also suggests possible errors in our determination of celestial masses, and possible explanations for inconsistent results in some co-gravitation experiments. The theory may in part account for dark matter and dark energy observations. Possibly most importantly, theoretically speaking, if the subject theory has any veracity, it in large part *dis-unifies* electromagnetism and gravity. It demonstrates why true field unification may be so elusive. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 07:33:22 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 iBMFXHXb023542; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMFXAsI023473; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:33:10 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 06:40:57 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravimagnetics and quantum gravity Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57062 X-Loop: vortex-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 1:54 AM 12/22/4, thomas malloy wrote: >Horace Heffner posted; > >>The EM-GK isomorphism of gravimagnetics is complete, > >Hum, what does that mean? An isomorphism is a 1-1 correspondence between two sets that preserve all operations and relations defined on those sets. When an isomorphism is established for two systems then they are mathematically the same system. A theorem proved in one system is then proven in the other. I suggest a text on Algebra, like MacLane and Birkoff. You must have ignored the EM-GK postings earlier (I don't blame you! They were tedius. 8^). I'll repost a new draft, Draft #4, in three parts. > >>thus it extends to all >>the way to the quantum world. The mediator of the gravitational force, the >>messenger graviton, i.e. virtual graviton, is the analog of the vitual >>photon. > >Do you know of an instrument to detect gravitrons? I assume you mean "real" gravitons, as opposed to the gravity messenger particle commonly called the graviton? I have only just now developed a theoretical framework for realizing the possibility of their exisitence. The existence of such an instrument at this early time would be quite amazing. >What is the >difference between a regular and a virtual one? A virtual graviton carries no gravitational charge, it is merely the messenger particle for the gravitational force. A real graviton can constitute gravity waves which carry momentum just like photons, and which can superposition to form gravity waves that are in all respects like electromagnetic waves, except they are propigated via the gravipermeability and gravipermittivity of the vaccum, instead of the electromagnetic permeability and permittivity of the vacuum. >How do they relate to >String Theory? > >>Unlike the photon, and like the virtual photon, the virtual photon >>carries no gravitational charge. > >what is the difference between a regular photon and a virtual one? See the EM-GK postings. > >>An interesting thing then is the momentum >carrying analog to the photon itself. > >AFLIK, the photon has no mass, ergo no momentum, is that correct? See the EM-GK postings. > >AFLIK, GR presupposes that there is no difference between >acceleration and gravity, This is a false assumption many people make. GR only actually assumes there is no difference at any given *point*. It is easy to theoretically distinguish between gravity, linear acceleration due to force, and angular accleration due to a centripetal force, by the nature of the tidal effects. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 08:06:08 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 iBMG5ogZ028750; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:05:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMG5mBX028733; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:05:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:05:48 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004501c4e83f$9a1a1200$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: Capturing OU using fast semicondcutors ? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:02:12 -0800 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/57063 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: Can it be so simple that the inertia of the electron is due to Lenz's law? http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/Jonsson/I=EM.pdf But even so, this is strictly conservative, no? Emil Lenz put a definite direction on induced currents when the magnetic field is changing. In other terms: "The Induced current is such as to OPPOSE the CHANGE in applied field." But in a time-delineated sense, there is some potential leeway, when it gets down to picoseconds. Lenz's Law is all about conservation of energy... maybe. It guarantees that induced currents get their energy from the *motion* of creating the change... but what if the "effect creating the change" borrows some of its kinetic energy from Casimir, et al. (ZPE, or Horace's Gravimetric Filed -gravitational ZPE)? The free-energy "regaugers" and magnet-heads have been hacking around the edges of this for some time, and if they cannot push any device into OU it may mean that they have missed one big (or actually quite tiny) detail. Frequency. What would be the minimum frequency for OU from a "truncated Lens Law" - that is, if we assume the Casimir is optimum at 2 nm and the effective speed of an EMF pulse is 2/3 c ? BTW we would also have to posit that the electron can give up angular momentum in a proper sized cavity (or magnetic domain) and get then that back from Casimir. Well it is faster than any solid state device is likely to produce for some time to come. The frequency is well into the EUV, but with line widths in semiconductors already only an order of magnitude "fatter" now, it won't be long 'till we find out - about 6 years before 2 nm is in mass production ? depending on how one interprets Moore's laws. But that geometry can be done now with electron beam lithography... Depending on deep one's pockets are... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 10:50:35 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 iBMIoTXb019871; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:50:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMIoJq0019831; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:50:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:50:19 -0800 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: Toroid experiments Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:50:08 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20041222045215.39983.qmail@web12402.mail.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: <3leYo.A.u1E.qHcyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57064 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 Kyle + Nick. You both must be correct with respect to the second order effect on dielectrics being due to an acoustic pulse; certainly varnishing the windings will only slightly concentrate the electric fields closer to the core but will substantially reduced the acoustic Q of the device. As the rod is being expulsed from the core rather than drawn in, it's the conductivity of the rod that is important. Thus the induced current flow in the rod due to the leakage from the torroid causes the rod to be repelled. As you say, I wouldn't expect the permeability of the rod to matter much, given the geometry, but a permeable rod would tend to be drawn in and stay in the center counter to what is seen. John asks about the laser experiment, and I'll add my voice. This is the only part of the ATG experiment that seemed anomalous to me. Anyone replicate this? Also, you ( Kyle ) posted earlier on the FTL thread. Sadly, I've been mad busy on my new software product to keep on that thread, but I found it rather amusing that you in fact have already done one of the FTL experiments as described by Nimtz, namely the double prism microwave experiment you described to me earlier in the year. If you haven't already, check out the papers on this URL http://www.ph2.uni-koeln.de/Nimtz/pub/paper-list.html and you will see a paper with a diagram of the double prism and an explanation of his FTL theories ( mainly the QM notion that tunneling is instantaneous ). K. -----Original Message----- From: Kyle Mcallister [mailto:kyle_mcallister@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 11:52 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Toroid experiments Hi guys, Back when ATG initiated all of this, based on some conjecture proposed by Rick Anderson, I did my own experiments with this. I even went so far as to have rapidly-shipped to me the exact cores used in their experiments, same ferrite composition, same size. Used everything the same, got the same effects they did. I found later that coating the windings with polyurethane varnish stopped the paper-moving effect. I later also found that the moving up and down of the coils was likely due to the toroids behaving as 1-turn solenoids and interacting with the vertical component of the earth's magnetic field. Positioning magnets of large field area around this device would make it do things differently. These brief pulses introduced to the coils will produce a leaky field, as the core is saturated, as pointed out by Keith. Jean-Louis checked for magnetic field in the center of the toroid when it was connected to straight DC. This is not conclusive for the case of capacitor discharge transients. Also, the changing magnetic field will likely produce a rather healthy E field at right angles to the B field (through the toroid 'hole' and around) and this could have a nice effect on dielectrics. Also note that Jean-Louis set up a sort of charge detector there, and it detected establishment of charge in the center of the toroids. As to the question of whether or not a metal object will be pulled into the center and suspended there, I don't think this is likely given the asymmetrical nature of the setup, and the brief transients used. It is not going to 'stay there' like it would for a DC field, it will be shot through. I built a few variants of 'coil guns' before, and they do this same thing, regardless of whether or not the projectile is magnetic or not...if it is conducting, it will work. I'm not saying this should not be investigated, far from it. I think it should, and I fully support Jerry Bayles and Jean-Louis going further with this. But for the time being, it looks as if it can be explained conventionally. I hope there is something else. I've always had a funny feeling about toroids, that there is something there, if only we can 'get at it'. This is one of the reasons I rarely post my experimentation. I usually end up figuring out how the conventional stuff explained the effect perfectly. But...the search for the elusive unconventional stuff is damn fun! --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 11:15:18 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 iBMJFBXb027235; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:15:11 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMJF9pU027211; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:15:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:15:09 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006f01c4e856$9ead3740$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041221100938.029eda10@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Announcing A New Book At LENR-CANR.org Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:46:58 -0800 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: <2zbl5D.A.HpG.9ecyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57065 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: "Cold Fusion And The Future," by Jed Rothwell, published by LENR-CANR.org, December 2004, 186 pages. This book is not copyright. It is distributed for free at LENR-CANR.org, here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf Many free-thinkers (and it is a threatened micro-minority) some of whom who have gravitated to Vortex for one reason alone, crave educated speculation. They may only give CF itself one chance in a hundred of panning out, but they admit to the possibility. And that is why this book should be very well-received here. Besides the advent of this new technology, our only hope for the future is that the other 99+% of the populace develops a little more "mental-daring," shall we say. Even many intelligent people do not like to be challenged by an uncertain future, especially if they do not agree with the underlying premise. Otherwise Sci-Fi would be mainstream fiction. That is too bad. Society really cannot make the best use of these radically new and unraveling technologies unless we can do careful in-depth thinking and planning, well in advance of the actual proof. By then it is too late to make much difference, and it will take on a life of its own (often under the greed-based leadership of a few individuals who have the resources to claim it as there own). That lack of foresight at the societal level is one of the dynamic ingredients behind Gould's "Punctuated Equilibrium" mentioned by Jed about p.65. Equilibrium *has to be* punctuated to give the other 99% enough time to play catch-up without stressing their mental health. Anyway, one can appreciate many of Jed's ideas even without his firm belief that cold fusion. per se, will be the motivating technology. I read it with the broader understanding that it could be either cold fusion, ZPE extraction, the hydrino or some now-unknown tek and still amount to the same dynamic impetus. This morning I went to far as to cast the I Ching for an even more "far-out" appraisal of the book. Here is the answer, with the traditional anachronistic (or not) commentary. "Cold Fusion And The Future " The present is embodied in Hexagram 26 - Ta Ch'u (The Taming Power of the Great): It will be advantageous to be firm and correct. If he does not seek to enjoy his revenues in his own family, without taking service at court, there will be good fortune. It will be advantageous for him to cross the great stream. The fourth line, divided, shows the young bull, yet having the piece of wood over his horns. There will be great good fortune. The fifth line, divided, shows the teeth of a castrated hog. There will be good fortune. The situation is shifting, and Yang (the active masculine force) is gaining ground. The future is embodied in Hexagram 1 - Ch'ien (The Creative): That which is great and originating, penetrating, advantageous, correct and firm. The things most apparent, those above and in front, are embodied by the upper trigram Ken (Mountain), which is transforming into Chi'en (Heaven). As part of this process, stillness and obstruction are giving way to strength and creativity. The things least apparent, those below and behind, are embodied by the lower trigram Chi'en (Heaven), which represents strength and creativity. I consider this result to be a particularly favorable prophecy. BTW This was the actual result or the divination, but if I had tried to "fake it" to make it look more alluring, I don't believe that I could have done as well as this. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 11:33:12 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 iBMJX6Xb031465; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMJX5q0031451; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:05 -0800 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: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:32:59 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) 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/57066 X-Loop: vortex-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. Yes, this is heading in a direction I like... Let's go a little further. Considering a QM description of gravito-kinetics, we can imagine gravitons being emitted by precessing masses in a manner similar to photon emission from precessing charged masses. What we see from experiment is that there are well known transitions for the photon emissions, but there are other transitions said to be "forbidden". I assert that these forbidden transitions are in fact transitions which lead to graviton emissions. Due to a variety of factors, these emissions are MUCH less likely and are incorrectly described as being "forbidden". Experimental apparatus which select for these transitions and prohibit the photon emission paths are good candidates for GK radiators. K. -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner@mtaonline.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 1:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Gravimagnetics is forced into the quantum world by the fact the smallest angular momentum is h/(4*pi) and the smallest increment of angular momentum is h/(2*P). In that gravimagnetics defines the electromagnetic force and gravimagnetic force as independent entities in separate dimensions, the unification of the two fields is only through the embodiment of both charge and gravitational charge within some individual particles. The Bohr magneton, q_e * h/(4*Pi*m), thus establishes the link between the two quantum universes. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 11:33:19 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 iBMJXBgZ011526; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMJX8Kg011504; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:33:08 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001301c4e85d$0e8cfd60$f0027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Thank you Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:33:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01C4E82A.C37B6190" 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=0.2 required=4.0 tests=HTML_50_60,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.64-cvtv_w9f4wgtp Resent-Message-ID: <6to7CD.A.szC.0vcyBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57067 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_000F_01C4E82A.C37B6190 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0010_01C4E82A.C37B6190" ------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C4E82A.C37B6190 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankTo each I wish a joyful holiday season and a new year filled with = hopes and dreams. A special THANK YOU to Horace for posting Desiderada. I will forward a = copy to friends. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C4E82A.C37B6190 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
To each I wish a joyful holiday season and a = new year=20 filled with hopes and dreams.
A special THANK YOU  to Horace for = posting =20 Desiderada. I will forward a copy to friends.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C4E82A.C37B6190-- ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C4E82A.C37B6190 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000e01c4e85d$0e12c450$f0027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C4E82A.C37B6190-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 12:58:44 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 iBMKwHgZ009694; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:58:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMKwFha009663; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:58:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:58:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041222155525.029e5250@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:58:02 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: More ICCF-11 papers uploaded 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/57068 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: New ICCF-11 papers uploaded. See: http://lenr-canr.org/FilesByDate.htm An improved Acrobat conversion of McKubre's PowerPoint slides uploaded: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHreviewofex.pdf This is using SoftScan "PDF Create," which Pam Boss recommended. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 13:25:07 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 iBMLOvgZ019104; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:24:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMLOsS4019082; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:24:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:24:54 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 12:32:44 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57069 X-Loop: vortex-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 2:32 PM 12/22/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >Yes, this is heading in a direction I like... > >Let's go a little further. Considering a QM description >of gravito-kinetics, we can imagine gravitons being >emitted by precessing masses in a manner similar to >photon emission from precessing charged masses. What >we see from experiment is that there are well known >transitions for the photon emissions, but there are >other transitions said to be "forbidden". I assert that >these forbidden transitions are in fact transitions >which lead to graviton emissions. Due to a variety of >factors, these emissions are MUCH less likely and >are incorrectly described as being "forbidden". Experimental >apparatus which select for these transitions and prohibit the >photon emission paths are good candidates for GK radiators. > >K. A *very* interesting thought. I have to ponder the small energetics embodied in gravity waves. Conservation of energy is a problem, or boon, depending on your perspective. The factor (q_e/m_e) = 1.7588x10^11 coul/kg is rather large. I suppose to conserve energy a transaction forbidden in EM could occur that involved the creation of large numbers of real gravitons. I also have to wonder if real gravitons and real photons can be created one without the other, and if so, can they be split after emission? Mass charge and electomagnetic charge coexist, embodied in the wave generating particle. I don't offhand see why one form of radiation could not occur without the other, but this is all new territory for me. Perhaps what we have here is just another set of orthogonal or conjugate quantum variables, the probabilities of (real) graviton vs photon emission upon acceleration. If so, when one is forbidden the other may not be, so its probabilty becomes 1. This use of EM forbidden zones, combined with energy conservation, is thus a powerful means to get the graviton energy flow up to collosal values, so adds credence to your approach in that an otherwise nominal gravipoynting vector becomes quite large. It is too bad the term graviton is already used up. Maybe I should be using the term "graviphoton" to refer to real gravitons, and just "graviton" to refer to the ordinary (virtual) messenger graviton. I should also note that any radiating apparatus generating EM radiation is likely generating graviphotons as well, unless it is somehow, say energetically, forbidden. However, the associated gravimagnetic momentum and energy flow should be very small. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 14:38:10 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 iBMMc2gZ009187; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:38:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMMc0oR009156; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:38:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:38:00 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=WC49ob0VY2NxxX1NXs6tT6XfjE2xwcUAW8d3SEJ/mYYLVCuxY1Iy/yn6WAxlE1fd9GuizqjSt/JQloSYOcu2nX85AHDB0wMoJZxE/lpLu4isntq/pKGGyKqm8jaBvqlsnzi02HJ5fO+d8AKq/yeaKny9zzI/bGQc7/Bv15K0WfE= ; Message-ID: <20041222223758.78880.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:37:58 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Re: Toroid experiments To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <41C93F95.3080909@ihug.co.nz> 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/57070 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: --- John Berry wrote: > But if real, how do you explain the laser beam being > bent? > According to what I read, that is inconclusive at this point. Further, a gravitational field ale to bend a light beam is approaching the surface gravity on a neutron star, thus you won't need delicate balances to measure it! I'm not saying it isn't real either...just that it is not conclusive yet. --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 14:41:15 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 iBMMfAXb012962; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:41:10 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBMMf8gt012945; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:41:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:41:08 -0800 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, 22 Dec 2004 13:49:00 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57071 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Graviphotons, assuming they exist, may provide an alternate and normally undetectable path for dissipating energy from energized nuclei, if it is otherwise forbidden, enabling LENR without detectable signature radiation. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 19:39:40 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 iBN3cjgZ013658; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:38:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBN3cdjV013592; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:38:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:38:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:34:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Gravimagnetics and quantum gravity From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57072 X-Loop: vortex-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 at hheffner@mtaonline.net wrote: > >> >> AFLIK, GR presupposes that there is no difference between >> acceleration and gravity, > > This is a false assumption many people make. GR only actually assumes > there is no difference at any given *point*. It is easy to theoretically > distinguish between gravity, linear acceleration due to force, and angular > accleration due to a centripetal force, by the nature of the tidal effects. GR treats all forms of acceleration as indistinguishable from gravity. The truth is GR is absolutely devoid of common sense. That is the power *and* the poverty of GR. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 20:09:44 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 iBN49WgZ029141; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:09:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBN49UwC029121; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:09:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:09:30 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=sLjapSCa+taadBm9RqS3G3LWIeYKQlzoM38gfy2GiiYdwBgNo+5Mwx9f0X9H2/C/7MOsK9b9AiqQ82ZzYq1CuHcRaDcWdiM2YZSzedVaNyW6B2fU3x47VX4dzp7y3LNpROT0Tf3qlbavravKp/fmW8oO53IIZT3KoL0vgh586yQ= ; Message-ID: <20041223040928.13892.qmail@web12407.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:09:28 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: RE: Toroid experiments, New Tests 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/57073 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > As you say, I wouldn't expect the > permeability > of the rod to matter much, given the geometry, but > a permeable rod would tend to be drawn in and stay > in the center counter to what is seen. Also notice upon observing the photos on Jean-Louis' experiment page on this, and the old ATG page, the steel rod is ejected from the small toroid side in one case, and the large toroid side in the other case. This sounds very much like a basic 'coil gun' effect. The different sizes of the two toroids will probably set up a field gradient, and cause the ejection of the rods as opposed to the pulling in effect. It would be harder to get a balance with the two different sizes. I did some tests tonight, not long ago. Wound a larger toroid, about an inch diameter, and a smaller one, about 1/2 inch diameter. 22AWG magnet wire used, pulsed with 50VDC from a 22,000uF capacitor (size of a soup can..older but still got its ginger). This will flip over small screws which are balanced on one end, will appear to 'jerk' slighly if supported by its lead wires. The jerking effect corresponds well to the introduction of a nearby permanent magnet. Reverse the magnet or the polarity to the coils, and the motion reverses. I held this thing in my hand as well when pulsing it, from either the 22,000uF cap or by make and break contact with a 12V car battery. You can feel the windings 'jumping'. Straightforward magnetic induction effects as near as I can see. Also, this effect works if you just use the large toroid....it will move around metal pieces a bit on its own. As to there being said to be no field in the center of the toroids, this is not true. There is a magnetic field there, the toroid itself is a 1 turn solenoidal coil, with the windings just wrapped 'funny'. These will, upon connecting DC to them, attempt to align themselves with the Earth's magnetic field (or the field of a nearby permanent magnet). As far as the laser thing goes, it could be either due to the toroids flexing a bit, and the edges of windings which come into the outer fringes of the beam 'lens' it, or heating of the air in the center causing changes in its optical properties. (Ever seen 'heat shimmer' over a hot road?) No easy way of telling without reproducing it. Would be interesting to try the same laser experiment with a regular solenoidal type coil. I'm not an optics guy, so I don't have much to add here. One other thing, if you use two toroids which are wound exactly the same, they will tend to attract to one another. If you use two toroids which are wound so as to give the same direction of B field in the ferrite, but one is wound counterclockwise around the periphery, and the other is wound clockwise, they will tend to repel one another. This seems to prove the 1-turn solenoid hypothesis: in the first case, the internal B fields are the same way, and the current is flowing in the same directions around the periphery, so unlike magnetic poles are set up on the sides of the toroids which are facing each other, and they attract...in the second case, the internal B fields are going the same way alright, but the periphery currents are flowing in opposite directions, thus setting up like poles on the toroid sides facing each other, and making them repel. Simple magnetism at its finest. > Also, you ( Kyle ) posted earlier on the FTL thread. > Sadly, I've been mad busy on my new software product > to keep on that thread, but I found it rather > amusing > that you in fact have already done one of the FTL > experiments as described by Nimtz, namely the double > prism microwave experiment you described to me > earlier > in the year. Hehehe....yes, amazing what can be done with a few pounds of paraffin wax, an old cardboard box, duct tape, a heat gun and a hacksaw. And the generous help of the college telecommunications department who provided the microwave transmitter/receiver equipment. Thanks for the URL, I will check it out! I was not able to try and measure the speed of signals through this device to any accurate degree, but it would be interesting to try in the future. If it doesn't do FTL, at least you can make some candles out of the wax. ;) --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 22 23:04:20 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 iBN74HXb013018; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:04:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBN7457P012945; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:04:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:04:05 -0800 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: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 01:04:30 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: RE: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification 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/57074 X-Loop: vortex-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; >Graviphotons, assuming they exist, may provide an alternate and normally >undetectable path for dissipating energy from energized nuclei, if it is >otherwise forbidden, enabling LENR without detectable signature radiation. Ha, I've long speculated that the energy had to be going some where, in the form of a particle. It has been suggested that the missing energy took the form of neutrinos. Am I correct that no signature radiation has been detected? What about gravitrons, how are they detected? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 04:51:32 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 iBNCpTLm022897; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:51:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNCpNgu022838; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:51:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:51:23 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 03:59:11 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Resent-Message-ID: <2O9lDB.A.wkF.L9ryBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57075 X-Loop: vortex-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 1:04 AM 12/23/4, thomas malloy wrote: >Horace Heffner Posted; > >>Graviphotons, assuming they exist, may provide an alternate and normally >>undetectable path for dissipating energy from energized nuclei, if it is >>otherwise forbidden, enabling LENR without detectable signature radiation. > >Ha, I've long speculated that the energy had to be going some where, >in the form of a particle. It has been suggested that the missing >energy took the form of neutrinos. Am I correct that no signature >radiation has been detected? > >What about gravitrons, how are they detected? Gravitons are merely gravitational force, best detected when in small quantities in space or on a torsion pendulum. I assume you mean graviphotons? How many physics miracles do you expect per day? 8^) I only just realized they might exist. If you can strongly couple to them then they might be detected as heat. In the case of cold fusion then it means the LENR reaction vessel might best be surrounded with a blanket of material consisting of the *product* type of atoms from the fusion so they can absorb and possibly retransmit the graviphotons but possibly keep some of the energy around as phonons. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 06:30:35 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 iBNEUP7V008932; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:30:25 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNEUNFX008904; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:30:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:30:23 -0800 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: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 05:38:14 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravimagnetics, dark energy, dark matter Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57076 X-Loop: vortex-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 way to look at dark energy is to see it as the red shifting of gravitons. If two bodies are in mutually departing motion their gravitons are mutually seen as red shifted. Hubble found that as a general rule all distant objects are in receeding motion, with velocity proportional to their distance from us. Since the red shiting of gravitons (as well as photons) is proportional to the velocity, there appears to be a repelling force that is proportional to distance, a kind of dark energy from the vacuum, which it is not. It is merely the diminution of gravity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 06:44:11 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 iBNEi47V012285; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:44:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNEi3Oq012269; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:44:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:44:03 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 05:51:55 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Phoenix universe Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57077 X-Loop: vortex-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 a large protion of the universe crunches, then a black hole of sufficient mass may form that is capable of continually regurgitating negative mass matter. The universe, devoid of the matter that had crunched, is then filled with negative mass matter of a characteristic (+-i) that is opposed to the previous type of matter. Relative to itself, negative matter still mutually attracts, so the new universe is indistinguishable from the old, gravitationally speaking, other than the fact there may remain a great repulsar at the center, continually renewing local matter as the universe expands. The universe is thus reborn from the ashes as an ever expanding universe. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 06:48:06 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 iBNEm0Lm017145; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:48:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNElwDQ017132; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:47:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:47:58 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 05:55:48 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Gravimagnetics, dark energy, dark matter Resent-Message-ID: <9eJtv.A.hLE.eqtyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57078 X-Loop: vortex-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 way to look at dark energy is to see it as the red shifting of gravitons. If two bodies are in mutually departing motion their gravitons are mutually seen as red shifted. Hubble found that as a general rule all distant objects are in receeding motion, with velocity proportional to their distance from us. Since the red shifting of gravitons (as well as photons) is proportional to the velocity, there appears to be a repelling force that is proportional to distance, a kind of dark energy from the vacuum, which it is not. It is merely the diminution of gravity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:46:09 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 iBNFk3Lm032027; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:46:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNFk1nF032008; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:46:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:46:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <7d.5f525632.2efc4231@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:45:53 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 3) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103816753" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: <5euvDD.A.E0H.5guyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57079 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103816753 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: There must then be a gravitational equivalent to ZPE, a gravity wave equivalent to the zero point field (ZPF), due to the thermal vibration of matter throughout the universe. I have done the math on this. I show that mass energy and thermal energy are the source of the gravitational mass of matter and of the energy stuck in matter. of mss _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html) of the energy in mass _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html) frank z -------------------------------1103816753 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>There=20 must then be a gravitational equivalent to
ZPE, a gravity wave equivale= nt=20 to the zero point field (ZPF), due to the
thermal vibration of matter=20 throughout the universe. 
I have done the math on this.  I show that mass energy and thermal= =20 energy are the source of the gravitational mass of matter and of the energy=20 stuck in matter.
 
of mss
 
http://www.angelf= ire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html
 
of the energy in mass
 
http://www.angelf= ire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter8.html
 
frank z
 -------------------------------1103816753-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:49:16 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 iBNFn97V031508; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:49:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNFn6e7031474; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:49:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:49:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041223104651.029add40@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:48:38 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Nature reports more sonofusion results Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_3773937==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57080 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: --=====================_3773937==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed [I have never heard of Impulse Devices http://www.impulsedevices.com/index.html. - JR] From Nature, 432, 940-1, 23/30 ~Dec. 2004 Bubble-based fusion bursts onto the scene [WASHINGTON] A company in California is launching an experimental power reactor based on 'bubble fusion', despite reservations within the scientific community over whether the effect exists. Impulse Devices in Grass Valley hopes to sell its sonofusion research reactors for about US$250,000. It claims they use ultrasound to generate bubbles in 'heavy' water, made up of hydrogen's heavier isotope deuterium. The bubbles can be imploded rapidly, generating a high temperature that allows deuterium nuclei to undergo fusion reactions, it says. "The technology could produce enough energy for electricity production in ten years," claims Mark Ludwig, chief executive of Impulse. But many scientists are not convinced. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee claimed to have achieved fusion with a similar technique in 2002. But an internal review by other Oak Ridge scientists questioned the group's results, and the work remains in limbo (see Nature 416, 7; 2002). --=====================_3773937==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" [I have never heard of Impulse Devices http://www.impulsedevices.com/index.html. - JR]

From Nature, 432, 940-1, 23/30 ~Dec. 2004

Bubble-based fusion bursts onto the scene

[WASHINGTON] A company in California is launching an experimental power reactor based on 'bubble fusion', despite reservations within the scientific community over whether the effect exists.

