From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 00:08:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5177d2d015336; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 00:07:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5177Y0x015278; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 00:07:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 00:07:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060601070726639.9C0B11C00082@mwinf3206.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060601070728.00b575a4@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, 01 Jun 2006 08:07:28 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: O2 enrichment Resent-Message-ID: <7qHHjB.A.RuD.0IpfEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68602 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:30 am 01/06/2006 +1000, Robin wrote: > [snip] > I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon > some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us > as to the details of its operation and perhaps a > patent number? On the subject of O2 enrichment, has anyone ever analysed the output of the Ranque-Hilsch Vortex tube to see if the oxygen/nitrogen ratio is the same for the cold stream as for the hot stream? Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 02:58:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k519wFWd028079; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 02:58:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k519wDOG028053; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 02:58:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 02:58:13 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=AkOBX//QZlwCsg7gOIDT/ktw3LcbHrj/rPwuJE/5K+gLjFUK92aC2yV8LnLMdayh; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066419585466@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: O2 enrichment Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:58:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940043c8e764a3c154d9bd26d294345e991350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.135 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68603 X-Loop: vortex-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 think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon > some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us > as to the details of its operation and perhaps a > patent number? > You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen Concentrators for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per minute delivery. With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts. http://www.gas-plants.com/oxygen-generator.html "An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen from the nitrogen." "The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a delivery pressure of 3 bar is required." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
>
> I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon
> some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us
> as to the details of its operation and perhaps a
> patent number?
>
You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen Concentrators
for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per minute delivery.
With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts.
 
"An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen from the nitrogen."
"The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a delivery pressure of 3 bar is required."
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 03:37:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51AbCLD017903; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:37:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51AbATE017882; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:37:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:37:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0a3601c68567$0993e190$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066419585466@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: O2 enrichment Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:35:01 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: <9wsdCC.A.QXE.WNsfEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68604 X-Loop: vortex-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! How much does a used unit cost roughly Fred, and what's the valving system and the "pressure swing" for? If it is just a sieve letting smaller molecules through as they describe a simple bleeding of the O2-depleted air should work shouldn't it? (that's the way reverse osmosis systems work) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 11:58 AM Subject: Re: O2 enrichment > > >> I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon >> some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us >> as to the details of its operation and perhaps a >> patent number? >> > You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen > Concentrators > for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per > minute delivery. > With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts. > > http://www.gas-plants.com/oxygen-generator.html > > "An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers > air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination > and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The > oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one > of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts > as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen > from the nitrogen." > > "The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately > 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a > delivery pressure of 3 bar is required." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 03:50:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51AnuRA026516; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:49:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51AnsQ2026487; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:49:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 03:49:54 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=GrSAk8N+ZprQicDSWftSGyGpwHB+Vj1ODO2ttYt+jXUqw/sxEfKc/3S10iuTgryK; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006641104942360@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: NRG Efficient HO-OH - H2 Production, was O2 enrichment Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:49:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fd3e74d14bb7ba1340b1fc732c7aba5a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.132 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68605 X-Loop: vortex-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 Blowing O2 over the cathode of a water electrolysis cell allows simultaneous production of OH at the anode and cathode. Or you can shut off the O2 and produce H2 at the cathode and OH at the anode. Simultaneous HO-OH (~ 80% Hydrogen Peroxide) decomposition and H2 combustion makes an attractive high NRG fuel. Easily storable-transportable for use in existing or Closed-Cyle-Argon ICEs: HO-OH + Ethanol ----> 2 CO2 + H2O + NRG or HO-OH + H2 -----> 2 H2O + NRG http://www.peroxidepropulsion.com/article/2 "Hydrogen peroxide has been used in many applications for propulsion and power generation in the last 60 years" WW II "Its first major use was by the German Luftwaffe during Word War II. In 1936 Helmuth Walters´ Walterwerke developed a 1000 kgf hydrogen peroxide propelled ATO (= Auxiliary Take Off) rocket engine for the Heinkel He 176. This first engine was a cold monopropellant rocket engine using injection of calciumpermanganate solution as a decomposition catalyst. 80% conc. H2O2 was used." "Probably the most well-known application of H2O2 during WW II was in the V2-rocket for the turbo-pump gas generator." "1990's - present The good news are that hydrogen peroxide has seen a great deal of renewed interest in the 1990s. There are many reasons for this. Most important I believe is its minimal environmental impact, simplicity of handling and lower cost. Since 1998 there have been six (!) International Hydrogen Peroxide Propulsion Conferences. Civil scientists and organizations like ESA, NASA and Russian organizations cooperate openly and peacefully in the field." ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/1/2006 3:59:14 AM Subject: Re: O2 enrichment > > I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon > some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us > as to the details of its operation and perhaps a > patent number? > You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen Concentrators for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per minute delivery. With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts. http://www.gas-plants.com/oxygen-generator.html "An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen from the nitrogen." "The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a delivery pressure of 3 bar is required." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Blowing O2 over the cathode of a water electrolysis cell allows
simultaneous production of OH at the anode and cathode.
Or you can shut off the O2 and produce H2 at the cathode
and OH at the anode.
 
Simultaneous HO-OH (~ 80% Hydrogen Peroxide) decomposition
and H2 combustion makes an attractive high NRG fuel.
 
Easily storable-transportable for use in existing or Closed-Cyle-Argon ICEs:
 
HO-OH + Ethanol ---->  2 CO2  +  H2O  + NRG or  HO-OH + H2 ----->  2 H2O  + NRG   
 
 
"Hydrogen peroxide has been used in many applications for propulsion and power generation in the last 60 years"

WW II
"Its first major use was by the German Luftwaffe during Word War II. In 1936 Helmuth Walters´ Walterwerke developed a 1000 kgf hydrogen peroxide propelled ATO (= Auxiliary Take Off) rocket engine for the Heinkel He 176. This first engine was a cold monopropellant rocket engine using injection of calciumpermanganate solution as a decomposition catalyst. 80% conc. H2O2 was used."
"Probably the most well-known application of H2O2 during WW II was in the V2-rocket for the turbo-pump gas generator."
"1990's - present
The good news are that hydrogen peroxide has seen a great deal of renewed interest in the 1990s. There are many reasons for this. Most important I believe is its minimal environmental impact, simplicity of handling and lower cost. Since 1998 there have been six (!) International Hydrogen Peroxide Propulsion Conferences. Civil scientists and organizations like ESA, NASA and Russian organizations cooperate openly and peacefully in the field."
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/1/2006 3:59:14 AM
Subject: Re: O2 enrichment

>
> I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon
> some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us
> as to the details of its operation and perhaps a
> patent number?
>
You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen Concentrators
for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per minute delivery.
With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts.
 
"An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen from the nitrogen."
"The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a delivery pressure of 3 bar is required."
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 04:40:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Bdsfd023731; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:39:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51BdnX6023668; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:39:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:39:49 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=duQM+GRFEKlOFRhZIM19uUIEFzjnlE0g4Nnw3/iJtFgt38GOsZUry/bsA08mO5bR62jShNdVJJ1N4Tj4AD6sIx+51t0B1rnyX23trIbaO4poLMa5kn8s/shTL7fhxgeG/NqRGmvCelT6JJFzrnjI2yLq2BSCTjVv6lui4uxONew= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:39:42 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: PLEASE :: What is "NRG" AND: "cold Fusion" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1173_12426850.1149161982327" Resent-Message-ID: <0IyX1C.A.qxF.EItfEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68607 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: ------=_Part_1173_12426850.1149161982327 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Vortex, As a new can you please let us know what NRG means? Is it possible, Please, to define acronyms when they are first used in any given text? On the topic of cold fusion: Please let us all know if the following is correct... and if not, can someone please yield a precis? (A) When aqueous cold fusion is studied hydrogen and oxygen are products of the electrolysis Yes? No? (B) The amount of H2 and O2 are not quantified... and in some cases are "recombined" (C) How is this recombination accomplished....specifically, please. (D) BIG question: Suppose you have a given cold fusion aqueous set up.... and there is production of hydrogen and oxygen Further, suppose you STORE and or Record the amount of H and O...... i] if one were to calculate the energy potential of combusting the O and H .. ENERGY....how much??? ii] combine O and H in fuel cell.... how much energy... how much loss in fuel cell? (E) How much energy in O and H ALONE from cold fusion, aqueous,..... the best example I can think of would be Mitchell Schwartz's nickle and light water and Li Carbonate system.... How much O, how much H ...and how much V and current used at what temp over what time?? (F) What is the total energy budget ...LEAVING HEAT OUT OF THE EQUATIONS AND CALCULATIONS IN TOTO ... if we examine energy, electrical in... and amount of H and O out .... It appears a potentially important body of information has been left out of all of the discussion to date. RECAP: [1] Aqueous cold fusion [2] M Schwartz, as example, light water, lithium carbonate, nickle electrodes [3] how much current and voltage input, over time [4] how much O and H generated Apologies to M Schwartz if the name has been spelled wrong. Herma On 5/31/06, Jones Beene wrote: > > In a "perfect world"... well, let's say a "rational world" which > wants to give up a reliance on fossil fuels, and the eco-damage of > such, yet still desires to have affordable personal automobile > transportation (perhaps that goal is irrational in itself )... > and assuming that LENR cannot become an affordable choice, due to > scale-up problems, inevitable electrode damage, too many > Randi-bots, the high cost for palladium, or whatever. > > All of the grid electricity for this rational world is generated > by some combination of wind, solar, nuclear and hydro - no carbon. > This mix puts you in the predicament of having lots of > under-utilized night-time capacity, especially if we encourage > "rational" small scale nuclear (subcritical, > natural-uranium-fueled) which is a matter of making this goal a > national priority, as the technology is there. > > The solution to that excess night-time capacity is that: in > addition to many vehicles being battery powered plug-ins - and > getting their charge at night (with or without the 'bettery') - > and this being the higher-priced option (batteries will always be > comparatively expensive) then there is still a cheaper option... > > ...especially for colder climates in the northern US and Canada... > which is this: At night you have a home heat-pump, which in > addition to heating the house, also produces liquid N2O at the > same time. IOW the energy used to make the N2O heats the house - > cogeneration. One of them is effectively free- either the home > heat or the transportation fuel. The low compression engine and > catalytic converter assures that little NOx is released. > > This N2O is a low density fuel, so you need to produce a lot of > it, maybe 20 gallons for a 100 mile commute - but as you are > heating your house with the rejected-heat, which is used to make > it, then the "fuel" can be essentially free. BTW it is low energy > density, sure, but still much higher than compressed air or liquid > air, as it does have inherent chemical energy in addition to the > energy of expansion. > > The big IF... is this: if N2O can be made reliably in a home-sized > reactor via the pressurized catalysis of air. > > You need a 2-1 ratio of gases instead of the natural 4-1 ratio- > but air can be enriched magnetically due to the magnetic > properties of the O2 component. > > No good reason why this wouldn't work... except ... for the > assumption of a "rational" world, and the needed billions for R&D, > now wasting away like oil-soaked sand in the middle East... > > ...what was that about a "rational world"? > > Jones > > ------=_Part_1173_12426850.1149161982327 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
 
 
Dear Vortex,
 
   As a new can you please let us know what NRG means?
   Is it possible, Please,  to define acronyms when they are first used in any given text?
 
  On the topic of cold fusion:
 
   Please let us all know if the following is correct... and if not, can someone please yield a precis?
 
 (A)  When aqueous cold fusion is studied hydrogen and oxygen are products of the electrolysis
     Yes?  No?
 
 (B)  The amount of H2 and O2 are not quantified... and in some cases are "recombined"
 
(C)  How is this recombination accomplished....specifically, please.
 
(D)  BIG question:
 
    Suppose you have a given cold fusion aqueous set up.... and there is production of hydrogen and oxygen
       Further, suppose you STORE and or Record the amount of H and O......
 
    i]  if one were to calculate the energy potential of combusting the O and H ..  ENERGY....how much???
   ii]  combine O and H in fuel cell.... how much energy... how much loss in fuel cell?
 
    (E)  How much energy in O and H
         ALONE from cold fusion, aqueous,..... the best example I can think of would be Mitchell Schwartz's nickle and light water and Li Carbonate system....
   How much O, how much H ...and how much V and current used at what temp over what time??
 
    (F)  What is the total energy budget ...LEAVING HEAT OUT OF THE EQUATIONS AND CALCULATIONS IN TOTO ...  if we examine energy, electrical in... and amount of H and O out ....
 
         It appears a potentially important body of information has been left out of all of the discussion to date.
 
         RECAP:
 
    [1] Aqueous cold fusion
   [2]  M Schwartz, as example, light water, lithium carbonate, nickle electrodes
 [3]  how much current and voltage input, over time
[4]  how much O and H generated
 
 
 Apologies to M Schwartz if the name has been spelled wrong.
 
            Herma
 
 
 


 
On 5/31/06, Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
In a "perfect world"... well, let's say a "rational world" which
wants to give up a reliance on fossil fuels, and the eco-damage of
such, yet still desires to have affordable personal automobile
transportation (perhaps that goal is irrational in itself <g> )...
and assuming that LENR cannot become an affordable choice, due to
scale-up problems, inevitable electrode damage, too many
Randi-bots, the high cost for palladium, or whatever.

All of the grid electricity for this rational world is generated
by some combination of wind, solar, nuclear and hydro - no carbon.
This mix puts you in the predicament of having lots of
under-utilized night-time capacity, especially if we encourage
"rational" small scale nuclear (subcritical,
natural-uranium-fueled) which is a matter of making this goal a
national priority, as the technology is there.

The solution to that excess night-time capacity is that: in
addition to many vehicles being battery powered plug-ins - and
getting their charge at night (with or without the 'bettery') -
and this being the higher-priced option (batteries will always be
comparatively expensive) then there is still a cheaper option...

...especially for colder climates in the northern US and Canada...
which is this: At night you have a home heat-pump, which in
addition to heating the house, also produces liquid N2O at the
same time. IOW the energy used to make the N2O heats the house -
cogeneration. One of them is effectively free- either the home
heat or the transportation fuel. The low compression engine and
catalytic converter assures that little NOx is released.

This N2O is a low density fuel, so you need to produce a lot of
it, maybe 20 gallons for a 100 mile commute - but as you are
heating your house with the rejected-heat, which is used to make
it, then the "fuel" can be essentially free. BTW it is low energy
density, sure, but still much higher than compressed air or liquid
air, as it does have inherent chemical energy in addition to the
energy of expansion.

The big IF... is this: if N2O can be made reliably in a home-sized
reactor via the pressurized catalysis of air.

You need a 2-1 ratio of gases instead of the natural 4-1 ratio-
but air can be enriched magnetically due to the magnetic
properties of the O2 component.

No good reason why this wouldn't work... except ... for the
assumption of a "rational" world, and the needed billions for R&D,
now wasting away like oil-soaked sand in the middle East...

...what was that about a "rational world"?

Jones


------=_Part_1173_12426850.1149161982327-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 04:50:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Bo5sN030572; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:50:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51BDUjA008515; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:13:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 04:13:30 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=EWWSH1VWIH1akXti1QNpbWjwQtWOV7jAg9pHnT+kFyTn/K4dda2Br9k35FH/1VpN; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200664111139463@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: O2 enrichment Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:13:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a68fd55fdb203e58e32fb885b2a54b45350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.132 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68606 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > Nice! How much does a used unit cost roughly Fred, and what's the valving > system and the "pressure swing" for? > You can shop on the web for "Oxygen Concentrators".that go from $450.00 and up, but a medical oxygen supplier might let you have an oldie for a few bars of "I Love Paris" or The Bonaoparte's Retreat: Met the girl that I love, In a town way down in Texas. 'Neath the stars up above, She was the sweetest girl I ever did see. So I held her in my arms and, Told her of her many charms, An'; I kissed her while the fiddles played, The Bonaparte's Retreat. All the world was bright as I held her on that night, And I heard her say: "Don't you ever go away." So I held her in my arms and, Told her of her many charms, An' I kissed her while the guitars played, The Bonaparte's Retreat. By the time you get to the last stanza, they will give it to you in order to get rid of you. :-) The compressor pressure pushes air into one can of molecualar sieve (a cheap clay product) and holds it momentarilly. Then you valve that off so that the O2 comes out while you pressurized the other, and so on. > >If it is just a sieve letting smaller > molecules through as they describe a simple bleeding of the O2-depleted air > should work shouldn't it? (that's the way reverse osmosis systems work) > You can buy the 5 angstrom molecular sieve (clay product) from any catalyst or dessiccant supplier by the quart or carload. It lasts a long time if it isn't contaminated.by oil, water, or dust. Medical Oxygen machines work for years without major repairs, but they check the O2 quality from them about every 3 - 6 months. The relays and solenoid valves wear out the fastest. Fred > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 11:58 AM > Subject: Re: O2 enrichment > > > > > > >> I think Fred has a device that enriches O2 based upon > >> some form of filtration. Perhaps he can enlighten us > >> as to the details of its operation and perhaps a > >> patent number? > >> > > You can buy used PSA (Pressure Swing Absorption) Medical Oxygen > > Concentrators > > for a song. The O2 is usually ~ 95% or better with about 6 liters per > > minute delivery. > > With an efficient compressor and valving system they draw about 450 watts. > > > > http://www.gas-plants.com/oxygen-generator.html > > > > "An Oxygen Generator Unit comprises of an air compressor which delivers > > air at moderate pressure. The air is free from oil and dust contamination > > and has low humidity. The temperature of the air is below 40° C. The > > oxygen generation process starts when the pressurized clean air enters one > > of the PSA columns. This column consists of a synthetic zeolite that acts > > as a molecular sieve. As a result of which the sieve separates the oxygen > > from the nitrogen." > > > > "The discharge oxygen pressure for the low pressure units is approximately > > 0.5 bar. If the system is required to drive ceramic oxygen diffusers, a > > delivery pressure of 3 bar is required." > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 05:28:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51CJe2h019777; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:19:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51CJWwi019609; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:19:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:19:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001a01c68575$981998c0$a9037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: O2 enrichment Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:19:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01C6854B.AE3506F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68608 X-Loop: vortex-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_0016_01C6854B.AE3506F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0017_01C6854B.AE3506F0" ------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C6854B.AE3506F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. >On the subject of O2 enrichment, has anyone ever analysed=20 the output of the Ranque-Hilsch Vortex tube to see if the=20 oxygen/nitrogen ratio is the same for the cold stream as=20 for the hot stream? Howdy Frank.. Excellent question. Good thought. We just happen to be playing with a = few "toys" and may be able to test for O2 using a simple dissolved = oxygen analyzer between the two tanks...hmmm. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C6854B.AE3506F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..
 
>On the subject of O2 enrichment, has anyone ever analysed =
the=20 output of the Ranque-Hilsch Vortex tube to see if the =
oxygen/nitrogen ratio=20 is the same for the cold stream as
for the hot stream?
 
 
Howdy Frank..
 
Excellent question. Good thought. We just happen to be playing with = a few=20 "toys" and may be able to test for O2 using a simple dissolved oxygen = analyzer=20 between the two tanks...hmmm.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0017_01C6854B.AE3506F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C6854B.AE3506F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001501c68575$96ef97b0$a9037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C6854B.AE3506F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 05:50:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51CnjaY008602; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:49:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51CngLH008563; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:49:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:49:42 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=N2YMnm14Bv9+QF15HM//x1u3OV3A7HAAYweUKvUn+eLmGk0VtKESqVdoVrZa5/LW; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006641124928152@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: PLEASE :: What is "NRG" AND: "cold Fusion" Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 06:49:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940db2b4ef0ea6712716aeafcc1a5850167350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.50 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68609 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 NRG is jargon for ENERGY, John. For electrolysis of water, you might start here: http://www.science-projects.com/Electrolysis/eLysis.htm#start Molar Solutions: http://www.coscosci.com/lab/test_solns.htm "The molecular weight of a sodium chloride molecule (NaCl) is 58.44, so one gram-molecular mass (=1 mole) is 58.44 g. We know this by looking at the periodic table. The atomic mass (or weight) of Na is 22.99, the atomic mass of Cl is 35.45, so 22.99 + 35.45 = 58.44. If you dissolve 58.44 g of NaCl in a final volume of 1 liter, you have made a 1M NaCl solution, a 1 molar solution." "To make molar NaCl solutions of other concentrations dilute the mass of salt to 1000ml of solution as follows: 0.1M NaCl solution requires 0.1 x 58.44 g of NaCl = 5.844g 0.5M NaCl solution " J.L Naudin's Cold Fusion Recipes: http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/logbook/advices.htm "For the Sodium Hydrogenocarbonate ( NaHCO3 ) ( Baking Soda ) : The weight of 1 Mole is 84 g. If you want to have a 0.2 molar solution ( 0.2 M ). For 0.2 Liter, you need to add : 0.2 * 84 * 0.2 = 3.4 g of NaHCO3." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
NRG is jargon for ENERGY, John.
 