Impulse Devices in Grass Valley hopes to sell its sonofusion research reactors for about US$250,000. It claims they use ultrasound to generate bubbles in 'heavy' water, made up of hydrogen's heavier isotope deuterium. The bubbles can be imploded rapidly, generating a high temperature that allows deuterium nuclei to undergo fusion reactions, it says. "The technology could produce enough energy for electricity production in ten years," claims Mark Ludwig, chief executive of Impulse.

But many scientists are not convinced. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee claimed to have achieved fusion with a similar technique in 2002. But an internal review by other Oak Ridge scientists questioned the group's results, and the work remains in limbo (see Nature 416, 7; 2002). --=====================_3773937==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:54:19 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 iBNFsDLm002808; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:54:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNFsB0K002784; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:54:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:54:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <76.491fd6c1.2efc4418@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:54:00 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103817240" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57081 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103817240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: The universe may or may not spontaneously create mass and therefore energy from the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a given reference frame in this universe mass and energy must remain in the balance E/m = c^2. Very good thought. I went been down this path in 1990. I have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable. see page 11 _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html) One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is always in balance with its negative gravitational potential. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html) frank z -------------------------------1103817240 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>The=20 universe may or may not spontaneously create mass
and therefore energy=20= from=20 the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a
given reference frame in=20= this=20 universe mass and energy must remain in the
balance

  = E/m=20 =3D c^2.
Very good thought.  I went been down this path in 1990.  = ;I=20 have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable.  see=20= page=20 11
 
http://www.angelf= ire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html
 
One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is alw= ays=20 in balance with its negative gravitational potential.
 
http://www.angelf= ire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html
 
frank z
 
 
 -------------------------------1103817240-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:55:22 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 iBNFtD7V001348; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:55:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNFtCIo001332; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:55:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:55:12 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 10:55:01 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103817301" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57082 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103817301 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: so photons always carry momentum and energy in the ratio E/p = h(c/lambda)/(h/lambda) = c I disagree. I have found that the gravitational mass of the photon is variable. Frank Z -------------------------------1103817301 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>so=20 photons always carry momentum and energy in the ratio

  =20= E/p=20 =3D h(c/lambda)/(h/lambda) =3D c
I disagree.  I have found that the gravitational mass of the photo= n is=20 variable.
 
Frank Z
 -------------------------------1103817301-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 07:58:15 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 iBNFw87V002515; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:58:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNFw6kp002493; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:58:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:58:06 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1df.318ad8c1.2efc4502@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:57:54 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103817473" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57083 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103817473 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -------------------------------1103817473 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 -------------------------------1103817473-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 08:01:06 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 iBNG10Lm005010; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:01:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNG0wnD004984; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:00:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:00:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <1fb.265b746.2efc45ad@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:00:45 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortel-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103817645" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57084 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103817645 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: The universe may or may not spontaneously create mass and therefore energy from the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a given reference frame in this universe mass and energy must remain in the balance E/m = c^2. Very good thought. I went been down this path in 1990. I have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable. see page 11 _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html) One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is always in balance with its negative gravitational potential. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html) frank z -------------------------------1103817645 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 =20
In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>The=20 universe may or may not spontaneously create mass
and therefore energy=20= from=20 the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a
given reference frame in=20= this=20 universe mass and energy must remain in the
balance

  = E/m=20 =3D c^2.
Very good thought.  I went been down this path in 1990.  = ;I=20 have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable.  see=20= page=20 11
 
 
One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is alw= ays=20 in balance with its negative gravitational potential.
 
 
frank z
 
 
 -------------------------------1103817645-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 08:10:15 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 iBNGA87V007494; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:10:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNGA7aj007475; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:10:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:10:07 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004001c4e909$5d6fc500$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041223104651.029add40@pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Nature reports more sonofusion results Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:06:28 -0800 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/57085 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 have never heard of Impulse Devices > http://www.impulsedevices.com/index.html. - JR] Surely you remember Ross Tessien? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 08:12:03 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 iBNGBnLm007750; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:11:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNGBmfb007731; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:11:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:11:48 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:11:40 EST Subject: tried aol 9.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103818300" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57086 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: -------------------------------1103818300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Not any faster on dial up. More adds everywhere which slows things down a bit. It sets the Mac program *.Mov as a default viewer on I.E. explorer. This slows things down a bit especially on older computers. I had to delete the MAC media player to stop it from taking over. Frank Z -------------------------------1103818300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Not any faster on dial up.  More adds everywhere which slows thing= s=20 down a bit.
It sets the Mac program *.Mov as a default viewer on I.E. explorer.&nbs= p;=20 This slows things down a bit especially on older computers.  I had to=20 delete the MAC media player to stop it from taking over.
 
Frank Z
 -------------------------------1103818300-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 08:20:58 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 iBNGKqLm009856; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:20:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNGKpgx009840; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:20:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:20:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <8c.1ccfbd55.2efc4a59@aol.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:20:41 EST Subject: Fwd: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103818841" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57087 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103818841 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: The universe may or may not spontaneously create mass and therefore energy from the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a given reference frame in this universe mass and energy must remain in the balance E/m = c^2. Very good thought. I went been down this path in 1990. I have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable. see page 11 _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html) One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is always in balance with its negative gravitational potential. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html) frank z -------------------------------1103818841 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>The=20 universe may or may not spontaneously create mass
and therefore energy=20= from=20 the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a
given reference frame in=20= this=20 universe mass and energy must remain in the
balance

  = E/m=20 =3D c^2.
Very good thought.  I went been down this path in 1990.  = ;I=20 have found that the gravitational effect of a photon is variable.  see=20= page=20 11
 
 
One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is alw= ays=20 in balance with its negative gravitational potential.
 
 
frank z
 
 
 -------------------------------1103818841-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 08:27:07 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 iBNGR0Lm012745; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:27:01 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNGQwBT012708; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:26:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:26:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004601c4e90b$b8040600$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: 2005 New Year's Predictions Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:23:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0043_01C4E8C8.A95A7F00" 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/57088 X-Loop: vortex-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_0043_01C4E8C8.A95A7F00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2005 New Year's Predictions (from the Fringe) Everyone else seems to be doing it... jumping the calendar gun by a = week in order to get their prediction in ahead of the rest. Here are = three predictions that you will see nowhere else but from the Perpmo = fringe. I predict that when all is said and done: nuclear fusion - of either the = cold or hot variety will be shown to be a pure statistical phenomenon = that is independent of any "threshold" temperature ... Now that does not at first seem to be saying a lot... except for the = realization that if one were to poll all nuclear scientists, there would = be almost universal agreement that it is false.=20 They are wrong. What I am essentially saying is that temperature, or its equivalent, = plays the single role in fusion of increasing the time-delineated = probability of a reaction, and that is all. There is NO threshold = temperature. Other ways to increase probability are as effective as high = temperature, maybe more so. Related prediction: The indicia of nuclear fusion are dependent upon the confinement regime = at the time of fusion. Now that does not at first seem to be saying a lot... except for the = realization that if one were to poll all nuclear scientists, there would = be almost universal agreement that it is false. Again, they are wrong. The indicia of fusion, and in particular the appearance of neutrons or = so-called "signature" photons, are only indicative of the confinement = regime at the time of fusion. These can vary all over the place, = depending on confinement issues. No more than one in a thousand "experts" would buy either of these = predictions at the end of 2004, and I will have the greatest delight in = presenting this posting to the one who "discovers" the truth and = publishes it as his own breakthrough, but alas, it may not be in 2005. = BTW I do not claim either insight as "my "insight - both are obvious to = any observer from nearly 15 years of LENR research and analysis. Third Prediction This one may actually happen this year. The application of a strong = magnetic field in the range of 10,000-40,000 Gauss, when crossed = orthogonal to the normal electric field of a CF cell, will increase the = probability of deuterium fusion at lower temperature significantly, and = will allow for the triad fusion of helium (3 He --> C) in a confined = matrix, as well. Now that last sentence is an eye-opener, correct? Yes I know that = magnetic have been tried, but with mixed success, but here is the case = for a real threshold, having to do with the complex issues of nucleon = alignment, resulting in partial Coulomb nullification, as Frederick = Sparber has been posting for sometime. Again I would like to express the semi-humor of this situation (i.e. the = "fringe" having to be enlisted to re-educate the mainstream) with an = update of the "Farside criteria" ... named in honor of that imaginative = creator of animal "experts" Gary Larson. The "Farside criteria" ... or Larson vs Lawson Lawson's Criteria is universally accepted in nuclear physics circles as = defining the minimum criteria under which nuclear fusion can occur. But = the formula depends on untenable assumptions and juvenile mistakes. = Lawson (and almost all mainstream experts in 2004) will agree that = Density (particles/cm3) times confinement Time (sec) =3D 10^16 = (Deuterium-Deuterium fusion) must reach this minimum value at a = threshold temperature (for every particular kind of fusion). One can = vary either the density or the confinement time, but not the threshold = temperature, according to the mainstream.=20 Without the "threshold," which is the error in this bogus but = universally accepted "rule" (it is not quite a law), it can easily be = shown that temperature/density/time recalibration below the threshold = will also serve to make-up for the relatively low ignition temperature = of LENR in what I am calling "the Farside criteria for LENR". As you = notice, I am taking the radical leap of saying that a temperature = "threshold" is not accurate but that the threshold is merely a = time-delineated measure of the probability of deuterons getting close = enough to each other - so effective pressure can substitute for = temperature. Also important is the nucleon alignment at the very instant = of close proximity. This factor can be altered by an applied magnetic = field. But unlike the situation in a Tokomak, the magnetic field MUST be = orthogonal to electric field for any benefit to accrue. Also, most CF reactions of this type in a Pd matrix are likely to be = multi-body reactions and furthermore, the accelerating gradient is NVE = pressure - which is the thermo-electric enhancement to Casimir-like pressure which operates on excitons of a specific geometry. That was a = conclusion from a previous posting which will not be repeated in detail = in this one. Pd has a density of 20 gm/cc (and has 106.4 Atm wt), this gives 5E^21 = Pd atoms/cc and at 1:1 overall loading the number of deuterons is = astronomical compared to Lawson's wimpy plasma density. There is thus = an effective gain in density of Lawson-like criteria over that of hot-fusion of upwards to 10E^17 particle per unit area. Plus, have = most observers the importance of the time factor in must be included. = When a CF reaction doesn't show much effect for a couple of days, could it mean that the particle [virtual temperature x time] factor is = off by a factor of nearly a billion (50 hrs =3D 180,000 sec which gives = CF initiation almost a billion times more statistical *time* i.e. = comparing this particular factor to the 200 microseconds of the hot fusion variety). Yesterday, Frederick Sparber and I had a dialog about the magnetic = enhancement, and disagree on the minimum magnetic field which will make = a substantial difference. Fred believes that the field requirement is = low enough so that strong permanent magnets might do the trick. I have a = different premise based on diamagnetic issues (not ready for publication = yet) but considering the total magnetic package of a deuterium or helium = filled matrix, I do not believe that permanent magnets can provide = enough field strength, except perhaps very close to the magnet surface - = which for NIB magnets could be up to 12,000 Gauss. Under my assumptions, = it would seem like one needs about 14,000 for deuterium and over 40,000 = for helium in order to get a significant reduction in Coulomb = nullification, but this is doable and with deuterium with a = crossed-field electromagnet drawing no more than a few hundred watts. Anyway, my easy-to-marginalize expectation/prediction is that in the = coming year or two, Larson and his "Farside" contingent of fringe = pathological Perpmos will "rule" over Lawson and his cadre of = well-trained monkeys.=20 But will anyone notice? Jones ------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C4E8C8.A95A7F00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2005 New Year's Predictions (from the Fringe)
 
Everyone else seems to be doing it...  jumping the calendar = gun by a=20 week in order to get their prediction in ahead of the = rest. Here=20 are three predictions that you will see nowhere else but from the = Perpmo=20 fringe.
 
I predict that when all is said and done: nuclear fusion - of = either the=20 cold or hot variety will be shown to be a pure statistical phenomenon = that is=20 independent of any "threshold" temperature ...
 
Now that does not at first seem to be saying a lot... except for = the=20 realization that if one were to poll all nuclear scientists, there would = be=20 almost universal agreement that it is false.
 
They are wrong.
 
What I am essentially saying is that temperature, or its = equivalent, plays=20 the single role in fusion of increasing the time-delineated probability = of a=20 reaction, and that is all. There is NO threshold temperature. Other ways = to=20 increase probability are as effective as high temperature, maybe more = so.
 
Related prediction:
 
The indicia of nuclear fusion are dependent upon the confinement = regime at=20 the time of fusion.
 
Now that does not at first seem to be saying a lot... except for = the=20 realization that if one were to poll all nuclear scientists, there would = be=20 almost universal agreement that it is false.
 
Again, they are wrong.
 
The indicia of fusion, and in particular the appearance of neutrons = or=20 so-called "signature" photons, are only indicative of the confinement = regime at=20 the time of fusion. These can vary all over the place, depending on = confinement=20 issues.
 
No more than one in a thousand "experts" would buy either of these=20 predictions at the end of 2004, and I will have the greatest delight in=20 presenting this posting to the one who "discovers" the truth and = publishes it as=20 his own breakthrough, but alas, it may not be in 2005. BTW I do not = claim either=20 insight as "my "insight - both are obvious to any observer from nearly = 15 years=20 of LENR research and analysis.
 
Third Prediction
 
This one may actually happen this year. The application of a = strong=20 magnetic field in the range of 10,000-40,000 Gauss, when crossed = orthogonal to=20 the normal electric field of a CF cell, will increase the = probability of=20 deuterium fusion at lower temperature significantly, and will allow for = the=20 triad fusion of helium (3 He --> C) in a confined matrix, as = well.
 
Now that last sentence is an eye-opener, correct? Yes I know that = magnetic=20 have been tried, but with mixed success, but here is the case for a real = threshold, having to do with the complex issues of nucleon alignment, = resulting=20 in partial Coulomb nullification, as Frederick Sparber has been posting = for=20 sometime.
 
Again I would like to express the semi-humor of this situation = (i.e. the=20 "fringe" having to be enlisted to re-educate the mainstream) = with an=20 update of the  "Farside criteria" ... named in honor of that=20 imaginative creator of animal "experts" Gary Larson.
 
 
The   "Farside criteria" ... or  Larson vs=20 Lawson

Lawson's Criteria is universally accepted in nuclear = physics=20 circles as defining the minimum criteria under which nuclear fusion can = occur.=20 But the formula depends on untenable assumptions and juvenile=20 mistakes. Lawson (and almost all mainstream experts in 2004) will agree = that=20 Density (particles/cm3) times confinement Time (sec) =3D 10^16=20 (Deuterium-Deuterium fusion) must reach this minimum value at a = threshold=20 temperature (for every particular kind of fusion). One can vary either = the=20 density or the confinement time, but not the threshold temperature, = according to=20 the mainstream.
 
Without the "threshold," which is the error in this bogus but = universally=20 accepted "rule" (it is not quite a law), it can easily be shown that=20 temperature/density/time recalibration below the threshold will also = serve to=20 make-up for the relatively low ignition temperature of LENR in what I am = calling=20 "the Farside criteria for LENR". As you notice, I am taking the radical = leap of=20 saying that a temperature "threshold" is not accurate but that the = threshold is=20 merely a time-delineated measure of the probability of deuterons getting = close=20 enough to each other - so effective pressure can substitute for = temperature.=20 Also important is the nucleon alignment at the very instant of close = proximity.=20 This factor can be altered by an applied magnetic field. But unlike the=20 situation in a Tokomak, the magnetic field MUST be orthogonal to = electric field=20 for any benefit to accrue.
 
Also, most CF reactions of this type in a Pd matrix are likely to = be=20 multi-body reactions and furthermore, the accelerating gradient is NVE = pressure=20 - which is the thermo-electric enhancement to Casimir-like
pressure = which=20 operates on excitons of a specific geometry. That was a conclusion from = a=20 previous posting which will not be repeated in detail in this = one.

Pd has=20 a density of  20 gm/cc (and has 106.4 Atm wt), this gives 5E^21 Pd = atoms/cc=20 and at 1:1 overall loading the number of deuterons is astronomical = compared to=20 Lawson's wimpy plasma density.  There is thus an effective gain in = density=20 of Lawson-like criteria over that
of hot-fusion of upwards to = 10E^17 =20 particle per unit area. Plus, have most observers the importance of the = time=20 factor in must be included. When a CF reaction doesn't show much effect = for a=20 couple of days,
could it mean that the particle [virtual temperature = x time]=20 factor is off by a factor of nearly a billion (50 hrs =3D 180,000 sec = which gives=20 CF initiation almost a billion times more statistical *time* i.e. = comparing this=20 particular
factor to the 200 microseconds of the hot fusion=20 variety).
Yesterday, Frederick Sparber and I had a dialog about the magnetic=20 enhancement, and disagree on the minimum magnetic field which will make = a=20 substantial difference. Fred believes that the field requirement is low = enough=20 so that strong permanent magnets might do the trick. I have a different = premise=20 based on diamagnetic issues (not ready for publication yet) but = considering the=20 total magnetic package of a deuterium or helium filled matrix, I do not = believe=20 that permanent magnets can provide enough field strength, except perhaps = very=20 close to the magnet surface - which for NIB magnets could be up to = 12,000 Gauss.=20 Under my assumptions, it would seem like one needs about 14,000 for = deuterium=20 and over 40,000 for helium in order to get a significant reduction in = Coulomb=20 nullification, but this is doable and with deuterium with a = crossed-field=20 electromagnet drawing no more than a few hundred watts.

Anyway, my easy-to-marginalize expectation/prediction is = that in=20 the coming year or two, Larson and his "Farside" contingent of fringe=20 pathological Perpmos will "rule" over Lawson and his cadre of = well-trained=20 monkeys.
 
But will anyone notice?
 
Jones


------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C4E8C8.A95A7F00-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 09:40:13 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 iBNHe8Lm029947; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:40:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNHe6bj029924; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:40:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:40:06 -0800 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: On the Chinese Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:44:10 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412231244.10295.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: <0Aqgp.A.gTH.2LwyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57089 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kinda like the Chinese symbol for 'interesting times' containing the symbol for 'danger' and the symbol for 'opportunity'! Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 10:27:26 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 iBNIRK7V010121; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:27:20 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNIQwBx010008; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:26:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:26:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041223182528.006b30a4@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, 23 Dec 2004 18:25:28 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: 2005 New Year's Predictions Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57090 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:23 am 23-12-04 -0800, you wrote: >What I am essentially saying is that temperature, >or its equivalent, plays the single role in fusion >of increasing the time-delineated probability of a >reaction, and that is all. There is NO threshold >temperature. Other ways to increase probability are >as effective as high temperature, maybe more so. Absolutely 8^) Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 10:29:03 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 iBNISrLm009659; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:28:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNISqjU009637; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:28:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:28:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005c01c4e91c$bf320920$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <200412231244.10295.rockcast@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: On the Chinese Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:25:14 -0800 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: <2Tfs2.A.hWC.j5wyBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57091 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Standing Bear observes, > Kinda like the Chinese symbol for 'interesting times' containing the symbol for 'danger' and the symbol for 'opportunity'! Yes... but the so-called "curse" can only be traced back as far as Scotland !! http://hawk.fab2.albany.edu/sidebar/sidebar.htm But that should come as no surprise to those who have read: "How the Scots Invented the Modern World: The True Story of How Western Europe's Poorest Nation Created Our World and Everything in It" by ARTHUR HERMAN http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0609606352/002-7595920-9025657?v=glance Beannachd leat, Shamus MacBain From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 10:30:32 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 iBNIURLm010076; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:30:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNIUPxi010042; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:30:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:30:25 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041223182856.006a540c@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, 23 Dec 2004 18:28:56 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Phoenix universe Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57092 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:51 am 23-12-04 -0900, you wrote: >If a large protion of the universe crunches, then a black hole of >sufficient mass may form that is capable of continually regurgitating >negative mass matter. The universe, devoid of the matter that had >crunched, is then filled with negative mass matter of a characteristic >(+-i) that is opposed to the previous type of matter. Relative to itself, >negative matter still mutually attracts, so the new universe is >indistinguishable from the old, gravitationally speaking, other than the >fact there may remain a great repulsar at the center, continually renewing >local matter as the universe expands. The universe is thus reborn from the >ashes as an ever expanding universe. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Keep taking the tablets 8^) G. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:02:45 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 iBNJ2cLm018505; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:02:38 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNJ2a8m018491; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:02:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:02:36 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 10:10:29 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Phoenix universe Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57093 X-Loop: vortex-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 9:28 AM 12/23/4, Grimer wrote: >Keep taking the tablets 8^) > >G. No tablets here except vitamins. Maybe just lack of sleep? 8^) The existence of negative gravitational mass is, through symmetry, practically demanded by the gravimagnetic theory. When a gravity gradient becomes sufficiently large in a black hole, negative gravitational mass particle pairs created by vacuum fluctuations can be separated by tidal effects within the black hole and thus brought into permanent existence. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:26:51 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 iBNJQk7V024996; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:26:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNJQZAB024901; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:26:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:26:35 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 10:34:25 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: MOE Cell - down memory lane Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57094 X-Loop: vortex-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 Multi-resonant Orthogonal Electrolytic (MOE) Cell Horace Heffner - 4/22/96 We have established experimentally that cell EMF equalization rates and cell chemistry should not be affected by changing the electrolyte flow direction from longitudinal, as in the Patterson Power Cell (PPC), to a direction orthogonal to electrolytic current flow. Provided electrolyte flow is upward, an orthogonal electrolytic cell should work as well as the longitudinal flow PPC. It is superior in that the H2 and O2 can be obtained from separate degassing stations, and thus it is possible to avoid recombination, avoid explosion risks, and possible to utilize the evolved gasses later in a fuel cell or by other means. In an orthogonal cell it is also possible to combine many simultaneous forms of stimulation into a single multi-resonant electrolytic cell design. Assume two vertical electrodes with a gas barrier between, and vertical (y axis) fluid flow, and horizontal (x axis) electrolytic current flow. It is then possible to place a major magnetic field B in the z axis direction. This has several advantages: (1) MHD forces will move the electrolyte so no pump is needed. This permits a much higher electrolysis current with the same efficiency because it is doing triple duty doing electrolysis and acting as two pumps, one for O2 bearing and one for H2 bearing electrolyte. As a bonus, there are no moving parts. (2) There is still room for a small perturbing magnetic field generation in the x direction, thus it is possible to stimulate the protons or deuterons with an NMR resonant frequency. This will put the protons in a continual state of precession and flipping. At very least this proton motion stimulation should increase adsorption rates. At best it may assist in phase locking deuterons or protons interacting at lattice site boundaries and in the fluid phase of the cell, permitting other forms of stimulation to trigger fusion events. In addition, should an energetic electron "fall into" the coulomb well, an interaction with the magnetic field of the flipping nucleus should increase the probability of an energetic photon emission, thus temporarily binding the electron to the nucleus until it can sap enough energy from the ZPE sea to climb back out. This series of events, as described in the Partial Orbital Hypothesis of Cold Fusion, would transfer energy from the ZPE sea to the lattice as heat. This process would be assisted by alloying particle emitters, especially beta emitters, into the cathode. (3) Storms' paper "Critical Review of the "Cold Fusion" Effect", March 1, 1996, page 42 mentions 82 MHz RF signals and high current micro-pulses (through the cathode) as being heat enhancing stimuli. For this reason, it may be desirable to combine the 82 MHz signal superimposed on the electrolytic potential with the NMR perturbing magnetic force generating current, thus the NMR resonant frequency should be 82 MHz. This means, for light water (proton) applications, that B must be 1.9524 weber/meter^2. Then the NMR perturbing field coil can be excited by the same 82.0 MHz current that is superimposed on the DC electrolytic current, making the AC portion of the electrolytic current do double duty, once as an electrode/interface stimulator, and second as an NMR perturbing field generator. (4) The electrolytic cell has it's own innate capacitance which is controllable through choice of electrode geometry and electrolyte chemical composition. It should be possible to design the cell so, used with additional inductance, tuning and control circuitry, it will resonate at 82 MHz. (5) The 82 MHz electrolyte stimulation signal will also make protons in the solution oscillate up and down in the y direction, generating accousic vibrations in the cell. The dimensions and geometry of the electrolytic fluid containing walls of the cell can be adjusted to create an acoustically resonant environment. Also, electrode geometry and surface geometry may be designed to reflect and/or utilize this ultrasound to aid in adsorption or other desired effects. Such an electrolytic cell would therefore clearly be multiply resonant. In addition to gaining large effect with small input by utilizing resonance, the proposed design gains efficiency by utilizing a single electric waveform to drive all of the cell functions and stimulate all of the cell's resonances. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:39:53 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 iBNJdh7V027797; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:39:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNJdgjb027782; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:39:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:39:42 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 10:47:35 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Fwd: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57095 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:20 AM 12/23/4, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > > >In a message dated 12/22/2004 10:33:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, >hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: > >The universe may or may not spontaneously create mass >and therefore energy from the vacuum, but it seems reasonable that in a >given reference frame in this universe mass and energy must remain in the >balance > >E/m = c^2. > > > >Very good thought. I went been down this path in 1990. I have found that >the gravitational effect of a photon is variable. see page 11 > >_http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html_ >(http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter7.html) > >One step more will show that the positive energy of the universe is always >in balance with its negative gravitational potential. > >_http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html_ >(http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter5.html) This issue could make for some discussion, but it is really irrelevant to the gravimagnetic theory. It was included only as background thinking that leads to the actual theory. The theory itself is pretty much embodied in the Gravimagnetism thread. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 11:49:32 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 iBNJnNLm028727; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:49:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNJnMFb028713; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:49:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:49:22 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 10:57:15 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: 2005 New Year's Predictions Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57096 X-Loop: vortex-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 9:25 AM 12/23/4, Grimer wrote: >At 08:23 am 23-12-04 -0800, you [Jones Bean] wrote: > >>What I am essentially saying is that temperature, >>or its equivalent, plays the single role in fusion >>of increasing the time-delineated probability of a >>reaction, and that is all. Meant to say "does not play the single role" above? >>There is NO threshold >>temperature. Other ways to increase probability are >>as effective as high temperature, maybe more so. > >Absolutely 8^) > >Grimer Absolutely. This is well known fact, even for hot fusion. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 13:51:43 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 iBNLpaLm021859; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:51:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNLpYVc021851; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:51:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:51:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:50:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Nature reports more sonofusion results From: Harry Veeder To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041223104651.029add40@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="MS_Mac_OE_3186665440_611382_MIME_Part" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57097 X-Loop: vortex-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 message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3186665440_611382_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit NATURE does not mention the results of a better experiment published in spring 2004 in one of the physical review journals. Harry Jed Rothwell at jedrothwell@mindspring.com wrote: [I have never heard of Impulse Devices http://www.impulsedevices.com/index.html. - JR] >From Nature, 432, 940-1, 23/30 ~Dec. 2004 Bubble-based fusion bursts onto the scene [WASHINGTON] A company in California is launching an experimental power reactor based on 'bubble fusion', despite reservations within the scientific community over whether the effect exists. Impulse Devices in Grass Valley hopes to sell its sonofusion research reactors for about US$250,000. It claims they use ultrasound to generate bubbles in 'heavy' water, made up of hydrogen's heavier isotope deuterium. The bubbles can be imploded rapidly, generating a high temperature that allows deuterium nuclei to undergo fusion reactions, it says. "The technology could produce enough energy for electricity production in ten years," claims Mark Ludwig, chief executive of Impulse. But many scientists are not convinced. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee claimed to have achieved fusion with a similar technique in 2002. But an internal review by other Oak Ridge scientists questioned the group's results, and the work remains in limbo (see Nature 416, 7; 2002). --MS_Mac_OE_3186665440_611382_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: Nature reports more sonofusion results NATURE does not mention the results of a better experiment published in spr= ing 2004
in one of the physical review journals.

Harry


Jed Rothwell at jedrothwell@mindspring.com wrote:

[I have never heard of Impulse Devices http://www.impulsedevice= s.com/index.html. - JR]

>From Nature, 432, 940-1, 23/30 ~Dec. 2004

Bubble-based fusion bursts onto the scene

[WASHINGTON] A company in California is launching an experimental power rea= ctor based on 'bubble fusion', despite reservations within the scientific co= mmunity over whether the effect exists.

Impulse Devices in Grass Valley hopes to sell its sonofusion research react= ors for about US$250,000. It claims they use ultrasound to generate bubbles = in 'heavy' water, made up of hydrogen's heavier isotope deuterium. The bubbl= es can be imploded rapidly, generating a high temperature that allows deuter= ium nuclei to undergo fusion reactions, it says. "The technology could = produce enough energy for electricity production in ten years," claims = Mark Ludwig, chief executive of Impulse.

But many scientists are not convinced. Researchers at Oak Ridge National La= boratory in Tennessee claimed to have achieved fusion with a similar techniq= ue in 2002. But an internal review by other Oak Ridge scientists questioned = the group's results, and the work remains in limbo (see Nature 416, 7; 2002)= .

--MS_Mac_OE_3186665440_611382_MIME_Part-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 14:34:38 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 iBNMYT7V004175; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:34:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBNMYRBW004162; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:34:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:34:27 -0800 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, 23 Dec 2004 17:34:15 EST Subject: Re: GR, QM, and Field Unification (DRAFT #4, Part 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103841255" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: <1A5vBD.A.4AB.zf0yBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57098 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103841255 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/23/2004 2:40:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner@mtaonline.net writes: This issue could make for some discussion, but it is really irrelevant to the gravimagnetic theory. It was included only as background thinking that leads to the actual theory. The theory itself is pretty much embodied in the Gravimagnetism thread. Regards, Horace Heffner I derived the gravitomagnetic field from fundamental principles. The field is = G(dm/dt)/CC It is not a quantum phenomena. It is classical. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter6.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter6.html) Unless your theory can produce that result you are spinning your wheels. Frank Z -------------------------------1103841255 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/23/2004 2:40:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20 hheffner@mtaonline.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>
This=20 issue could make for some discussion, but it is really irrelevant to
th= e=20 gravimagnetic theory.  It was included only as background thinking=20 that
leads to the actual theory.  The theory itself is pretty much= =20 embodied in
the Gravimagnetism thread.

Regards,

Horace=20 Heffner         

I derived the gravitomagnetic field from fundamental principles. =20= The=20 field is =3D G(dm/dt)/CC
It is not a quantum phenomena.  It is classical.
 
http://www.angelf= ire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter6.html
 
Unless your theory can produce that result you are spinning your=20 wheels.
 
Frank Z
 
-------------------------------1103841255-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 23 20:19:08 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 iBO4J3MM006933; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:19:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBO4HeWi006445; Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:17:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:17:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <410-220041252441716950@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 Thursday, December 23, 2004 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:17:16 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d82d14a51e415b178f8f5fc889d05c4c48548b785378294e88350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.232.12.228 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57099 X-Loop: vortex-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: What's New > To: Akira Kawasaki Date: 12/23/2004 10:27:05 AM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Thursday, December 23, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 24 Dec 04 Washington, DC 1. ACUPUNCTURE: RESEARCHER FINDS THE HAYSTACK IS FULL OF NEEDLES. Huge breakthrough? A University of Maryland researcher, who has been touting acupuncture for the last 17 years, now reports it may actually work sort of. Here's the picture: a few thousand years before it was known that blood circulates or germs cause disease, doctors who had never dissected a frog, claimed that yin and yang could be balanced by inserting needles into the right points, among the hundreds of points strung along 12 meridians. They called it "acupuncture," from the Latin acus, needle and punctus, prick. Which is odd, because they were Chinese. But if they figured out acupuncture, they must have been smart enough to learn Latin. Scientists today can't even find the meridians. A Maryland study of 570 elderly patients who suffer from arthritis of the knee, found that 6 months of acupuncture modestly reduced pain and improved agility. Six months? Why not take an aspirin? Scientists suggest the needles stimulate release of endorphins. Jalapeno peppers do the same thing. So it wouldn't matter where you stick the needles would it? Then who needs an acupuncturist? 2. PAIN: CAN YOU BALANCE YOUR YIN AND YANG WITHOUT GETTING STUCK? It's been a great holiday season for the purveyors of alternative cures. First there was a flu vaccine shortage. In addition to Oscillococcinum, http://www.aps.org/WN/WN04/wn121004.cfm , olive leaf extract, grapefruit seed extract, African ginger, and ionic silver were being sold along with supposed immune-boosting multi- vitamins to treat or prevent flu. All of this stuff is sold under the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act of 1994, which means it doesn't require FDA approval. Then Merck recalled its popular painkiller Vioxx, on the basis of a slight increase in heart attack risk. That led to similar concerns about the other big COX-2 inhibitor, Celebrex, and finally, it got down to Aleve, an over-the- counter drug, for which the risk was barely significant. WN believes most chronic pain sufferers will insist they are fully willing to accept the small risks. 3. NASA: EVERY CANDIDATE TO REPLACE O'KEEFE IS "THE FRONTRUNNER." Last Friday WN mentioned two "frontrunners" to replace O'Keefe as NASA chief: Gen. Kadish, head of the Missile Defense Agency, and former member of Congress Bob Walker. Well, it's getting pretty crowded at the front. Early Saturday morning Bob Park debated retired Marine Major General Charles Bolden on BBC World News. BBC described Bolden as "the frontrunner." CQ Today reported that Sen. Brownback (R-KS), Space Subcommittee chair, is pushing retired Air Force General Pete Worden, who headed the Office of Strategic Influence http://www.aps.org/WN/WN02/wn022202.cfm . All former astronauts are also frontrunners. The litmus test is a conviction that the most important goal is Moon/Mars. 4. MISTLETOE: WN WENT SEARCHING FOR A HOLIDAY-CONNECTED STORY. Used by the druids in exotic sacrificial ceremonies, mistletoe injections are the latest quack cancer cure in Europe. 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 Dec 24 04:12:32 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 iBOCCTMM030204; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:12:29 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBOCCRZv030187; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:12:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:12:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=h/1+f3PFX6U3iW4EPyYbH95Jtj2UkcS+FIY8nSyrIJ55RMgzxaqzHoY6+dxxgzXy; Message-ID: <410-2200412524111053460@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: Stocking Stuffer Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:10:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94074405ded0606638f1e2fc13e6b23924c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.247 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57100 X-Loop: vortex-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 my tenth grade (1948) we discussed being able to dictate to a typewriter that would print out what you said. :-) These are now available for less than $200.00 US. It looks like a great tool for dyslexics and stroke victims, too. Frederick Sony ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder with Voice-to-Print Software Technical data Recording media: Flash Memory Built-In 32MB PC Connectivity: With USB Speaker: 1 1/4 inches diameter Input/Outputs: USB Port, Earphone Jack, DC-in Jack, Microphone Jack Power requirements: DC 3V with "AAA" x 2 Battery Battery life: Record ST/SP/LP 14 Hours Channel: Mono/stereo LED: Record- Red, Play- Green Weight: 2 3/4 ounces Dimensions: 1 5/8 x 4 x 1/2 inches What's in the box: recorded, Dragon Naturally Speaking Voice to Print Software, PC Download Software, "AAA" Battery x 2, Carrying Case, Earphone MDR-ED228LP, USB Cable RK-G136 Sony ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder with Voice-to-Print Software Product Description >From the Manufacturer Sony’s new ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder makes recording and transcription easy. Use Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred Voice to Print software to easily convert your recorded files to text and download directly to your PC. With the new voice e-mail function and software, you can send audible e-mails with attached files. These features and up to 696 minutes of recording make the ICD-ST25VTP the right choice for your voice recording needs. Features Includes Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred Voice to Print software to easily convert your recorded files into text Up to 696 minutes of recording is available on the integrated circuit chip which may be recorded over and used again USB compatible for fast transfer rate to a PC Includes Digital Voice Editor software via USB port on a PC Choice of Stereo, SP and LP recording modes: ST-85min, SP-250 Min, LP-696 Min Digital Voice-Up Function increases the volume of the person speaking when recorded at a distance Multi-Directional Microphone and Directional Microphone mode easily adjusts the direction of the microphone to improve the recording quality Overwrite Correction function allows the user to rewind to a location and re-record the dictation High quality sound using LPEC CODEC with improved frequency response Advanced Digital VOR (Voice Operated Recording) stops the recording during silent pauses, saving valuable recording time, then begins recording again without missing a single syllable thanks to the digital buffer 5 File Folders provide separate message areas for different applications such as business memos or personal reminders, for better organization and faster access Priority function automatically moves priority marked dictations to the front of the list of recordings in the folder Voice E-Mail function using the supplied digital voice editor software lets you easily send audible e-mail with an attached file Slim style design, only one-half inch thick, with Record and Pause controls located on the side of the unit for easy operation Easy to use Playback/Edit function lets you playback and edit with the push of a button Digital Pitch Control/Playback Speed Control allows recordings to be heard at slower than normal speeds without distortion to facilitate transcribing or editing, or faster than normal to move quickly to a desired portion Full function LCD Display shows number of messages recorded, recording length, date, time and battery power remaining One button Play from Record lets you switch from Recording mode to Play mode with one finger Incremental Rewind (Easy Search) is the equivalent of tape Fast Rewind but without returning all the way to the beginning of each recording, to help locate specific passages 32MB built-in Flash Memory uses high capacity IC chip, which may be recorded over itself and used again with distortion-free clarity Built-in Playback Speaker for monitoring playback of recordings Record-Pause function temporarily stops recording to allow for pauses in dictation or to provide time for reference to documents, then resumes where recording was stopped Add-Recording function allows you to insert and add additional information to any message without affecting the original Battery strength LCD provides a visible signal of battery strength Hold Switch prevents accidental operation or changes to settings while carrying the unit in pocket or briefcase A-B Repeat function enables a specific segment of the recording to automatically play over and over again Hi/Lo mic sensitivity enables the unit to record different situations Stereo Earphone and Microphone Jack allows listening through earphones for privacy or transcription and connection of an external microphone for special applications LED Operation Indicators (Record/Play) indicates Red when unit is recording, Green when in playback mode Microsoft Windows 98/2000/Me/XP compatible ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

In my tenth grade (1948) we discussed being able to dictate to a typewriter that
would print out what you said.  :-)
 
These are now available for less than $200.00  US.
 
It looks like a great tool for dyslexics and stroke victims, too.
 
Frederick
 
Sony ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder with Voice-to-Print Software
 
Technical data
 
Recording media: Flash Memory Built-In 32MB
PC Connectivity: With USB
Speaker: 1 1/4 inches diameter
Input/Outputs: USB Port, Earphone Jack, DC-in Jack, Microphone Jack
Power requirements: DC 3V with "AAA" x 2 Battery
Battery life: Record ST/SP/LP 14 Hours
Channel: Mono/stereo
LED: Record- Red, Play- Green
Weight: 2 3/4 ounces
Dimensions: 1 5/8 x 4 x 1/2 inches
What's in the box: recorded, Dragon Naturally Speaking Voice to Print Software, PC Download Software, "AAA" Battery x 2, Carrying Case, Earphone MDR-ED228LP, USB Cable RK-G136
 

Sony ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder with Voice-to-Print Software
 
Product Description
From the Manufacturer
Sony’s new ICD-ST25VTP Digital Voice Recorder makes recording and transcription easy. Use Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred Voice to Print software to easily convert your recorded files to text and download directly to your PC. With the new voice e-mail function and software, you can send audible e-mails with attached files. These features and up to 696 minutes of recording make the ICD-ST25VTP the right choice for your voice recording needs.
 
Features
 

Includes Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred Voice to Print software to easily convert your recorded files into text
Up to 696 minutes of recording is available on the integrated circuit chip which may be recorded over and used again
USB compatible for fast transfer rate to a PC
Includes Digital Voice Editor software via USB port on a PC
Choice of Stereo, SP and LP recording modes: ST-85min, SP-250 Min, LP-696 Min
Digital Voice-Up Function increases the volume of the person speaking when recorded at a distance
Multi-Directional Microphone and Directional Microphone mode easily adjusts the direction of the microphone to improve the recording quality
Overwrite Correction function allows the user to rewind to a location and re-record the dictation
High quality sound using LPEC CODEC with improved frequency response
Advanced Digital VOR (Voice Operated Recording) stops the recording during silent pauses, saving valuable recording time, then begins recording again without missing a single syllable thanks to the digital buffer
5 File Folders provide separate message areas for different applications such as business memos or personal reminders, for better organization and faster access
Priority function automatically moves priority marked dictations to the front of the list of recordings in the folder
Voice E-Mail function using the supplied digital voice editor software lets you easily send audible e-mail with an attached file
Slim style design, only one-half inch thick, with Record and Pause controls located on the side of the unit for easy operation
Easy to use Playback/Edit function lets you playback and edit with the push of a button
Digital Pitch Control/Playback Speed Control allows recordings to be heard at slower than normal speeds without distortion to facilitate transcribing or editing, or faster than normal to move quickly to a desired portion
Full function LCD Display shows number of messages recorded, recording length, date, ! time and battery power remaining
One button Play from Record lets you switch from Recording mode to Play mode with one finger
Incremental Rewind (Easy Search) is the equivalent of tape Fast Rewind but without returning all the way to the beginning of each recording, to help locate specific passages
32MB built-in Flash Memory uses high capacity IC chip, which may be recorded over itself and used again with distortion-free clarity
Built-in Playback Speaker for monitoring playback of recordings
Record-Pause function temporarily stops recording to allow for pauses in dictation or to provide time for reference to documents, then resumes where recording was stopped
Add-Recording function allows you to insert and add additional information to any message without affecting the original
Battery strength LCD provides a visible signal of battery strength
Hold Switch prevents accidental operation or changes to settings while carrying the unit in pocket or briefcase
A-B Repeat function enables a specific segment of the recording to automatically play over and over again
Hi/Lo mic sensitivity enables the unit to record different situations
Stereo Earphone and Microphone Jack allows listening through earphones for privacy or transcription and connection of an external microphone for special applications
LED Operation Indicators (Record/Play) indicates Red when unit is recording, Green when in playback mode
Microsoft Windows 98/2000/Me/XP compatible

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 06:17:38 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 iBOEHTfk000829; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:17:30 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBOEHRbc000820; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:17:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:17:27 -0800 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: Nature reports more sonofusion results Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:21:52 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412240921.52557.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57101 X-Loop: vortex-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 23 December 2004 16:50, Harry Veeder wrote: > NATURE does not mention the results of a better experiment published in > spring 2004 > in one of the physical review journals. > > Harry > > > Jed Rothwell at jedrothwell@mindspring.com wrote: > > [I have never heard of Impulse Devices > http://www.impulsedevices.com/index.html. - JR] > > From Nature, 432, 940-1, 23/30 ~Dec. 2004 > > Bubble-based fusion bursts onto the scene > > [WASHINGTON] A company in California is launching an experimental power > reactor based on 'bubble fusion', despite reservations within the > scientific community over whether the effect exists. > > Impulse Devices in Grass Valley hopes to sell its sonofusion research > reactors for about US$250,000. It claims they use ultrasound to generate > bubbles in 'heavy' water, made up of hydrogen's heavier isotope deuterium. > The bubbles can be imploded rapidly, generating a high temperature that > allows deuterium nuclei to undergo fusion reactions, it says. "The > technology could produce enough energy for electricity production in ten > years," claims Mark Ludwig, chief executive of Impulse. > > But many scientists are not convinced. Researchers at Oak Ridge National > Laboratory in Tennessee claimed to have achieved fusion with a similar > technique in 2002. But an internal review by other Oak Ridge scientists > questioned the group's results, and the work remains in limbo (see Nature > 416, 7; 2002 Be nice if there was a website that we could go to for the report in Nature and the other February report. The 'Nature' artical is not available on Nature's website even with a search. 'Nature' maintains three classes of availability for it's information, however, and this particular bit of info just might have shown up had I been not a third class [free] reader, but a second or 'first' class paying reader......with the NYT style registration of 'cos. More of the database model of news reporting. I wonder if there is a free Russian version of this. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 12:02:09 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 iBOK23MM020187; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:02:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBOK1l9u020127; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:01:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:01:47 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:01:38 EST Subject: Cassini Ready to Launch Probe to Titan To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103918498" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: <9H-RQD.A.Z6E.rWHzBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57102 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103918498 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit PASADENA, Calif. (Dec. 24) - With a gentle shove on Christmas Eve, the Cassini spacecraft will launch the European Space Agency's Huygens probe on a course that should send it plunging into the atmosphere of Saturn's big moon Titan. The probe must be released precisely on course because it has no means of maneuvering and will remain dormant until a timer wakes it up for entry into Titan's hazy, hydrocarbon-laced atmosphere and a parachute descent to the surface on Jan. 14. Confirmation of a successful release should be received by NASA's Deep Space Network antennas in Spain and Goldstone, Calif., just before 11 p.m. EST Friday, Jet Propulsion Laboratory said. The $3.3 billion Cassini-Huygens mission, a project of NASA, ESA and the Italian space agency, was launched on Oct. 15, 1997, from Cape Canaveral, Fla., to study Saturn, its spectacular rings and many moons. During the nearly seven years Cassini took to reach the ringed planet, the attached probe was powered through an umbilical cable and awakened from sleep mode every six months for tests. Cassini entered orbit around Saturn in June and has made several passes by Titan in preparation for the probe's release. Friday evening, tension-loaded springs will push Huygens away from Cassini on a free-fall toward Titan. On Monday, Cassini will perform a course change to avoid following the probe into Titan. Huygens is designed to make a 2 1/2-hour descent by parachute to the surface of the moon, which, according to some theories, could have lakes of methane. Instruments aboard the probe will investigate the atmosphere's chemistry and cameras will try to record images of the surface. It's not known whether Huygens will drop into liquid or onto a hard surface, where it may operate for a few minutes. As long as it is operating, Huygens will be transmitting data back to Cassini, which will later turn around to point its antenna at Earth and send the data to the Deep Space Network and on to ESA's Space Operations Center in Darmstadt, Germany. -------------------------------1103918498 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

PASADENA, Calif. (Dec. 24) - With a gentle shove on=20 Christmas Eve, the Cassini spacecraft will launch the European Space Agency'= s=20 Huygens probe on a course that should send it plunging into the atmosphere o= f=20 Saturn's big moon Titan.