For electrolysis of water, you might start here:
 
 
Molar Solutions:
 
"The molecular weight of a sodium chloride molecule (NaCl) is 58.44, so one gram-molecular mass (=1 mole) is 58.44 g. We know this by looking at the periodic table. The atomic mass (or weight) of Na is 22.99, the atomic mass of Cl is 35.45, so 22.99 + 35.45 = 58.44.

If you dissolve 58.44 g of NaCl in a final volume of 1 liter, you have made a 1M NaCl solution, a 1 molar solution."

"To make molar NaCl solutions of other concentrations dilute the mass of salt to 1000ml of solution as follows:

0.1M NaCl solution requires 0.1 x 58.44 g of NaCl = 5.844g

0.5M NaCl solution "

J.L Naudin's Cold Fusion Recipes:

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/logbook/advices.htm

"For the Sodium Hydrogenocarbonate ( NaHCO3 ) ( Baking Soda ) :
The weight of 1 Mole is 84 g. If you want to have a 0.2 molar solution ( 0.2 M ).
For 0.2 Liter, you need to add : 0.2 * 84 * 0.2 = 3.4 g of NaHCO3."

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 06:15:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51DEpJ1024779; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 06:14:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51DElaV024716; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 06:14:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 06:14:47 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=r5nXIzmMKI8YB6Y8uhiBep5yXH61EGwsymq0l6OfCqmgFZ7KBa00LGKqJaUEJIo9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006641131427679@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Abnormal Excess Heat or Abnormal Scientists? Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:14:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d7ba85f3b6be0a178d520c4723ca07f7350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.50 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68610 X-Loop: vortex-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 Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on metal surfaces I vote for the latter. http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf THE INTERACI’ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/ppclkrs/index.htm "2) Here is our protocol, more or less. a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and 91 C. b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions: aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes. bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)" "Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on metal surfaces
I vote for the latter. 
 
 
THE INTERACI’ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS
 
 
 
 

"2) Here is our protocol, more or less.

  • a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and 91 C.
  • b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions:
    • aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes.
    • bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes
    • cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min
    • dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min
    • ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min
    • ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)"
"Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81"
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 07:36:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51EZqHf019812; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:35:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51EZoCF019792; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:35:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:35:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060601103324.03d92a80@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 10:35:42 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret In-Reply-To: References: <1533008.1149128874358.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68611 X-Loop: vortex-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: >I suspect that would be enough to power a few L.E.D s. I do not see how this would be any different from powering a Seebeck calorimeter, which is essentially a collection of thermoelectric devices that capture as much heat as possible from the sample. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 07:53:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Er1W7031124; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:53:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51EqwSl031099; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:52:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 07:52:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: Cold fusion advocates should put up or shut up Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 11:03:16 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-Rcpt-To: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68612 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: Walter writes: >I don't propose turning science over to magicians, much less priests. Yet that is where we are at now. There is only one science that I know of. It is learning through experience and mistake. There is no other. When I wrote earlier of doing the Ohsawa carbon arc experiment, I did not say what results I got. I could, but what would be the point? _You_ must do the experiment. It is relatively easy, and perhaps there are still people here able to help. You seem to have been smart enough to pick up on the fact that electron spins can act collectively in some forms of carbon; there should be ample discussion of this issue in the archives. It is in my opinion an important issue. If you don't do the experiment, then you are left to believe the results of another. That person could be lying, they could be foolish and not understand what they are doing, they could be careless. The key word is belief. When you lack direct experience in something, and you have an opinion on the subject, then that is a belief. The Amazin' K. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 08:34:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51FLJtM017999; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 08:21:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51FLGtG017959; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 08:21:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 08:21:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002d01c6858e$ff814530$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <1533008.1149128874358.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <7.0.1.0.2.20060601103324.03d92a80@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 11:20:50 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68613 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Jed Rothwell" Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret > Harry Veeder wrote: > >>I suspect that would be enough to power a few L.E.D s. > > I do not see how this would be any different from powering a Seebeck > calorimeter, which is essentially a collection of thermoelectric devices > that capture as much heat as possible from the sample. > > - Jed ----------------------------------- It's obviously different in terms of stagecraft. However, LED's require several volts to light, even though they are the most efficient light source known. Converting heat to electricity via the thermoelectric effect is a very inefficient process unless you are using PowerChips, which are new and iffy. What Harry is not considering is that the volrage across a thermoelectric junction is small, so many junctions would be needed in series. Furthermore, the LED's will respond to the total heat released in the cell, not the "excess heat" which is critical. As Jed points out, the Seeback calorimeter is a precision quantitative device, and the LED's are not. So, the LEDs would prove nothing to a knowledgeable observer. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 09:34:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51GXvSV008538; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:33:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51GXuZN008511; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:33:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:33:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003501c68599$24b3ee20$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-22006641131427679@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Abnormal Excess Heat or Abnormal Scientists? Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:33:40 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68615 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: Speaking of both... ... in the early days of CF, Keith Johnson at MIT proposed a number of different chemical process (at least 3) involving either nickel or palladium and an "active lattice" rather than real fusion, to account for the excess heat being seen (seen everywhere but at his alma mater, is the "official" story). A few of these hypotheses, later partly abandoned, could also be termed as beta-aether effects, which correspond to an internal phase-change of the lattice at Casimir dimensions. But can that hypothesis be bootstrapped into ultra-efficient electrolysis? After all - it is a surface effect. BTW these effects were at first thought to be conservative - one way changes. Johnson also proposed an ultra-efficient electrolysis cell. Mark Goldes sent me a clipping from MIT "Tech Update" Dec. 1994 which mentions this electrolysis cell, but apparently it went no further in development, as little more turns up on google. Apparently that cell was expected to produce OU heat (or why bother?). I doubt if it was even built beyond a crude cell, but was it a missed opportunity? Interestingly the cathode produced mostly H2 but the anode was a "common manifold" for what he thought was H2 and O2 but probably was HO-OH, or a mix of all or the above and more, and apparently that anode gas was little different from Brown's gas, except for the emphasis on nickel being active. Few other details like the voltage, were given in the abstract. At that time Johnson believed that the excess energy released from P&F cells was caused by the internal cyclic gamma-phase change of atomic deuterium to dideuterium, and/or variations of the Jahn-Teller effect. The heat produced is "latent" in that it is produced by repeated formation of the "interstitial sublattice" of the D-D bonds between the tetrahedral interstices in gamma-Pd-D. Horace Heffner has a similar but better thought-out hypothesis - the AEH. Horace is apparently on vo-sabbatical but if he is reading any of these posts, maybe he will comment on the implementation of AEH techniques for common manifold electrolysis. According to Johnson, as atomic deuterium diffuses into Pd and dideuterium diffuses out causing 9.4 eV per Pd atom of "excess heat." However, this effect is a one-time thing unless ZPE/Casimir serves reverse the phase change - effectively providing "infinite energy". It should be noted that the 9.4 eV photon in the EUV spectrum will itself split water, so that could be "part of the package" towards ultra-efficient electrolysis, with or without real fusion or hydrinos - and all three may be involved somehow. At any rate - this all goes to show how ultra-efficient electrolysis and LENR have been interconnected - joined at the hip really, for over a decade and it is really too bad that funding was never there to really go further into looking at using a modified nickel-CF-light water cell to produce "common manifold gas" and port that directly to power an ICE... ... or is that what the so-called Joe-Cell has "backed into" serendipitously? BTW ... "directly" being a key concept in the overall system ("common manifold gas" being ported **directly** to power an ICE) because "recombination" not to mention "explosion" in the common manifold is big potential problem, and we are likely dealing with effective lifetimes of around 50 milliseconds. Also [flash!] this thought just occurred for an improvement to the Joe/Johnson cell ... which would be the "porous nickel" cathode of Randy Mills... you remember, the cool experiment where he produces hydrinos which are ported directly from a hollow porous nickel cathode - to a mass spec... which BTW is about the most convincing experiment Mills ever pulled off. Why did he stop there? ... or better yet, why doesn't some enterprising young experimenter "start" there (after all this is "commencment" week in a few places? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 09:40:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Ge42s013673; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:40:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51GUMGw005848; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:30:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 09:30:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060601122229.03d92a80@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 12:30:01 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret In-Reply-To: <002d01c6858e$ff814530$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> References: <1533008.1149128874358.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <7.0.1.0.2.20060601103324.03d92a80@mindspring.com> <002d01c6858e$ff814530$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68614 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: >Furthermore, the LED's will respond to the total heat released in >the cell, not the "excess heat" which is critical. Yup. That was my point. >As Jed points out, the Seeback calorimeter is a precision >quantitative device, and the LED's are not. So, the LEDs would prove >nothing to a knowledgeable observer. As long as we are confined to dealing with ~1 watt devices, it will take a knowledgeable observer to appreciate what is going on. Dr. K. Observer will be impressed by a Seebeck, and put off by the LED gadget. He would probably consider it an unprofessional stunt. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 10:14:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51H6qNu001864; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:06:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51H6nNq001833; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:06:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:06:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 13:05:57 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret In-reply-to: <002d01c6858e$ff814530$640fa8c0@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: <0l8HJB.A.kc.n6xfEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68616 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jed Rothwell" > Subject: Re: Hot fusion little-known secret > > >> Harry Veeder wrote: >> >>> I suspect that would be enough to power a few L.E.D s. >> >> I do not see how this would be any different from powering a Seebeck >> calorimeter, which is essentially a collection of thermoelectric devices >> that capture as much heat as possible from the sample. >> >> - Jed > ----------------------------------- > It's obviously different in terms of stagecraft. > > However, LED's require several volts to light, even though they are the most > efficient light source known. Converting heat to electricity via the > thermoelectric effect is a very inefficient process unless you are using > PowerChips, which are new and iffy. What Harry is not considering is that > the volrage across a thermoelectric junction is small, so many junctions > would be needed in series. Furthermore, the LED's will respond to the total > heat released in the cell, not the "excess heat" which is critical. As Jed > points out, the Seeback calorimeter is a precision quantitative device, and > the LED's are not. So, the LEDs would prove nothing to a knowledgeable > observer. > > Mike Carrell > > The point is not to accurately measure excess heat or output power. The point is to provide a visceral demonstration that output power exceeds input power. For such a demonstration you would use _all_ the heat. At first you would run the input power directly into a bank of LED's and see how many are producing light. Next you would disconnect the input power from the panel and reconnect the input power to the Cold Fusion Device and then connect the panel to the CFD's out power. Then you would see how many more are producing light. Instead of the LED's you could use a small motor to turn a small propeller or disc and see the speed difference. No doubt there are other possibilities. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 10:38:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Hbebt026417; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:37:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51Hbb9a026362; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:37:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:37:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060601103314.02e94860@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 10:33:20 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: National Energy Symposium, Los Angeles, Ca, June 15, 2006 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="=====================_247168156==.REL" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68617 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: --=====================_247168156==.REL Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_247168156==.ALT" --=====================_247168156==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Emacs! June 1, 2006 Dear Readers, We wish to bring to your attention the National Energy Symposium, the first in a series of six such events that will be featured throughout the U.S. and sponsored by leading academic institutions such as Caltech and University of Southern California with the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. The Symposiums are also cosponsored by Congressional Quarterly and The Communications Institute, the project coordinator. The first one-day event, on June 15, 2006, will take place on the campus of the University of Southern California, in Los Angeles. Tentative dates for other locations are mid-October for New York and early December for Washington, D.C. Events in other cities will be announced as they are known. The issues that will be discussed comprise perhaps the most crucial problems facing humankind. We can no longer hope and wish that global warming is just a speculative theory. It is now quite clear that many of the current world conflicts, and perhaps impending conflicts, have their roots in energy and its availability. New Energy Times spoke with John E. Cox, Jr., President of The Communications Institute in Pasadena, Calif. New Energy Times: What inspired you to develop this program? John Cox: I was the chief of staff to a United States Congressman in the mid 1970s during the energy crisis. Policymakers and media simply didn't understand the crisis then and responded in totally inappropriate ways like trying to ration gasoline based on the distance of gas stations from center cities to blaming the shortage on an oil industry conspiracy. The challenges today are even more complex and cry for greater knowledge in economics and engineering to approach these issues rationally, intelligently. What we don't need is more partisanship! What we need is statesmanship and the unvarnished facts that can direct public and private decision-making, and that is what this program will provide. New Energy Times: What are you hoping it will achieve? John Cox: We want to provide, particularly to policymakers, media and private/public sector leaders, a better understanding of how our nation can best tackle the energy challenges we have now and in the future. This requires, in part, an understanding of the viability of the sources we now have and those that may be on the horizon for the future. What technologies offer the best possibility to improve the environment and are technologically and economically viable right now? Program Flyer Press Release Registration Steven B. Krivit Editor, New Energy Times Executive Director, New Energy Institute Inc. 11664 National Blvd. Suite 142 Los Angeles, California, USA 90064 www.newenergytimes.com (310) 470-8189 New Energy Times (tm) is a project of New Energy Institute, an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which provides information and educational services to help bring about the clean-energy revolution. The New Energy Times (tm) newsletter, Web site, and documentary projects are made possible by the generous contributions of our sponsors and supporters. If you have received this announcement from a colleague and you wish to be added to the New Energy Times (tm) mailing list, or if you would like to unsubscribe, click here http://newenergytimes.com/news/news.htm. --=====================_247168156==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Emacs!


June 1, 2006

Dear Readers,
 
We wish to bring to your attention the National Energy Symposium, the first in a series of six such events that will be featured throughout the U.S. and sponsored by leading academic institutions such as Caltech and University of Southern California with the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. The Symposiums are also cosponsored by Congressional Quarterly and The Communications Institute, the project coordinator.
 
The first one-day event, on June 15, 2006, will take place on the campus of the University of Southern California, in Los Angeles. Tentative dates for other locations are mid-October for New York and early December for Washington, D.C. Events in other cities will be announced as they are known.
 
The issues that will be discussed comprise perhaps the most crucial problems facing humankind. We can no longer hope and wish that global warming is just a speculative theory.
 
It is now quite clear that many of the current world conflicts, and perhaps impending conflicts, have their roots in energy and its availability.

New Energy Times spoke with John E. Cox, Jr., President of The Communications Institute in Pasadena, Calif.

New Energy Times: What inspired you to develop this program?

John Cox: I was the chief of staff to a United States Congressman in the mid 1970s during the energy crisis. Policymakers and media simply didn’t understand the crisis then and responded in totally inappropriate ways like trying to ration gasoline based on the distance of gas stations from center cities to blaming the shortage on an oil industry conspiracy. The challenges today are even more complex and cry for greater knowledge in economics and engineering to approach these issues rationally, intelligently. What we don’t need is more partisanship! What we need is statesmanship and the unvarnished facts that can direct public and private decision-making, and that is what this program will provide.

New Energy Times: What are you hoping it will achieve? 

John Cox: We want to provide, particularly to policymakers, media and private/public sector leaders, a better understanding of how our nation can best tackle the energy challenges we have now and in the future. This requires, in part, an understanding of the viability of the sources we now have and those that may be on the horizon for the future. What technologies offer the best possibility to improve the environment and are technologically and economically viable right now? 


Program Flyer             Press Release             Registration

 
Steven B. Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
Executive Director, New Energy Institute Inc.
11664 National Blvd. Suite 142
Los Angeles, California, USA 90064
www.newenergytimes.com
(310) 470-8189


New Energy Times (tm) is a project of New Energy Institute, an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which provides information and educational services to help bring about the clean-energy revolution.
 
The New Energy Times (tm) newsletter, Web site, and documentary projects are made possible by the generous contributions of our sponsors and supporters.

If you have received this announcement from a colleague and you wish to be added to the New Energy Times (tm) mailing list, or if you would like to unsubscribe, click here http://newenergytimes.com/news/news.htm.

--=====================_247168156==.ALT-- --=====================_247168156==.REL Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="ebb7be0.jpg"; x-mac-type="4A504547"; x-mac-creator="4A565752" Content-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20060601103314.02e94860@mail.newenergytimes.com.1> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ebb7be0.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQAAAQABAAD/2wBDAAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEB AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQH/2wBDAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEB AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQH/wAARCABCAJsDASIA AhEBAxEB/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQA AAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1FhByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkKFhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3 ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZWmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWm p6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXGx8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/8QAHwEA AwEBAQEBAQEBAQAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtREAAgECBAQDBAcFBAQAAQJ3AAECAxEEBSEx BhJBUQdhcRMiMoEIFEKRobHBCSMzUvAVYnLRChYkNOEl8RcYGRomJygpKjU2Nzg5OkNERUZHSElK U1RVVldYWVpjZGVmZ2hpanN0dXZ3eHl6goOEhYaHiImKkpOUlZaXmJmaoqOkpaanqKmqsrO0tba3 uLm6wsPExcbHyMnK0tPU1dbX2Nna4uPk5ebn6Onq8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwD+/iii igAooooAKKK/Pv8A4Ka/8FDPhh/wTH/ZJ8c/tRfFDRb7xfNplxp/hD4Z/DXRtX03Rtc+KvxZ8Rx3 snhrwJpmp6qksemWn2HTNb8XeLNfg0vXrvwz8PPCfjPxVa+GvEV3odt4f1fWhRq4mtSw9CDqVq9S FKlBbzqVJKMIq/WUmkvNg2km5NKK1bfRLVu29ktXY6P9un/goX+yv/wTk+EGofGT9qL4k2fhLTJb XWT4E8CaXHFqnxS+LfiLRreOR/Bvww8FCe2u/EusXN1e6VYyalcS6T4V8Of2tp+q+NPE3hzw6Ztc g/hp/bK/4O7f22PjXrXinwf+wV8FPCn7Nvw9to9Uay+IXjPTtN+Mnx+l0jQNf1PUk8aPpurxy/Bj 4djWPB40mPxD4H1nwH8X4vD+tNrENn8TNbRbR4fxH8Wa/wDtmf8ABan9te/+J3xc8XjxN8XPHFtN fWem2ugeILnwH8KPgz4Y1DWDp/hz4T+Fiuu6To3w28FahqepaB4e0mXxAJvE3xC1V7nxN4m8T/E7 x34i8d69tTf8E2/23fC3iDwX8Bfh0njDUdX+Ptz4tsNE8C2ukeO/BOh+N4vAuhar4q0261G98TaR oPg3WI9a8OWd9rvh+STWptD8PR3MWu+JNe8NRmbV4/728PPoycM5HlEM+8V8TVo432EMV/YscTQp yp05NOlOeHlOMnScdalSr7is5QcYqy/KuIPE/hzL87w3DDznLcLnGOw8qmCy/ENxq4uhFOEqqumv ZpRknJOPvaayab3rz/gpV/wVe/aK+Kc2t/GD/go1+1X8PUk0nQ9e1c+BPi1rnwQ8LHR9S1DT49Of wx8LvhPrPwp8GS6tLpuqR62dL0XQYtcufD+n6z4k/epozqnrvwM/4KQ/8Fc/hR8d/GHhb4bf8FG/ 2izBo8nifSpPEH7QPjS++Nvh2a38PamLKWPTPBX7SafEHSNM1o77CM6ZoGgr4kUSvF5bqrIv1Hff 8ETfiH8IP2Z/CXir4jeFvCvhj42WD6P8RfFnxb+IHxO8d+FdP8PR3Eupw+CPA3gmPwrPqWnw6Nom j6J4fk8THxh4C0bx7ofijUtURPHeheFtHSS3/Jb4taT8a/Det2nwRs/DfxK1X4jNq9u6RadpXjqT xjr/AIgWSM3pHhuPVtc07VNT+3eHbIpq2ixaodbOlxzvrUjKiQ/1n4b8AfR2znJ8VhcVw1kLp4Sa jD6z/Z+MjiY1UqcrYyompxcYzVRRnNOOt5Q5VL8kh4uriXiLH5RwtxLGtXwPNl1XBUp0qWEwlaao yqZrhYKrKeIwyhVpw/exoKtec6Ual1Nf1R/s2/8AB2N8YPgr4t074U/8FDvgRo3xP0S2OnWmofHH 9nyyuvBPjbS7ZdAvSuo+IfhN48mj8GeP9U1vXIrYa7qnhLxx8J/D+g6PJq9x4b8M+Iv7Khtr3+zb 9mr9qb4AftgfCbQvjb+zf8VPCHxh+GuuiOO21/wfftcfYNUfTdM1eTw74m0m+jsde8HeMNMsNY02 TXvBfjDSdB8WeH5NQtofEGiaVMxiH+Ub8Hv+CVvx4+Ingn4gfEr9pZPFX7Jfg/wtb+HYdB8VftF+ EtU+G2k+JdTv7uxglsNK1P4hf8IUNV1BtI+3y6Lo2hvdtK2myf29JarpuiR67F+wN+3X+0r/AMEh f2hbb9oH4CapB8Sfg14u1ceDviz4AkutS0j4WftCeCvDOo6k93pksradLqXgX4g6Asuq6v8ADPxq 2gHxD8P9X1HUmuvDniL4ceKPFPhLx1/PXjJ9GTw54mjnWZeDtbA5RxDlftK0uHsLnOFx+UZxCCjK rDLatSrJZdj7SgoYVSjh3USg6NOTlVj+rcJeIWFeK/1dzPMo5jmOBpUXmGPhh61OEKs4rltiVTWE qN+9zYaE5YunGPNJWS5/9f6ivnz9lf8AaQ+E/wC15+z/APCv9pL4IeILTxJ8Mvi14TsvFHh29tpr CW5tWkaTT9V8O6/DYSXEGmeLvButafqXhHxfoQuHm8PeKNF1nQbv/StMkCfQdf5u4nDV8HiK+ExV KdDE4arUoV6NSLjUpVqU3CpTnF2cZQnFxknqmj9bdtLNSTSlGSd4yjJKUZRfWMk00+qaegUUUVgI KKKKACiiigAor8Abz/gvT8MfC/8AwWs8Uf8ABHr4n/Bx/h95D+CvDnw8/aauvjD4dXw74t+Jvjz4 KeBPjb4W8BeJPh14o8J+EV8Jp4tj8S6h8NPCGo6J4++IGv8Ain4lP4I8NaL4VWTx8brwx4R4o/4O N38NfDv/AILQ+PD+xuLg/wDBIb4+fCb4GLpbftBiEftBn4oftS+Pf2aD4rF7J8EgnwrTQz4I/wCE 2j0RofiIusJqa+HX1zSPsp1+fpjg8VKHtVRn7L2cavO7K9OVeOGjNJ6uMq0lTTV9Wna12p5or7S0 bXXdLmaemml3ro0nZs/p1or+cbwR/wAFi/8AgpB4g/Y++KX7b/in/gi63gr4D+Ev2StM/a++GfiU f8FGvgR4oHxc8EX+qfDXxPf2J0nTfhgnjDwCulfs6+K/iL8fGm1/wrNrU3/Cqh8LY/DEXjHxv4eh Tz34hf8ABzf+zr4Q0L/gkh4r0bwJ8Ptd0L/gpMLWb4xX3iP9omy+HD/sOaFY/FHwD8HfH3i/x5Y+ KfhOmp+NPAvg74iX3xs8PQePtdt/g/4F8cD9nPxrr3hXxDceGZrjWtEawOLlGUo0JzjCtHDycEpq NacZTjTbi2uZxhOSXVQna/LKxzx0vJK6T100clG+utrtJ9r3eh/T3X+XD/wdWft53/7Sv/BR0/Bv wdr8B+GP7CtpffCvwrNo+o2Ez3Hx31dfDfir43eOLDUtP0jQvEum6poWsp4I+Dl1oOsa74g0fw/4 g+DWt+IfDa21x4m8QRj+6L9m7/gqoP2lv+Cp/wC2X/wTq8CfAv8Atf4bfsa+AdF1jxf+2D4U+Jn/ AAmvgbUfitqcfwyhuvgbrvhfR/h/HoXgHx1put+J/ix4ek0jVvitq3iOXWfgL8R7P/hF4rjQvEsH hb+OD/gsB/wR9/4JxfBH9u742eMP2xP+Czy/s1fEb9qTx18U/wBrvQvhRD/wTo+OHxcPh3wV8cvj H8TtS0i3fxz8KviPrGhaqui63pfiTw+0uoWvh/XNcn8NXGvTaHosWuW+fq+B8dhMlzxY3McDLGYi jl9bEYDBxpVcS/rFSEVTxLhh02nhKc5YyMpuMISpJz1XKc+MpyrUHGnNWclzO8YppX91uT5WpSsr a3Tuul/i/wD4I8/tW/s3/wDBP3XP2gvjz+0l4p8Z+K9e8YeB/Bngv4OWHhiybXNd8ReFtS8SeKPE nxLt7CTUdXHhOBoPFOneBtYL6r4mQK6a2Lf+3bmSdn/RXx5/wdU+L9LuPEfiT9nv9nrwRo3w50if wt4KluPHfxD063+Osk/jjw5r2pt4k8F+HjYa1pDaLoWo+GtUSfWZfAfxC8L+HLq++Hv/AAl0Ql8e aJ4bk/Mr9q3/AIN6v2mPgz/wTA/Zy/4KT/B34hf8NM/Dnx98Afh1+0T8dvhloHw0m8F+Ov2dfAfx b+GHgr4lzeIrEDxd45l+Mfw68Dvq2oQ/EjxHpUPgaX4fW1jB8Sh8Pm8Fz/EfxB8Nvqg/8GsTp/wV L/4dpJ+3ZvY/sAxftzH40N+zDwQv7RI+ALfDD/hXK/tCgkZ/4q0eNB49Rgg/4R8+FwQNdX9nxXin kWar2/EGLnnlWbxDlHMXmUq1TCwt7DCVuS9P22ipQc701SjGLcqd7fi2N8EuHs74shxnntKrmGfY XC08ty2vTqfUY4HAUsVXxFCMFhZQdSaeJnOdXnvOSXNG6sfCerf8F6f2rPDn7VviT9ofSPEWg/tC W32fxFZeAtF/aC+HVjoNp4Ws/FNxo+ozW0fhz4W+NdB1KGLRJdJfRPD1o3j3W/DkGg6trOvQ+HdH 8S+ILg23K/Ez/g4q/wCCqXjqHWbLSPjpp/wm0HXrS0tJ9B+F/wAOvhr4eXT12QG6k0nxNf8AhTV/ iNpbakbcTTFPHBYlvkk8gRxri+Jv+Cf/APwTa8YfFH9kz4J/scf8Fcrf9q34j/tK/tb/AAI/Zs1z w6/7Avxy+A4+F/gX4w+JZvDOpfGt9c+JvjDTdC8ct4J1m88O6V/wre31zRdf8TDxIk8HiHS7fQrm ZP0sf/g2+/YVk/bpH/BND/h9cU/ba4U/BRf+Cb/xhJCn4Q/8NAYHxIPx0HwjH/FpwPGBK+OwQFOg KP8AhJcaLXLmXiXlGJw9KtUq0I8+EjQweVxy/EvB4ClTm5Rhh5V8LOXKnKbjXvz8zjZQhZx93B+E vAuCxmHx1LhDI55jSoQpyzNZfhI4yokopvEYiMU8TUSUferJ1JWndte8/wCan4wftQ/tIftEXlvr Pxv+N/xN+LF/YebDpt58R/G/iXxmdHs5Ha8vLHSpvEmq6s2l6e0lzvbStM8uFjjbFuAWbMvPjl4n 1D4W+G/g9bTWtj4P8K6xqfiWLTbb7XCuq+K9akZNU8Y6kC7rNrDaLD4e8Peaqs0Ph/wnpKIqytrV xrf74/Cv/ggF8Cbv4D/8FCf2k/2k/wDgpGv7NXwU/wCCff7fHxo/Ya8beOV/Y+8X/GD/AISNvhh4 w+GXgTw58UG8OfD/AOMA8VaM/jvxh8VvD+lL4K0rRfGx8Nxjz73xZcW32i70bhde/wCCTn/BK230 n9lbxl4G/wCC/P7PvjHwD+0d8fB8EPEer6l+zgvgHx18BtDvPA/xm1HT/ij8U/gn4v8A2ioPjB4S 8B6p8W/hz4K+F134w+J3hv4c+BPDHh/4qaJ8UfEnjlfhxBDca96WXeMWAyadD6hmMqVd4NUcRUdL H4imo6SX1LmhT+rV25XcoxlByTiu59fT4dwqpqhDA4OnR51VhGEaNC06FlCbUXrLniuWXxbWaV0/ 2Z/4M2P25PEdt41+O/8AwT/8Za2brwrrnh/UP2jPg7Z39/psCeG/EWi3/hfwv8VfDGnx38o13Uj4 30/X/CvjbQ9C0lG0XRV8EfErxGsSXGu61cv/AKAH+fz61/ncf8Esv+CCH7X37Ef/AAVy8d+PvHv7 R+kfs/8AwU/YU+MXwItfAn7RXiX4QeIbPwH+3Ha/tM39n4H8NfBv4VH4ox6H8N7fXfHfgDxt4h+B vxN1LQPHXxG8UfBb9oD4heDPh18L7f4g+JtY0Xx5Yf0If8FcP+C2/wC1f/wSh8Saz4p8Wf8ABMGL 4n/slXXj/wAE/DH4X/tSf8NpeAPBf/CyfG/in4X3HxK1Tw+3wR0z4SfEP4k+DX0CXw18RfDn9r64 r6Jqo8EPrkF3H/b+iaJcfivHOZZbxLxRVzDJVTSzCnTdWMlLCqti6MFGviEsVKLTrpRqTvJt1XK9 5y19/CxqUsNCNZW9neKekrU1yqK93VqL5opvSySTtE/o3or+cX4l/wDBbn9rD9m/4nf8E7fgz+2B /wAEvR+zn8Tf+Cgn7Xmvfs36F4ab9tb4a/Fs/D/wJpWv/steGNN+Nf8Aa3wv+FHiDQPFz6xrv7Qn ijS1+GVzrHgnXbf/AIVX551wxePdKfQ9/wD4I9f8HCnwJ/4Km+FP2lLvx74E8O/sd+NP2ZvD0PxO 8Y+HfG3x18IeLPDOpfAV9PupPEHxesPGWs6L8J9X03QvhVq2lX2lfGjU9V8D2vgf4e2niP4Y63c/ EK7bx0+j+HvjVha8o1pwgqkMO0qsqc4VIx5pQhF80JSTi51IRUk2rzj0aZtzxbUeazd0k0020lJq z10Tvtsn1TR/Q3RX8lXwo/4OnPC3xo/ZD/4KZ/tg+B/2Jddg8Ef8E/tf/Zet/CHhTxV8e9P0nxH8 bfCn7Tfxy8S/CTw5rviZtI+EfiTSvgxrvhTRtBsPF2u+FdGn+MtodV1G48J23ijbph8S3f258A/+ Csv7dfxD/Ze+NH7Z/wAbf+CT/wDwz5+zX4M/YJ+If7cHwd+JB/bs+EPxcb44P4b+H+ifFH4d/C6P wZ4Q+HVp45+HTfFD4e32reIk8aeIfDlynhCTRxomueFpdc1O3tVl0KqveLjaShaVovmag+XlbUtp p7arVdbHPHv57O1k2m72sldPVtLTfVX/AH5or+Y39l//AILUf8FW/wBsn4J+CP2jv2b/APgg2vxN +CPxGPiVvB3jq3/4Kkfs3eFTrS+E/GGv+BfEKx+GviB8KfB3ivT20zxT4Z1zS/L1vRdKkm/s8zxe bFLC839Fvwp8TeNPFPwt+Gvij4m/Dy4+EnxI8SeAPBuv/ED4UnxRp/xEPwy8baz4c03UvFXw+b4g eHbdPD/jhvBmu3N/4cbxfoiR6T4kbTTrGnRx2l5EiqdGpTk4SiuaLalGMozaa3UlFtx+aQ001fXW zTaaVntq0t9LLr8j+O/9rr/g3n+KP/BRb/gst/wUo+LX7RXgPXvht+yp8bv2Z/h/D+yp+1P4X8c/ DnV9W8I/tMeCPhj+yR4K0rUb74O6f8Q4PGvibQYYPBnxh8J+KPDnjzw/oPh7xB4YTX/+EX8UeDPF 2s/D74iaL8VfBH/ghh/wVx8Df8E9P+C8PwE+MPwqT4q/tFfth+Pf2INS+D3jKP48/CzxMf2nNb+D f7WPjf4mfGr4nt448efEHQtc0lda0jWE8c/2v8c0+H3j/wARrq5Z/Dp8WfaNBi/0KqK6f7RxX1Z4 RzvQdGnQUHd8tOnXjiEottuPNVhGUkrJtJ25rtrkjdO1mm3dO17q332uk+ztsrH8hn/BF7/glA/w mHj34U/tR/8ABFE/sl/8LQ/YE8Vfsv8A7Qv7V0n/AAUf/wCF8v8AtNDxy3wu8N/F7wP/AMKN+Hfx I1g/BY/Gv+zfEXxL/wCEj8D61Avw7bw2PCvhjX9IfX7d5vgn/gm3/wAGsHxU8Nfs6/8ABUHwP+3l 8GPgLrPxz+I/gLUvgh+wV461T4n+IfEWh+EfGfhuz8Va/ZftFadL8PoLifwL8O/G3xHsvgjceHdY 1rw/b/H2P4feCviV8PvGPwz8LeDvH2v+BviP/fTRVVMzxdWpOpKpJSqeycv3lad5UbcjbqVJydrP 3XLkSk4qKjZJqMbJcqsr2slHR7q0Ul5rS99W23K/803/AAbL/wDBKj4v/wDBM39lH4u3v7U3w70D 4cftQ/tD/FuPXfEGhaJ8RIvHepaJ8Gfhvog8OfCnwh4pbwrrmufDO01rTvFfiX4veN45PAuq+JVu PDXxH8KxeLfEz+IdIHhTwP8AOX/BSb/gr18GZv2ovFngH4Ef8HBsv/BPxvgzDrnwV+LXwET/AIJO +Lv2sWi+Nvwx+IPj3R/iH4qj+KHi/wCHUMZWT/iUeDW0bw5PrXhdW8C/8JF4f1u6XxJdSN/XNX+a D/wcFfsOeJf2Wv8Agq/4q+Mfw90jwfpPw9/bX0j/AIW7o0ninQvD8nw9t/GltJ4c0r446fqSeLJN eGseKJfiIml/FPxG2m6F/ZMcfxW0KORRNHOifpvhNkGS+IfiJgsk4ozHE5ZSzlzhTxGBhgFyVI8l 6cYZjhcZh1FYeM40FyKcaipuE7qz8fPMe8nyjE46nGM/qsVJwqSlFON7Xc4yhZ83Ldu6d9UlqvVv ib/wcaab+yf8F/8AghPF+wf8V3+NOofsw/sfW3wS/wCChv7LeseHvij4H8DeKmj+EH7JXhvT/CV/ r/i3wVpWgSePvDfiXwH8Tv8AhWHxl+GJ8cP8P9ZtNTW7TxP8NfHXinwF8Rfv/wD4fof8Etv+H+Z/ bSP7TU4/ZqH/AASF/wCGXR8Rv+FI/tFc/HL/AIbQHxSPg4eDz8Ix468r/hBANYbxb/wjQ8Fh1Oi/ 8JGddA0uv5YPhtq+jfsQftY33iz9pj4VeKvGOipo1rqnw5+HWj/tC+LfhVe2ul674s0fW/D1+vxH +E/w+UXn9haZ4cvNKj0dG+EuhaF47fStdfRNBk8FzeGR9dfFP/goN/wS0+GHxU1PWv2Ef2DvG/ib X/FXh/xN4c1HUv2jPEHwv+I/g6x8c3+mappOk/E3wzonxc+Hf7Q/jDUzo2p6mdfc6p8W/APh7xIi BfiF8OZPK0iTQf3Hir6NGR8O43BYSGaZ/mDzCeMVGrBcPKPtaThyUKvs8yq4ui3zpLESy+84KpOl hZ8srfBS8RMwqYeGKyrI6Wb4evgvb0J4XHxpQdalpKhKpWUKUYtRv7VycL80ZOKhzT+pf2ov+ClP hnxV8Uv+CcXi74tf8F9Zv+CjXw0+BH/BTz9kT4//ABD+E5/4JV6j+yJF8LvBHwv8S+Ib/wAWfHof EHwn4EXWfHX/AAhuiS6l4XHwu0CLWtZ8Rp42bXtG0PVbjw5bA/pV4i/4OWf2W/jt+2D+3D+x78Yv jn8aNB/4JzfGTw14P1L9lL9uv9lvT/jn8Dfj/wDs6eIPDvwH+Gmr/EDTWtfBPhPQfjtqHho/Grw7 4313wz4kk8BeI9V0fxM+q+Efid4X+Kv7L/j2VPhNyDfs5f8ABNs/Gb9nD4o/Hb9m/WvBfj83PhX4 PaH4a+H3h/4HeAPA2t3viLxBqem+IPi78d/CHwI1PQf7STwhYeJr/WG8ZJ4C+Era3ovh5k1zwu/h vRdDt9D8e/aw+In/AAQi+Gmr/DvxJ8R/2L/jLrHwo8XeDr3SfCXiv4W+DI/hb8OPip4H0u91TUtN 1jW7bw98VPhT8T9U+JLGWO3g13xn4S0jxPPoviPTR8Stat/s9rpGhfK1/BLI8LmFLLcZ/rjKrCvi aDjgctwuKpO85/V6WHx3JQw+KxUqvJSl9YhhKUXOSc5RhG/5nl/0mMszmrTwuU8P1sVjlnOLyLEY N5hgIV45jglWqYmjgqTxcpZgqdDD4isvqrlOapqPJCcm4/I/7KP7VX/BNnxD/wAEm/8Agpv/AME0 v2p/+Cn3iTwj41/ab/4KLeMvi34T/as8UfstftP/ABk8WfGT4feHfGP7L3jXQ/2gPEfg3SdJv9Ys fE/xw1T4Ja9NrnhLx38UV+IPh3Wtfu9b8QtrMqxHXd7/AILuf8FSf2Vv2t/+CSX7OX7K/hP/AIKF yf8ABQr9rj4c/te6P8U/ib8WT+yP8R/2TB4s8CReC/2m9O0zX38Cat8OPDvw20P/AIQ7TviN8Pfh t/ZXh3xHc614hfT/APhLp7R3uNd+zZ3xi/4N8vgz8UfgB8Qf2sv2AvilB8f/AIbeNtR+I/i/4aeH fDTXmj6T8FPAPh9n8UeHfCHjG/8AiF4gbxl4u8W6t4RluNI1vVdX0bw5P4Y8R6bpVtdeHJLfxIvi Dw7/AD3/ABw/Yf1P4GfA74P/ABp1z4pfDzVJ/i5BPqEfwv07ULF/iN4Ts08Q+N9Mg1XxB4caVdVX R9Z0vwhY6/omtnSDo0ukeJ9LTzWYRtPlg/BbLeIK1uHMfiK7oYiFHH5diPqmX5rl+ZQoVZUqE6eM weCmoRjTqPEU6VeVCrVi3GvVl7Bv9bw3iPw/Vq4TAVMXCnmGPaeEw8/aupiI+0qRnS9nF1Gq1B0p c0N6aT51qk/6dv2Xf+Cinw5/bP8A2HP+DdH9hnTPiVrfxg/bn/Zp/wCCqH7Iniv4m/CTQfg14+tr /wAD/s0fs3ePfj54X8Ha7c+JtE+G2j/DHVNF+GP7O8vwmu/EmtaL4h17X4PD9hq3i74iyy3GkfED XLf+h3/g5r/YQ/as/wCChv7BHwk+C/7Inwsb4wfEvw3+114B+J+u+GW8ZfDX4f8A2HwPoXwe+Pnh nVNdXVfih4s8F6I/la74z8M6Wul2uu/27LHqiTJC9nbaxIn88/8AwaB/sC614w/aQ+KH7ePj3w/a P4O+BfhO4+GPwgv7q1Be++LXxQ03TdT8SeJPD+p6XrUM2lan4M+DV6NG1/RtZ0Jhrnh747aVKrqs Uwb/AETsgHHc/rivyHj7IcBwTxFh8kwOLqY/E5VQw9XNJ4ynBRhmuIjCrWwUY052lSofu6bbalUc 5xcm0mfc4HEfXKE6vLyxlOcI8ruuSCilLa12rt6vRp2Wx/OD/wAFo/2Dv2sf2t/29/8Aght8ZvgB 8K3+IHw0/Y3/AGubz4nftHeJP+E5+G3hM/DzwRc/F/8AZE8WQ6+dL8a+LvDmt+LlXR/hZ421JtL8 B6L4m1sHRBbto6z6pocOq/gx+wX/AMGiPiX40/st6DF+3rF47/Yz/aU8H/tea/qOvp4M8S/Cz4zQ /F39ji/8A/CV/wDhDtPfwp8Q/GvgX4eePoPHtj8SR8PvihK+s674bTUdaT4j/Cz4k6FN8Ox4W/0J qK+Mw2Y4vBKawtaVDncXN03Zy5WmlLpKN4p8rTV0nukdkoQm25RT62dmk7QV15+4lfV2urtM/gT0 b/gg5+3P8Kf2Sf8Ag4n/AGa/g3+y22keFP2rfjv+yUP+Cfng4/G74Q3a+Ovgp8DP20fiX48hUeI/ FXxf1TWPDC+CPglqPg/VAfjbrnh7xXr8rSWcX9veJ0vIz9d/8EtP+CY3jz9nX4WftG+Efid/wQHT 4U/ErxN/wTK+LXwA8f8AxXP/AAVP0n4hJ+3f441bQPAOk+MP2fj4H0T4ha3oP7LY/aj1vQLvxEnx Q8PzJoXwUTTItEt9fEbQpL/ZjRSq5hia0KtOpNyVacKk25Tu5QhGmnL3rTbjCKbmpO92mrhyxTTS tZcq0Wiu3ZaXVm3azVk7an+cp+09/wAER/jt8Uvgj428Bfs2/wDBsW37K3xp1mPwwPA/x+P/AAWe 8GfHR/ACaX4u8Naz4hVvhh4++Kmh+FPFh8Q+E9L8QeCM6zrAk8Py+JD4k0N5ZdC0hT/c5/wT++GP jr4G/sG/sTfBT4n6RL4Z+JXwg/ZG/Zu+F/xD8NxzjXo/D/jjwD8G/BnhXxZoia34e1bVtB1ZdK17 Sr+wXUdF1PUNLuxbiewvLi1eKVvs+ilVx1etCFOcpOMJOUeaUpu8rKWtRzdnyppKyUnJr4mOMVFt pyu1Z2aitLWsopdvO+l27BRRRXGMKKKKACvzB/4Kyf8ABNr4c/8ABTr9kzxf8E/FFtZaf8TPDqXn jL4A+PZtQ1DRB4K+KdlYSJpCa/qulWuq39x8O/FBJ8P/ABE0Y6L4gA8PXyeKfDOhr8TfBvw98S+H f0+orqwONxmWY7CZjgMRPDYvBVoV6FanbmhUg1KLTfZpXTupK8ZJxbRM4QqQlTqRUoTXLKL2af8A X369D/Of/wCCbXwD8W/s5ftC6t8H/wBovQr/AONHxB+Cfh8+G/iP8D/FXwS03V/iH8CfFnxAu9Uf Wo9P+IOpavrOt+JfB2q6SNUk8P6nE8fwm+Inh/xXpvxI+Gsx8MeOvDfiHx/+gnj3/gnf8A/2gfjN D4u+E/7KXh/4JeJvEB8RaN4q0k3+laBYf2BFNpUeneIPDPgyT7R4X8OWFxpEunaFr2k+CPD76TpH iNvFkANzMIvEniP+pD9qf9i34bftR6cNafV/FHwh+NGm6XZ6L4S+P3wvfQ9L+JPhrSNP1K51KPw1 qZ1zRdf8MeP/AAHNLqevpP4E8f8Ah/xL4ehk8Sat4g8LR+GPGg0Txrof8hH7c3/BMn/gtF8EPEs/ iD4f6Vov7ZHwbgt9X1bx54y+DfiMaR8cPEfhzS7uO/1LTtV+G/jtdZ8a+H9c8Z6Rqeq+C/DPh34I TfH/AFtdBtZYvFuv3Kro1u/91eH/AIycN8d5tlOM4i4gwnA/FuW5ZDC0cyzZY/E5RmWZP3Vi1GlX pUcP7R8t6GKqYaMZ8lODrRSqx/zm8cvo5eNuccX1sx8PeKnS4Wzfk/tbC4avHKcyp0KeKq4mVCj/ AGdgOV1Jxruj9anRxNSrDmqYlVHOTPovwF/wSo+JOk+JRp/x0msdP12zU2v9v6Lq2ieKriT4e+GL K30nTtfvdU1L4g6Nqv8AZE32m3h0aw1HwB4i1tFukTxNHoIXQfL+Yf22/wBgn4Q+I/hXrfw8+IX7 QE+t/DS28QzeIfCvxUsPAur6np3w08bato2oal4g0nT20/xXJ4M1C5fwj4d0h/EOkW3iHwRNrrSe EXOgzR6DoW78hJdP/bR+BUFj8QItW/a1/YWSOe98T+EfBX7RXgrw7oPhKDxfpR8QajLZaV4N+Kmr eBNT1mPXotQbRvEWraL8JtYfXtC8T+NfDviPw5r3hbXvEUFxV8KeBv2t/wBoPwhD4E+IH7MHxq/a R+G/i7x9deJfF3x8/Yl0z4w+JNc1lYpfEWpeILfxB4b8KeBviz8JNH/tPUPEGkweGdEtvhF8KXn1 fwvpMc8oikl8RN+o8UcN8VyxOQ8R4/i7IOLOH8FHAyqZzlma5bk+WYSpSSjRlXhPH4r2s44qUHhq 1SdZ0qldzk4QioH5XH6OGeUeKcHjeGeLM0yLO8PXyzGTeKxmKzLibKcZQxGHxFSeDhPA4LJ8bT9n DFU8XRb5sRgW4zV6t5VP+CIn7QPiL9h//gor4N+G2p6/4j+IvwM+KmieMfC+uaR4Dn0nxboMltra K1j8S/E+kx+LbXR/A2k+GbLwfY6x8Rdd8YGO48A/DvTtb8Q+IdDihjjeL3r9rP8AY8tf+Cov/BSn wX4S/Yc+AeieGPhD440Tw54aFx4X8deHLzSPCmk+HPEuoWPxD+M/j/w14d8Y6/H8PvCHg7R5bPwj Y6BoVx4e0GJNH8EaD4T8O654o8RaH4F8QfYv7M//AAbXftYftH6F4Q8J/Hj4f6L+yx8FfBj6ha+B /FXxj+Kvir42ftC2PhfxFDb+PMeB/hP8NfFfgr4a+CNG1rxbf6+niPwp421/w3rvhfXPFPivXpPA eueITN4g17+1v9jP9hX9nf8AYR+G1h8PPgT4Og0uaTSfDmm+MPHWsvY6h8QPiPf+HbFtO07WfGXi G203SIXMAudQOg+EdA0rQfh74Ft9Qm8O/DXwh4K8KJbaDB+XeIvid4acD5jPMuD8c+JeLo5J/ZWF o4bHf2jkODq15VnUzDOMyowweEzLFQjib0cHgqWKjSxVGUa2Iw8Y0nP+68p4Hz/Ns5yvP5QWV1cL Shhs0xuY5dg6WOzWk4Q5sZgo4HGT+pYmqoQ9pGqoRSqQTpzlSVOPQfsZ/sm/C39iX9nL4Y/s0fBr T7nTvBHwy8OW2j2kt/eXGp6zrGptcyap4g8Qa3qU3ledq3iTW7/UNcvYYI7HRYLnUpbbw/oejeH7 e00iD6soo/z+f+fp3NfwrjsbisxxmJx+NrTxGLxdadfEVqj5p1KtSTlKcm9229+ySWyP33DYenha FPD0k+SnHlTbblJ9W27ttvX5hRRRXKbhRRRQAUUUUAFFFFABRRRQAUUUUAFFFFAFS5jjYqWRGOSc lVJyAoByR1AAGeuAB2qdYolIZY41YdCqKCMjBwQARkcfSiiun/l0v8D/ADiePD/kZ1/8VP8A9Msk ooormPYCiiigAooooAKKKKACiiigD//Z --=====================_247168156==.REL-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 10:54:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51Hs4tv006023; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:54:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51Hs279005985; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:54:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:54:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060601135135.03dfdb98@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 13:53:25 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: National Energy Symposium, Los Angeles, Ca, June 15, 2006 In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20060601103314.02e94860@mail.newenergytimes.com > References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060601103314.02e94860@mail.newenergytimes.