The probe must be released precisely on course becaus= e it=20 has no means of maneuvering and will remain dormant until a timer wakes it u= p=20 for entry into Titan's hazy, hydrocarbon-laced atmosphere and a parachute=20 descent to the surface on Jan. 14.

Confirmation of a successful release should be receiv= ed by=20 NASA's Deep Space Network antennas in Spain and Goldstone, Calif., just befo= re=20 11 p.m. EST Friday, Jet Propulsion Laboratory said.

The $3.3 billion Cassini-Huygens mission, a project o= f=20 NASA, ESA and the Italian space agency, was launched on Oct. 15, 1997, from=20= Cape=20 Canaveral, Fla., to study Saturn, its spectacular rings and many moons.

During the nearly seven years Cassini took to reach t= he=20 ringed planet, the attached probe was powered through an umbilical cable and= =20 awakened from sleep mode every six months for tests.

Cassini entered orbit around Saturn in June and has m= ade=20 several passes by Titan in preparation for the probe's release.

Friday evening, tension-loaded springs will push Huyg= ens=20 away from Cassini on a free-fall toward Titan.

On Monday, Cassini will perform a course change to av= oid=20 following the probe into Titan.

Huygens is designed to make a 2 1/2-hour descent by=20 parachute to the surface of the moon, which, according to some theories, cou= ld=20 have lakes of methane.

Instruments aboard the probe will investigate the=20 atmosphere's chemistry and cameras will try to record images of the surface.= =20 It's not known whether Huygens will drop into liquid or onto a hard surface,= =20 where it may operate for a few minutes.

As long as it is operating, Huygens will be transmitt= ing=20 data back to Cassini, which will later turn around to point its antenna at E= arth=20 and send the data to the Deep Space Network and on to ESA's Space Operations= =20 Center in Darmstadt, Germany.

 

 -------------------------------1103918498-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 12:43:18 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 iBOKh2fk029617; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:43:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBOKgvoq029568; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:42:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:42:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:43:17 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Parksie and medicine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <3Ep5gD.A.8NH.R9HzBB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57103 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Every so often one of my joints get sore. The last few times it's been my right shoulder. It only hurts when I move it in certain directions, and I could live with it, however I chose not to. Thirty some years ago a healer listened to me explain where it hurt, and then asked me some other questions, and recommended that I try Du Hou Ji Sheng Wan, a Chinese Herbal recipe. Within a few days the pain in my hip was gone. The second time I climbed Mount Anterro, in Colorado's Collegiate peaks, I carried a bottle of then with me. The bottle I had was almost empty, so I drove over to an herb shop and paid just over $8 per bottle of 200 pills. They come in the form of a ball of compacted herb surrounded by a coating. The coating tastes rather pleasant, if I suck on the balls long enough I wear through it and the taste becomes quite bitter. hopefully I won't have to open the second bottle. Parksie would attribute this to the placebo effect. I don't think that an objective observer like me is affected by the placebo effect. What I'm sure of is that the pain in my shoulder is almost gone. This incident made me think about Parksie. If he had his way, pills like these would be outlawed. His MD equivalent would probably prescribe anti inflamatories, after charging me for an office visit to tell me what I all ready know, I have the beginnings of arthritis in my shoulder. I could easily spend ten times as much money for a short term fix. Well the herbal formula only lasts so long too. but there are no side effects from the herbs, and I don't have to worry about adverse interactions between them and the mental acuity enhancer that I'm taking. The anti imflamatories are members of the class of drugs which include Vioxx and Allieve. I like to think that when Parksie goes into one of his rants against herbal or energy medicine he's just being ignorant, but it's more likely that he knows which side of the bread the butter is on, and prefers the butter. Next time you complain about how much money we are spending on health care, remember there are two big reasons, synthetic drugs and lawyers. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 12:43:53 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 iBOKhdfk029837; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:43:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBOKhbcF029814; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:43:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:43:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:44:05 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: support Richard C Hoagland 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/57104 X-Loop: vortex-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 think that we would all agree that NASA is a stuffed shirt bureaucracy that could use a good shaking up. You may have heard that the office of director of NASA is open. Richard is interested in the job. You can express your support in a letter or email to President Bush. One thing's for sure, if Richard were to get that job, either someone would kill him, or he would shake NASA up. According to Richard, the power output of the solar cells which power the Mars Rover was decreasing. This was anticipated because of the accumulation of dust. Recently however the power output returned to 100%. Either someone wiped them off, or it rained and washed them off. Hum, given the money that those rocket scientists spent to send that vehicle to Mars. I would have expected some method of cleaning the panels. Richard also said that the rock in the background looks a lot like concrete reinforced by a rectangular mesh, www.enterprisemission.com . From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 24 15:34:53 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 iBONYkMM032166; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:34:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBONYiIc032155; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:34:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:34:44 -0800 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, 24 Dec 2004 14:42:39 -0900 To: From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Gravimagnetics and Quantum Field unification Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57105 X-Loop: vortex-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 2:32 PM 12/22/4, Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi Horace. > >Yes, this is heading in a direction I like... > >Let's go a little further. Considering a QM description >of gravito-kinetics, we can imagine gravitons being >emitted by precessing masses in a manner similar to >photon emission from precessing charged masses. I see you continue to use the term "gravito-kinetics". I would like to point out that without the isomorphism, and the terminology justified by the isomorphism, supplied in the EM-GK theory, the theory of gravimagnetism I proposed, one gets nowhere except by trodding along one law at a time. With the gravimagnetic theory, everthing in the purely gravimagnetic dimensions is completely defined, named, quantified, formulated, or theoretically proven to the same extent the electromagnetic analog is. This goes for the gravimagnetic quantum universe as well. Experimental proof clearly remains. Also, as we briefly discussed, the interaction between the two universes yet requires work. There are indeed lifetimes of work to realize the ramifications and benfits, if the theory holds. There is no confusion regarding the term gravimagnetic when it is realized the EM and GK forces work in separate dimensions. Magnetism in the EM universe is electromagnetism, in the GK universe it is gravimagnetism. Mathematically speaking, they are one and the same within their own universes. They both *are* magnetism in a real sense. It is the interaction that occurs due to embodyment of both electromagnetic charge (+-q) and gravimagnetic charge (+-i m) in the same particles that ties the universes together and unifies the fields. Gravimagnetics ... it just don't get no respect. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 07:15:38 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 iBPFFVfk002020; Sat, 25 Dec 2004 07:15:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBPFFQNS001992; Sat, 25 Dec 2004 07:15:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 07:15:26 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <15b.47117abb.2efede02@aol.com> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 10:15:14 EST Subject: probe released To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1103987714" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57106 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1103987714 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/products/pdfs/tcFlyby20041221.pdf_ (http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/products/pdfs/tcFlyby20041221.pdf) -------------------------------1103987714 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/products/pdfs/tcFlyby20041221.pdf= =20
-------------------------------1103987714-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Dec 25 15:10:36 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 iBPNAUMM011941; Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:10:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBPNAS2Q011912; Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:10:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:10:28 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=2Efj7j9fAe9lc4iVQ/VysxjT0fpEbcBp2rCEcfoNRSphWweKcHGI3jmlatnxlYMTGHBckQxhz2UF6AkvmEUBJmHibZ+ANNzKybhiVgIwfjuryQUPB2V5G5o29fs3nCN+2ERMyDlf4Sb8HWnbrCXpzdafa43+S3IDPQb2/9OGRhI= ; Message-ID: <20041225231021.34770.qmail@web41522.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:10:21 -0800 (PST) From: Harvey Norris Subject: Re: Capturing OU using fast semicondcutors ? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <004501c4e83f$9a1a1200$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/57107 X-Loop: vortex-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: > The free-energy "regaugers" and magnet-heads have > been > hacking around the edges of this for some time, and > if they > cannot push any device into OU it may mean that they > have > missed one big (or actually quite tiny) detail. > Frequency. > What would be the minimum frequency for OU from a > "truncated > Lens Law" - that is, if we assume the Casimir is > optimum at > 2 nm and the effective speed of an EMF pulse is 2/3 > c ? BTW How low can the natural electrical vibration of an inductor go? An array 20 by 30 winds; ~ 4 inch by 6 inch winds of 600 winds connected as identically wound spirals from the outside in and ajacently layered as inside -out windings produces an extremely low oscillation some 30,000 hz, making the emf pulse itself near 1/13th c. This method of making "extra" internal capacity in a coil by its geometry reduces the natural resonant frequency of the coil. Monitoring of a pancake style coil with large width windings, resembling a spiralled one plate capacitor also shows significant lowerings of natural resonant frequencies. By using 4 layers the comparisons between a normal return wind method and the above method of turning one set of pancake coils backwards with respect to the other, but also reversing the enter and exits points of conduction show a reduction of 330,000 hz to 250,000 hz for a 200 ft length of such pancake coil windings. Since the edge of the insulated flattened wire is of a comparably smaller area between layers, then what the interior ajacent layerings provide for, we can only imagine the possible reductions available if the edges were also given appreciable internal capacity. In the simplest case of using square type insulated wire that could be layered in a diagonal manner, instead of the typical one dimensional layering manner of either horizontal or vertical, the increase of internal capacity for the one dimensional model to that of a two dimensional one to increase internal capacity can be shown to be greater then 6 fold. The first order magic square as a possible guide to coil numbered winding codes uses a diagonal layering method for its construction of successive winds. It may well turn out that the magic squares actually provide a code for constructing coils of maximum internal capacity. Particulary intriguing is the 2nd order square, first sensibly expressed as a 64 wind assembly. Here half of the winding routes can still be in the same position as a returned layered wind provides for, and only half of the routes need be changed to become a 8 sided magic square. If dual sets of diodes for current orientation paths could be placed at the 32 junctions that have the option of making changed winding routes, the array could function as a normal laterally wound array when the current is moving in one direction, but when the current reverses direction as occurs in AC, it would take the route of maximum internal capacity. This might be designed for consideration of making a parametric change of internal capacity, dependent on the frequency input of the generator, and we need not be concerned about the energy input normally involved by changing capacity by actual movements of plates through space itself. HDN > we would also have to posit that the electron can > give up > angular momentum in a proper sized cavity (or > magnetic > domain) and get then that back from Casimir. > > Well it is faster than any solid state device is > likely to > produce for some time to come. The frequency is well > into > the EUV, but with line widths in semiconductors > already only > an order of magnitude "fatter" now, it won't be long > 'till > we find out - about 6 years before 2 nm is in mass > production ? depending on how one interprets Moore's > laws. > > But that geometry can be done now with electron beam > lithography... Depending on deep one's pockets > are... > > Jones > > > > > > > > > ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 10:59:13 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 iBQIx76b020134; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:59:08 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBQIx5Ok020124; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:59:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:59:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002e01c4eb7c$6fc0e0c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Subject: Hummingbird Holiday Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:55:14 -0800 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: <2BSHcD.A.T6E.5nwzBB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57108 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. --Lan Mandragoran For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. --Arthur C. Clarke My favorite "gift" of this season was not wrapped and found under a tree. It exists outside the window where I am typing now. It is a kind of "heaven" for one of nature's most precious life-forms, the hummingbird. Their "ambrosia" takes the form of a plethora of late blooming flowers. As northern California is frost-free, they tend to migrate here in great numbers, to the seasonal consternation of the permanent population. Experts are pretty sure that they have animal metabolism figured out to the minute detail. You may not realize it, but like many forms of "alternative energy" discussed on vortex, in hummingbirds and all cellular life this mechanism involves some variation of a hydrogen-permeable membrane and a storage "matrix" for hydrogen (and perhaps its isomers). But in all animals, a phosphate-based protein is involved. "ATP -->ADP + energy" is the more general route for powering animal life, but this process begins (according to the experts) with a free-proton crossing a one-way membrane and cannot operated without that membrane - which may not even be a "real" proton conductor. This factor is seldom mentioned and the experts instead have focused solely on what happens to that proton later in the ATP "converter". That lack of getting the total picture is a function of reverse-myopia, perhaps, because the experts may be entirely correct as far as they go; but they do not venture far enough. I have been watching hummingbirds for half an hour just now as part of a daily ritual going back years, and I doubt that the experts can even begin to understand the whole situation, especially without trying to do an accurate "energy balance." The attempts which I have seen to account for energy expenditure are a joke of number manipulation - and are "not even wrong." No expert wants to admit that these oddities of nature are expending far more energy than they take-in. There is perhaps 3-4 times more energy being expended by hummingbirds than can possible be accounted for in their caloric intake, IMHO. The experts are partially correct in one pathway of utilization, but that fact has hindered their deeper look into the underlying mechanics and has forced them into number juggling, if not outright data falsification. We should evaluate the notion that there is another source of energy which can be used by some animals with higher "needs". This secondary source is also related to the metabolism of hydrogen, but not via the combustion-metabolism of hydrogen through ATP. And this form of hydrogen exploitation is definitely risky, health-wise, so it had not been fully exploited by evolution and only appears in organisms with intense energy requirements. The details of this suggestion for an "extra" source of proton-based energy for certain fast metabolizers (or for certain hibernators) is incomplete now, and "sounds" a bit like the hydrino theory of Randall Mills. But I think Mills is mistaken in so many details of that theory that it is hardly worth mentioning, except for the notion that hydrogen can be induced to drop below the normal ground state, with OU consequences. >From my perspective, however, the drop below the normal ground state is both *temporary*, oscillatory, energy-neutral or endo-thermic, on-going but "not-quite reversible" which involves those instances where the hydino is converted to "bare" before popping back to ground state. Like some OU devices, going as far back as seventy years to Langmuir's torch, the *bare proton* (and its prior 'redundant' but temporary and non-conservative 'ground-states') may be the key to getting "extra" energy from Dirac's sea. The process probably does involve a temporary hydrino, but the hydrino formation alone may even be slightly endothermic. You can call the net result "ZPE" if it makes it easier to grasp, but it involves a temporary hydrino and a sequential bare proton. The hydrino is not permanent but oscillates near the Dirac interface of our 3-space and reciprocal space, and when it does cross over as "bare" it can bring back a characteristic quantum of energy and re-inflate to normal. It all depends upon disruption of the "quantum foam" of virtual positronium (which is the only well-known and proven item in this speculation.) The amount of energy released when ATP "burns" -->ADP+ PHO4~substrate is about -30.5 kilojoules per mole. Sounds like a lot - and for humans it is adequate. But it is not very much compared to the winter sugar content of the late blooming 'Rehmannia elata' on which the hummingbirds which I am watching are feeding *while hovering* in mid-air and with enough discretionary energy to fight off late-comers with blinding speed and agility. There are presently three "iridescent" beauties out there now, dueling and sipping, who appear unwilling to share in the bounty but I suspect that some of their jousting has to do with gender considerations.... but anyway - it is one heck of a lot of work that they are expending for a few milligrams of pollen which doesn't even taste that sweet to me. And I suspect that even their "iridescence" is indicative of the evolutionary pathway that allowed them to tap into a hidden source of energy, as it involves the Forster radius and UV photons. My new year's resolution will be to get a hummingbird feeder, but till then this speculation will have to do. BTW, like much of the "backward thinking" of mainstream science, it is customary to report favorable energy reactions, like the -30.5 kilojoules per mole, with a *negative* number. Go figure. But it is emblematic of a science in much need of revision. Cell metabolism is complicated and not fully understood, even the "experts" will somewhat begrudging admit to the "not fully" part, but they grow numb at the mention of protons going "below ground state." Several different proteins can extract energy from the hydrolysis of ATP. All of them appear to 'couple' some sort of motion of the protein with the energy-releasing hydrolysis. The motion of the protein can then be harnessed to do necessary things involved in muscle contraction and eventually in allowing the hummingbird to hover; ....also such things as pump chemicals across a cell membrane. Almost all of the protein energy "movement" which results from ATP involves the creation of temporary "energy holes" - ions which can be filled with some form of charge or quasi--charge 9hydrino). BTW, there is only a 300 mV membrane potential for protons in biology, whereas in normal electrolysis the necessary potential is at least 4 times higher. That seems like OU in itself, but there is more to the story. This fact alone (of the too-low potential boundary) is indicative to me that the so-called H+ ion is not crossing the membrane as an ion at all, but is crossing as a hydrino whose "volume" being six times less than normal, permits it to go through anything with a negative near-field. It is much easier to store a hydrino than a bare proton and much easier to "pump" Dirac's sea with the oscillation. To keep the containment one-sided, all the cell must do is to present a positive near-field on the inner wall. The potential energy stored in the phosphate bonds (adenine tri-phosphate, for instance)...is actually rather limited, but during "chemiosmosis" in cells structures, H+ ions are said to pumped across an organelle membrane into a confined space where they can remain "bare" for an extended period of time. In my reappraisal of this, it is the hydrino which is pumped across the membrane and stored with *far less* problem than a proton. This may be the key to securing "extra energy" only when needed. The confined hydrinos cannot pass back through the charged membrane except through where their only exit is an uncharged ATP gate. BUT, when extra energy is needed, it may be to the organism's benefit to force hydrinos completely "bare" for extended periods in order to gather in some of the 6.8 eV UV energy from the Dirac sea interface. In evolution, this could NEVER be long-term solution for any life-form (obviously or else evolutionary pressures would have already eliminated the ATP mechanism altogether). I suspect the problem is that this 6.8 eV quantum of energy which is the ionization energy of virtual positronium is both too difficult to harness on a constant basis and is also "ionizing" radiation. which would eventually destroy the cells of any organism which tried to depend on it solely - unless that organism evolved structures which were not affected by UV (life on Mars?) Also consider "torpor" and hibernation in mammals and birds and the advantages of UV utilization from bare protons, in that limited cased. The very high rates of metabolism required for maintenance of endothermy in small mammals at low ambient temperatures are not sustainable unless food supply is constant in quality and quantity. For hummingbirds this is a tough imperative. These small active animals can save large amounts of energy by abandoning regulation of body temperature at their normal high levels during winter cold spells. "Heterothermy" is the term used for "daily (nightly) hibernation" and it may be another instance where the hydrino boosted ATP mechanism can be employed to "stretch" energy reserves, when needed. But this is getting too involved for one posting. Later perhaps it will be interesting to explore heterothermy and "iridescence" and whether either is really indicative of an evolutionary pathway that allows organisms to tap into a hidden source of energy. At any rate, the main point of this Holiday essay is that among the many gifts for which we should be thankful, we should also look to nature herself in order to get a handle on ways we can learn to harness hidden resources. Happy Holidays to all, Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 18:32:10 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 iBR2W6YZ025611; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:32:06 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBR2VeF7025435; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:31:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:31:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001c01c4ebbc$2fd65090$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Hummingbird Holiday Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:30:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EB89.CE177FF0"; 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/57109 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4EB89.CE177FF0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EB89.CE177FF0" ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EB89.CE177FF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankAlways a joy to read posts by those with a command of English as = Jones.. I loved the reverse-myopia adage. Hummingbirds.. hmm!! yes we watch them feed here in mid south Texas = during summer at many feeders we set out. I have always suspected they = recharge at night during a near hibernation event although, as Jones = indicated, that cannot account for the energy released per calorie = intake as we measure energy. On predictions for the new year.. my record is minus.. but here goes. Most of the true advances in OU will be made by Americans in spite of = the advanced research moving at warp speed in Japan. The reason being is = revealed in Jones post albeit subtle. This nation continues to grow " = free thinkers" that are both steady headed, candid and observant.=20 Observing a humming bird is both a task and a joy. To "see" a form of OU = in its flight requires a "mind atmosphere" that appears to be available = in quanities in the USA.That this nation continues to produce an = atmosphere of free thought is astounding in the annals of science. = Witness the Christmas day Saturn probe event by JPL. The flame of a candle does not cast a shadow if an external light source = is beamed across the flame against a white backboard. The candle = produces a shadow, but not the flame. Is this another indicator of OU? Perhaps we are looking at more than we see. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EB89.CE177FF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Always a joy to read posts by those with a = command of=20 English as Jones.. I loved the reverse-myopia adage.
 
Hummingbirds.. hmm!! yes we watch them feed = here in mid=20 south Texas during summer at many feeders we set out. I have always = suspected=20 they recharge at night during a near hibernation event although, as = Jones=20 indicated, that cannot account for the energy released per calorie = intake as we=20 measure energy.
 
On predictions for the new year.. my record is = minus..=20 but here goes.
 
Most of the true advances in OU will be = made by=20 Americans in spite of the advanced research moving at warp speed in = Japan. The=20 reason being is revealed in Jones post albeit subtle. This nation = continues to=20 grow " free thinkers" that are both steady headed, candid and observant. =
 
Observing a humming bird is both a task and a = joy. To=20 "see" a form of OU in its flight requires a "mind atmosphere" = that appears=20 to be  available in quanities in the USA.That this  = nation=20 continues to produce an atmosphere of free thought is astounding in the = annals=20 of science. Witness the Christmas day Saturn probe event by = JPL.
 
The flame of a candle does not cast a shadow = if an=20 external light source is beamed across the flame against a = white=20 backboard. The candle produces a shadow, but not the flame. Is this = another=20 indicator of OU?
 
Perhaps we are looking at more than we = see.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EB89.CE177FF0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EB89.CE177FF0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001701c4ebbc$18aee2b0$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EB89.CE177FF0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Dec 26 20:13:35 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 iBR4DU6b026434; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:13:31 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBR4DFQ1026383; Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:13:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:13:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <5f14eb31-6c01-46a3-a93e-be3022bc8347> Message-ID: <000701c4ebca$5af78ab0$ba59ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <002e01c4eb7c$6fc0e0c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Subject: Re: Hummingbird Holiday Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:12:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 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/57110 X-Loop: vortex-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 as usual is observant and provocative. I once owned a book on hummingbirds by Crawford Greeenwalt, at that time president of DuPont. He had a hummingbird feeder in his back yard, and became fascinated with the idea of photographing them, particularly capturing the iridescent feathers. This was in the early 60s. He was on the board of a museum or two, and a few phone calls established that no collection of real photos existed. Being who he was he called Edgerton at MIT, the father of flash phototgraphy, and had some special flash setups built for his backyard feeder, where a bird would trip a high speed flash exposure and after many trials the iridescent plumage would be recorded. He also arranged for others to set up hummingbird feeders in central and south america, then fly down for a weekend of photogrphy. All told, there were some 15,000 pictures. The best made it to the book. As befits a gentleman scientist, there was a chart placing hummingbirds in a contiuum of sizes between the largest insects and other birds, and and an analysis of the wing movements that enabled hovering. This was the true work of a gentleman scientist making an excellent contribution to a topic that was non-commercial and of minor scientific interest, yet was unprecedented for the time. Among all this I remember from that book or elsewhere an observation that bird wings flap at a resonant frequency determined by the mass of the wings and the elasticity of the breast muscles, requiring relatively little energy to keep the wings going. I might also note that contemporary studies of insect flight in connection with making artificial insect robots has shown that aerodynamics on that scale is different than for birds and for fixed wing aircraft. Viscosity and local vortices become important, subtle, complex, hard to model, but effective. Back in the LENR world, there are indeed hints that hydrino and transmutation processes may be at work routinely but beyond our ability to measure, model, or currently conprehend. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 00:03:56 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 iBR83bJo015006; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:03:51 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBR83ZKo014997; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:03:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:03:35 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 02:03:54 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: proposed space drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57111 X-Loop: vortex-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 this company is for real, they are years ahead of everyone else, or they are a candidate for the Hugo Award. http://www.unitel-aerospace.com/prototyp/test1a.htm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 07:06:17 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 iBRF6953003871; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:06:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRF64Td003832; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:06:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:06:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227100453.02a50ec8@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:05:52 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Nikkei ranked MHI transmutation No.3 advanced technological innovation in 2004 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/57112 X-Loop: vortex-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 is a message from Takahashi describing what I consider an astounding development. - JR] Dear all: The Nikkei-Shinbun (Japanese Financial Times) wrote an article on the most important technological trends in 2004, on its science page of 27th December 2004 issue. The Mitsubishi Heavy Industry (MHI) transmutation works (leader Dr. Yasuhiro Iwamura) by deuterium permeation through Pd complexes were ranked No.3. The No.1 was the bio energy synthesis by the joint work of Hamamastsu Photonics Co. and University of Tokyo. 5 out of top 20 were related to the information transfer technology by quantum communications. The MHI work was only one ranked within 20s, for nuclear related science and technology. The Nikkei-Shinbun wrote, about the MHI work as; " This is a very innovative technology to make transmutation of elements with low costs, compared with existing methods as fission reactors and big accelerators, and when rare-noble elements will be produced like "alchemy" it will be so beneficial to humanity." Best wishes for a Happy News Year, Aktio Takahashi akito@sutv.zaq.ne.jp From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 07:12:40 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 iBRFCX53005447; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:12:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRFCWh4005425; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:12:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:12:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <13d.964a026.2f018056@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:12:22 EST Subject: gravity experiments To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1104160342" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57113 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1104160342 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _IngentaConnect Article: Gravity modification experiment u... disk and radio fr_ (http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/els/09214534/2003/00000385/00000004/art02284;jsessionid=5pdf9csnaeka3.victoria) -------------------------------1104160342 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
IngentaConnect=20 Article: Gravity modification experiment u... disk and radio fr=20
-------------------------------1104160342-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 08:14:14 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 iBRGE753021414; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:14:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRGE5Da021386; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:14:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:14:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=TeWzh4iXg852fizJ+z05SiWm8L5kIhg2x5xO/wOGL4+HsoNa/u8rVeGHGGsQ/F6n; Message-ID: <410-2200412127151231980@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 Rim of Fire Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:12:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940299e7cde31673622a61954457afe0f95350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.70 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57114 X-Loop: vortex-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 Makes one feel a bit puny. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/savageearth/hellscrust/index.html Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Makes one feel a bit puny.
 