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/68618 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steve: Are you going to try to bring up cold fusion at this meeting? Will you be distributing fliers or books? If so, I will send you a flyer for LENR-CANR.org, in Word format. Please print some copies. Maybe other people here can suggest literature to be distributed, such as Beaudette's book or stuff from Infinite Energy. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 12:14:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51JEVdU029570; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:14:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51JETgf029547; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:14:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:14:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060601191421622.980431C00087@mwinf3202.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 20:16:54 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68619 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: [Apologies for the quoting - required context] > Jones wrote: > > One does not necessarily need to believe in the > present objective proof of a crude device like the > Joe-Cell to further investigate what is going on. It [snip] > The fact that a particular device, like a few of these > cells, has gotten that close to a real anomaly - i.e. > to some level of success, often indicates that there > is much room for improvement over the primitive level > of design being used previously... [snip] > serendipitous discovery of 'something novel' ... which > has been completely overlooked by the practioneers due > their lack of knowledge of physics and focus on > 'orgone' or related hocus-pocus. [snip] > There is the possibility of achieving something > valuable and unique here, in this sub-field which can > be termed as 'eltra-efficient electrolysis' and it may > be drivaive and based roughly on these crude early > designs, but the end product will surely be very > different from any of them. About a month ago I posted the following: > On Y!, there are a few individuals discussing theory based on > known science, or what might be considered reasonable > extrapolations to it. On the whole, though, there's a lot of > Orgone breathers (which may/may not prove valid), attempting to > discuss cell theory/construction without really knowing how the > thing works (assuming it does). However, on Y! you also seem to > have a decent number of folks actually doing hands-on experiments. > > Here (vortex) we've got some very well grounded scientific > expertise, with a decent amount of open mindedness. Over the > last few weeks I've seen a number of plausible (and a few not so) > theories evolve here as to how these, or similar, cells might > function. What I've not seen here are any suggested protocols > for simple experiments to work towards proving - or otherwise - > any of these theories. [snip] > My challenge: how about a few simple protocols for reproducible > experiments to test some of the theories previously discussed here? Whilst it's gratifying to find Jones agreeing with my original proposition - and he certainly puts the case more eloquently than I did - simply restating the current position does not help advance matters. The only practical response that I had to my original mail was from Robin, and I passed on his suggested protocol to Greg Watson in Australia, who is due to undertake some tests on a cell setup provided by Peter Stevens (date presently unknown). Also, as far as I am aware, Fred is the only person here actively pursuing similar research in a hands on manner (with the assistance of his 'lackey' :-). The reason for my original post - and I have to assume Jones' too - is still valid: there ought to be a sufficient depth of multi-disciplinary expertise amongst the readership here to provide both the theoretical and practical basis to actually move our understanding of this particular phenomenon forwards, if the will exists. I recognise that discussing the Joe cell is very much in vogue at the moment, and have no desire for this topic to take up too much bandwidth on this list. However, and providing that our mod does not disagree, I'd like to pull together a summary of the various theories out there, for discussion. More pertinently, and picking up on Jones' final point above, the true benefit of doing so would be to facilitate a discussion around how those theories might actually be investigated, with simple and replicable experimental set-ups designed to optimally test each particular theory, or combinations thereof. I'd be happy to get my hands dirty, opening this can of worms and actually building. However, there are currently so many Schiffer-style Joe cell replications being undertaken that I can see little added value in pursuing that approach myself - let's have some alternatives to the 'crude early designs', as Jones puts it. If you believe that adopting an empirical approach to this topic would be worthwhile, please drop me a line privately. Whilst I continue to enjoy the theoretical banter which drew me here in the first place, it does seem a shame not to draw upon the group's collective expertise to attempt to produce something practical. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/353 - Release Date: 31/05/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 14:00:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51KxkaT001886; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:59:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51KxfsL001818; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:59:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:59:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007f01c685be$4a5f5540$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:59:35 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68620 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick, > Whilst I continue to enjoy the theoretical banter which drew me > here in the first place, it does seem a shame not to draw upon > the group's collective expertise to attempt to produce something > practical. There have been some good practical ideas for improvement of the basic cell - already appearing in many of these posts, but often you have to "read between the lines," to move forward towards an actual design. Here is more specific detail from this one observer. Of course, you might not get agreement on every detail from others on vortex, because many are looking at this from differing perspective - i.e. as being LENR or hydrino-based - and probably a few are still grasping at "orgone" ... but if one had the resources to mount an edisonian-type effort, then there are half a dozen fairly clear routes for improvement over what we have seen in the crude efforts online, based on what is known and suspected and covering all the possibilities. Starting with the basic goal of an ultra-efficient, plain water, low voltage, common-manifold (Brown's gas) electrolysis cell - to be combined with an ICE such that the mixed-gas drawn from the cell will power the ICE with no other fuel, using only AC current from the alternator and rectified - and starting from the JoeCell and Brown's-gas cell designs, here are things which should be tried. 1) Far more electrode surface area to be provided in the cell, particularly the surface area of the "floating" (or unpowered) electrodes, and a far larger cell, relative to the engine to be powered. I have suggested two layers of nickel or stainless "foil" for this, wrapped like a jelly-roll with dielectric spacers, and giving 20-50 time more surface area than before. Fred thinks that an even better approach is using the metal in "powder" form, i.e nickel-black or equivalent. The problem with that is keeping the metal powder out of the engine and possibly too-fast recombination of the gases. 2) Maximize the amount of bubbling across the electrode surfaces and maximizing the airflow in general and get the cell as close to the intake manifold as possible to limit recombination. This needed micro-bubbling is another reason why foil, instead of powdered metal, for the unpowered electrodes, makes sense. 3) Use a hollow porous nickel cathode, kept at as high a vacuum as possible. This may provide possible hydrino or LENR effects, as well, to the H2 which is coming through the cathode. Mills has done this. This cathode could have its own dedicated vacuum pump, and feed into the manifold close to the valves. By reducing the amount of H2 in the anode-mix, which is mostly oxidizer, then some preignition fears can be eased. 4) The current drawn by the cell is approximate 2-10% of what would normally be necessary to get the energy-level following combustion which is being seen on occasion, in some of the anecdotal reports... that is- if these cells were "only" benefiting regular electrolysis, which it is not the case. Since the Helmholtz layer is the "free" active variable, it should receive the most attention. Thus the larger surface area. More current cannot be added since the present voltage should not be exceeded, without changing the conductivity of the liquid. This however ruins its dielectric properties. Finding the proper OU zone will be a delicate balance, since even stainless steel will oxidize gradually. Consequently, it might be expedient to add a strong AC ripple to the unpowered electrodes or to the anode only, or both, but not the cathode. The anode will be subject to oxidation and an AC ripple may serve to both reduce oxidation and also to enhance HO-OH production. The hydroxyl radical is resonant at 1665 MHz,and would be an interesting frequency to apply to the unpowered foil electrode jelly-roll. 5) For a small 4-cylinder engine - 1500 cc or less. I would shoot for a 5 gallon sized heavy plastic container, about 100,000 cm^2 of surface area for the twin unpowered electrodes using stainless or nickel foil rolled with a deep pattern and then possibly etched- then in the center a hollow porous nickel cathode, and at the container walls and anode wrapped on the inside of the periphery; and then power the thing with about one kw drawn and rectified from the alternator. In order to get the cell to draw 75 amps or so, it might require some electrolyte in the form of KOH - hopefully not. The incredible amount of unpowered electrode surface, at slightly less spacing then before, should provide the "free" Helmholtz boost. As Fred says, the current is only a "tickler" and not the totality or the active force. I would add another 500 watts of AC to the unpowered electrodes, preferably RF at frequency harmonic of 1665 MHz. Another 50 watts can be used for a dedicated cathode vacuum pump. Total electrical input is now about 1.5 kW and the total heat content of the mixed-gas produced by this electrical input (in my dreams)is 10 kW for 3000 RPMs. The difference of P-in and P-out comes courtesy of Dr. Casimir by way of Dr. Helmholtz, and many others (Dr. Puthoff et al.). The simplest way to set-up an experiment is open-cycle, but a closed-cycle is preferred (eventually). With open cycle, you would use the maximum engine vacuum to draw air through the cell itself, across the massive are of electrodes, "wiping" them with the micro-bubbling of water, and using a porous baffle under the electrodes, so that air is drawn from bottom to top and then immediately into the intake to prevent recombination. Now - if you are an AutoCad 'jockey' and want to draw that up for a visual appraisal and corrections, be my guest. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 14:45:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k51LjhoV001438; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:45:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k51Ljfmk001420; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:45:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:45:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:45:36 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C853DBDA32FD55-132C-123D9@mblkn-m09.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Park on the Fermi Paradox Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.73 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68621 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Great piccy of Robert with his WC Fields nose. ;-) http://www.thespacereview.com/article/629/1 Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 19:50:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k522nQNE011469; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 19:49:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k522nO3e011452; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 19:49:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 19:49:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Xqh8FAKjpdJgBaoPumBDBImITVrI9uXpxHLS9gjuEzljKwlR38iN2HaaZ+X35F0P; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006652249817@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 20:49:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409a216571385bb0082f693c3ceafff981350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.132 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68622 X-Loop: vortex-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 To recap a bit. The distilled water in the 12 wall-plate cell (12 volt 10 floated plates) gave a reading of about 2 milliamperes, adding a small amount of baking soda (NaHCO3) boosted the current to about 20 milliamperes which figures since no matter the amount of NaHCO3 in solution the pH locks at 8.3. We added a small amount of Borax (Na2B407-10 H2O) which forms 2 Na+ + B4O7= which undergoes hydrolysis to Boric Acid 4 H3BO3 + 2 OH -. The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots of gas production inflating a balloon, which my able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until "maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle ready for a road test. :-) Fred Sodium Perborate: http://www.chem-world.com/htm/product/sodium_perborate.htm NaBO3.H2O "Sodium perborate monohydrate is prepared by dehydrating sodium perborate tetrahydrate. The monohydrated form is essentially showing three advantages in comparison with the tetrahydrated form: a higher content of available oxygen, a higher heat stability and a higher dissolution rate into water. It provides a high available oxygen content equivalent to 32% hydrogen peroxide - 50% more active oxygen than the same weight of sodium perborate tetrahydrate. Sodium perborate releases nascent oxygen at elevated temperatures, it is a stable, solid source of active oxygen" Sodium Percarbonate http://www.chem-world.com/htm/product/sodium_percarbonate.htm 2Na2CO3.3H2O2 "Sodium percarbonate is a free-flowing powder with a common name of solid hydrogen peroxide, it is an addition compound of sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide. Sodium Percarbonate has an active available oxygen content which is equivalent to 27.5% H2O2. It breaks down to oxygen, water and sodium carbonate upon decomposition" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
To recap a bit. The distilled water in the 12 wall-plate cell (12 volt 10 floated plates) 
gave a reading of about 2 milliamperes, adding a small amount of
baking soda (NaHCO3) boosted the current to about 20 milliamperes which
figures since no matter the amount of NaHCO3 in solution
the pH locks at 8.3.
We added a small amount of Borax (Na2B407-10 H2O) which
forms 2 Na+ +  B4O7=  which undergoes hydrolysis to
Boric Acid  4 H3BO3 + 2 OH -.
 
The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots
of gas production inflating a balloon, which my
able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until
"maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle
ready for a road test. :-)
 
Fred
 
Sodium Perborate:
 
 
NaBO3.H2O
"Sodium perborate monohydrate is prepared by dehydrating sodium perborate tetrahydrate. The monohydrated form is essentially showing three advantages in comparison with the tetrahydrated form: a higher content of available oxygen, a higher heat stability and a higher dissolution rate into water. It provides a high available oxygen content equivalent to 32% hydrogen peroxide - 50% more active oxygen than the same weight of sodium perborate tetrahydrate. Sodium perborate releases nascent oxygen at elevated temperatures, it is a stable, solid source of active oxygen"
 
Sodium Percarbonate
 
 
2Na2CO3.3H2O2
"Sodium percarbonate is a free-flowing powder with a common name of solid hydrogen peroxide, it is an addition compound of sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide. Sodium Percarbonate has an active available oxygen content which is equivalent to 27.5% H2O2. It breaks down to oxygen, water and sodium carbonate upon decomposition"
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 1 22:40:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k525eHUa016212; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 22:40:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k525VPND009007; Thu, 1 Jun 2006 22:31:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 22:31:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000e01c68604$d56a6a30$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , "vortex-l" References: Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 22:24:33 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68623 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick, > My post was prompted by my interest in anecdotal evidence of the > functioning of the Joe cell. There is a school of thought that > it is 'merely' an ultra-efficient low voltage electrolysis cell > .... However, such a theory is at odds with reports of the > actual physical functioning of the cell. How so? ... please do not mention that 'red herring' of disinformation which will not die, it seems... that being the cell that works when it is sealed from the manifold. That statement has been debunked, I am told. There is NO cell which works when sealed. A goodly sized fraction of everything Joe has told others, probably to judge their level of gullibility (and get a good laugh) has been debunked by someone else later, it seems, after having invested (wasted) of an inordinate amount of time. The people who seem to be getting decent results in Oz are the people who abandoned most of Joe's B.S. some years ago. But yes, there are some who will say otherwise ... and that is the problem of depending too-heavily on anecdote - isn't it? If "orgone" exists, it is the most likely hydrino, which hydrides immediately and will not pass through a seal in enough quantity to power the ICE (most likely). I think if you want to approach this with some modicum of scientific rationality, you must weed out the disinformation. But of course, one man's weed is another's flower. Some folks like Kudzu... go figure. The one unusual item, to avoid weeding-out, which is out-of-step with normal electrolysis parameters (somewhat) is the necessity for the longish water pre-treatment regime. That step seems to be absolutely essential, I am told, but everything else is consistent with electrolysis in which an order of magnitude more energy is derived from a given amount of input current - using the pretreated water. That pretreatment is worthy of investigation itself, but the pretreatment could be automated for home usage and is not a big drawback and does not require much energy input. It probably serves to structure the water to carry a higher capacitance. I've wasted way too much time on the video clips (weeding), but am considering going over to S.L.C. to see the Stephens demo as a last resort (or for sure if they can talk Randi into showing up, and raise the bar a bit) - but hopefully - prior to July a well-documented and fairly scientific effort, with reliable data, will appear and spare me the effort of that trip. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 00:31:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k527V0uc005892; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 00:31:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k527Uv8E005858; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 00:30:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 00:30:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Cold fusion advocates should put up or shut up X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: ID = 8324edccdbae1c0007349b58b3c30403 Reply-To: michael.foster@excite.com From: "Michael Foster" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: michael.foster@excite.com X-Mailer: PHP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20060602073048.2C75C2F59E@xprdmxin.myway.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:30:48 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68624 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My oh my, what a heated discussion! I hate to disappoint you Walter, but I don't see myself as the savior of cold fusion, or anything else, for that matter. I agree with Keith. You should try the experiment yourself. I doubt if my experiment or it's results are unique. I did this trial myself just to see if all the postings I had read about it might be true and for the same reason you should. I doubt if I had fifty bucks into this bit of "scientific research". I bought a rather high power DC supply in a surplus store for $10. And as I recall (this was about ten years ago) the spectroscopic grade carbon rods were $30. These rods come with an analysis sheet showing how pure they are. I still have some of the rods, but seem to have lost the sheet. There was essentially no iron in them. You really must do this. It's probably less time consuming than this discussion. It's certainly not expensive, nor does it require special knowledge. As for Mr. Randi's prize, I have no interest in trying to convince him or his cohorts of anything. Besides, a million dollars just doesn't do it for me anymore;) As Jed has eloquently pointed out, Randi makes the rules up as he goes along. Jed has also stated that he is not Michael Foster. Isn't he lucky? M. _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 01:28:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k528RHA4003749; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:27:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k528REXE003705; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:27:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:27:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060602082709895.DA9351C00086@mwinf3106.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:29:43 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68625 X-Loop: vortex-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, > There have been some good practical ideas for improvement of the > basic cell - already appearing in many of these posts, but often > you have to "read between the lines," to move forward towards an > actual design. Here is more specific detail from this one > observer. The difficulty in 'reading between the lines' is obviously that one brings one's own preconceptions and experiences to the party in interpreting such comments, potentially leading to misunderstanding or, worse, (sub)conscious rejection of what is being suggested. So, thank you for the fulsome reply (filed for now, but not forgotten - see below). > Of course, you might not get agreement on every detail from others > on vortex, because many are looking at this from differing > perspective - i.e. as being LENR or hydrino-based - and probably a > few are still grasping at "orgone" ... I sincerely hope that there will be considerable disagreement! My post was prompted by my interest in anecdotal evidence of the functioning of the Joe cell. There is a school of thought that it is 'merely' an ultra-efficient low voltage electrolysis cell (and parallels have been drawn with Kanarev's work) - with this theory being vociferously promulgated by one of the more vocal members of the JC community. However, such a theory is at odds with reports of the actual physical functioning of the cell. I am assuming that not everyone here with a potential interest has had the time to closely follow the JC community since the relatively recent surge in popular interest - the two Y! groups alone jointly generate several hundred messages weekly. This was one of the reasons that I proposed to summarise some of the theoretical thinking for the consideration of this group. My hope would be that in discussing the alternative theories - coupled with the increasing anecdotal evidence - we may come up with several different (possibly complimentary, possibly not) strands of practical research to follow. I believe that it would also be likely - as your own mail actually demonstrates - that by initially keeping the focus on the Joe cell itself, potentially interesting avenues of investigation may open up, even if they have little to do with how that particular cell operates. [As a side note, I must reiterate that I have not seen a working Joe cell in person. However, I neither wish to continue prefacing comments with 'if this is true' or some such, nor do I believe that we can merely ignore the mounting anecdotal evidence. As Jones noted previously, suspension of (dis)belief can be a useful technique, at times.] Consequently, I'd quite like to have that more general theoretical discussion prior to moving down to specifics for any particular investigation. I wouldn't want us to limit ourselves simply to examining ultra-efficient electrolysis, no matter how valid that approach may transpire to be, at the expense of alternative, but equally interesting theories, such as those suggested here by Robin. I'll pull together a summary of current thinking within the JC groups for posting over the next week or so, which I hope will prove interesting and stimulate some debate. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/353 - Release Date: 31/05/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 01:44:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k528i2ra012093; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:44:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k528i0Wd012061; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:44:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 01:44:00 -0700 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:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type; b=N3OuK63n5ZIK6sDQGSxdqA3hXr4sXuR2gXPgCcRVODZr8QsrUlYL4d9jkO4YJAF6bfOw6y2nFD6IaFDLug6jRfoj75EK76HNpT1LS/A5JPKsgxIw1EtYM15u4iOQqiECUK8U66bOqxwvE7Q3a0cegef1gcnfprPhQnKhi5SIgUM= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 04:43:54 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Cc: vortex-l MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2265_31146981.1149237834076" Resent-Message-ID: <5tjFPB.A.T8C.Pp_fEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68626 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_2265_31146981.1149237834076 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Vortex, Below text mentions X voltage in increments.... but there does not seem to be a Current Meaurement! What happened to the other part of the figure to be able to compute energy, ie., in WATTS? Thank you for the article. Can we find out the current measured. La Petomaine On 6/1/06, Frederick Sparber wrote: > > Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on > metal surfaces > I vote for the latter. > > > http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf > ** > *THE INTERACI'ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS* > ** > ** > * * > http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/ppclkrs/index.htm > > > "2) Here is our protocol, more or less. > > - a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of > the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The > beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about > 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very > little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing > when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are > always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, > we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is > suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place > only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The > thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and > 91 C. > - b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes > should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions: > - aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes. > - bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes > - cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min > - dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min > - ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min > - ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)" > > - > > "Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was > reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP > distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data > "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results > with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 > and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81" > ------=_Part_2265_31146981.1149237834076 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

Dear Vortex,
 
   Below text mentions X voltage in increments.... but there does not seem to be a Current Meaurement!
 
 
 
       What happened to the other part of the figure to be able to compute energy, ie., in WATTS?
 
 
      Thank you for the article.   Can we find out the current measured.
 
 La Petomaine
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
On 6/1/06, Frederick Sparber <fjsparber@earthlink.net> wrote:
Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on metal surfaces
I vote for the latter. 
 
 
THE INTERACI'ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS
 
 
 
 

"2) Here is our protocol, more or less.

  • a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and 91 C.
  • b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions:
    • aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes.
    • bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes
    • cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min
    • dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min
    • ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min
    • ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)"
"Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81"

------=_Part_2265_31146981.1149237834076-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 03:53:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52ArEY5014302; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:53:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52ArCJO014282; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:53:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 03:53:12 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=cOVioVteycL/jOBqkf+YjzaTBmzbO9bMyqwp3PAtQCJcg9ziRrIQ5W/2r47YxkpJ; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665210525810@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 04:52:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94081a094507614c07ae977b6f0d8807bfe350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.48 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68627 X-Loop: vortex-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 This goes a long way towards explaining why the combined Baking Soda-Borax increased the cell current by nearly 400 times over what it was using distilled (CO2 laced) water. Since Hydrogen Peroxide HO-OH decomposes in alkali, the OH should come off the SS plate surfaces. Possibly the release of CO2 >From HCO3 - at the interface keeps them from interacting to form H2O + O2 in the cell. http://www.borax.com/detergents/pheffect.html# Sodium borate salts are classic alkaline buffers in detergent formulations, with pH determined principally by the acid:base ratio, i.e. [H+]=Ka[H3BO3] / [B(OH)-4]. Borax is particularly effective as it releases boric acid and its conjugate base B(OH)-4 in equal amounts. An essential function of detergent buffers is the ability to maintain the wash liquor in the pH range of 9 - 10.5. In this alkalinity range the effectiveness of detergents is optimized and hence good pH buffering makes a direct contribution to the washing process. Borates buffer in precisely this region, and can produce a pH jump effect, which is useful in certain detergent applications. Alkaline buffering Under alkaline washing conditions the surfaces of soil particles and the substrates (e.g. fabrics, tableware or hard surfaces) to which they adhere, acquire negative electrostatic charges and repel each other, loosening the soil into the liquor and inhibiting redeposition. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/1/2006 8:50:19 PM Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode To recap a bit. The distilled water in the 12 wall-plate cell (12 volt 10 floated plates) gave a reading of about 2 milliamperes, adding a small amount of baking soda (NaHCO3) boosted the current to about 20 milliamperes which figures since no matter the amount of NaHCO3 in solution the pH locks at 8.3. We added a small amount of Borax (Na2B407-10 H2O) which forms 2 Na+ + B4O7= which undergoes hydrolysis to Boric Acid 4 H3BO3 + 2 OH -. The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots of gas production inflating a balloon, which my able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until "maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle ready for a road test. :-) Fred Sodium Perborate: http://www.chem-world.com/htm/product/sodium_perborate.htm NaBO3.H2O "Sodium perborate monohydrate is prepared by dehydrating sodium perborate tetrahydrate. The monohydrated form is essentially showing three advantages in comparison with the tetrahydrated form: a higher content of available oxygen, a higher heat stability and a higher dissolution rate into water. It provides a high available oxygen content equivalent to 32% hydrogen peroxide - 50% more active oxygen than the same weight of sodium perborate tetrahydrate. Sodium perborate releases nascent oxygen at elevated temperatures, it is a stable, solid source of active oxygen" Sodium Percarbonate http://www.chem-world.com/htm/product/sodium_percarbonate.htm 2Na2CO3.3H2O2 "Sodium percarbonate is a free-flowing powder with a common name of solid hydrogen peroxide, it is an addition compound of sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide. Sodium Percarbonate has an active available oxygen content which is equivalent to 27.5% H2O2. It breaks down to oxygen, water and sodium carbonate upon decomposition" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
This goes a long way towards explaining why the combined
Baking Soda-Borax increased the cell current by nearly 400 times
over what it was using distilled (CO2 laced)  water.
 
Since  Hydrogen Peroxide HO-OH decomposes in alkali, the OH
should come off the SS plate surfaces. Possibly the release of CO2
From HCO3 - at the interface keeps them from interacting to form H2O + O2 in
the cell.
 
 
Sodium borate salts are classic alkaline buffers in detergent formulations, with pH determined principally by the acid:base ratio, i.e. [H+]=Ka[H3BO3] / [B(OH)-4]. Borax is particularly effective as it releases boric acid and its conjugate base B(OH)-4 in equal amounts.
An essential function of detergent buffers is the ability to maintain the wash liquor in the pH range of 9 - 10.5. In this alkalinity range the effectiveness of detergents is optimized and hence good pH buffering makes a direct contribution to the washing process. Borates buffer in precisely this region, and can produce a pH jump effect, which is useful in certain detergent applications.

Alkaline buffering
Under alkaline washing conditions the surfaces of soil particles and the substrates (e.g. fabrics, tableware or hard surfaces) to which they adhere, acquire negative electrostatic charges and repel each other, loosening the soil into the liquor and inhibiting redeposition.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/1/2006 8:50:19 PM
Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode

To recap a bit. The distilled water in the 12 wall-plate cell (12 volt 10 floated plates) 
gave a reading of about 2 milliamperes, adding a small amount of
baking soda (NaHCO3) boosted the current to about 20 milliamperes which
figures since no matter the amount of NaHCO3 in solution
the pH locks at 8.3.
We added a small amount of Borax (Na2B407-10 H2O) which
forms 2 Na+ +  B4O7=  which undergoes hydrolysis to
Boric Acid  4 H3BO3 + 2 OH -.
 
The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots
of gas production inflating a balloon, which my
able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until
"maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle
ready for a road test. :-)
 
Fred
 
Sodium Perborate:
 
 
NaBO3.H2O
"Sodium perborate monohydrate is prepared by dehydrating sodium perborate tetrahydrate. The monohydrated form is essentially showing three advantages in comparison with the tetrahydrated form: a higher content of available oxygen, a higher heat stability and a higher dissolution rate into water. It provides a high available oxygen content equivalent to 32% hydrogen peroxide - 50% more active oxygen than the same weight of sodium perborate tetrahydrate. Sodium perborate releases nascent oxygen at elevated temperatures, it is a stable, solid source of active oxygen"
 
Sodium Percarbonate
 
 
2Na2CO3.3H2O2
"Sodium percarbonate is a free-flowing powder with a common name of solid hydrogen peroxide, it is an addition compound of sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide. Sodium Percarbonate has an active available oxygen content which is equivalent to 27.5% H2O2. It breaks down to oxygen, water and sodium carbonate upon decomposition"
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 05:28:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52CRkbE006879; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:27:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52CRhgO006849; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:27:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:27:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:27:39 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8545712484DF3-215C-1EC29@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <410-22006652249817@earthlink.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <410-22006652249817@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.67 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k52CRf05006823 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68628 X-Loop: vortex-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: Frederick Sparber   The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots of gas production inflating a balloon, which my able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until "maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle ready for a road test. :-) <><><><><><> Caution Mr. Lackey not to use a vehicle of value; but, a visionary vehicle which can be junked if he experiences catastrophic failure of the engine due to hydrogen embrittlement. This has already happened to one of Bob Lazar's four wheeled ufos. Speaking of "visionary vehicles", Malcolm Bricklin, who brought you Subaru (a good thing) and the Yugo (not a good thing) is bringing to the US a new line of vehicles from Wuhu China. No it's not a joke and GM should not be laughing. http://vvcars.com I might have posted this before; but, there are rumors that there just might be a PHEV in the works, too. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 05:38:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52CcH2n013051; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:38:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52CcGY3013032; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:38:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:38:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: Eloy Message-ID: <23546419.20060602072352@eskimo.com> From: Eloy To: Subject: Never better cant be f0und. Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 07:23:52 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html X-Priority: 1 X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.62.03) Home X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68629 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Never better cant be f0und.

Hello my friend!

Please open your mind for a simple thing
Internet provided products always cheaper than others.
You may agree or not, but this is a fact
Just compare the numbers and get the same goods for a half value
You may agree or not, but this is a fact.

From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 06:43:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52Dh1tS019267; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 06:43:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52DgxR8019228; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 06:42:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 06:42:59 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=gBoQ4df972GBK/PBw12d9YgTN9+jzg4lnow7T2LoXhOgQdrnun9e3q63GfJxzUrB; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006652134250487@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:42:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b2043b8c61fe31bbdd7231f584b838ac350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.210 Resent-Message-ID: <95GZ_.A.YsE.jBEgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68630 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frederick Sparber >   > The current stabilized at ~ 800 milliamperes with lots > of gas production inflating a balloon, which my > able-bodied "lackey" stored away and refuses to light until > "maybe on the 4th of July" but he has the unit set up on a vehicle > ready for a road test. :-) > > <><><><><><> > > Caution Mr. Lackey not to use a vehicle of value; but, a visionary > vehicle which can be junked if he experiences catastrophic failure of > the engine due to hydrogen embrittlement. This has already happened to > one of Bob Lazar's four wheeled ufos. > Your typical "ufo" burning up the pavement at 15 to 75+ mph is reacting that hydrogen in motor fuel (CxHy) + O2 ----> x CO2 + y H2O with a lot of O, H2, H, OOH, and OH free radicals created during the burn. We just want to pre-charge the intake air with lighter O, H2, H, OH, radicals to get them distributed in the cylinder during the compression stroke to enhance the combustion of the heavier CxHy fuel. Personally, I would like to have seen more bench experiments, but my "lackey" promoted himself to Heap Big Chief Field Engineer, and is now flying on his own with his 6 cylinder fuel-injected 1993 GMC pickup. He attached the cell outlet tube to the plumbing that comes out below the butterfly valve on the carburetor. At idle the vacuum almost collapsed the plastic container and sucked liquid into the manifold. He compensated for this by some means that I don't understand yet.. We/He intend to use sensing the liquid level current change on the cell stack to operate a solenoid valve to allow metering makeup water into the cell, otherwise the chicken waterier approach would let the engine suck the 5 gallon reservoir dry in nothing flat. I'll be following this saga closely. :-) Fred . > > Speaking of "visionary vehicles", Malcolm Bricklin, who brought you > Subaru (a good thing) and the Yugo (not a good thing) is bringing to > the US a new line of vehicles from Wuhu China. No it's not a joke and > GM should not be laughing. > > http://vvcars.com > > I might have posted this before; but, there are rumors that there just > might be a PHEV in the works, too. > > Terry > > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 07:48:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52EaXcp026658; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:36:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52EaTT3026513; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:36:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:36:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 10:36:11 -0400 Message-Id: <8C854690759F579-215C-1F206@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <23546419.20060602072352@eskimo.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <23546419.20060602072352@eskimo.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Never better cant be f0und. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, billb@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.67 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68631 X-Loop: vortex-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, Bill, Looks like you got yourself a STD that's using your contact list. :-) Terry -----Original Message----- From: Eloy To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 07:23:52 +0400 Subject: Never better cant be f0und. Hello my friend! Please open your mind for a simple thing Internet provided products always cheaper than others. You may agree or not, but this is a fact Just compare the numbers and get the same goods for a half value You may agree or not, but this is a fact. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 07:53:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52Er4IS006831; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:53:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52Er3K9006791; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:53:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:53:03 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=CpdpvFAXgYWkZ7KiodBzeeeLh59lWzWRcqqaNTLvnRS45j3vvAXaoYSs1986smtY; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665214524355@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:52:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ae31a1f795049fa662a2023d671590ba350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.168 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68632 X-Loop: vortex-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 Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. The basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals play a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can be illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of the reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Actually  2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14  reaction steps.
 