 
 
 
Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 08:24:09 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 iBRGO053023871; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:24:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRGNxsE023855; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:23:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:23:59 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=BI2q9WWmf3XqsAuDV7dBUhjSIQL2OpEzuzb6G0wh2jEvTTCOvV1UKAuk/GawPIZjoW3wjomZ7MU2I19moHVEvyx4g8Be0mw79F4VNKHpexGejITDOfFJD8x9Nqj3FiVYV9H8FGAXvcnHI09QYKRJmNmuxUVm7O1vEmNIi4KpeqE= ; Message-ID: <20041227162352.88710.qmail@web51701.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Tsunami & Sir Clarke 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/57115 X-Loop: vortex-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 trust he is okay. Maybe Jed could find out? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 08:42:16 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 iBRGg753027822; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:42:07 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRGg5Tk027800; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:42:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:42:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227114014.02a51d90@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:41:58 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Tsunami & Sir Clarke In-Reply-To: <20041227162352.88710.qmail@web51701.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041227162352.88710.qmail@web51701.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_7624734==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <58fvu.A.TyG.dtD0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57116 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_7624734==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed (That would be Sir Arthur, by the way.) I assume he is okay. It would be a major news story otherwise. I sent him the following message: Subject: Why was there no warning?!? Dear Arthur, The news from Sri Lanka is dreadful. I hope that you are personally okay. It took hours for the tsunami to strike. With all the high-tech radio, satellite and fiber optic connections, I cannot understand why there was no warning. Japan, Alaska and Hawaii have sophisticated automatic warning systems, but even without them, the news should have been enough. It seems to me this is a major failing of our technology. Nothing could be done to prevent the damage, but thousands of lives could have been spared. I have not seen this aspect of the tragedy reported in the US newspapers. You should speak out about it, since you have contributed so much to communications. - Jed --=====================_7624734==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" (That would be Sir Arthur, by the way.)

I assume he is okay. It would be a major news story otherwise. I sent him the following message:


Subject: Why was there no warning?!?

Dear Arthur,

The news from Sri Lanka is dreadful. I hope that you are personally okay.

It took hours for the tsunami to strike. With all the high-tech radio, satellite and fiber optic connections, I cannot understand why there was no warning. Japan, Alaska and Hawaii have sophisticated automatic warning systems, but even without them, the news should have been enough. It seems to me this is a major failing of our technology. Nothing could be done to prevent the damage, but thousands of lives could have been spared.

I have not seen this aspect of the tragedy reported in the US newspapers. You should speak out about it, since you have contributed so much to communications.

- Jed
 --=====================_7624734==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 09:01:29 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 iBRH1NJo000508; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:01:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRH1KBK000483; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:01:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:01:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227120105.02a52478@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:01:12 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Washington Post did discuss the lack of communications . . . Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_8782109==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57117 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_8782109==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27552-2004Dec26.html It seems people need education, as well: "Even without a sophisticated early warning system, experts said, just knowing about the nature of tsunamis could have saved lives. A rapidly receding shoreline is a warning that the elevation wave is about to strike -- people may have as long as 10 minutes to flee the ocean's edge, Synolakis said. Even fleeing when the sound of the approaching wave can be heard might save lives, Bernard said . . ." - Jed --=====================_8782109==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27552-2004Dec26.html

It seems people need education, as well:

"Even without a sophisticated early warning system, experts said, just knowing about the nature of tsunamis could have saved lives. A rapidly receding shoreline is a warning that the elevation wave is about to strike -- people may have as long as 10 minutes to flee the ocean's edge, Synolakis said. Even fleeing when the sound of the approaching wave can be heard might save lives, Bernard said . . ."

- Jed
 --=====================_8782109==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:16:37 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 iBRLGW53025982; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:16:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRLGK8I025908; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:16:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:16:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <41D07BCE.2030507@ihug.co.nz> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:17:02 +1300 From: John Berry User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tsunami & Sir Clarke References: <20041227162352.88710.qmail@web51701.mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20041227114014.02a51d90@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227114014.02a51d90@pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <5szTSB.A.nUG.juH0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57118 X-Loop: vortex-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.clarkefoundation.org/ He's fine Jed Rothwell wrote: > (That would be Sir Arthur, by the way.) > > I assume he is okay. It would be a major news story otherwise. I sent > him the following message: > > > Subject: Why was there no warning?!? > > Dear Arthur, > > The news from Sri Lanka is dreadful. I hope that you are personally okay. > > It took hours for the tsunami to strike. With all the high-tech radio, > satellite and fiber optic connections, I cannot understand why there > was no warning. Japan, Alaska and Hawaii have sophisticated automatic > warning systems, but even without them, the news should have been > enough. It seems to me this is a major failing of our technology. > Nothing could be done to prevent the damage, but thousands of lives > could have been spared. > > I have not seen this aspect of the tragedy reported in the US > newspapers. You should speak out about it, since you have contributed > so much to communications. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:22:24 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 iBRLMGJo028386; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:22:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRLMFAO028364; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:22:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:22:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227160938.02a6c320@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:21:48 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: More strange comments by Correa Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_24416078==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <-a5UhC.A.I7G.G0H0BB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57119 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_24416078==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Google Alerts alerted me to this: http://www.aetherometry.com/correa_nuclear_fusion.html Correa makes weird claims about calorimetry, especially Mizuno, and Figure 1 in the Hagelstein paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Hagelsteinnewphysica.pdf "Lastly, the Cold Fusion literature is riddled with defective experiments. The Ohmori-Mizuno Aqueous Glow Discharge is one example among all too many. If the presentations made by the six selected laboratories were of comparably poor quality, it is not hard to understand the skepticism about spurious measurements of unsustained excess heat, a problem which seems to have bedeviled the field CF researchers have claimed to have produced evidence of excess energy. This determination, however, would have to have resulted from the comparison of two time integrals - for input and output power, respectively - made for contemporary time intervals and, in particular, for time intervals which would include the actual beginning of the experiment and continue until either the temperature of the CF cell had returned to the baseline or the stimulating current had been discontinued. Rarely has such determination been made properly. Glaring failures, like that of the Ohmori-Mizuno device, occurred precisely because the selected time intervals did not extend to the completion of the experiment. Fig. 1 of the submitted review is one other example. Given such omissions, little can be ascertained about the reality of claims of excess energy, specifically in the form of excess heat." I cannot imagine what Correa has in mind here. Mizuno and Ohmori both measure every joule from the moment the power is turned on until the cell returns to room temperature. Figure 1 looks about the same to me. Correa may have a point, buried somewhere under the layers of rhetoric, but I'll be darned if I can find it. Anyway he is the last person who should be criticizing other people's calorimetry. I was a little surprised to find that Correa pays attention to me and my statements on this forum. For the record, I pay no attention to him. - Jed --=====================_24416078==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Google Alerts alerted me to this:

http://www.aetherometry.com/correa_nuclear_fusion.html

Correa makes weird claims about calorimetry, especially Mizuno, and Figure 1 in the Hagelstein paper:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Hagelsteinnewphysica.pdf

"Lastly, the Cold Fusion literature is riddled with defective experiments. The Ohmori-Mizuno Aqueous Glow Discharge is one example among all too many. If the presentations made by the six selected laboratories were of comparably poor quality, it is not hard to understand the skepticism about spurious measurements of unsustained excess heat, a problem which seems to have bedeviled the field CF researchers have claimed to have produced evidence of excess energy. This determination, however, would have to have resulted from the comparison of two time integrals - for input and output power, respectively - made for contemporary time intervals and, in particular, for time intervals which would include the actual beginning of the experiment and continue until either the temperature of the CF cell had returned to the baseline or the stimulating current had been discontinued. Rarely has such determination been made properly. Glaring failures, like that of the Ohmori-Mizuno device, occurred precisely because the selected time intervals did not extend to the completion of the experiment. Fig. 1 of the submitted review is one other example. Given such omissions, little can be ascertained about the reality of claims of excess energy, specifically in the form of excess heat."

I cannot imagine what Correa has in mind here. Mizuno and Ohmori both measure every joule from the moment the power is turned on until the cell returns to room temperature. Figure 1 looks about the same to me. Correa may have a point, buried somewhere under the layers of rhetoric, but I'll be darned if I can find it. Anyway he is the last person who should be criticizing other people's calorimetry.

I was a little surprised to find that Correa pays attention to me and my statements on this forum. For the record, I pay no attention to him.

- Jed
 --=====================_24416078==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 13:35:19 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 iBRLZDJo032526; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:35:13 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBRLZBu9032498; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:35:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:35:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227163117.02a6c5b0@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:35:07 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Nikkei ranked MHI transmutation No.3 advanced technological innovation in 2004 In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227100453.02a50ec8@pop.mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20041227100453.02a50ec8@pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_25213812==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57120 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_25213812==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed I will translate the Nikkei article as soon as I get a copy. It does not seem to be on their web site. Even if it were, the site requires a subscription, I think. This article could be an important propaganda coup. I uploaded a brief note about it in our news section. I expect that Iwamura will soon be confirmed in formal publications from Tokyo University and the Japan Synchrotron Radiation Research Institute Spring8 facility. That will be even more important, and it will be much more substantive than year-end kudos from the Nikkei. - Jed --=====================_25213812==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" I will translate the Nikkei article as soon as I get a copy. It does not seem to be on their web site. Even if it were, the site requires a subscription, I think.

This article could be an important propaganda coup. I uploaded a brief note about it in our news section.

I expect that Iwamura will soon be confirmed in formal publications from Tokyo University and the Japan Synchrotron Radiation Research Institute Spring8 facility. That will be even more important, and it will be much more substantive than year-end kudos from the Nikkei.

- Jed
 --=====================_25213812==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 17:11:59 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 iBS1Bla1013952; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:11:52 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBS1BkmB013946; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:11:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:11:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Message-ID: <24.672641cb.2f020cc9@aol.com> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:11:37 EST Subject: Re: More strange comments by Correa To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1104196297" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5005 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57121 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------------------------------1104196297 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/27/2004 4:22:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, jedrothwell@mindspring.com writes: I was a little surprised to find that Correa pays attention to me and my statements on this forum. For the record, I pay no attention to him. - Jed Don't put me on your "pay no attention list" Jed Frank Z -------------------------------1104196297 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/27/2004 4:22:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20 jedrothwell@mindspring.com writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D3>I was a=20 little surprised to find that Correa pays attention to me and my statement= s on=20 this forum. For the record, I pay no attention to him.

-=20 Jed
Don't put me on your "pay no attention list" Jed
 
Frank Z
-------------------------------1104196297-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Dec 27 20:33:22 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 iBS4XDa1022364; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:33:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBS4XBDM022339; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:33:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:33:11 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" From: "Colin Quinney" To: "Frederick Sparber" Cc: "Ed Storms" , Subject: blacklisted scientists Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:33:04 -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 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57122 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 Fred, I just came across this report of blacklisting going on at the Cornell server. Apparently perhaps 100s of scientists are being blacklisted (Ed Storms included) by persons unknown. See: http://www.archivefreedom.org/casehistories.htm> Nasty business indeed.. Colin From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 07:14:23 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 iBSFEJsP003273; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:14:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSFEDKu003147; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:14:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:14:13 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041228101254.02a356a8@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:14:10 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: blacklisted scientists In-Reply-To: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> References: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_88755171==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57123 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: --=====================_88755171==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed For more about the Cornell arXiv scandal, see: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JosephsonBpathologic.pdf - Jed --=====================_88755171==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" For more about the Cornell arXiv scandal, see:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JosephsonBpathologic.pdf

- Jed
 --=====================_88755171==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 08:36:41 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 iBSGaXsP029483; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:36:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSGaWRE029458; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:36:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:36:32 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041228163626.96497.qmail@web81107.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:36:26 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Biological OU 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/57124 X-Loop: vortex-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 implications of OU in biology are mind-boggling... and apparently more appealing to a wider audience than much of the speculation which normally appears on vortex. That is probably why I received so many private messages about the hummingbird piece from a few days back - which was spontaneous and not at all well-researched (resisting the pun-temptation to say that it was "on a lark"). But nevertheless the speculation must have "hit a nerve" and provided others who had half-heartedly considered the possibility of biological OU an "arguable" or possible route to achieving that outcome, or at least made a "prima facie case" for one particular methodology which can operate in consort with normal ATP metabolism. Such is the value of the Internet. It allows the much wider dissemination of ideas (even incorrect ones, which this may turn out to be) across unrelated fields, some of whose experts might have avoided the taint of "pathological" whimsy or knowledge (whichever the case may be) due to the influence of scientific geniuses like Park and Randi. At any rate, an observer in one field cannot freely explore alternatives which everyone else in their field is terrified to propose... so if nothing else, vortex provides a relatively guilt-free stage to expound upon the "impossible" whether it be antigravity of overunity... you can even make up an alias if you want to protect your credentials in that other field. Speaking of which, I was sent the following information, which is particularly eye-opening in regard to the subject of finding a true energy balance (in high-metabolizers). It comes from a dedicated hummingbird site: http://www.hummingbirds.net/migration.html I had not realized that some "Ruby-throated" hummingbirds in the Eastern US are long migrators - this despite NOT having the good aerodynamics for gliding on the wind, like the Albatross and many other birds, nor the long-lifespan in which to learn and pass-on the route (they live 1.5-2 years). A large population from Canada and the US migrates in the Fall, all the way across the Gulf of Mexico and back and going INTO the prevailing winds, most often. Across the Gulf, it is a nonstop flight of up to 500 miles, which takes 18-22 hours depending on the weather. Although hummingbirds may fly over water in company of mixed flocks of other bird species, they do not "hitchhike" on other birds as many oil-rig workers have said. Some hummingbirds land on offshore oil rigs or fishing boats to rest, so their routes and numbers are documented. Before departing, each bird will have nearly doubled its weight, from about 3.25 grams on average to 6 grams; when it reaches the end of its journey, it may weigh only 2.5 grams. OK from this information, it is possible to get a rough idea of the net energy balance. We have been given an indication of both "work" accomplished and energy expenditure - moving an average mass of about 4 grams over 800 km in 20 hours (40 km/hr) while burning over three grams of (presumably) fat, without the benefit of good aerodynamics for gliding. I'm going to do a little more research on the prevailing winds and other factors, like the Carnot efficiency of fat metabolism, and try to contact a "real" expert on hummingbirds before going further, as apparently some readers got the impression that precise and careful measurements had already been made. Biological OU or not? Anyone else want to take the stage and expound ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 08:58:26 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 iBSGwFa1031314; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:58:15 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSGur5Z030936; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:56:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:56:53 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Mark S Bilk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hummingbird Holiday Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:52:07 -0800 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <0412280856460F.00834@isis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <0tcD6D.A.UjH.UBZ0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57125 X-Loop: vortex-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: <002e01c4eb7c$6fc0e0c0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> Organization: http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911 On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 10:55:14AM -0800, Jones Beene wrote: >... Jones, you write about the most interesting things! (Comments/questions interspersed below.) >in hummingbirds and all cellular life this mechanism >involves some variation of a hydrogen-permeable membrane and >a storage "matrix" for hydrogen (and perhaps its isomers). > >But in all animals, a phosphate-based protein is involved. >"ATP -->ADP + energy" is the more general route for powering >animal life, but this process begins (according to the >experts) with a free-proton crossing a one-way membrane and >cannot operated without that membrane - which may not even >be a "real" proton conductor. This factor is seldom >mentioned and the experts instead have focused solely on >what happens to that proton later in the ATP "converter". Since we've had X-ray crystallography and computerized molecular modelling for decades, wouldn't the position (and the activity with respect to protons) of every atom in the pore molecules of that membrane be known by now? BTW, here are some diagrams of the process that I found recently: http://www.esb.utexas.edu/mabrybio211/chapter09/Overview-resp1.jpg http://www.esb.utexas.edu/mabrybio211/chapter09/Cellular-resp.jpg http://www.esb.utexas.edu/mabrybio211/chapter09/Krebs-cycle.jpg http://www.esb.utexas.edu/mabrybio211/chapter09/Chemiosmosis1.jpg http://www.esb.utexas.edu/mabrybio211/chapter09/Chem-mech-produces.jpg >I doubt that the experts can even begin to understand the >whole situation, especially without trying to do an accurate >"energy balance." >There is perhaps 3-4 times more energy being expended by >hummingbirds than can possible be accounted for in their >caloric intake, IMHO. If they will hover inside a large dewar, maybe calorimetry can measure this? >We should evaluate the notion that there is >another source of energy which can be used by some animals >with higher "needs". This secondary source is also related >to the metabolism of hydrogen, but not via the >combustion-metabolism of hydrogen through ATP. I think Gurdjieff spoke of "higher hydrogens" ! >And this form >of hydrogen exploitation is definitely risky, health-wise, >so it had not been fully exploited by evolution and only >appears in organisms with intense energy requirements. I can't believe that Mills, an M.D., hasn't fed hydrinos to a few rats, and the fact that he won't admit it and tell the results has me worried about toxicity. Then there's spontaneous human combustion. When was this discussed on the list? I couldn't find the posts. BTW, I can't figure out what "electronium" is. Are there bacteria that generate hydrogen gas? If so, do they make monoatomic hydrogen first? If they have any potassium ion in them, there should be hydrinos... >But I think Mills >is mistaken in so many details of that theory that it is >hardly worth mentioning, except for the notion that hydrogen >can be induced to drop below the normal ground state, with >OU consequences. To me the important thing is whether he's correct about the details of _what_ is happening in his experiments, not his underlying explanation of _why_ it's happening (CQM). >From my perspective, however, the drop below the normal >ground state is both *temporary*, oscillatory, >energy-neutral or endo-thermic, on-going but "not-quite >reversible" which involves those instances where the hydino >is converted to "bare" before popping back to ground state. >Like some OU devices, going as far back as seventy years to >Langmuir's torch, the *bare proton* (and its prior >'redundant' but temporary and non-conservative >'ground-states') may be the key to getting "extra" energy >from Dirac's sea. The process probably does involve a >temporary hydrino, but the hydrino formation alone may even >be slightly endothermic. You can call the net result "ZPE" >if it makes it easier to grasp, but it involves a temporary >hydrino and a sequential bare proton. The hydrino is not >permanent but oscillates near the Dirac interface of our >3-space and reciprocal space, and when it does cross over as >"bare" it can bring back a characteristic quantum of energy >and re-inflate to normal. It all depends upon disruption of >the "quantum foam" of virtual positronium (which is the only >well-known and proven item in this speculation.) Yowie! What is "reciprocal space"? And how can a hydrino become a bare proton? What happens to the electron? It would take much more energy to remove it from a hydrino than from a hydrogen atom. Wouldn't it be possible to test this ZPE hypothesis by creating and then re-inflating hydrinos and seeing if there's a net energy gain? But if hydrinos are readily re-inflated by ZPE, wouldn't Mills' hydrino compounds be unstable? >but anyway - it is one heck of a lot of work that >[hummingbirds] are expending for a few milligrams of pollen >which doesn't even taste that sweet to me. And I suspect >that even their "iridescence" is indicative of the >evolutionary pathway that allowed them to tap into a hidden >source of energy, as it involves the Forster radius and UV >photons. Here's an article that defines the Forster radius: http://www.biophysj.org/cgi/content/full/83/6/3626 If your hypothesis is correct, then hummingbirds should glow in the UV, right? Even if it's vacuum-UV, paint a little of the right fluorescent dye on them and they should glow in the visible. Do they fly in the dark? Everyone thought you and I were crazy. But we were seeing the truth; more than they could see. Once you open the door you can never close it. -- Gothika (2003) Mark From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 09:47:52 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 iBSHlesP016117; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:47:40 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSHlcLo016109; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:47:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:47:38 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kABys51wOaF2PyzCPLsfxdSr7yuLyp3ayrAJkMndQ1W8PwpQM77EaH7RnLHJaAaG; Message-ID: <410-2200412228164557730@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: James D. Gow Hot Fusion Device Patents Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:45:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9400fd98dfac802c42b99244976447a89c0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.180 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57126 X-Loop: vortex-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 Seems that James D. Gow (et al) saw low energy Deuteron Stripping and large neutron yields with these devices at LBL. 3,014,857 Dec. 1961 filed 1958 3,025,429 Mar. 1962 These can be pasted in at: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm Free TIFF Reader for viewing them: AlternaTIFF: http://www.alternatiff.com/ Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Seems that James D. Gow (et al) saw low energy Deuteron Stripping and large neutron
yields with these devices at LBL.
 