 
"Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. The basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals play a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can be illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of the reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:"
 
"To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant"
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 08:02:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52F1tn8012649; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:01:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52F1r29012628; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:01:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:01:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:01:41 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8546C9704EA40-7F4-1C2BF@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Who Killed the Electric Car Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.72 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68633 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Coming to a theatre near you: http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/ "The electric car is not for everybody. It can only meet the needs of 90% of the population." - Ed Begley, Jr. in the trailer. more here: http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article623261.ece Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 08:06:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52F61sE015729; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:06:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52F5xlL015686; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:05:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:05:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003301c68656$09f37f20$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-22006652134250487@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:05:50 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68634 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since were throwing around the names of - shall we say, controversial personalities like Bob Lazar ... don't forget the original (not in time but in independently verified successful demonstrations). And it is not 'Joe' nor Yull Brown nor Archie Blue but instead is a guy with even more baggage, but also with real scientific credentials, and some 'hint' of real proof: Stanley Meyer. Without getting into the sordid details of that episode in alternative-energy, and the psychological problems of a tormented-soul, here is a fairly authoritative report, supposedly independent, from an expert in electrolysis who witnessed one of the successful demos (other demos were apparently not successful): "A second cell carried nine stainless steel double tube cell units and generated much more gas. A sequence of photographs was taken showing gas production at milliamp levels. When the voltage was turned up to its peak value, the gas then poured off at a very impressive level. "We did notice that the water at the top of the cell slowly became discolored with a pale cream and dark brown precipitate, almost certainly the effects of the chlorine in the heavily chlorinated tap water on the stainless steel tubes used as "excitors". [Meyer elsewhere stated that the water was not chlorinated and should be either distilled or demineralized, but.... what did he know?] "He was demonstrating hydrogen gas production at milliamp and kilovolt levels." [This high voltage (~2000 v) is in contrast to the Joe Cell (12 v) and to normal electrolysis (~ 2.5 v) and indicates an electrostatic modality, which actually may be more consistent with the electrical input being a "tickler" for the Helmholtz surface reaction] "The most remarkable observation is that the cell and all its metal pipework remained quite cold to the touch, even after more than twenty minutes of operation. The splitting mechanism clearly evolves little heat in sharp contrast to electrolysis where the electrolyte warms up quickly." "The practical demonstration of the Meyer cell appears substantially more convincing than the para-scientific jargon which has been used to explain it. The inventor himself talks about a distortion and polarization of the water molecule resulting in the H:OH bonding tearing itself apart under the electrostatic potential gradient, of a resonance within the molecule which amplifies the effect." "Apart from the copious hydrogen/oxygen gas evolution and the minimal temperature rise within the cell, witnesses also report that water within the cell disappears rapidly, presumably into its component parts and as an aerosol from the myriad of tiny bubbles breaking the surface of the cell. Meyer claims to have run a converted VW on hydrogen/oxygen mixture for the last four years using a chain of six cylindrical cells." END of quoted excerpts (original can be found on Keelynet) The biggest departure from Meyer's work by the Joe-Cell proponents (more like a degeneration from more advanced predecessor work) is the sharply lower voltage. Given the Meyer success (occasional at least), however, it would be wise for any experiment to try to accommodate both high voltage and low voltage operation in the same type of cell. However, to his credit, Joe did make on big advance over Meyer. Query: The one advance made by Joe could very well be the long *pretreatment* of the water in a DC electric field ... causing one to wonder what would have happened had Meyer known about that particular detail ... and/or also causing the observer to wonder how long it will take for someone else to re-connect all the dots... not just these tow but all the dots. We have Stan, Joe, Archie, Yull and others - all of which prior-art has been hitting around the edges of the 'bulls-eye' which is ultra-efficient electrolysis . IMHO, given that necessity is the mother-of-invention, and Hubbert has provided the nedssity, it is only a matter of time before someone refocused the sights and scores a direct hit... Apparently the mother-of-invention is romantically attracted to these 'characters' ... who as Pierre sez ... are mostly Pas-Normal ? Jones I should phonetically explain that attempted cross-cultural pun, but not today.... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 08:09:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52F8fXP017678; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:08:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52F8cvb017639; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:08:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:08:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,204,1146456000"; d="scan'208"; a="196257525:sNHT310228434" Message-ID: <819554558.1149260913529.JavaMail.root@fepweb05> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 8:08:33 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Who Killed the Electric Car MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68635 X-Loop: vortex-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 Terry: > Coming to a theatre near you: > > http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/ > > "The electric car is not for everybody. It can only meet the needs of > 90% of the population." > > - Ed Begley, Jr. in the trailer. > > more here: > > http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article623261.ece > > Terry That was hilarious! Begley at his best! Thanks, Terry. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 08:38:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52Fc7T0008142; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:38:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52Fc5DR008121; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:38:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:38:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060602111429.03e20370@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:16:32 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Paper about three explosions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_6161437==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68636 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_6161437==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangXontheexplo.pdf Zhang, X., et al. On the Explosion in a Deuterium/Palladium Electrolytic System. in Third International Conference on Cold Fusion, "Frontiers of Cold Fusion". 1992. Nagoya Japan: Universal Academy Press, Inc., Tokyo, Japan. - Jed --=====================_6161437==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" See:

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

Zhang, X., et al. On the Explosion in a Deuterium/Palladium Electrolytic System. in Third International Conference on Cold Fusion, "Frontiers of Cold Fusion". 1992. Nagoya Japan: Universal Academy Press, Inc., Tokyo, Japan.

- Jed
--=====================_6161437==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 09:56:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52GtZ9i027695; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:55:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52GtWNu027629; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:55:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 09:55:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:55:20 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8547C775CD038-7F4-1C7F2@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <410-22006652134250487@earthlink.net> <003301c68656$09f37f20$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <003301c68656$09f37f20$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.72 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68637 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene Since were throwing around the names of - shall we say, controversial personalities like Bob Lazar ... <><><><><><> Here's an interesting analysis of Meyer's patent: http://www.waterfuelcell.org/Patent.html I got this link from: http://waterpoweredcar.com/ Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 10:10:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52HA5xZ007876; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:10:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52H7Q0j006017; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:07:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:07:26 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Z46C8d+ok7baZLyjRHsUMRvnK70uzF3HXfQ7tAQzKees1At8jMEpQXzmzTyVjaMK; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066521776821@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:07:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940679b3bfa9f1f724973ff80a215f5ba6b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.183 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68638 X-Loop: vortex-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 since I was calling the Throttle Body a carburetor. Boy am I behind the times. http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/sub_care_sat/1272341.html?page=1& c=y "Cleaning Throttle Bodies" Terry wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jones Beene > > Since were throwing around the names of - shall we say, controversial > personalities like Bob Lazar ... > > <><><><><><> > > Here's an interesting analysis of Meyer's patent: > > http://www.waterfuelcell.org/Patent.html > > I got this link from: > > http://waterpoweredcar.com/ > > Terry > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 10:23:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52HN3Ev018308; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:23:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52HMv10018210; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:22:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:22:57 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=O0IRCkV1WpjblTihXpPNEI8YZEwvJVB1Th3YlINRtx/5Q+1j6lDCXUQBi9GzotlG; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006652171615170@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:16:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940248341e8e9ac1ca35c1c745a50449084350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.183 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68639 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jones Beene > > Since were throwing around the names of - shall we say, controversial > personalities like Bob Lazar ... > > <><><><><><> > > Here's an interesting analysis of Meyer's patent: > > http://www.waterfuelcell.org/Patent.html > All you have to do is substitute a metal plate (the biased floating/neutral plates) and the OH - ions on one side will give up it's electron through the plate to the H3O+ on the other side and the OH and H will come off as a gas. > > I got this link from: > > http://waterpoweredcar.com/ > > Terry > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 11:01:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52I134X016309; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:01:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52I0vm2016249; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:00:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:00:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 14:00:09 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_CDhpmrY3RGA2seDaCTzIEQ)" 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/68640 X-Loop: vortex-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. --Boundary_(ID_CDhpmrY3RGA2seDaCTzIEQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I don't know anything about this experiment, but current is not essential for calculating the power. P = (V^2)/R since P =VI and I = V/R Harry john herman wrote: Dear Vortex, Below text mentions X voltage in increments.... but there does not seem to be a Current Meaurement! What happened to the other part of the figure to be able to compute energy, ie., in WATTS? Thank you for the article. Can we find out the current measured. La Petomaine On 6/1/06, Frederick Sparber wrote: Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on metal surfaces I vote for the latter. http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey _SSR_1987_T.pdf THE INTERACI'ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/ppclkrs/index.htm "2) Here is our protocol, more or less. a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and 91 C. b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions: aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes. bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)" "Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81" --Boundary_(ID_CDhpmrY3RGA2seDaCTzIEQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current I don't know anything about this experiment,
but current is not essential for calculating the power.

P = (V^2)/R

since P =VI  and I = V/R

Harry

john herman wrote:


Dear Vortex,

  Below text mentions X voltage in increments.... but there does not seem to be a Current Meaurement!



      What happened to the other part of the figure to be able to compute energy, ie., in WATTS?


     Thank you for the article.   Can we find out the current measured.

La Petomaine













On 6/1/06, Frederick Sparber <fjsparber@earthlink.net> wrote:
Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on metal surfaces
I vote for the latter.  
http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf  <http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf>

THE INTERACI'ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS


http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/ppclkrs/index.htm

"2) Here is our protocol, more or less.
  • a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram for 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady machine-gun-like roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix the liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows the temperature of between 89 and 91 C.
  • b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions:
    • aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes.
    • bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes
    • cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min
    • dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min
    • ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min
    • ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)"
"Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 and 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81"



--Boundary_(ID_CDhpmrY3RGA2seDaCTzIEQ)-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 11:38:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52IcTS0007564; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:38:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52IcRKT007551; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:38:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:38:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00c101c68673$b9e34c40$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: More on Meyer Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:38:21 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68641 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Excerpts from: Electronics World & Wireless World (Jan 1991) also: Infinite Energy 19:(1998) Obituary, and KeelyNet File MEYER1.ASC and the famous UK panel evaluation, which Frank Grimer will sympathize with. "Eye-witness accounts suggest that US inventor Stanley Meyer developed an electric cell which will split ordinary tap water into hydrogen and oxygen with far less energy than that required by a normal electrolytic cell." Emphasis in "far less". Another of those eye witnesses in the US was vortexian Mark Goldes, and there have been many others, on both sides of the Atlantic. Most agree that there was "something" going-on here, and of a 'not-normal' variety, or as Pierre might opine, Pas Normal... that would be- both in the experiment and the mind of the experimenter. "In a demonstration made before Professor Michael Laughton, Dean of Engineering at Mary College, London, Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, a former controller of the British Navy, and Dr Keith Hindley, a UK research chemist ... Meyer's cell, developed at the inventor's home in Grove City, Ohio, produced far more hydrogen/oxygen mixture than could have been expected by simple electrolysis." Yes, these naturally skeptical UK experts can probably be fooled, but rarely. They were probably invited to the panel because of life-long pathological skepticism. Did they let their guard down, was Meyer a Randi-dandy magician, or was there some conspiracy in play? No, not likely. Instead, the answer may be closer to "Karma," if you really understand the ultimate meaning of that term. Meyer's name, to the linguist is roughly the English equivalent of 'maker' or '-mizer' - i.e. one who does something - as distinguished from miester - the one who gets the credit. Whereas normal water electrolysis requires the passage of current measured in amps (or even kiloamps) to power an ICE, as Meyer's cell was able to do - he achieves the same amount of gas with milliamps. Furthermore, ordinary tap water requires the addition of an electrolyte such as sulfuric acid to aid conduction; Meyer's cell functions at greatest efficiency with pure water - no electrolyte. According to the witnesses, the most startling aspect of the Meyer cell was that it remained cold, perhaps even below ambient (actively cold), even after hours of gas production. How is that possible? "Meyer's experiments," the UK study announced, "which he seems to be able to perform to order, have earned him a series of US patents granted - under Section 101." The granting of a patent under this section is dependent on a successful *physical* demonstration of the invention to a normally skeptical Patent Review Board. Meyer's cell seems to have many of the attributes of an electrolytic cell except that it functions at high voltage, low current rather than the other way around and with much less energy than the normal technique (which is itself efficient). Since the unavoidable implication of this equation is the dreaded "perpetual motion" which the USPTO hates beyond all reason, these patents of Meyer could not have been granted without an actual demonstration to skeptical experts. Construction is unremarkable. The electrodes - referred to as "excitors" by Meyer - are made from parallel plates of stainless steel formed in either flat or concentric topography. Gas production seems to vary directly with surface area and as the inverse of the distance between them; the patents suggest a spacing of 1.5 mm produces satisfactory results. The real differences occur in the power supply to the cell. Meyer uses an external inductance which appears to resonate with the capacitance of the cell - pure water apparently possesses a dielectric constant of about 5 - to produce a parallel resonant circuit. This is excited by a high power pulse generator which, together with the cell capacitance and a rectifier diode, forms a charge pump circuit. Mark Goldes believes that Meyer himself did not understand the electronics, and had them built by others, and that much of the resultant success was 'inspired' or serendipity. It always is ... on the fringe. High frequency pulses build a rising staircase DC potential across the electrodes of the cell until a point is reached where the water breaks down and a momentary high current flows. This is reminiscent of the similar work of Puharich. In the Meyer cell, a current measuring circuit in the supply detects this breakdown and removes the pulse drive for a few cycles allowing the water to "recover" whereas with Puharich is was a set frequency of 42.8 kHz (USPTO # 3629521 1971 Puharich). A witness team of independent UK scientific observers testified that the results were accurate. The witnesses report the lack of any heating within the cell - and perhaps active cooling. Meyer declined to release some trade secret details which would allow UK scientists to duplicate the device. However, he has supplied just enough detail to the US Patent Office, along with the working device, to persuade them that he can substantiate his claims. "The results appear to suggest efficient and controllable gas production that responds rapidly to demand and yet is safe in operation. We clearly saw how increasing and decreasing the voltage is used to control gas production. We saw how gas generation ceased and then began again instantly as the voltage driving circuit was switched off and then on again." "After hours of discussion between ourselves, we concluded that Stan Meyer did appear to have discovered an entirely new method for splitting water which showed few of the characteristics of classical electrolysis." that was the conclusion of the UK team. Needless to say, no mention of overunity. USPTO # 4,936,961 Method for the Production of a Fuel Gas - Stanley Meyer Details sometimes overlooked: FIG. 2 shows a perspective of a "water capacitor" element used in the fuel cell circuit. Here Meyer is calling it what it is: a water capacitor NOT a real electrolysis cell of prior art. Description of the Preferred Embodiment: In brief, the invention is a method of obtaining the release of a gas mixture including hydrogen on oxygen and other dissolved gases formerly entrapped in water, from water consisting of: (A) providing a capacitor, in which the water is included as a dielectric liquid between capacitor plates, in a resonant charging choke circuit that includes an inductance in series with the capacitor; (B) subjecting the capacitor to a pulsating, unipolar electric voltage field in which the polarity does not pass beyond an arbitrary ground, whereby the water molecules within the capacitor are subjected to a charge of the same polarity and the water molecules are distended by their subjection to electrical polar forces; (C) further subjecting in said capacitor to said pulsating electric field to achieve a pulse frequency such that the pulsating electric field induces a resonance within the water molecule; (D) continuing the application of the pulsating frequency to the capacitor cell after resonance occurs so that the energy level within the molecule is increased in cascading incremental steps in proportion to the number of pulses; (E) maintaining the charge of said capacitor during the application of the pulsing field, whereby the co-valent electrical bonding of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms within said molecules is destabilized such that the force of the electrical field applied, as the force is effective within the molecule, exceeds the bonding force of the molecule, and hydrogen and oxygen atoms are liberated from the molecule as elemental gases; and (F) collecting said hydrogen and oxygen gases, and any other gases that were formerly dissolved within the water, and discharging the collected gases as a fuel gas mixture. END of paraphrased online material ... M.O. > The H2O molecules are polarized and "elongated" (pulsated into a 'slinky-like' stretching) by the application of an electrical potential to the extent that covalent bonding of the water molecule is so weakened that the atoms can dissociate for a longer than expected time frame - and/or the molecule actually breaks down into hydrogen and hydroxyl ionic components without immediate recombination. I an ICE this mix has all the attributes of an exploding ultracapacitor - which is exactly what it is for a fraction of a second. Ah...If only ... If only Stanley had known about other enhancement details - or if he had not been so paranoid and afflicted with "inventor's disease"... and worse. If only... or as the say in Scrabble competition: "Phonely"... He had given up some control, built onto what he had, with the assistance of a US government lab or even a UK lab ... then the world might today be a far different place for either country. No oil shortage, no oil wars, no trillion dollar NeoCon mistakes... Dream on, little dreamer, Dream on ... Como-Esta ? I am assuming of course that there was NO hidden conspiracy, that Stanley was not murdered by the PetroMafia, that he was a deeply troubled paranoid, and that his invention did NOT work reliably because he did not himself appreciate all that was going on and refused the help of experts - BUT that the cell did work on occasion - and that he became deeply embittered over the whole situation... and note: there was no mention in this short summation of the possibility of "orgone" poisoning . BTW, the occasion when the cell did perform being the Section 101 hearing at USPTO... wow ... think about that. As a former denizen of Crystal City, I can vouch for the importance of that detail. That demonstration before the mother____ of all skeptics - in itself is worth more than the entire trillion dollars spent on our miserable oil war... And to digress a bit - does not anybody in government understand the incredible value of the inventive spark, and/or ... the terrible burden this becomes to the inventor himself? We need a better way to get this kind of thing to market. Maybe I am lost in an "alternate universe" trying to envision the way things might have been - or else it's all a bad dream - but why do we, as a nation, seem to be continually making the worst possible of all bad decisions, whenever the opportunity presents itself? The Buddhist-amongst will probably point to the 'Bad Karma' of Indo-China, still with us from the previous generation of war-mongers. When you must witness the drama and the bitter irony - the sublime calm and spiritual resolve of a Buddhist monk who voluntarily self-immolates in front of the NBC cameraman (not a single occasion but many) - to the horror and utter amazement of a billion viewers world-wide, this is a visual image of divine purpose that stays with you for a long time. It is Yahweh telling Sam, "you ought not to be here." In Iraq they do it with vest-bombs and car bombs. Sorry to end such a promising piece of speculation on such a sentimental soap-opera-ish diatribe - but aren't all of these disparate things inter-related into our national-Karma? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 12:16:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52JFhNB030589; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 12:15:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52JFctL030531; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 12:15:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 12:15:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060602191532276.437C19400085@mwinf3209.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Cc: "Jones Beene" Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 20:18:06 +0100 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 In-Reply-To: <000e01c68604$d56a6a30$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68642 X-Loop: vortex-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, > > My post was prompted by my interest in anecdotal evidence of the > > functioning of the Joe cell. There is a school of thought that > > it is 'merely' an ultra-efficient low voltage electrolysis cell > > .... However, such a theory is at odds with reports of the > > actual physical functioning of the cell. > > How so? > > ... please do not mention that 'red herring' of disinformation > which will not die, it seems... that being the cell that works > when it is sealed from the manifold. That statement has been I thought that we were trying to keep an open mind ? Nonetheless, acceptance or otherwise of BPR does not preclude the suggestion that something other than electrolysis is at work here - assuming that we are accepting that any definition of electrolysis as currently understood includes disassociation and consequent 'use' of electrolyte. It has been widely reported that users running in 'shandy mode' (i.e. with cell output directly entering the engine's carb) frequently see little or no gas production within the cell and, more pertinently, do not notice the cell's water volume varying over a matter of weeks or months of use - whilst typically seeing a 25% increase in MPG performance terms. > If "orgone" exists, it is the most likely hydrino, which hydrides > immediately and will not pass through a seal in enough quantity to > power the ICE (most likely). I think if you want to approach this > with some modicum of scientific rationality, you must weed out the > disinformation. But of course, one man's weed is another's flower. At this stage - with no real science having been undertaken on these cells - I would consider it extremely rash to dismiss any reported phenomenon. Sure, it could be that certain 'facts' are simply bunk, but they could also provide insight into the underlying mechanics (e.g. the supposed cold running of BPR engines - electrostatic cooling? If so, this would point us in a specific direction for cell operation). I'm not proposing that we immediately accept a paradigm changing position, but that we certainly should leave the door slightly ajar. All that we can do is trust the data. Sadly, and coming full circle, it is the absence of anything other than anecdotal data which prompted me to start down this path in the first place. I remain hopeful that by testing a variety of theories intellectually - and then the more promising ones practically - that we will be able to advance our understanding. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 13:07:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52K6oV8028376; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:06:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52K6mZS028345; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:06:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:06:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Subject: RE: More on Meyer Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:06:45 -0500 Message-ID: <29E5343E7F6959449B97C93EB07190C50C04B23E@CCUMAIL24.usa.ccu.clearchannel.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: More on Meyer Thread-Index: AcaGc+c2f9dZyDFeSCiQxqK382WZ0wAC5P0w From: "Zell, Chris" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jun 2006 20:06:46.0313 (UTC) FILETIME=[1339D190:01C68680] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k52K6jEA028312 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68643 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Has ANYONE ever replicated Meyer's results? Even the Puharich patent doesn't seem as dramatic. OT, I feel more strongly about the work of Paul Brown - who, it appears to me, was far more rigorous and publically demonstrated than any ZPE/"free energy" enthusiast. Yet, I never hear about anyone taking up his work on Betavoltaics. As with Meyer, what's the truth in this? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 16:00:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52N0b0a031581; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:00:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52N0Yrn031547; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:00:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:00:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060602230022146.23BCE9000082@mwinf3207.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Cc: "Jones Beene" , Subject: RE: More on Meyer Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 00:02:57 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00c101c68673$b9e34c40$6401a8c0@NuDell> Resent-Message-ID: <1hEcZC.A.ssH.SMMgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68644 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: As usual, Jones' timing is 'interesting', to say the least. Earlier today, Dave Lawton posted a file (MeyerRep.pdf) to the JoesCell2 Y! group, which is claimed to be a replication of Meyer's demonstration electrolyser (see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JoesCell2/message/2472). I've not yet had chance to read through, but it may be worth a look. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 16:18:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k52NIQmf007529; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:18:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k52NIOVx007511; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:18:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:18:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 19:18:17 -0400 Message-Id: <8C854B1F72588A1-28F8-8E49@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C851412CE08645-CF0-1102D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C851412CE08645-CF0-1102D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Still Another Bettery? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k52NIL5H007467 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68645 X-Loop: vortex-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: Terry http://www.physorg.com/news67796415.html    "Russian scientists have invented a battery that can capture energy not only from the sun, but also from the stars, the head of a research institute at the Dubna Nuclear Institute, near Moscow, said.    "The scientists have successfully created a new substance," Valentin Samoilov announced, "thanks to which this battery can work on earth, independently of meteorological conditions, using solar and stellar energy.    "This is a battery like no other," Samoilov, who head's the Institute's center for applied research, told the Itar-Tass news agency, explaining that it could function 24 hours a day and was twice as effective as an ordinary solar panel at converting light into electricity.    Moreover, Samoilov declared, the new battery was cheaper than a solar panel.    <><><><><><>    Okay, another Ruskie hoax?  <><><><><><> Maybe not: http://pesn.com/2006/05/31/9500274_Star_Battery/ Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 17:06:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k530648X032582; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:06:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53062k8032558; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:06:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:06:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <010401c686a1$7dc49650$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: More on Meyer Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:05:57 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68646 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: "Patrick Vessey" > As usual, Jones' timing is 'interesting', to say the least. > Earlier today, Dave Lawton posted a file (MeyerRep.pdf) to the > JoesCell2 Y! group, which is claimed to be a replication of > Meyer's demonstration electrolyser http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JoesCell2/message/2472. Hmm. I don't know Dave Lawton, but have seen the video of this Meyer rep. http://www.opensourceenergy.org/_layouts/apps/vplayer2.asp?vID=19# He did a decent job, but there are also improved versions out there, which I am just "tuning into" (more on that later)... ... and no, the coincidental timing is not "telepathy", ESP, magic, or an alias - simply I am using a self-designed "Meme-Antenna" which seems to work quite well It is vaguely reminiscent of something-seen in the excellent David Cronenberg film: eXistenZ. A must-see in many ways...the film that is... the antenna is strictly off-limits to earthlings Because of Meyer's fraud conviction, shortly before he died (he had already gone nuts by then) no one is going to believe the full importance of this invention until they see the device powering an ICE, and using only recycled power from the ICE. This was accomplished by Meyer on occassion (curiously for only 2 miles to a 'tankful') but it is terribly corrosive to metal, and begs for a ceramic engine. The fact the engine was unavailable at the time of his trial is a main reason he lost - and that really pushed him over the edge. Wait! ... Hold the Presses! the meme-antenna is getting a new message right now, but it is in another language... Yes, yes... You will be seeing a water-powered auto (err... WasserCar) this summer, and it will be coming from... where else - the former East Berlin, now wall-less. and it looks like it will be powering one of those vintage Skodas ... oops. Bad Choice. Stay tuned... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 17:42:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k530gUmu018988; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:42:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k530gT0q018963; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:42:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:42:29 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=SmaXtqKWlESaIQRYnRwycBXutviG9seLXniKCYyAtm6PhqR5ll+e+2pzRNI1a1Vb; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666304214330@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 2, 2006 Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 17:42:14 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d84f2c6cf37b74dcea9be54036650e01ab27b02ac19e33883a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.100.209 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68647 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 aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > [Original Message] > From: What's New > To: Date: 6/2/2006 2:19:32 PM Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 2, 2006 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 2 Jun 06 Washington, DC 1. ADDICTION: ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION INCREASES WHEN TIMES ARE HARD. President Bush says we need "to move beyond a petroleum-based economy." Move where? The House cut the nuclear energy request in half; fusion is, as it has always been, decades away; ethanol from corn is nice, but it can't save much oil. President Bush gave a plug to ethanol from cellulosic biomass. He can't be wrong all the time can he? Some rich investors are backing it http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN06/wn033106.html , and some very smart scientists. MIT chemist John Deutch commented on it in the Wall Street Journal a month ago, and today's Science has an editorial about cellulosic biomass by Stanford biologist Chris Somerville. They think it's worth major investment in research. 2. EVOLUTION IN GEORGIA: FEDERAL APPEALS COURT SENDS CASE BACK. Since 1995, the Cobb County School Board had ordered pages on evolution torn out of science textbooks. But a new textbook in 2002 had too many pages to tear out, so they just added a sticker saying evolution is only a theory anyway. A federal District Court judge said the stickers violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment and told the school district to rip all 35,000 off http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN05/wn011405.html . Thursday, citing insufficient evidence, a Federal Appeals Court said put'em back on until the District Court determines if the school board acted "religiously neutral," or the case is retried. 3. FLAG POLE SITTING: DISCOVERY IS CLEARED FOR JULY 1 LAUNCH. The NASA Authorization bill, passed in May, makes "uninterrupted capability for human spaceflight during transition to the Crew Exploration Vehicle in 2010" US policy. To do what? No field of human endeavor has been advanced by the shuttle or the ISS. 4. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: PLAYING NOW AT THE SUPREME COURT THEATER An evangelical Christian group in Washington, DC, Faith and Action, is erecting a stone monument to the stone tablets on the front lawn of a row house across the street from the U.S. Supreme Court building. The group does not have the approval they need according city officials, but perhaps they cleared it with a higher authority. The granite sculpture weighs 850 pounds. 5. HULK ROBERTSON: HOW DO YOU HANDLE AN 850 POUND RELIGIOUS ICON? Religious broadcaster Pat "The Hulk" Robertson, who had been pushing his "age-defying protein shake," should have no problem. On the Web site of his Christian Broadcasting Network, he says he has leg-pressed 2,000 pounds. When he proves he can do that, I’ll convert. 6. IMMIGRATION: ADVOCATES OF TOUGHER BORDER SECURITY SEND BRICKS. No one pays attention to e-mail anymore. So at a time when everything entering the Capitol or Congressional Office Buildings is carefully screened, thousands of bricks have been sent to members of Congress to build a wall. "At least they're not being thrown through the windows" one staffer pointed out. 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.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnew&A=1 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 18:38:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k531bsPY017414; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:37:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k531bq5r017391; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:37:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:37:52 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Ci6ELTF/al769bE1vtcTi5PeaxRLfsQopIpMzUCaNZhe5wwI2m4S9RiJzUnQN/p8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666313739327@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:37:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a974e5c043db299620b177c69660e55d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.19 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68648 X-Loop: vortex-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 Given the way electrostatic charge can accumulate on moving vehicles maybe Hamish Robertson is getting closer to the facts: http://www.thejoecell.com/ The most likely place for accumulated charge to settle is at the ~ 6,000 square centimeter Helmholtz Layer Interface of the electrodes/container vessel in the Joe Cell. Lots of ReDox possibilities there, even if it only spits out electrons near the air intake without actual connection to the Throttle Body, or for us older folks the carburetor. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Given the way electrostatic charge can accumulate on
moving vehicles maybe Hamish Robertson is getting closer to
the facts:
 