3,014,857     Dec. 1961 filed 1958
 
3,025,429   Mar. 1962
 
These can be pasted in at:
 
 
Free TIFF  Reader for viewing them:
 
 
Frederick
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 10:44:23 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 iBSIiHsP000985; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSIiHv2000980; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041228184406.6201.qmail@web81105.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:06 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Hummingbird Holiday To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <0412280856460F.00834@isis> 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/57127 X-Loop: vortex-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 Mark, > Since we've had X-ray crystallography and computerized molecular modelling for decades, wouldn't the position (and the activity with respect to protons) of every atom in the pore molecules of that membrane be known by now? With respect to "normal" metabolism, yes. My speculation relates only to those few species which have manged to survive and flourish in situations where it "seems" like they are expending more energy than can be accounted for in caloric intake. I do not believe that there is any scientific study which has looked closely at this specific issue with an open mind. > I think Gurdjieff spoke of "higher hydrogens" ! Well, I am not up to speed on that but if it relates to the hydrino, whether it be the Mills' hydrino or the same beast from another perspective, it should probably be called "lower hydrogen" ! > > And this form of hydrogen exploitation is definitely risky, health-wise, so it had not been fully exploited by evolution and only appears in organisms with intense energy requirements. > I can't believe that Mills, an M.D., hasn't fed hydrinos to a few rats, and the fact that he won't admit it and tell the results has me worried about toxicity. OR... else the hydrino reverts back to normal hydrogen too quickly in digestion. I doubt if it is either toxic or stable (for extended periods) in the redundant ground state; and feeding it would likely not provide much benefit, energywise; especially if no natural or evolved containment structure is in place. And since the small size of the hydrino allows it to penetrate any solid material, it would likely disperse through any rodent (if that species is not equiped to utilize it) - as soon as it was released from whichever hydride state it was in when fed. OTOH, such science-geniuses as "Randi" have claimed to "smell a rat" in Mills' work, so maybe BLP has a secret breeding program underway under the auspices of so-called "Homeland Security" or whatever other nazi-esque secret bureau is involved. Ha! and if any test animal is inadvertently released near their traditional home, the rat-lands near Crawford, they will surely give Barney, no doubt an excellent ratter, a new challenge. But being both a handsome Scottie, and the most intelligent member of that clan, he will quickly eradicate the problem, hydino-powered or no. > Then there's spontaneous human combustion. When was this discussed on the list? I couldn't find the posts. You can go to the vortex "thread archives": http://www.escribe.com/science/vortex/ and search by keyword, such as "SHC" > BTW, I can't figure out what "electronium" is. Not surprising !: The original impetus for the existence of electronium (*e-) comes from the string theory of Frederick Sparber, in which the "strings" are best visualized as disks or loops (the snake eating its tail) and from analogizing the quark formative process extending to leptons. As such, I suspect that Fred imagines the (*e-) triad to have the appearance of a stack of three rings, the center being counter-spin to the other two but with an *aligned axis* of the three (electron positron electron)or check the archives for such posts: http://www.escribe.com/science/vortex/m31674.html > Are there bacteria that generate hydrogen gas? If so, do they make monoatomic hydrogen first? If they have any potassium ion in them, there should be hydrinos... Yup, but for how long befor they reinflate? > To me the important thing is whether he's correct about the details of _what_ is happening in his experiments, not his underlying explanation of _why_ it's happening (CQM). I could not agree more. His experimental work is impressive. > Yowie! What is "reciprocal space"? It is actually a well-known mathematical and physical construct which has been taken out of context by yours-truly and made to align with the locus of Dirac's sea for several reasons that are most obvious to mathematicians. > And how can a hydrino become a bare proton? What happens to the electron? It would take much more energy to remove it from a hydrino than from a hydrogen atom. But it does not need to be removed. Once the atomic size shrinks near the "interface" between our 3-space and reciprocal space, probably about 50 picometers, there is a probability of either the proton or its shrunken electron, or both, tunneling far enough into the "other side" of the interface to disrupt the "quantum foam" of "virtual positronium"... after which it can either bring back into our 3-space the 6.8 eV ionization energy or else an electronium itself (*e-), or else disappear ir there is a large accumulated deficit onthat side. At least Fred and I often subscribe to this hypothesis... especially when it is most convenient ;-) > Wouldn't it be possible to test this ZPE hypothesis by creating and then re-inflating hydrinos and seeing if there's a net energy gain? Hopefully. Perhaps that is already one of the energy sources of cold fusion, and many other anomalies. > But if hydrinos are readily re-inflated by ZPE, > wouldn't Mills' hydrino compounds be unstable? Yup. > If your hypothesis is correct, then hummingbirds should glow in the UV, right? They do, but that does not mean the hypothesis is correct - but only that iridescence and UV are so intertwined in a generic sense, that there could exist both a connection and an evolutionary pathway for utilizing (an tolerating large doses) UV photons... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 13:48:31 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 iBSLmRE7011900; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:48:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBSLmKHo011850; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:48:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:48:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=kfL63ZRWOuaVZZ8EVh8Yexi5mIHf6SNpk4GDQC4OoXrr29WvFyrl3df1XPpGNFZemRgwfmYO2xHRzXPgChdId4dB3p9NeoKY+iWIA7EBvPHYkTRyWVNa+9XRvntcA2PIrWIapvNQ3LHxsF5h5sFumSZcHoRFpLcXSadBz8zytdI= ; Message-ID: <20041228214814.30697.qmail@web51704.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:48:13 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: Biological OU To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041228163626.96497.qmail@web81107.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/57128 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > Biological OU or not? Anyone else want to take the > stage and expound ? Others have: http://www.harding.edu/USER/plummer/WWW/animphys/foodenergy.HTM Looks like you should be studying the Monarch Butterfly instead. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Dec 28 20:43:46 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 iBT4hdA1008149; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:43:39 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBT4hG9X008078; Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:43:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:43:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xe+kV2N/XYGx/H/YsSdhgTtQHHG+fix39I2kYg2m5FLsJL68VbiLAyON/k1wst2e; Message-ID: <410-220041232934141960@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: Mercury Cathode Electrolysis Cell? Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:41:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402f8501f869e0752d42ec5edbba91cc66350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.229 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57129 X-Loop: vortex-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 Might a pool or ball of mercury in an inverted cone in contact with a "wire" act as an electrolysis cell cathode? The anode might be a conductive manganese dioxide-coated brass rod (or such) made by plating the rod (anode) in a potassium permanganate solution at about 12 volts DC (works better with a little NaOH added). This coating may also double as a D2 - O2 recombiner catalyst? Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Might a pool or ball of mercury in an inverted cone in contact with a "wire"
act as an electrolysis cell cathode?
 
The anode might be a conductive manganese dioxide-coated brass rod (or such) made by
plating the rod (anode) in a potassium permanganate solution at about 12 volts DC (works better
with a little NaOH added).
 
This coating may also double as a D2 -  O2 recombiner catalyst?
 
Frederick
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 01:29:05 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 iBT9SrYw019349; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:28:53 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBT9SpFa019331; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:28:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:28:51 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 03:29:09 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Parksie on herbal supplementation Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <_e02uC.A._tE.Sjn0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57130 X-Loop: vortex-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 was channel surfing this evening and I came across a discussion of herbal supplements on PBS. There was Parksie on the TV going on about the dangers of unregulated herbs. He is silent about the 250,000 people who died from adverse reactions to synthetic pharmaceutical drugs of course. I wrote my last post on the subject before I read last week's edition of What New. True to form, Parksie continued to shoot his mouth off about things that he either doesn't understand, or which conflict with Parskie's Pet Paradigm. Acupuncture has survived the test of time, and IMHO, needs for further proof, but Parksie once again attacked a study about it as inconclusive. This stands to reason, as Parksie can't see any evidence of LENR's either. Having seen both acupuncture, and homeopathy, a related form of energy medicine work, I don't care what any study shows. I was having lunch after church services last Sabbath with a lady who was relieved of morning sickness by acupuncture. She related how her exhusband, an MD, had accompanied her to the therapist. He was concerned with the sterility of the procedure. Given her inability to keep any food down before the procedure, and the subsequent relief of symptoms, it made a believer out of him. I am reminded of a chemistry professor who once quipped about plotting the data and then drawing the curve. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 05:04:17 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 iBTD4ERk020261; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 05:04:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTD42Cc020185; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 05:04:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 05:04:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=n8F5FhOItJpdNGrLSSsP3DR+OI48dYGxspaq+Jd7pla7Ir55m7uv1uDXj6CxTsCC; Message-ID: <410-220041232912226370@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: Eureka! Mercury into Gold Over The Weekend! Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:02:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c676e3102f022d705f5504269614e317350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.68 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57131 X-Loop: vortex-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 All you need is an underwater arc between two side-by-side pools of mercury and low energy deuteron stripping and/or Electronium (*e-) & Hydrinos. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Hg/radio.html 197 Hg Electron Capture (2.672 days) -----> 197 Au (stable) Money-back guarantee questionable? :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
All you need is an underwater arc between two side-by-side pools of mercury
and low energy deuteron stripping and/or Electronium (*e-) & Hydrinos.
 
 
 
197 Hg     Electron Capture (2.672 days)  ----->  197 Au   (stable)
 
Money-back guarantee questionable?  :-)
 
Frederick
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 06:25:41 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 iBTEPQRk005438; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:25:36 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTEPOhr005402; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:25:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:25:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=BAYdgOaK4bl5DT9fau7YlG++2DEm+uL+KGEDV70YWsF9bpK1oMevZ8WcKdoME++nKr9NnnvIHuo/t6Eh+Iwb2QbUZ2+eehOTWTg4z3/u7m6GtvwvvZo6P6F7KuQYXGo7ncq6rIog0pVSPs1BUdyxT5GW+BRFR7cRaKDmOZvhbXo= ; Message-ID: <20041229142508.3336.qmail@web51708.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:25:07 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo 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/57132 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 Yahoo news: Experts: Tsunami Kills Few Animals By GEMUNU AMARASINGHE, Associated Press Writer YALA NATIONAL PARK, Sri Lanka - Wildlife officials in Sri Lanka expressed surprise Wednesday that they found no evidence of large-scale animal deaths from the weekend's massive tsunami — indicating that animals may have sensed the wave coming and fled to higher ground. An Associated Press photographer who flew over Sri Lanka's Yala National Park in an air force helicopter saw abundant wildlife, including elephants, buffalo, deer, and not a single animal corpse. Floodwaters from the tsunami swept into the park, uprooting trees and toppling cars onto their roofs — one red car even ended up on top of a huge tree — but the animals apparently were not harmed and may have sought out high ground, said Gehan de Silva Wijeyeratne, whose Jetwing Eco Holidays ran a hotel in the park. "This is very interesting. I am finding bodies of humans, but I have yet to see a dead animal," said Wijeyeratne, whose hotel in the park was totally destroyed in Sunday's tidal surge. "Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a sixth sense," Wijeyeratne said. Yala, Sri Lanka's largest wildlife reserve, is home to 200 Asian Elephants, crocodile, wild boar, water buffalo and gray langur monkeys. The park also has Asia's highest concentration of leopards. The Yala reserve covers an area of 391 square miles, but only 56 square miles are open to tourists. The human death toll in Sri Lanka surpassed 21,000. Forty foreigners were among 200 people in Yala who were killed. __________________________________________________ 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 Dec 29 08:30:52 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 iBTGUjYw028531; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:45 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTGUhsU028496; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:43 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <01ec0a44-c3b8-495e-922b-ae07ce26bc95> Message-ID: <003b01c4edc3$b5b8a880$5c5accd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Hummingbirds, Butterflies and BLP Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:17:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0031_01C4ED97.EB8800E0" 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/57133 X-Loop: vortex-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_0031_01C4ED97.EB8800E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable While we are having flightly specualtions about the long distance = migratory feats of ruby-throated hummingbirds and Monarch butterflies in = the context of biological transmuation. it's worth considering the BLP = reaction. One of these involves potassium ions as catalysts had hydrogen = atoms. For another reaction between H and He+, an energy yield 100 = timesthat of combustion has been measured.=20 Mills' experimental work has been in electrolytic cells and plasmas. The = essential reaction is a "resonant transfer" of energy between a hydorgen = atom and a catalyst, triggering a collapse of the hydrogen atomto a = lower energy state. I doubt that Mills' work to date has exhausted all = the conditions under which this can occur, which could include = biological systems. One of the chemical products postualted is a hyper = battery using hydrinos that has extremely high energy density.=20 Potassium is common enough, a catalyst. Water is everywhere, including = in the air as vapor. Given the low energy demands of these little flying = machines, is perhaps not absurd to think that they may have perfected = the art of in-flight refueling running on energy extracted from water = vaopr via catalysis with on-board potassium catalyst.=20 Mike Carrell ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C4ED97.EB8800E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
While we are having flightly = specualtions about the=20 long distance migratory feats of ruby-throated hummingbirds and Monarch=20 butterflies in the context of biological transmuation. it's worth = considering=20 the BLP reaction. One of these involves potassium ions as catalysts had = hydrogen=20 atoms. For another reaction between H and He+, an energy yield 100 = timesthat of=20 combustion has been measured.
 
Mills' experimental work has been in = electrolytic=20 cells and plasmas. The essential reaction is a "resonant transfer" of = energy=20 between a hydorgen atom and a catalyst, triggering a collapse of the = hydrogen=20 atomto a lower energy state. I doubt that Mills' work to date has = exhausted all=20 the conditions under which this can occur, which could include = biological=20 systems. One of the chemical products postualted is a hyper battery = using=20 hydrinos that has extremely high energy density.
 
Potassium is common enough, a catalyst. = Water is=20 everywhere, including in the air as vapor. Given the low energy demands = of these=20 little flying machines, is perhaps not absurd to think that they = may have=20 perfected the art of in-flight refueling running on energy extracted = from water=20 vaopr via catalysis with on-board potassium catalyst.
 
Mike Carrell
------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C4ED97.EB8800E0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 09:25:16 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 iBTHP2Yw012929; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:25:02 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTHP14H012915; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:25:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:25:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041229172453.10396.qmail@web81104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:24:53 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM 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/57134 X-Loop: vortex-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 theory behind the existence of the triad-lepton we are calling electronium (*e-), the previously undescribed “heavy electron” (but not a muon), whether it is transitory or a fairly stable particle, is based upon *basic theory* in particular, the overlap with the quark formative process. But there appears to be a further and most interesting cross-connection to the hydrino. Mills' CQM does have many appealing features and is significant because it is the "other" theory building upon a revised form of quantum mechanics which is able to provide a workable deterministic model for the paradox of wave-particle duality. String theory is the first such theory, although its proponents usually scorn normal QM as much as Mills does. Funny how that works. Can the electronium (*e-) hypothesis benefit from Mills' insight? And can the hydrino theory benefit from a total divergence away from Mills’ intransigence at some point in the deveopment of that theory into something which is more workable, at least towards a free-energy device (sooner-rather-than-later)? Mills may have been the 'wunderkind' of the past few decades, being the only student EVER to graduate from Harvard Medical in three years, ect. ect. but his intellect pales in comparison to the greatest mind of the century - P.A.M. Dirac. Mills, having been grounded early-on in chemistry rather than physics, has chosen to not only neglect Dirac but totally poo-poo the idea of ZPE, which cannot be distinguished from Dirac's sea. IMHO, it is a no-no to impugn Dirac in any way... update him, yes, but to ignore him is to your severe detriment. Consequently, I have no problem in hiding behind Dirac's enormous coat-tails in poo-pooing the "second-part" of Mills' theory. IOW it is my contention that Mills got it right up to to the point of the shoreline of Dirac, but failed to take the plunge, as it were. In Mills' CQM, electrons are not infinitesimal points nor probability waves surrounding infinitesimal point particles but are spinning 2D (electric and magnetic) flux surfaces ("orbitspheres") that deform into various geometries under different conditions. This is not at all different from string theory... up to the point of the "deform" part. But if there is one thing that Frederick Sparber believes in even more than string theory, it is NOT to "fall in love" with any one emerging theory to the exclusion of all else. Therefore, I will take the liberty of extending the electronium (*e-) concept into the realm of the hydrino, by incorporating the "deformation" part - but is it deformation of the triad-lepton (not simply the electron) which provides the glaring difference - and eventually, the resultant anomalous energy. IOW Mills was correct up to a point of accounting for the appearance of free-energy, and then, by disregarding Dirac, he has ventured more egregiously into compounding his errors, ever since. Even though Mills' experimental work is superb ! ...it seems a clear case of "so close but so far away" as the pundits like to opine. The original impetus for the existence of electronium (*e-) comes from the string theory and from analogizing the quark formative process extending to leptons, but at that point, FS imagines the (*e-) triad to have the appearance of a tight stack of three rings (2-D discs), the center being counter-spin to the other two but with an aligned axis of the three discs(electron positron electron)into a unit. However, lets revise that a bit and consider the (*e-) which has NOW been "captured" by a hydrino after the transitory hydrino has ventured over into reciprocal-space and come back into our 3-space as a different entity - i.e. it has returned from the EPO flux, which is Dirac's coastline (interface), but not as hydrogen or a more severely shrunken hydrino but as a proton surrounded by the new (*e-)"OS" IOW not as an 'entity' but as a three-layered orbitsphere. The newly emerged hydrogen isomer will have a compound (*e-) triad particle but NOT in an "orbital" per se, but will have a layered probability-smear which represents the deformation of the captured Ps which is newly formed into the (*e-) triad (e-p+e-). This is one way (of three or four ways) that a hydrino coheres anamalous energy from the EPO field. The process can also operate "in reverse" to replenish a local deficits in the EPO field, but that deficit can be replenished naturally also. (Perhaps that is why hummingbirds need to keep 'on-the-move' so as not to loose the benefit of the heavy-hydrino, which is one way to describe this hydrogen isomer. The formative process begins with a "hole" which can be an energy hole or a geometric one, especially a topological charged hole such as might be found in ATP or other proteins. Once the atomic dimension of monatomic hydrogen become far less (even if it is a transitory shrinkage) when it gets near the "interface" between our 3-space and reciprocal space, probably about 50 picometers, then the result is that there is a greatly increased probability of either the proton, or its shrunken electron, or both, tunneling far enough into the EPO field - i.e. the "other side" of the interface, where it will then disrupt the "quantum foam" of "virtual positronium"... after which it can either bring back into our 3-space the 6.8 eV ionization energy, or else an electronium itself (*e-), or else disappear into the EPO field (should there be a large accumulated deficit on that side of reciprocal space). Again, as far as experimenters are concerned, the important thing is not whether Mills is correct about the details of CQM but whether he or others can improve upon it, and whether or not it can be made useful by some kind of reappraisal. To that end, perhaps it is prudent to determine if nature herself has chosen to use this methodology through evolution, whether it be in the hummingbird, or the Monarch butterfly that Terry mentioned or whatever. Birds are the descendents of dinoasurs and have been evolving for 300 million years, so it stands to reason that if the EPO field can be accessed naturally, it would be flying birds or insects which are able to do it. Need is a mother, as they say. That interplay of form and time might also point to why *iridescence* is a necessary step along the way.( BTW are Monarchs iridescent?) Life may have been evolving for even longer elsewhere. If Dirac's sea is exploitable, nature may have chanced upon that methodology long before now... or even if not here on earth, perhaps it is the meme-information of such a methodology, arriving here “from elsewhere” (my favorite cop-out) which humans are just now, as we emerge into 2005, understanding how to decode. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 12:25:17 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 iBTKPCRk010543; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:25:12 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTKPA7K010533; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:25:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:25:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=WFVVmfRehAR2oW/duTIphuCq0M0t//Q7ycaBDcLvbbC3Z/p9kjLlfFFvV/tIgPqoW05riNbyShqcUh2dVtT5NGj1X3mpSAUfjiRhE1lU/v+DbqAffBawp5Z+RGuQ059P4//y/a22ysdyoOey9OiMFYEV7URYE+FXHM3gdbe+gZk= ; Message-ID: <20041229202459.53446.qmail@web51710.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:24:59 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229172453.10396.qmail@web81104.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/57135 X-Loop: vortex-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: > To that end, perhaps it is prudent to determine if > nature herself has chosen to use this methodology > through evolution, While I admire your open treatment of this idea, I am compelled to inject a variation on the Fermi Paradox. If life could tap either Randell's hydrino or Paul's sea would they not evolve to the point that the sugars of nature are no longer required? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 12:47:24 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 iBTKlERk019046; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:47:14 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTKlDXY019022; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:47:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:47:13 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=Sp8vXZjgCVRsXxjm6fyEpJpcv6PpJ2pQdfXxkys2XAqxmrtnT6xCmUbj0O95xInm+gwBeE/07TO9ChyFGkbq00HjvYw3hoBuvAc0LTeETkLgg/whmFVY4zJVygKA2zsfQejTk3JR1qn/5bi6pMQkzvgaH8GDbZUCB5n4sor1n18= ; Message-ID: <20041229204703.60545.qmail@web51710.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:47:03 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229172453.10396.qmail@web81104.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <5rQbiB.A.KpE.Qfx0BB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57136 X-Loop: vortex-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: > That > interplay of form and time might also point to why > *iridescence* is a necessary step along the way.( > BTW > are Monarchs iridescent?) Yes, but Boyle explained this long ago http://newton.ex.ac.uk/research/emag/butterflies/iridesc-text.htm as the result of constructive interference. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:29:12 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 iBTLT3Yw027944; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:29:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTLSnN1027833; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:28:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:28:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041229212841.19177.qmail@web81103.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:28:41 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229202459.53446.qmail@web51710.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <0KRlF.A.1yG.RGy0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57137 X-Loop: vortex-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: > While I admire your open treatment of this idea, I am compelled to inject a variation on the Fermi Paradox. If life could tap either Randell's hydrino or Paul's sea would they not evolve to the point that the sugars of nature are no longer required? Good point. And let me re-affirm that this was pure speculation from the git-go, and the chances of this alternative-energy-route being accurate for any form of earthly life are extremely slim... nevertheless... There are a couple of rationalizations that would answer this paradox - one is the work-in-process scenario, which would involve consideration of the "slice of time" in which we are stuck. IOW... IF this methodology can be used, but evolving life is only just now to the stage of "learning" this new trick, then it hasn't yet had time enough to spread very far... or perhaps is stuck into a niche role because of other considerations (such as "cheaper" alternatives). This "cheaper" alternatives" rationalization being the determinative issue could conceivably have existed in perhaps our own recent history - say having a cold fusion engine (or ZPE, etc) available for cars in 1935, shortly after Langmuir's torch demonstrated that OU from hydrogen was possible ;-} Yes, it might have been possible then, but with gasoline at 15 cents a gallon, nobody would have bought it then if the engine was so expensive that it could never pay back its zero fuel cost in net savings - and consequently the technology would have languished or be relegated to "niche" markets, such as long-range aircraft - and in fact just having the alternative could have keep the price of gasoline artificially low for decades. That idea of "cheaper" goes beyond monetary currency to "evolutionary currency," it would seem. The other rationalization was hinted at earlier - and that is the *negatives* out-weighing the positive advantages for all but a select group of high metabolizers. The "negative" in this case being having to deal with ionizing radiation from UV. This UV as we are all aware is damaging to cells and will cause cancer eventually, but if your have the overpowering "need" which hummingbirds have and your lifespan is only 1.5-2 years, which is less time than cancer takes to develop, then it could conceivably to be implemented an alternative. As mentioned, 'iridescence' itself could be protective for UV and could be required for it to be useful, as well. In short, it would seem that a super-efficient form of metabolism which is far riskier health-wise could co-exist with the "cheaper" but less efficient alternative and not displace it over time IF there were a number of severe negative issues involved (some of which may not even be apparent). Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:38:02 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 iBTLbjYw030838; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:37:46 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTLbiOv030825; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:37:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:37:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041229213736.61883.qmail@web81104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:37:36 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229204703.60545.qmail@web51710.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/57138 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > That interplay of form and time might also point to why *iridescence* is a necessary step along the way. > Yes, but Boyle explained this long ago as the result of constructive interference. Yes. Of course that is true and the original purpose of iridescence could have been solely and totaly related to mating, or whatever. But what becomes interesting here is not the "original" purpose of that particular trait, but a wholly unintended purpose that only millions of years later is found to be useful. There is a name for this evolutionary process of the unintended eventually becoming the necessary, but I can't remember it now (emergent property??)... but this is all very intriguing - even when it turns out to be a "wild goose chase" or some other "bird brained" waste of bandwidth... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:51:24 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 iBTLpHRk003764; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:51:18 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTLpGtO003737; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:51:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041229164525.02a45480@pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:49:49 -0500 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Microscopic changes to "Cold Fusion and the Future" 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/57139 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 fixed two typos in the book, and made nearly all footnotes conform to the EndNote standard. (I am not sure what to do with a few of them.) I uploaded slightly revised versions of the high and low resolution copies. If this were software, I would call it Release 1.01. I will probably print some copies next week. So far, 260 copies have been downloaded. That is not bad for this time of year, when traffic is low. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:59:18 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 iBTLx4Yw003875; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTLx0Cc003831; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:00 -0800 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: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> References: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:59:17 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: blacklisted scientists Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <8wkJJB.A.z7.jiy0BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57140 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: Colin posted; >Hi Fred, > >I just came across this report of blacklisting > going on at the Cornell server. >Apparently perhaps 100s of scientists are being blacklisted (Ed >Storms included) by persons unknown. >See: http://www.archivefreedom.org/casehistories.htm> > >Nasty business indeed.. I want to thank Jed Rothwell for posting the talk by Brian Josephson Does anyone have a list of the blacklisted scientists? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 13:59:56 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 iBTLxoRk005806; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:50 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTLxmMD005790; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:59:48 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:00:18 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: energy from biological systems 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/57141 X-Loop: vortex-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 Posted; There is perhaps 3-4 times more energy being expended by hummingbirds than can possible be accounted for in their caloric intake, IMHO. I'd think that this much excess energy should be measurable. If you put a bird in a container, it would seem to me that you could monitor the temperature of the air. Since it would be necessary to monitor the production of CO2, and balance that against energy in the sugar that you fed the bird. And I suspect that even their "iridescence" is indicative of the evolutionary pathway that allowed them to tap into a hidden source of energy, as it involves the Forster radius and UV photons. I don't understand why the light reflecting characteristics of the feathers should be a manifestation of the body's ability to tap into the ZPE. What is the Forster radius and what is it's relationship with UV photons? animal life, but this process begins (according to the experts) with a free-proton crossing a one-way membrane and cannot operated without that membrane - which may not even be a "real" proton conductor. This factor is seldom mentioned and the experts instead have focused solely on what happens to that proton later in the ATP "converter". I sat in on a series of lectures on this mechanism. There are a series of organometallic complexes which carry the surplus electrons from the site of the oxidation reaction to the site where the the reactions producing the ADP and ATP are produced. This is the first time I've heard about a one way membrane which conducts protons. I'd be interested in hearing more about this membrane. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 14:11:53 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 iBTMBcYw008086; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:11:42 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTMBaXG008059; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:11:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:11:36 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=Y58nMYW9yjEnWsdkoIGP97wpHk2MPw2DszIoVFSyUulOUFMYMqyjtHkg1wn2k0JjvkY5hRN7XOgH2Dk+xHb/mR1jbaHiE71NeSCvpZxxNkdVDfDwErt3U0pmyqy8CVGi0gjwY2Ie9vHVBh0PgNu2I/CsyeGA+tjHHF7MNKzIIy8= ; Message-ID: <20041229221128.38215.qmail@web51709.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:11:28 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229212841.19177.qmail@web81103.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/57142 X-Loop: vortex-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: > There are a couple of rationalizations that would > answer this paradox - one is the work-in-process > scenario, which would involve consideration of the > "slice of time" in which we are stuck. Ah! Then, there is an irony here in that the continued evolution, after crawling from Dirac's Sea, results in a creature who needs no metabolism and possibly no material existence at all -- solving the real Fermi Paradox! They're here, we just can't see them. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 14:57:32 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 iBTMvNYw021873; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:57:23 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTMvLEK021856; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:57:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:57:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041229225715.49623.qmail@web81110.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:57:15 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20041229221128.38215.qmail@web51709.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/57143 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Ah! Then, there is an irony here in that the continued evolution, after crawling from Dirac's Sea,results in a creature who needs no metabolism and possibly no material existence at all -- solving the real Fermi Paradox! Of course... where it all started is where it all ends,and if one is so inclined, one can even call the non-material existence "soul" for short.... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Dec 29 15:20:17 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 iBTNK8Yw028865; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:20:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBTNK5mD028825; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:20:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:20:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20041229231953.1893.qmail@web81108.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:19:53 -0800 (PST) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: energy from biological systems 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/57144 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- thomas malloy wrote: > I don't understand why the light reflecting > characteristics of the > feathers should be a manifestation of the body's > ability to tap into > the ZPE. Its not about feathers. At least not at first. Guess one should assume nothing about the extended imagination of the readership, however, so let me see if I can make it a little clearer. If you are an animal which has evolved the capability (genes) which allow you to grow certain feathers (which give you an advantage in mating)... these would be feathers with half-micron regular dimensions and precise patterning which defract visible light in a certain way, then... add 50 million years of mutations... ...then, there is the increased probability that the same feather genes mutated to grow other proteins internally which are either electrically conductive or semi-conductive, like an oldish semiconductor (if memory serves, the old '386 chip used half-micron lines) which may have some capability to respond to internally generated photons of a particular frequency, which itself is claimed by R. Mills to be the by-product of hydrino oscillation. There are other variations on the "more general" theme of genes which have the capability of creating large planar patterned structures which "might" [and let me stress the extremely high probability that this is only a raw and probably incorrect hypothesis]... ... which might is one's wildest imagination have provided the synergy needed to tap into this hidden resource (Dirac's EPO field and/or ZPE). You can certainly be on sounder footing to believe in the availability of Dirac's EPO field as a future resource, and reject the notion that it has ever been used by animal life on this planet. But it makes for a provocative ongoing thread, doesn't it? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 00:31:38 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 iBU8VI98025006; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 00:31:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBU8VFgd024972; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 00:31:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 00:31:15 -0800 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: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:31:39 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: RE: The Unitel drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-DCC-CPI-Metrics: Clear 1161; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Resent-Message-ID: <5JnBmB.A.FGG.Tz70BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57145 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: Fellow Vortexians; I sent the message at the bottom, and received the following reply. What do you people think about lifting 3 pounds with a horsepower, or 1 KW? of energy? received from From: "Tim Ventura" >Hi Thomas -- > >Who are the Vortexians? > >3 lbs per horsepower, using every dirty-trick in the book for enhancing >Lifter efficiency. That includes boosting ion-wind, specific field-shaping, >reversing the charge-polarity (power-supply runs negative), etc... > >There's no question that you could build an ion-wind aircraft, but it would >be expensive, and I am looking at big-game hunting on some of the other >ideas like gravity beams :o) > >Other than that, only changing the air is going to make a difference, and >that tends to undermine any possible space applications. > >Tim > >-----Original Message----- >From: thomas malloy [mailto:temalloy@metro.lakes.com] >Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 2:42 PM >To: tventura6@comcast.net >Subject: The Unitel drive > Tim Ventura at www.americananitgravity.com >Dear Tim; > >I was listening to you last night on C to C AM. Last time we talked I >questioned the efficacy of your design. I found your claim regarding >the amount of lift for a unit of power. I'm going to run it past the >Vortexians on the Vortex-L discussion group. Your claiming three >pounds of lift for a horse power, is that correct? I also found your >comments on the observed lift being too large by several orders of >magitude to be produced by the ion wind insightful. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 01:01:53 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 iBU91neY026737; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:01:49 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBU91ifo026697; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:01:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:01:44 -0800 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: <1165.165.121.32.175.1104371958.squirrel@165.121.32.175> References: <1165.165.121.32.175.1104371958.squirrel@165.121.32.175> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:02:12 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: concerning the ZPE 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/57146 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fellow Vortexians; I sent the email below to "Larry Maurer" at http://www.unitel-aerospace.com/ , and received the following reply What say you; Nobel Prize, or Hugo Award? >Tom: > >If you only know what we know. Aside from 10 X 28 Gauss for attraction in >fromnt of the ship to attract it at a phenomenal rate (the intensity of a >black hole)to the projected beam end-point, we have 10 X 13 gauss on the >hull (300,000 times stronger than earth's magnetic field) check out Cal >berkely's EM magnet composed of same material (niobium-tin). We can order >4'x8' sheets of diamond or grow them on hull surface with our contractors. > >I believe in the ZPE as well don't get me wrong but our laser propulsion >system is much more feasible. Have you read our book? Michael Miller & I >are going to be on the James Jancek show this Sunday... At any rate, >thanks so much for your interest in advanced propulsion. Say hi to hal for >us will you? good luck. > >Regards, > >Larry Maurer > > > >The claims that you make on your website make it look like you are >> either years ahead of every thing else that I have read on the >> subject. Either that or you should be nominated for a Hugo Award. >> >> I'm an investigative reporter for Free Energy News, all one word >> .com. You say that you use a laser to is charge the word? the ZPE. >> This allows the craft to move. I have read Puthoff's paper on the >> subject, however another paper he sent me, showed that we were far >> from making it work. The skin of your proposed craft also raises some >> questions, I take it that you have a plan for fabricating the blue >> diamond layer? >> >> I'm more interested in cohering the ZPE as a source of energy. It's a >> lot more down to earth, and there are way more customers for it. >> >> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 01:40:20 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 iBU9eEeY001732; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:40:15 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBU9eEjI001718; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:40:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:40:14 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=sBFWFyrMa8dhY0lisupIyg+Hqe8L6a4q2QhQCJodm+2lHlOOCUdMOUymLYZbh9Xx; Message-ID: <412-220041243083838800@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: Gluons, or Mutual Inductance Between Energy Loops? Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:38:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402ba8e3fb7a9e91b28bed9db549301315350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.241 Resent-Message-ID: <6XLzvD.A.ya.9z80BB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57147 X-Loop: vortex-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_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Jones. Note that the three quarks (energy loops) of the proton can induce energy/mass (size) change in the electrons (leptons) or the (*e-) and thus change their orbit about it. http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em1/lectures/node60.html "We have seen that a current flowing around some loop, 1, generates a magnetic flux linking some other loop, 2. However, flux is also generated through the first loop. As before, the magnetic field, and, therefore, the flux , is proportional to the current, " http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/indmut.html If it was any more fertile, it would be crap. :-) Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Jones.
 
Note that the three quarks (energy loops) of the proton can induce energy/mass  (size) change
in the electrons (leptons) or the (*e-) and thus change their orbit about it.
 

"We have seen that a current $I$ flowing around some loop, 1, generates a magnetic flux linking some other loop, 2. However, flux is also generated through the first loop. As before, the magnetic field, and, therefore, the flux ${\mit\Phi}$, is proportional to the current, "

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/indmut.html

If it was any more fertile, it would be crap.   :-)

Frederick

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- ------=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="img647.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: img647.png Content-Id: <410-2200412430838361101@13071999> iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAA4AAAAQBAAAAAGxCMxxAAAAAnRSTlMAD+Ys0KkAAABFSURBVHic VYlRDoAwDEL5NNnddyETeyT570cdQ83WEh4EFBKlt/iKw0sxu7rSXGo3xrfmb82rbiUQkwz34zab d3bzvAYf8C5uHGvDNz0AAAAASUVORK5CYII= ------=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="img1585.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: img1585.png Content-Id: <184671-2200412430838361102@13071999> iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAABAAAAAQBAAAAAGIb30qAAAAAnRSTlMAD+Ys0KkAAABYSURBVHic PYsxCsAwDAM1FjLk4QX3K9kNzZOqPYOrOCRgxNk+IUAEKkKQqRkV/AS5FUVvMaXYtxPDFH6ry6Ee nun19T3aBqIsgBQBjZYXFjbLl1/vkt0n/C+karLbMqt2AAAAAElFTkSuQmCC ------=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 03:31:29 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 iBUBVIeY026625; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:31:22 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUBVGfL026618; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:31:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:31:16 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Baronvolsung@aol.com Message-ID: <110.40207b96.2f0540fa@aol.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:31:06 EST Subject: Re: energy from biological systems To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_110.40207b96.2f0540fa_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/57148 X-Loop: vortex-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_110.40207b96.2f0540fa_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/29/04 2:00:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, temalloy@metro.lakes.com writes: > There is perhaps 3-4 times more energy being expended by > hummingbirds than can possible be accounted for in their > caloric intake, IMHO. > >From wind tunnel tests and 3D modeling it has been shown that Bee's and Birds fly on the crest of the wind vortex wave created by their wings to get extra energy (almost 50 percent extra) from the vortex. Birds fly in a line to maximize the vortex waves created by their wings. Birds can sense the vortex wave crests and if it is to weak they fly away to form a prefect line in a flock. Birds also collect and use solar and neutrino energy from the environment in their cells which allows them to fly long distances without food across the ocean. 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_110.40207b96.2f0540fa_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message=20= dated 12/29/04 2:00:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, temalloy@metro.lakes.com wr= ites:


There is perhaps 3-4 times=20= more energy being expended by
hummingbirds than can possible be accounted for in their
caloric intake, IMHO.


From wind tunnel tests and 3D modeling it has been shown that Bee's and=20= Birds fly on the crest of the wind vortex wave created by their wings to get= extra energy (almost 50 percent extra) from the vortex.  Birds fly in=20= a line to maximize the vortex waves created by their wings.  Birds can=20= sense the vortex wave crests and if it is to weak they fly away to form a pr= efect line in a flock.   Birds also collect and use solar and neut= rino energy from the environment in their cells which allows them to fly lon= g distances without food across the ocean.=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_110.40207b96.2f0540fa_boundary-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 08:47:55 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 iBUGlh98029759; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:47:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUGleo0029739; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:47:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:47:40 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005101c4ee8e$ba7960a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: The Unitel drive is no Ruby Throat Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:43:44 -0800 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/57149 X-Loop: vortex-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 do you people think about lifting 3 pounds with a horsepower, or > 1 KW? of energy? I suppose instead of just "lifting" you mean to "hover in place" without the benefit of a wing (forward motion into an airfoil); and instead of KW, which is NOT a unit of energy, you mean kwh, which is a unit of energy. Is that correct? If so, the result above is better than an average helicopter, which generally requires as a rule-of-thumb about one kwh per pound of payload to hover (for the turboprop - diesels can do 2 pounds per kwh), light airplanes can lift 100 pounds per kwh but NOT hover, which is much more energy-intensive ... which means that this new technology, if independently verified, is pretty good on first appraisal, but only if it scales-up, and that is far from guaranteed ... but lets compare that to a hummingbird. 1 kilowatt-hour (kwh) = 3.6 x 106 J = 3.6 million Joules. The energy content of water-free fat is approximately 35 J/gram if converted at 100% efficiency. The hummingbird "burns " about .15 grams of fat-equivalent per hour in hovering, so IF the efficiency of conversion of heat into mechanical energy were 100% that would be 5.25 J/hr . For comparison, then, if the hummingbird were brought up to the same scale as your hypothetical lifter (one kwh) then it would be lifting (hovering) a payload of 1,543 pounds instead of 3 pounds. As you can see it is about 500-1000 times more efficient than the best humans can do... .....but the hummingbird "experts" want you to believe that despite this, its metabolism is not overunity ... perhaps they are correct. OTOH, they have never really looked closely enough to see if anything else could be going on, and that is primarily because prior to the advent of this whole LENR/hydrino phenomenon (past 15 years), there was not a single "arguable" route for accomplishing biological overunity. Consequently many of them went back and "doctored" the data so that it would not appear that anything was amiss. Sci-Am even published some of it. Personally, I would like to see the results of a sensitive UV sensor placed near the pectoral muscles of a high metabolizer.... but, let's try to use a butterfly instead of a hummingbird... just in case the animal cannot recover from the trauma (one can assume that insects are more "expendable" for science, no?) You decide - biological OU, or is something else more mundane going on. Actually, I suspect that it is something more mundane, and that here the 2nd law is not being violated, but I'm not sure what could be going-on... but no truth-seeker should rule out the possibility, however small, of a hydrogen isomer being involved to tap into Dirac's sea somehow, for instance... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 09:00:05 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 iBUGxh98007129; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:59:43 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUGxgUB007113; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:59:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:59:42 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=E/zrVXZAmxC+NzHkeh1oK3iZMTNYl2SdaI/JB+5sqIvHq/kOQLBFLdIcYuUJ6WxC; Message-ID: <410-220041243015585680@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2004.1.42.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "George" , "vortex-l" Subject: DOE - Fossil Energy DOE's Hydrogen from Natural Gas R&D Program Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:58:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BC2B74.89D1CCC0" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94007d9b5db6332d225653f06a9c692efc4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.36 Resent-Message-ID: <21b2aC.A.EvB.9PD1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57150 X-Loop: vortex-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_01BC2B74.89D1CCC0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/fuels/hydrogen/hydrogen-from-gas.html Steam Reforming of Methane to Hydrogen: 1, CH4 (16 tons) + H2O (18 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 3 H2 (6 Tons) 2, 3 H2 (6 Tons) + 1.5 O2 (48 Tons) ----> 3 H2O (54 Tons) + 672 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy. Direct Burning of Liquid Methane in a car or Jet Engine: CH4 (16 Tons) + (Air 32 tons of Oxygen O2) ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 2 H2O (36 Tons) + 736 Million BTUs Conclusion: It is more practical to burn/transport Liquid Methane. :-) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
Steam Reforming  of Methane to Hydrogen:
 
1, CH4 (16 tons) + H2O (18 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ---->  CO2  (44 Tons!!)  +  3 H2  (6 Tons)
 
2, 3 H2 (6 Tons) + 1.5 O2 (48 Tons) ----> 3 H2O (54 Tons) + 672 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy.
 
Direct Burning of Liquid Methane in a car or Jet Engine:
 
CH4 (16 Tons) + (Air 32 tons of Oxygen O2) ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 2 H2O (36 Tons) + 736 Million BTUs
 
Conclusion:
It is more practical to burn/transport Liquid Methane.   :-)
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- ------=_NextPart_000_01BC2B74.89D1CCC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="DOE - Fossil Energy DOEs Hydrogen from Natural Gas RD Program.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: DOE - Fossil Energy DOEs Hydrogen from Natural Gas RD Program.url Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="DOE - Fossil Energy DOEs Hydrogen from Natural Gas RD Program.url" W0RFRkFVTFRdDQpCQVNFVVJMPWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuZmUuZG9lLmdvdi9wcm9ncmFtcy9mdWVscy9o eWRyb2dlbi9oeWRyb2dlbi1mcm9tLWdhcy5odG1sDQoNCltJbnRlcm5ldFNob3J0Y3V0XQ0KVVJM PWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuZmUuZG9lLmdvdi9wcm9ncmFtcy9mdWVscy9oeWRyb2dlbi9oeWRyb2dlbi1m cm9tLWdhcy5odG1sDQpNb2RpZmllZD1DMEM3RkY5Nzg1RUVDNDAxNTUNCg== ------=_NextPart_000_01BC2B74.89D1CCC0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 10:17:08 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 iBUIH0eY020027; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:17:04 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUIFbXJ019505; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:15:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:15:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:17:28 +0800 From: FHLew Subject: Re: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <001901c4ee9b$d2651d00$0201a8c0@fhlew> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1104430562-17301-220-1 X-Barracuda-URL: http://172.19.0.20:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall #10 at tm.net.my X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.26 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.26 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=5.5 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 2.64, rules version 2.1.749 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------- 0.26 MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR URI: Includes a link to a likely spammer email References: <20041229142508.3336.qmail@web51708.mail.yahoo.com> Resent-Message-ID: <9S1ldD.A.swE.JXE1BB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57151 X-Loop: vortex-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: "This is very interesting. I am finding bodies of humans, but I have yet to see a dead animal," said Wijeyeratne, whose hotel in the park was totally destroyed in Sunday's tidal surge. "Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a sixth sense," Wijeyeratne said.> " If only we knew, Boss, what the stones and rain and flowers say. Maybe they call us - and we don't hear them. When will people's ears open, Boss? " So asks Zorba in Nikos Kazantzakis' Zorba the Greek. Please click the webpage : Vortex : Generation of liquid vortex in URL: http://lewfh.tripod.com/coloursarecodedfrequenciesinphotonicbandgapcrystalst ructures/ With regards Lew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Blanton" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:25 PM Subject: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo > From Yahoo news: > > Experts: Tsunami Kills Few Animals > > By GEMUNU AMARASINGHE, Associated Press Writer > > YALA NATIONAL PARK, Sri Lanka - Wildlife officials in > Sri Lanka expressed surprise Wednesday that they found > no evidence of large-scale animal deaths from the > weekend's massive tsunami - indicating that animals > may have sensed the wave coming and fled to higher > ground. > > An Associated Press photographer who flew over Sri > Lanka's Yala National Park in an air force helicopter > saw abundant wildlife, including elephants, buffalo, > deer, and not a single animal corpse. > > Floodwaters from the tsunami swept into the park, > uprooting trees and toppling cars onto their roofs - > one red car even ended up on top of a huge tree - but > the animals apparently were not harmed and may have > sought out high ground, said Gehan de Silva > Wijeyeratne, whose Jetwing Eco Holidays ran a hotel in > the park. > > "This is very interesting. I am finding bodies of > humans, but I have yet to see a dead animal," said > Wijeyeratne, whose hotel in the park was totally > destroyed in Sunday's tidal surge. > > "Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a > sixth sense," Wijeyeratne said. > > Yala, Sri Lanka's largest wildlife reserve, is home to > 200 Asian Elephants, crocodile, wild boar, water > buffalo and gray langur monkeys. The park also has > Asia's highest concentration of leopards. The Yala > reserve covers an area of 391 square miles, but only > 56 square miles are open to tourists. > > The human death toll in Sri Lanka surpassed 21,000. > Forty foreigners were among 200 people in Yala who > were killed. > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 10:21:30 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 iBUILH98008122; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:17 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUILFfX008092; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xwf3LnGZ0tlvVXA9X8BcOua2YnFj8RC4DzCWMXvHM6i/7g6PAZtaY9tPDa/GfMEJ; Message-ID: <410-2200412430171939260@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: DOE - Fossil Energy DOE's Hydrogen from Natural Gas R&D Program Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:19:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404e9ed95e4ce1a6194341d46b4cb1886e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.23 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57152 X-Loop: vortex-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 Oops. > Steam Reforming of Methane to Hydrogen: > 1, CH4 (16 tons) + H2O (18 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 3 > H2 (6 Tons) > > 2, 3 H2 (6 Tons) + 1.5 O2 (48 Tons) ----> 3 H2O (54 Tons) + 672 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy. 1, CH4 (16 tons) +2 H2O (36 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 4 H2 (8 Tons) 2, 4 H2 (8 Tons) + 2 O2 (64Tons) ----> 4 H2O (72 Tons) + 896 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy. > Direct Burning of Liquid Methane in a car or Jet Engine: > CH4 (16 Tons) + (Air 32 tons of Oxygen O2) ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 2 H2O (36 Tons) + 736 Million > BTUs ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Oops.
 
> Steam Reforming  of Methane to Hydrogen:
 
> 1, CH4 (16 tons) + H2O (18 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ---->  CO2  (44 Tons!!)  +  3
> H2  (6 Tons)
>
> 2, 3 H2 (6 Tons) + 1.5 O2 (48 Tons) ----> 3 H2O (54 Tons) + 672 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy.
 

1, CH4 (16 tons) +2 H2O (36 tons)+ Heat ( X Tons CH4)& Catalyst ---->  CO2  (44 Tons!!)  +  4
H2  (8 Tons)

 2, 4 H2 (8 Tons) + 2 O2 (64Tons) ----> 4 H2O (72 Tons) + 896 Million Btus Minus The Input Energy.

> Direct Burning of Liquid Methane in a car or Jet Engine:
 
> CH4 (16 Tons) + (Air 32 tons of Oxygen O2) ----> CO2 (44 Tons!!) + 2 H2O (36 Tons) + 736 Million
> BTUs