 
The most likely place for accumulated charge to settle is
at the ~ 6,000 square centimeter Helmholtz Layer Interface
of the electrodes/container vessel in the Joe Cell.
 
Lots of  ReDox possibilities there, even if it only spits out electrons
near the air intake without actual connection to
the Throttle Body, or for us older folks the carburetor.
 
Fred
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 2 18:55:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k531stRo024784; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:54:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k531sso6024768; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:54:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:54:54 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=q8maWHZw4V1ihUD9jIGc3oV1syMFvOh7L+3xWRSfw/Ghec4qqdYHU1w0DrRs1qN8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666315442889@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:54:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408e8efdfeb0bebd5e7ca0b9bc8ca1334e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.10 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68649 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, anyone have a small Van De Graaff that could be used to put some static charge on a Joe Cell? ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/2/2006 7:43:12 PM Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode Given the way electrostatic charge can accumulate on moving vehicles maybe Hamish Robertson is getting closer to the facts: http://www.thejoecell.com/ The most likely place for accumulated charge to settle is at the ~ 6,000 square centimeter Helmholtz Layer Interface of the electrodes/container vessel in the Joe Cell. Lots of ReDox possibilities there, even if it only spits out electrons near the air intake without actual connection to the Throttle Body, or for us older folks the carburetor. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, anyone have a small Van De Graaff that could be
used to put some static charge on a Joe Cell?
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/2/2006 7:43:12 PM
Subject: RE: Helmholtz Layer electrode

Given the way electrostatic charge can accumulate on
moving vehicles maybe Hamish Robertson is getting closer to
the facts:
 
 
The most likely place for accumulated charge to settle is
at the ~ 6,000 square centimeter Helmholtz Layer Interface
of the electrodes/container vessel in the Joe Cell.
 
Lots of  ReDox possibilities there, even if it only spits out electrons
near the air intake without actual connection to
the Throttle Body, or for us older folks the carburetor.
 
Fred
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 00:03:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5373dNw015159; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 00:03:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5373bwr015134; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 00:03:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 00:03:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060603070333767.BB44C1C00084@mwinf3007.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060603070335.00b7ca98@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: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:03:35 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Still Another Bettery? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5373XvZ015093 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68650 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:18 pm 02/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Terry > >http://www.physorg.com/news67796415.html  >  >"Russian scientists have invented a battery that can capture energy not >only from the sun, but also from the stars, the head of a research >institute at the Dubna Nuclear Institute, near Moscow, said.  >  >"The scientists have successfully created a new substance," Valentin >Samoilov announced, "thanks to which this battery can work on earth, >independently of meteorological conditions, using solar and stellar >energy.  >  >"This is a battery like no other," Samoilov, who head's the Institute's >center for applied research, told the Itar-Tass news agency, explaining >that it could function 24 hours a day and was twice as effective as an >ordinary solar panel at converting light into electricity.  >  >Moreover, Samoilov declared, the new battery was cheaper than a solar >panel.  >  ><><><><><><>  >  >Okay, another Ruskie hoax?  > ><><><><><><> > >Maybe not: > >http://pesn.com/2006/05/31/9500274_Star_Battery/ > >Terry Mmm....Interesting. 8-) FG From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 05:59:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53Cx8Cf019941; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 05:59:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53Cx50h019914; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 05:59:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 05:59:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0d7a01c6870d$31c47100$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200665214524355@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:56:56 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68651 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs gibbs controversy? Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the enthalpy change or the gibbs free eneregy change? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. > > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml > > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. The > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals play > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can be > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of the > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" > > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 07:03:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53DrkUp026918; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 06:53:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53Drhud026870; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 06:53:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 06:53:43 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=GYhe3v6ppJISCzbC65Pi8tcs/czM6c/aN/AfbbXm5Hr6OOBOjyKRLTdEZmJVgy5h; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663135330348@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:53:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b74cacc5cd9dfcc17fb4d27dcf09c985350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.132 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68652 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs controversy? > Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the > enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? > Is that a trick question, Michel? The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H bond.. Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or Enthalpy. But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole) equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = 290 KJ when you oxidize iron with O radicals. :-) OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + H-H = 498 - 382 = 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf Fred. > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: "vortex-l" > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM > Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > > > > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. > > > > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml > > > > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. The > > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals play > > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain > > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, > > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can be > > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of the > > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" > > > > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary > > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the > > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they > > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the > > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and > > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of > > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 07:05:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53E5KMg002358; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:05:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53E5HaV002329; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:05:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:05:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 10:05:10 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8552DDC9102FD-578-2F105@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060603070335.00b7ca98@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060603070335.00b7ca98@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Still Another Bettery? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68653 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer >Maybe not: > >http://pesn.com/2006/05/31/9500274_Star_Battery/ > >Terry Mmm....Interesting. 8-) <><><><><><> Yes. But I am having trouble relating to the significance of a negative permittivity. :-( Terry (who has been very busy trying to confirm that 300 TByte is adequate for a 1000 camera storage area network. my calculations disagree with the contractor's. i say we need 1.0 PByte {10^15}) ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 07:42:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53Ee2IO022160; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:42:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53EUaum017543; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:30:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 07:30:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 10:30:32 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8553167B42BBE-A6C-358D4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: On the State of US Physics Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <-97jBD.A.-RE.M0ZgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68654 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Andrew Beckwith, while attending this seminar in Italy: http://www.ccsem.infn.it/ef/emfcsc2006/pdf/Astrophysical.pdf made the following comment on the referenced subject in an email to Sarfatti: "They regard your treatment as an indication of serious sociological decay in the USA, in the US science establishment which is rewarding group think to the max in journals. Being eccentric, but informed is a plus here. Frankly you would have been right in your element here. The fun stuff is the two hour question and answer period the lecturers get put up to each day after about six p.m. You should have seen the stuff I asked . Well I think you have a few ideas, but what would get me repromanded in APS meeting venues for rocking the boat spurred on hour long highly philosophical debates which got extremely heated." Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 08:31:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53FUo4X015629; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 08:30:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53FUiHN015587; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 08:30:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 08:30:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0dfa01c68722$64256d10$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 17:28:40 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68655 X-Loop: vortex-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, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you mean "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the case of a resistor..." John, 1/ energy is discussed further down that page, in the COP calculations 2/ what does "La Petomaine" mean? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" To: Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:00 PM Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current >I don't know anything about this experiment, > but current is not essential for calculating the power. > > P = (V^2)/R > > since P =VI and I = V/R > > Harry > > john herman wrote: > > > Dear Vortex, > > Below text mentions X voltage in increments.... but there does not seem > to > be a Current Meaurement! > > > > What happened to the other part of the figure to be able to compute > energy, ie., in WATTS? > > > Thank you for the article. Can we find out the current measured. > > La Petomaine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/1/06, Frederick Sparber wrote: > Based on the work of Thiel and Madey, on "auto-dissociation" of water on > metal surfaces > I vote for the latter. > > http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey > _SSR_1987_T.pdf > y_SSR_1987_T.pdf> > > THE INTERACI'ION OF WATER WITH SOLID SURFACES: FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS > > > > http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/ppclkrs/index.htm > > "2) Here is our protocol, more or less. > a) Our container is an ordinary two-liters beaker. The level of the K2CO3 > electrolyte (0.2 M, as we had) is about 1.2 liters. The beaker is open and > fresh hot water is added when the level folls to about 1.0 liters, or more > often. There is no splashing at all (or very little, less than one gram > for > 50 grams evaporated. We do have splashing when power is too high at 300 or > 350 W. Under such conditions the COPs are always close to 1.0. Under > favorable conditions, on the other hands, we hear a steady > machine-gun-like > roar. The surface of the electrolyte is suprisingly quite. We do not mix > the > liquid; intensive boiling takes place only between the electrodes, mostly > near the very hot cathode. The thermometer, situated near the wall, shows > the temperature of between 89 and 91 C. > b) Mizuno told me that the rate at which the voltage changes should be > small. Here is how we arrive to favorable conditions: > aa) Apply 100 V for about 15 minutes. > bb) Apply 150 V for the next ~5 minutes > cc) Apply 200 V for the next ~15 min > dd) Apply 250 V for the next ~15 min > ee) Apply 300 V for about 60 min > ff) Apply 350 V and start measuring the COP (5 min per run)" > "Data collected under favorable conditions are in agreement with what was > reported by Fauvarque et al. We constructed a histogram of the COP > distribution for the run performed at 300 and 350 V. So far it has 33 data > "bricks." It shows 24 results with the COP between 1.2 and 1.4, 3 results > with the COP between 1.4 and 1.4, 10 data points with the COP between 1 > and > 1.2, and one result with the COP of 0.81" > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 09:36:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53GaZi9020768; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:36:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53GaX0o020750; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:36:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:36:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=bakhBATlA5ykSozOYOKxQgoudRY8Ij2mtlUIy/lu1lJ3DURvC9+QtnRxQilKyQcu; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663163617585@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:36:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940f6cca37b1ef6f23a0d7d9fb7edb87f65350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.1 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68656 X-Loop: vortex-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 Were you serious, Michel? :-) Google of La Petomaine: http://www.amiannoying.com/(j5fmnq55g2l1mkv1te4jshrb)/view.aspx?ID=4101 Joseph Pujol "(1857-1945) Born in Marseilles, son of a baker/confectioner Parisian music hall entertainer famed for his flatulent act at the Moulin Rouge in Paris (1898-99) Precursor for the likes of 'Mr. Methane' 'Discovered' his talent accidentally at twelve, while swimming underwater off Marseilles Nickname was 'Le Petomaine' (French for 'the farting gentleman' ." "Why he might not be annoying Medical science was unable to explain how he was able to control his flatulence. His ability was written up in leading medical journals. He performed as a travelling act after being fired from the Moulin Rouge." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Were you serious, Michel?  :-)
 
Google of La Petomaine:
 
 
Joseph Pujol
 
"(1857-1945)
Born in Marseilles, son of a baker/confectioner
Parisian music hall entertainer famed for his flatulent act at the Moulin Rouge in Paris (1898-99)
Precursor for the likes of 'Mr. Methane'
'Discovered' his talent accidentally at twelve, while swimming underwater off Marseilles
Nickname was 'Le Petomaine' (French for 'the farting gentleman' ."
 