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 10:21:51 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 iBUILg98008361; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:42 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUILd8H008331; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:39 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:23:35 +0800 From: FHLew Subject: Re: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <000c01c4ee9c$aca7bf40$0201a8c0@fhlew> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1104430978-14000-198-1 X-Barracuda-URL: http://172.19.0.19:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall #9 at tm.net.my X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.26 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.26 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=5.5 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 2.64, rules version 2.1.749 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------- 0.26 MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR URI: Includes a link to a likely spammer email References: <20041229142508.3336.qmail@web51708.mail.yahoo.com> <001901c4ee9b$d2651d00$0201a8c0@fhlew> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57153 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Apologies to all forum members for the typo. Please try this URL: http://lewfh.tripod.com/coloursarecodedfrequenciesinphotonicbandgapcrystalst ructures/ With regards Lew ----- Original Message ----- From: "FHLew" To: Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 2:17 AM Subject: Re: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo > "Terry Blanton" > wrote: > > "This is very interesting. I am finding bodies of > humans, but I have yet to see a dead animal," said > Wijeyeratne, whose hotel in the park was totally > destroyed in Sunday's tidal surge. > > "Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a > sixth sense," Wijeyeratne said.> > > " If only we knew, Boss, what the stones and rain and flowers say. Maybe > they call us - and we don't hear them. When will people's ears open, Boss? " > So asks Zorba in Nikos Kazantzakis' Zorba the Greek. > > Please click the webpage : Vortex : Generation of liquid vortex in > URL: > http://lewfh.tripod.com/coloursarecodedfrequenciesinphotonicbandgapcrystalst > ructures/ > > With regards > Lew > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Terry Blanton" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:25 PM > Subject: We Lack the Sense of a Water Buffalo > > > > From Yahoo news: > > > > Experts: Tsunami Kills Few Animals > > > > By GEMUNU AMARASINGHE, Associated Press Writer > > > > YALA NATIONAL PARK, Sri Lanka - Wildlife officials in > > Sri Lanka expressed surprise Wednesday that they found > > no evidence of large-scale animal deaths from the > > weekend's massive tsunami - indicating that animals > > may have sensed the wave coming and fled to higher > > ground. > > > > An Associated Press photographer who flew over Sri > > Lanka's Yala National Park in an air force helicopter > > saw abundant wildlife, including elephants, buffalo, > > deer, and not a single animal corpse. > > > > Floodwaters from the tsunami swept into the park, > > uprooting trees and toppling cars onto their roofs - > > one red car even ended up on top of a huge tree - but > > the animals apparently were not harmed and may have > > sought out high ground, said Gehan de Silva > > Wijeyeratne, whose Jetwing Eco Holidays ran a hotel in > > the park. > > > > "This is very interesting. I am finding bodies of > > humans, but I have yet to see a dead animal," said > > Wijeyeratne, whose hotel in the park was totally > > destroyed in Sunday's tidal surge. > > > > "Maybe what we think is true, that animals have a > > sixth sense," Wijeyeratne said. > > > > Yala, Sri Lanka's largest wildlife reserve, is home to > > 200 Asian Elephants, crocodile, wild boar, water > > buffalo and gray langur monkeys. The park also has > > Asia's highest concentration of leopards. The Yala > > reserve covers an area of 391 square miles, but only > > 56 square miles are open to tourists. > > > > The human death toll in Sri Lanka surpassed 21,000. > > Forty foreigners were among 200 people in Yala who > > were killed. > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 11:19:28 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 iBUJJI98027582; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:19:19 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUJJH89027570; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:19:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:19:17 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041230191759.00965644@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, 30 Dec 2004 19:17:59 +0000 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Lightweight merger (*e-) + CQM Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57154 X-Loop: vortex-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 14:11 29/12/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >--- Jones Beene wrote: >They're here, we just can't see them. Not Angles but Angels 8-) G. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 13:16:20 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 iBULGFeY006236; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:16:15 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBULGDYV006221; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:16:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:16:13 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00b301c4eeb4$3da712e0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005101c4ee8e$ba7960a0$d0bcfea9@jonesb9pacbell> <2cq8t09l4m7uokuctdeuciki9b79v7a5ua@4ax.com> Subject: Re: The Unitel drive is no Ruby Throat Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:12:14 -0800 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: <1qNr3.A.IhB.dAH1BB@ultra6.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57155 X-Loop: vortex-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 RvS - correction to previous post: ... to be precise, I should have added "for one hour" in two places.: a rule-of-thumb about one kwh per pound of payload is required for a helicopter.... to hover in place *for one hour* Also, it is a continuing oversight that I keep forgetting to use up my quota of "bird" idioms.... Previously, I was able to get in "on a lark" bird-brained" and "wild goose chase" but missed the prime opportunity for: As the crow flies... A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush... Bird's eye view ... Birds of a feather... The early bird catches the worm... Chicken out... Count your chickens before they hatch.... etc etc. .... or the one which most represents my feeling about the future of this hummingbird thread.... which is now poised to meet its timely end, in step with 2004... finding a way to kill two birds with one stone... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 15:28:15 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 iBUNRv98013925; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:27:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUNRtsw013907; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:27:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:27:55 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=RJJYiG9K9zZHH8iSGn6kVe10cJd8Ws3jIYbhNx0AKKP5EhExxi69nby/K+2ysEeAtnw4ggepx4FBBMn3IwHokHfYoPS9KqOnDs5169inlAZF1wuM8CU8lCY8pUk9AsE1aKYZ28lZikUkeh47lsbBq/dpNsPEHRfGQHvLgoMGZn8= ; Message-ID: <20041230232748.87804.qmail@web51704.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:27:47 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: The Unitel drive is no Ruby Throat To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <00b301c4eeb4$3da712e0$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/57156 X-Loop: vortex-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: > ... finding a > way to > kill two birds with one stone... 'Tis far better to stone two birds and move in for the kill, matey. A toast to the New Year: Here's to you as good as you are And here's to me as bad as I am. As good as you are And as bad as I am, I'm as good as you are, as bad as I am. Thanks for being a Vort, love your beanie! HNY to all! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 15:40:43 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 iBUNeY98018325; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:34 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUNeU1g018291; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:30 -0800 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: The Unitel drive is no Ruby Throat Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:40:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20041230232748.87804.qmail@web51704.mail.yahoo.com> X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57157 X-Loop: vortex-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 scribes; 'Tis far better to stone two birds and move in for the kill, matey. And I reply, "Leaving no bird unstoned, mon ami" happy gnu ears right back at ya. K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Dec 30 15:55:00 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 iBUNsl98022745; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:54:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBUNsiVk022711; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:54:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:54:44 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=nNSQtunDmx9y1jLpPPx8OvJWhoRBSILfqV292em9i/sV2ndl2Urib29AV0U3Z26jA56DR45JZuTS9IsC/JddDqiv2l4YXwsdSDSFEJtxWR6HE+bw2LeOVMTig5J0XMYM/Ye5Th5T9eDlE8K26j1VyiwacGTjUcOjCTvUcF/RIZ8= ; Message-ID: <20041230235442.78071.qmail@web12404.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:54:42 -0800 (PST) From: Kyle Mcallister Subject: Unitel, etc... 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/57158 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, I do not know much about the Unitel thing, however, what I do know is this: 1. I contacted T W Barrett several years back about one of his papers which was at that time posted to the Unitel website. He responded, we talked a bit, he said email back in about a year (!) and he would have a referenced paper ready for distribution. A year or so later, I emailed him back. No response. About three years ago, I emailed him again. He said he did not know anything about what I was talking about, even though what I asked about was the exact title of his paper coauthored with H. David Froning, "Inertia reduction and possibly impulsion by conditioning electromagnetic fields." He said email Froning. So I did...Froning said he had no time for any of this, and that he had never done work on inertia reduction, in theory or otherwise. Make of this what you will...it bothered me. 2. From hearsay, some (most?) of what Unitel is said to be derived from UFO experiences. Now, I do not know if this is true, so further insight into this would be nice. However, if that is the case, then it casts a little (more) doubt on credibility. As a side note, even if we DID manage to witness the aerial stunts of an alien-controlled vehicle, it would not do much for us...imagine a caveman watching a fighter plane go by. It is hard to imagine technology being gleaned from this. 3. There seems to be a book you have to purchase to fully grasp Unitel's ideas. Why am I reminded of Joseph Newman. 4. There is nothing special, AFAIK, about R-G-B colors, except for perception by the receptors in the human eye. *** So make of all this what you will...it is food for thought. *** Intelligent canines who have long since mastered the problems of FTL travel are no doubt barking at the peculiar human fixation on RGB. ;) --Kyle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 02:31:55 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 iBVAVk98001504; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:47 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVAVOpu001437; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <2.2.32.20041231102937.006b07a4@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, 31 Dec 2004 10:29:37 +0000 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: The Unitel drive is no Ruby Throat Resent-Message-ID: <-9yTJB.A.ZW.7pS1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57159 X-Loop: vortex-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 06:40 pm 30-12-04 -0500, you wrote: >Terry scribes; >'Tis far better to stone two birds and move in for the >kill, matey. > >And I reply, > >"Leaving no bird unstoned, mon ami" Don't ya mean? "Leaving no tern unstoned." ;-) tern: Any of various sea birds of the genus Sterna and related genera, related to and resembling the gulls but characteristically smaller and having a forked tail. Cheers and a Happy New Year to one and all. 8-) Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 07:18:08 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 iBVFI4eY010868; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:18:05 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVFHq92010793; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:17:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:17:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=oqCD1lGO2x5z3hqlyPZ7QjUzM/Cu36yhJZMdUcfI+eiD50bAXvNDMorgY/yZE3KE; Message-ID: <410-2200412531141750790@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: O.T. The Great Flood Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:17:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9401197c956775e1e5f37849f5673105b97350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.83 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57160 X-Loop: vortex-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 Could the earth have passed through a Comet Tail for 40 days of cosmic rainfall? http://www.ldolphin.org/flood.shtml "Most of the great mountain ranges we see today were probably build up after the flood by isostatic rebound, and by collision of the continental plates after rapid breakup and accelerated "drift." Before the flood the earth seems to have had just one continent. Division of the continents may have occurred rapidly "in the days of Peleg" (Gen. 10:25)---which was about 150 years after the flood. This can not be strongly supported from the Bible except for the fact that the root PLG (Peleg) is found in modern words such a "pelagic" and "archipelago." All that Genesis 10 actually says about Peleg is "in his days the earth was divided." This could mean a division and migration of peoples rather than referring to continental breakup. Rapid continental drift would have been so disastrous in terms of earthquakes, tidal waves, vulcanism and other upheavals that many scientifically-oriented Bible scholars believe the splitting of earth's original continent ("pangea") occurred during the year of the flood" Frederick ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Could the earth have passed through a Comet Tail for 40 days of cosmic rainfall?
 
 
"Most of the great mountain ranges we see today were probably build up after the flood by isostatic rebound, and by collision of the continental plates after rapid breakup and accelerated "drift." Before the flood the earth seems to have had just one continent. Division of the continents may have occurred rapidly "in the days of Peleg" (Gen. 10:25)---which was about 150 years after the flood. This can not be strongly supported from the Bible except for the fact that the root PLG (Peleg) is found in modern words such a "pelagic" and "archipelago." All that Genesis 10 actually says about Peleg is "in his days the earth was divided." This could mean a division and migration of peoples rather than referring to continental breakup. Rapid continental drift would have been so disastrous in terms of earthquakes, tidal waves, vulcanism and other upheavals that many scientifically-oriented Bible scholars believe the splitting of earth's original continent ("pangea") occurred during the year of the flood"
 
Frederick
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 11:37:31 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 iBVJal98005791; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:36:48 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVJaYmM005657; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:36:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:36:34 -0800 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: blacklisted scientists Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:43:43 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412311443.43788.rockcast@earthlink.net> Resent-Message-ID: <26g2k.A.UYB.Bpa1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57161 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 Wednesday 29 December 2004 16:59, thomas malloy wrote: > Colin posted; > > >Hi Fred, > > > >I just came across this report of blacklisting > > going on at the Cornell server. > >Apparently perhaps 100s of scientists are being blacklisted (Ed > >Storms included) by persons unknown. > >See: http://www.archivefreedom.org/casehistories.htm> > > > >Nasty business indeed.. > > I want to thank Jed Rothwell for posting the talk by Brian Josephson > > Does anyone have a list of the blacklisted scientists? Hello all, This is done not by persons unknown, but by a certain Paul Ginsparg at Cornell. According to the website above, this university hosts the archive and obviousely manages it. Since it is under the direction of physicist Paul, then he has the responsibility for what is done on or by the site with respect to publication of papers, etc. Just like the military in whose service I spent over 10 years, the commander of an outfit is the one who is responsible. The buck stops there. I am certain that this is not the only archive in the world, even if it is the one that most of 'our friends' use. Others may be in use by those 'not our friends'. As ours becomes divisive, it loses relevance and will eventually be shunned by the very community it purports to 'protect'. The danger is that inasmuch as the arXiv is a 'free world' creation and it is not free, it will not only lose the moral high ground, but also that discoveries made elsewhere will be known everywhere but in our own 'ruling clique'. We could be very unpleasantly surprised by another 'Sputnik' , an 'in your face' proof of an unknown technology by an hostile group done in an unignorable way. Standing Bear remember in the early fifties when many scientists and others were blacklisted for ostensible political but really many reasons. The result WAS Sputnik, a monumental acheivement done on a parallel track that no one in the west paid attention to until too late! Anybody seen Dr. Ning Li lately? Well we'll just wait, news of her may just float in someday. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 13:41:06 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 iBVLf098005998; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:41:00 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVLem93005816; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:40:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:40:48 -0800 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: concerning the ZPE Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 08:40:35 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <2hhbt0dt3402ovfpr44h3viav0ahrs8vnu@4ax.com> References: <1165.165.121.32.175.1104371958.squirrel@165.121.32.175> 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 iBVLeg98005752 Resent-Message-ID: <5j9OP.A.waB.gdc1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57162 X-Loop: vortex-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 thomas malloy's message of Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:02:12 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Fellow Vortexians; > >I sent the email below to "Larry Maurer" > at >http://www.unitel-aerospace.com/ , and received the following reply > >What say you; Nobel Prize, or Hugo Award? Probably the latter. > >>Tom: >> >>If you only know what we know. Aside from 10 X 28 Gauss for attraction in >>fromnt of the ship to attract it at a phenomenal rate (the intensity of a >>black hole)to the projected beam end-point, we have 10 X 13 gauss on the >>hull (300,000 times stronger than earth's magnetic field) 1E13 Gauss is not 300000 times the Earth's magnetic field, which is generally less than 1 Gauss if I remember correctly (nor is 130 Gauss). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 14:00:12 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 iBVLxv98010184; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:59:57 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVLxta3010157; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:59:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:59:55 -0800 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, 31 Dec 2004 13:08:00 -0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Happy New Year! Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57163 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Wishing all a happy new year. May 2005 be the year we make the great stride to unlimited clean energy, and thus toward peace on earth. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 14:12:00 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 iBVMBp98012849; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:11:51 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVMBlss012818; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:11:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:11:47 -0800 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: The Unitel drive Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 09:11:39 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <90ibt09g4s37npkr5ad9a1vr8rpslabfum@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 ultra5.eskimo.com id iBVMBi98012778 Resent-Message-ID: <3eWlTC.A.HID.j6c1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57164 X-Loop: vortex-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 thomas malloy's message of Thu, 30 Dec 2004 02:31:39 -0600: Hi, [snip] >>3 lbs per horsepower, using every dirty-trick in the book for enhancing >>Lifter efficiency. That includes boosting ion-wind, specific field-shaping, >>reversing the charge-polarity (power-supply runs negative), etc... As I said about a year ago, better than a helicopter, but not as good as conventional fixed wing aircraft. However, as a helicopter/dirigible replacement it might be interesting, particularly when powered by a radioisotope, which naturally lends itself to high voltage low current applications. Even more so, if the decay rate can be controlled. Furthermore, lack of moving parts makes it possible to construct light weight devices capable of lifting very large loads, especially when using a lightweight radioisotope power source. >> >>There's no question that you could build an ion-wind aircraft, but it would >>be expensive, and I am looking at big-game hunting on some of the other >>ideas like gravity beams :o) >> >>Other than that, only changing the air is going to make a difference, and >>that tends to undermine any possible space applications. True, AFAIK. [snip] >>pounds of lift for a horse power, is that correct? I also found your >>comments on the observed lift being too large by several orders of >>magitude to be produced by the ion wind insightful. Not really. The ion wind calculation is based upon the velocity of ions in a vacuum, but the craft isn't operating in a vacuum. When operating in air, the ions encounter resistance, and drag air molecules along with them, which increases the effective mass of the ions many fold. This results in a much larger momentum transfer which explains the lift. This effect is maximised by increasing the air resistance, i.e. by making the current path as long as possible. Additional lift might be obtained by making use of the Coanda effect over a curved hull (i.e. flying saucer shaped because the air will flow in all directions, from top to bottom) see e.g. http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/repcotst.htm , except of course that the hull would need to be an insulator, not a conductor. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 15:26:41 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 iBVNQW98029599; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:26:32 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iBVNQTBc029579; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:26:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:26:29 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Titankey-e_id: <8f81e25a-b0fa-432e-afe6-9b8a1988f58b> Message-ID: <001b01c4ef90$2293b0d0$2045ccd1@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <07a401c4ec96$5286c4f0$6401a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> <200412311443.43788.rockcast@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: blacklisted scientists Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:25:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Resent-Message-ID: <-fh1m.A.HOH.lAe1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57165 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: Standing Bear wrote: > remember in the early fifties when many scientists and others were > blacklisted for ostensible political but really many reasons. The result > WAS Sputnik, a monumental acheivement done on a parallel track > that no one in the west paid attention to until too late! Anybody seen > Dr. Ning Li lately? Well we'll just wait, news of her may just float > in someday. MC: Not quite so simple. There was resistance during the Eisenhower administration to "stunts". Wherner von Braun made the drive into space his life's mission and governments were means to that end, including the Nazis and the US Army. He made a point of surrendring his staff to US forces at the end of WW2 and the Army happily installed him at the Redstone Arsenal, where he bacame a US citizen. He had quitely made sure the pieces of high altitude rocets built for other purposes could be bolted together to reach earth orbit, so I was not long before the US followed suit. MC: The Russians were always ahead in lift power because they initially bungeled microelectronics. Their rockets had to lift heavier tube electronics and more relaince was placed on ground control. Thus they were also able to get humans into orbit before the US could. MC: If you look at the list of blacklisted scientists, it includes many besides Ed Storms. Some of them have been embroiled in fights and controversies for decades. Mike Carrell > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 16:57:35 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 j010vMeY009871; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:57:27 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j010vLkL009859; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:57:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:57:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=gFs4yvgNPvuWzTztDVROq4drx4+cbI7frjt1tEjeqQbE9dxde662wQt6C7qZ6smCyzvvbYVETvWjLagNRZDF4lmZ3rq8uYKJSlz5mzFRjXm5qjbdJuiD0YeWojSN3x/+VhckHudK6kPV3bnu3Iqjl9+jYY0NiSfSacreqrEYcZo= ; Message-ID: <20050101005711.72491.qmail@web51707.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:57:11 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Blanton Subject: Re: concerning the ZPE To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2hhbt0dt3402ovfpr44h3viav0ahrs8vnu@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/57166 X-Loop: vortex-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: > 1E13 Gauss is not 300000 times the Earth's magnetic > field, which is generally less than 1 Gauss if I > remember correctly (nor is 130 Gauss). 60 microTesla max. (0.6 Gauss) near the poles. 30 mT elsewhere. HNY! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 18:42:09 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 j012fxeY030384; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:42:03 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j012fv1M030360; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:41:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:41:57 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001c01c4efab$71597270$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: New year wishes Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:41:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EF79.0EE7F3A0" 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/57167 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C4EF79.0EE7F3A0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EF79.0EE97A40" ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EF79.0EE97A40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankBest wishes for the new year. Fred's comment on the great flood, continental drift and Peleg's ordeal = brings to mind my conversation with my geologist friend. ( One was = named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen. 10:25) My thoughts are the world was much smaller in diameter before the flood = i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no oceans. The earth was a single = land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of the mountain = ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( continents). As the = water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form = oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the = Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.=20 Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. = This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards. Hmmm !! = To each his own. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EF79.0EE97A40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Best wishes for the new year.
 
Fred's comment on the great flood, continental = drift and=20 Peleg's ordeal brings to mind  my conversation with my geologist = friend. (=20 One was named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen.=20 10:25)
 
My thoughts are the world was much = smaller in=20 diameter before the flood i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no = oceans. The=20 earth was a single land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of = the=20 mountain ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( = continents). As=20 the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low = places to=20 form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as = the=20 Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.
 
Most likely source of water from = above was Mars=20 being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the = planets=20 afterwards. Hmmm !!   
To each his own.
 
Richard
 
 

 

------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C4EF79.0EE97A40-- ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EF79.0EE7F3A0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001701c4efab$596b5930$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C4EF79.0EE7F3A0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 19:05:18 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j0135598016809; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 19:05:09 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j01353id016803; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 19:05:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 19:05:03 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:06:03 +0800 From: FHLew Subject: Re: New year wishes To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <00e301c4efae$d4335b60$0201a8c0@fhlew> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: multipart/related; boundary="Boundary_(ID_X7aIN0YD+zOXcxLuIyMa2A)"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1104548727-3964-201-1 X-Barracuda-URL: http://172.19.0.19:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: New year wishes X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall #9 at tm.net.my X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 1.13 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=1.13 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=5.5 tests=EXTRA_MPART_TYPE, HTML_20_30, HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 2.64, rules version 2.1.753 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------- 0.01 EXTRA_MPART_TYPE Header has extraneous Content-type:...type= entry 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 1.12 HTML_20_30 BODY: Message is 20% to 30% HTML References: <001c01c4efab$71597270$0100007f@xptower> Resent-Message-ID: <9O711.A.aGE.eNh1BB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57168 X-Loop: vortex-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. --Boundary_(ID_X7aIN0YD+zOXcxLuIyMa2A) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_oKYk7SitJ7+fCaCqAzr1yA)" --Boundary_(ID_oKYk7SitJ7+fCaCqAzr1yA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Blank ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 10:41 AM Subject: New year wishes Best wishes for the new year. Fred's comment on the great flood, continental drift and Peleg's ordeal brings to mind my conversation with my geologist friend. ( One was named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen. 10:25) My thoughts are the world was much smaller in diameter before the flood i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no oceans. The earth was a single land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of the mountain ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( continents). As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others. Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards. Hmmm !! To each his own. Richard --Boundary_(ID_oKYk7SitJ7+fCaCqAzr1yA) Content-type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Blank
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 10:41 AM
Subject: New year wishes

Best wishes for the new year.
 
Fred's comment on the great flood, continental drift and Peleg's ordeal brings to mind  my conversation with my geologist friend. ( One was named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen. 10:25)
 
My thoughts are the world was much smaller in diameter before the flood i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no oceans. The earth was a single land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of the mountain ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( continents). As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.
 
Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards. Hmmm !!   
To each his own.
 
Richard
 
 

 

--Boundary_(ID_oKYk7SitJ7+fCaCqAzr1yA)-- --Boundary_(ID_X7aIN0YD+zOXcxLuIyMa2A) Content-id: <00de01c4efae$d411c9a0$0201a8c0@fhlew> Content-type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Content-disposition: attachment; filename="Blank Bkgrd.gif" R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== --Boundary_(ID_X7aIN0YD+zOXcxLuIyMa2A)-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Dec 31 20:38:59 2004 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (IDENT:smartlst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j014cs98004570; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:38:54 -0800 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j014bYTB004297; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:37:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:37:34 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:39:28 +0800 From: FHLew Subject: Re: New year wishes To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <001d01c4efbb$e13b4fe0$0201a8c0@fhlew> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: multipart/related; boundary="Boundary_(ID_F2ItXGW5op/+I9ZLJmyUsQ)"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1104554280-26381-145-1 X-Barracuda-URL: http://172.19.0.20:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: New year wishes X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall #10 at tm.net.my X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.38 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.38 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=5.5 tests=EXTRA_MPART_TYPE, HTML_30_40, HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 2.64, rules version 2.1.754 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------- 0.01 EXTRA_MPART_TYPE Header has extraneous Content-type:...type= entry 0.37 HTML_30_40 BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message References: <001c01c4efab$71597270$0100007f@xptower> <00e301c4efae$d4335b60$0201a8c0@fhlew> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/57169 X-Loop: vortex-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. --Boundary_(ID_F2ItXGW5op/+I9ZLJmyUsQ) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_kUcqH36o6MhlW+mZKL5Rvw)" --Boundary_(ID_kUcqH36o6MhlW+mZKL5Rvw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT BlankI wish all the forum members a successful and peaceful New Year 2005 RC Macaulay wrote: < As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.> Flowing liquid is a Quantum Wave http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn971 Tsunamis caused by earthquakes and volcanic eruptions have demonstrated that the vibratory signatures of solitonic vortices are unique natural sculptors. Nature's Silence ( the splashing of water-falls, the roaring of the oceanic waves, the gurgling of a swiftly flowing stream,the howling of winds, the rhythmic dripping sound of raindrops and the rustling of leaves, which includng the seismic waves, are ELF ( Extremely Low Frequency ) electromagnetic waves .These are SCALAR WAVES. The evidence is manifested very elegantly in the coastline rocks and stones. Mother Nature is a unique sculptor artist of the first waters. http://lewfh.tripod.com/introductiontonutritionalscience/ < Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards.> Light is liquified Gas http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2497 With regards Lew ----- Original Message ----- From: FHLew To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 11:06 AM Subject: Re: New year wishes ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 10:41 AM Subject: New year wishes Best wishes for the new year. Fred's comment on the great flood, continental drift and Peleg's ordeal brings to mind my conversation with my geologist friend. ( One was named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen. 10:25) My thoughts are the world was much smaller in diameter before the flood i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no oceans. The earth was a single land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of the mountain ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( continents). As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others. Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards. Hmmm !! To each his own. Richard --Boundary_(ID_kUcqH36o6MhlW+mZKL5Rvw) Content-type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Blank

I wish all the forum members a successful and peaceful New Year 2005

RC Macaulay wrote:

 <  As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.>

            Flowing liquid is a Quantum Wave
 
 
Tsunamis caused  by earthquakes and volcanic eruptions  have demonstrated that the  vibratory signatures of solitonic vortices are unique natural sculptors. Nature's Silence ( the splashing of water-falls, the roaring of the oceanic waves, the gurgling of a swiftly flowing stream,the howling of winds, the rhythmic dripping sound of raindrops and the rustling of leaves, which includng the seismic waves, are ELF ( Extremely Low Frequency ) electromagnetic waves .These  are SCALAR WAVES.  The evidence is manifested very elegantly in the  coastline rocks and stones. Mother Nature is a unique sculptor artist of the first waters.
 
 
    < Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards.>

             Light is liquified Gas

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2497

 

 With regards

    Lew

----- Original Message -----
From: FHLew
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: New year wishes

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 10:41 AM
Subject: New year wishes

Best wishes for the new year.
 
Fred's comment on the great flood, continental drift and Peleg's ordeal brings to mind  my conversation with my geologist friend. ( One was named Peleg because in his time the earth was divided Gen. 10:25)
 
My thoughts are the world was much smaller in diameter before the flood i.e. a year was 360 days. There were no oceans. The earth was a single land mass. The expansion of the earth and upheaval of the mountain ranges gave way to gaps between the " high ground" ( continents). As the water rained down from above, it flowed down to the low places to form oceans, the extreme water flowing velocities carved such canyons as the Grand Canyon, the Hudson River Canyon and others.
 
Most likely source of water from above was Mars being stripped of water. This would require a reorientation of the planets afterwards. Hmmm !!   
To each his own.
 
Richard
 
 

 

--Boundary_(ID_kUcqH36o6MhlW+mZKL5Rvw)-- --Boundary_(ID_F2ItXGW5op/+I9ZLJmyUsQ) Content-id: <001801c4efbb$e0ef04a0$0201a8c0@fhlew> Content-type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Content-disposition: attachment; filename="Blank Bkgrd.gif" R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== --Boundary_(ID_F2ItXGW5op/+I9ZLJmyUsQ)--