"Why he might not be annoying
Medical science was unable to explain how he was able to control his flatulence.
His ability was written up in leading medical journals.
He performed as a travelling act after being fired from the Moulin Rouge."
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 09:50:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53GnqCf027801; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:49:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53GnpOo027777; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:49:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:49:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0db101c6871a$dc7eba30$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006663135330348@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:34:46 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68657 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2: 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this correspond to the enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the reaction? The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or another, I haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of what it will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick question. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs > controversy? >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? >> > Is that a trick question, Michel? > > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H > bond.. > Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or Enthalpy. > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole) > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = 290 KJ when you oxidize iron > with O radicals. :-) > > OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + > H-H = 498 - 382 = 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. > > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf > > Fred. >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> To: "vortex-l" >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. >> > >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml >> > >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. > The >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals > play >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can > be >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of > the >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" >> > >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 09:57:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53GvSw6032543; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:57:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53GvPgU032511; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:57:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:57:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <1ced01c6872e$c7293610$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:57:19 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68658 X-Loop: vortex-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 "numbers-folks" amongst-us, here is some useful background data for the WasserCar, and for hydrogen fuel in general, along with ongoing commentary about the difference in using H2+O2 as opposed to "common-manifold," or Brown's gas. One mole of hydrogen is two grams; the gram molecule of water is 18 grams. Hydrogen relative mass in a water molecule is 2x100/18=11.1%; oxygen relative mass is 16x100/18=88.9%. This means that 111.1 grams of hydrogen and 888.9 grams of oxygen are in every 1000 grams, or every one liter of water. The computational problems seem to arise in getting the volume of gas quantified, as H2 is both volatile and easily compressible. One liter of hydrogen gas at STP weighs 0.09 g; one liter of oxygen weighs 1.47 g. It is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234 liters of hydrogen gas and 888.89/1.47=605 liters of oxygen gas from one liter of water liquid - and the "expansion ratio" is thus 1839-to-1 when completely gasified as separate components. The expansion ratio of water to steam is 1680-1, in contrast - so there is a slight negative volumetric efficiency in burning a stoichiometric mix. Every gram of water contains 1.23 liters of hydrogen gas. Energy consumption for production of 1000 liters of hydrogen gas, using traditional methods is ~4 kWh and for one liter ~4 Wh. When looked at from the perspective of the liquid, ~5Wh is applied to every gram of water for complete hydrogen conversion using modern traditional methods. The stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for burning hydrogen is in air in an ICE is 34:1, based on volume of all gases at STP. At this maximum air/fuel ratio, hydrogen will displace 29% of the combustion chamber leaving only 71% for the air. As a result, the energy content of this mixture will be less than it would be if the fuel were gasoline (since gasoline is a liquid, it only occupies a smaller volume of the combustion chamber, and thus allows more air to enter). Of the air, approximately 21% is oxygen, and most of the rest nitrogen - approximately a 4-1 ratio. This means that the volume of oxidizer is a limiting factor in a traditional ICE burning H2, since only 14% of the volume can be used of O2 in a stoichiometric situation. This situation results in either the need for a larger engine, or supercharging to get a similar output to the same engine fueled with gasoline. But there are a number of possible alternative practical solutions, among which the closed-cycle using a larger displacement, and eliminating nitrogen, is perhaps the best - on paper- IF enough fuel can be produced in an ongoing fashion by recycling a portion of the engine output - converted to electricity. A very demanding challenge, of course, and one which even the very suggestion - inflames mainstream science - not to mention the 'Seven Sisters.' To show how difficult this goal appears to be - paper, consider: The most modern traditional Electrolyzers consume 4.0 kWh per cubic meter of this gas. Electrolysis takes place at a voltage of ~2.0 V and current of hundreds of amperes for the gas necessary. This much current produces much waste heat is in the electrolysis cell, which is only about 85% efficient in the most modern versions. When one cubic meter of hydrogen is burnt efficiently only 3.55 kWh of energy is released - compared to the ~4 it took to make it, and it gets worse from there. Hydrogen ICEs do have a significantly higher Carnot efficiency, at least 40% which is fully one third higher than their gasoline equivalent, but that pales in comparison to the shortfall which is presented. BTW this boost in efficiency goes back to the using the complex formula a couple of paragraphs down. Even with the higher efficiency, when this H2 combustion heat is converted to electricity, it is easy to see that no more than about 25% of the electricity needed to self-power an ICE can possibly be available, using the best traditional methods - high current, low voltage electrolysis. But yet there are at least 150 anecdotal, eye-witness claims for self-power using only water-fuel on the internet. Is this all bunkum? What is going on? And since the goal is not just self-power, but enough "overage" to use the engine for transportation, it is clear that a minimum COP of about 8-to-1 is necessary. More likely, the goal should be 10-1 improvement compared to normal electrolysis... which if true, begs the question: what is the real power source. Short answer: if the claims are true then it must involve either a nuclear reaction, below ground state hydrogen (hydrino), or ZPE. But first realize that nature does this on her own - and that is the importance of "surface effects" and the Helmholtz layer - which arguably tap into ZPE. Bond breaking always requires energy input, of course. Otherwise everything would fall apart all by itself, but not necessarily energy input above ambient or net input. In the case of hydrogen bonding, the thermodynamics are distinctly different from covalent. The natural molecular movements in water involve the constant breaking and reorganization of individual hydrogen bonds on a picosecond timescale, and the process must necessarily be nearly lossless, due to the enormous "transaction volume." One report in a respected physic journal indicated that the formula for water, on this picosecond time scale, is more like H1.5-O than H2-O (however that finding is in dispute) But the bottom line is that to utilize this intrinsic OU feature of water-reality, which is certainly a Casimir effect, we do not have to break the hydrogen bond of water - so much as to limit recombination following natural breakage !!! AHA - now we are getting a picture of why the Meyer electrostatic situation might work - it is not break the bond, as does traditional electrolysis, but is *limiting recombination.* Let's backtrack first to the issue of theoretical thermodynamic efficiency of an ICE which is based on the compression ratio of the engine, and the specific-heat ratio of the fuel and the Carnot "spread". The compression ratio limit of an engine is based on the fuel's resistance to "knock." A lean hydrogen mixture is less susceptible to knock than gasoline and therefore can tolerate higher compression ratios. The specific-heat ratio is related to the fuel's molecular structure. The less complex the molecular structure, the higher the specific-heat ratio. Hydrogen = 1.4 has a simpler molecular structure than gasoline and therefore its specific-heat ratio is higher than that of conventional gasoline = 1.1. However, either of these, burned in a more efficient oxidizer, like peroxides or super-oxidated mixed gases, can increase the effective specific heat dramatically. But the situation is not apples-to-apples, by any means, for two reasons. In common manifold electrolysis (Brown's gas) there are three gas streams - an anode gas (mostly O2), a cathode gas (most H2) and a neutral-plate mixed gas (mixed peroxides ). In this situation, the anode and cathode are conservative, like traditional methods, but most of the energy derives from the neutral-plate component - the mixed peroxides and superoxides, which are subject to speedy recombination. The next step in the evolution towards a reliable water-fuel system might well involve using the best feature of all of the prior art - the Meyer capacitance cell, the Brown's gas neutral plate design AND the Joe-cell contribution - which is the water pretreatment regime (he copied the neutral plate design from Brown). The next few months could be a promising time frame for this grass-roots technology, and it is just too bad (for many of us) that most of the action appears to be overseas nowadays .... and even worse, that so much disinformation is mixed into the lore of the WasserCar... to be expected perhaps for a subject first explored by none other than Jules Verne - and the subject of a David Mamet play. This may sound a bit cynical and/or paranoid, but it would not surprise me if some of the inordinate amount of disinformation out there was being promoted by special interests. Look at Chevron's books close enough, and you just might may see big payments to the Reich institute, or cases of Foster's fine brew being sent over to Joe and his pals, etc... Sorry Patrick, one has to draw the line somewhere, and for me it is above 'orgone' and about 2/3 of Joe's B.S.... but then again, that appraisal may change tomorrow, with even the tiniest bit of proof. Jones Progress is all a balancing act. Keeping an open-mind is important, but remember that a sieve doesn't hold much water... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 10:43:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53HgwQS025172; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:42:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53HgrSx025117; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:42:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:42:53 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=BEyZbILnH5yEEtRChLryUmdMz3SwAjHgAodIgulxRAjh+/R8EGAcn618rHutF5Lx; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663174215855@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:42:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403eb7297c77bf9fa3bb2c1e86645b6b5b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.121 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68659 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2: > > 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O > Gibbs Free Energy from CRC tables. HOH - 56.687 (liquid) OH + 8.18 HO-OH - 28.78 H +48.58 H2 0.00 O + 55.39 O2 0.00 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) -----> 2 H2O (liquid) 2 times -56.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole = - 475 KJ Gibbs Free Energy for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at STP. Measured innumerable times in a bomb calorimeter. > > How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this correspond to the > enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the reaction? > > The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or another, I > haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of what it > will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick question. > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM > Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > > > > Michel Jullian wrote: > >> > >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs > > controversy? > >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the > >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? > >> > > Is that a trick question, Michel? > > > > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H > > bond.. > > Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or Enthalpy. > > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole) > > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = 290 KJ when you oxidize iron > > with O radicals. :-) > > > > OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + > > H-H = 498 - 382 = 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy > > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. > > > > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf > > > > Fred. > >> > >> Michel > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Frederick Sparber" > >> To: "vortex-l" > >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM > >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > >> > >> > >> > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. > >> > > >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml > >> > > >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. > > The > >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals > > play > >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain > >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, > >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This can > > be > >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some of > > the > >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" > >> > > >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary > >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the > >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if they > >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to the > >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and > >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of > >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" > >> > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 10:53:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53HrNn0030983; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:53:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53HrIYE030937; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:53:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:53:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0e3701c68736$4e8105a0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006663163617585@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:51:13 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68660 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oh I see, "La petomaine" meant "Le pétomane", I would never have thought you barbars could mangle French gender and spelling that much ;-) I guess the spelling mistake stems from US mispronunciation "petomain" instead of "petoman"? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 6:36 PM Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current > Were you serious, Michel? :-) > > Google of La Petomaine: > > http://www.amiannoying.com/(j5fmnq55g2l1mkv1te4jshrb)/view.aspx?ID=4101 > > Joseph Pujol > > "(1857-1945) > Born in Marseilles, son of a baker/confectioner > Parisian music hall entertainer famed for his flatulent act at the Moulin > Rouge in Paris (1898-99) > Precursor for the likes of 'Mr. Methane' > 'Discovered' his talent accidentally at twelve, while swimming underwater > off Marseilles > Nickname was 'Le Petomaine' (French for 'the farting gentleman' ." > > "Why he might not be annoying > Medical science was unable to explain how he was able to control his > flatulence. > His ability was written up in leading medical journals. > He performed as a travelling act after being fired from the Moulin Rouge." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:08:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53I8bMZ007909; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:08:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53I8W2L007863; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:08:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:08:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=MxUAjASKL9jDqDW2E3zuvTktAikt9gaDUBM+INSCsDVZP4Enz0BRk7roxFwTXihz; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666318819634@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:08:19 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c4c052a09c35822d2ea6ab73d99c8138350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.216 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68661 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: USe This downloadable-storable Otto and Diesel Calculator and plug in Argon (gamma 1.67) Jones. Just by changing gamma from 1.4 for air on a 7:1 compression ratio closed Ottto cycle engine the efficiecy jumps from 54.08% to 72.85% http://members.aol.com/engware/calc3.htm Our 12 "wall-plate" electrolysis cell is generating lots of "Brown's Gas" or H + OH at 0.8 amperes 12 volts (9.6 watts) on the 11 series cells (~1.1 volts/cell) (10 floating plates) with the NaHCO3-Borax mix. pH ~ 10.5. Jones Beene wrote. > > For the "numbers-folks" amongst-us, here is some useful background > data for the WasserCar, and for hydrogen fuel in general, along > with ongoing commentary about the difference in using H2+O2 as > opposed to "common-manifold," or Brown's gas. > > One mole of hydrogen is two grams; the gram molecule of water is > 18 grams. Hydrogen relative mass in a water molecule is > 2x100/18=11.1%; oxygen relative mass is 16x100/18=88.9%. This > means that 111.1 grams of hydrogen and 888.9 grams of oxygen are > in every 1000 grams, or every one liter of water. The > computational problems seem to arise in getting the volume of gas > quantified, as H2 is both volatile and easily compressible. > > One liter of hydrogen gas at STP weighs 0.09 g; one liter of > oxygen weighs 1.47 g. It is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234 > liters of hydrogen gas and 888.89/1.47=605 liters of oxygen gas > from one liter of water liquid - and the "expansion ratio" is thus > 1839-to-1 when completely gasified as separate components. The > expansion ratio of water to steam is 1680-1, in contrast - so > there is a slight negative volumetric efficiency in burning a > stoichiometric mix. > Every gram of water contains 1.23 liters of hydrogen gas. Energy > consumption for production of 1000 liters of hydrogen gas, using > traditional methods is ~4 kWh and for one liter ~4 Wh. When looked > at from the perspective of the liquid, ~5Wh is applied to every > gram of water for complete hydrogen conversion using modern > traditional methods. > > The stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for burning hydrogen is in air > in an ICE is 34:1, based on volume of all gases at STP. At this > maximum air/fuel ratio, hydrogen will displace 29% of the > combustion chamber leaving only 71% for the air. As a result, the > energy content of this mixture will be less than it would be if > the fuel were gasoline (since gasoline is a liquid, it only > occupies a smaller volume of the combustion chamber, and thus > allows more air to enter). Of the air, approximately 21% is > oxygen, and most of the rest nitrogen - approximately a 4-1 ratio. > > This means that the volume of oxidizer is a limiting factor in a > traditional ICE burning H2, since only 14% of the volume can be > used of O2 in a stoichiometric situation. This situation results > in either the need for a larger engine, or supercharging to get a > similar output to the same engine fueled with gasoline. But there > are a number of possible alternative practical solutions, among > which the closed-cycle using a larger displacement, and > eliminating nitrogen, is perhaps the best - on paper- IF enough > fuel can be produced in an ongoing fashion by recycling a portion > of the engine output - converted to electricity. A very demanding > challenge, of course, and one which even the very suggestion - > inflames mainstream science - not to mention the 'Seven Sisters.' > > To show how difficult this goal appears to be - paper, consider: > The most modern traditional Electrolyzers consume 4.0 kWh per > cubic meter of this gas. Electrolysis takes place at a voltage of > ~2.0 V and current of hundreds of amperes for the gas necessary. > This much current produces much waste heat is in the electrolysis > cell, which is only about 85% efficient in the most modern > versions. > > When one cubic meter of hydrogen is burnt efficiently only 3.55 > kWh of energy is released - compared to the ~4 it took to make it, > and it gets worse from there. Hydrogen ICEs do have a > significantly higher Carnot efficiency, at least 40% which is > fully one third higher than their gasoline equivalent, but that > pales in comparison to the shortfall which is presented. BTW this > boost in efficiency goes back to the using the complex formula a > couple of paragraphs down. > > Even with the higher efficiency, when this H2 combustion heat is > converted to electricity, it is easy to see that no more than > about 25% of the electricity needed to self-power an ICE can > possibly be available, using the best traditional methods - high > current, low voltage electrolysis. But yet there are at least 150 > anecdotal, eye-witness claims for self-power using only water-fuel > on the internet. Is this all bunkum? What is going on? > > And since the goal is not just self-power, but enough "overage" to > use the engine for transportation, it is clear that a minimum COP > of about 8-to-1 is necessary. More likely, the goal should be 10-1 > improvement compared to normal electrolysis... which if true, begs > the question: what is the real power source. Short answer: if the > claims are true then it must involve either a nuclear reaction, > below ground state hydrogen (hydrino), or ZPE. But first realize > that nature does this on her own - and that is the importance of > "surface effects" and the Helmholtz layer - which arguably tap > into ZPE. > > Bond breaking always requires energy input, of course. Otherwise > everything would fall apart all by itself, but not necessarily > energy input above ambient or net input. In the case of hydrogen > bonding, the thermodynamics are distinctly different from > covalent. The natural molecular movements in water involve the > constant breaking and reorganization of individual hydrogen bonds > on a picosecond timescale, and the process must necessarily be > nearly lossless, due to the enormous "transaction volume." One > report in a respected physic journal indicated that the formula > for water, on this picosecond time scale, is more like H1.5-O than > H2-O (however that finding is in dispute) But the bottom line is > that to utilize this intrinsic OU feature of water-reality, which > is certainly a Casimir effect, we do not have to break the > hydrogen bond of water - so much as to limit recombination > following natural breakage !!! AHA - now we are getting a picture > of why the Meyer electrostatic situation might work - it is not > break the bond, as does traditional electrolysis, but is *limiting > recombination.* > > Let's backtrack first to the issue of theoretical thermodynamic > efficiency of an ICE which is based on the compression ratio of > the engine, and the specific-heat ratio of the fuel and the Carnot > "spread". The compression ratio limit of an engine is based on the > fuel's resistance to "knock." A lean hydrogen mixture is less > susceptible to knock than gasoline and therefore can tolerate > higher compression ratios. The specific-heat ratio is related to > the fuel's molecular structure. The less complex the molecular > structure, the higher the specific-heat ratio. Hydrogen = 1.4 has > a simpler molecular structure than gasoline and therefore its > specific-heat ratio is higher than that of conventional gasoline = > 1.1. However, either of these, burned in a more efficient > oxidizer, like peroxides or super-oxidated mixed gases, can > increase the effective specific heat dramatically. > > But the situation is not apples-to-apples, by any means, for two > reasons. In common manifold electrolysis (Brown's gas) there are > three gas streams - an anode gas (mostly O2), a cathode gas (most > H2) and a neutral-plate mixed gas (mixed peroxides ). In this > situation, the anode and cathode are conservative, like > traditional methods, but most of the energy derives from the > neutral-plate component - the mixed peroxides and superoxides, > which are subject to speedy recombination. > > The next step in the evolution towards a reliable water-fuel > system might well involve using the best feature of all of the > prior art - the Meyer capacitance cell, the Brown's gas neutral > plate design AND the Joe-cell contribution - which is the water > pretreatment regime (he copied the neutral plate design from > Brown). > > The next few months could be a promising time frame for this > grass-roots technology, and it is just too bad (for many of us) > that most of the action appears to be overseas nowadays .... and > even worse, that so much disinformation is mixed into the lore of > the WasserCar... to be expected perhaps for a subject first > explored by none other than Jules Verne - and the subject of a > David Mamet play. > > This may sound a bit cynical and/or paranoid, but it would not > surprise me if some of the inordinate amount of disinformation out > there was being promoted by special interests. Look at Chevron's > books close enough, and you just might may see big payments to the > Reich institute, or cases of Foster's fine brew being sent over to > Joe and his pals, etc... Sorry Patrick, one has to draw the > line somewhere, and for me it is above 'orgone' and about 2/3 of > Joe's B.S.... but then again, that appraisal may change tomorrow, > with even the tiniest bit of proof. > > Jones > > Progress is all a balancing act. Keeping an open-mind is > important, but remember that a sieve doesn't hold much water... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:12:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53IBwcU010617; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:11:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53IBuB9010586; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:11:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:11:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0e4c01c68738$e79bbee0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006663174215855@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:09:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E49_01C68749.AB056E20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68662 X-Loop: vortex-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_0E49_01C68749.AB056E20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My spreadsheet finds at 25=B0 and 1atm: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol (exothermic) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about 1477=B0C. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Molar masses and thermodynamic properties Enthalpy change kJ/mol Entropy change J/K/mol Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol =20 Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet -571.66 =20 -326.69 =20 -474.31 =20 =20 Again I agree with your dG value as you can see at bottom right of the = above table, but I suggest innumerable calorimeters have measured a = thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole (enthalpy) rather than 474 or 475 kJ/mole = (Gibbs) Michel ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions=20 > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2: >> >> 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O >>=20 >=20 > Gibbs Free Energy from CRC tables. >=20 > HOH - 56.687 (liquid) > OH + 8.18 > HO-OH - 28.78 > H +48.58 > H2 0.00 > O + 55.39 > O2 0.00 >=20 >=20 > 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) -----> 2 H2O (liquid) >=20 > 2 times -56.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole =3D - 475 KJ Gibbs Free = Energy > for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at STP. >=20 > Measured innumerable times in a bomb calorimeter. >> >> How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this correspond = to > the=20 >> enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the reaction? >> >> The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or > another, I=20 >> haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of = what it=20 >> will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick = question. >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message -----=20 >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> To: >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> >> >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs >> > controversy? >> >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you = think, the >> >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? >> >> >> > Is that a trick question, Michel? >> > >> > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the = O-H=20 >> > bond.. >> > Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or > Enthalpy. >> > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 = KJ/Mole) >> > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 =3D 290 KJ when you oxidize = iron >> > with O radicals. :-) >> > >> > OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + >> > H-H =3D 498 - 382 =3D 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy >> > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. >> > >> > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf >> > >> > Fred. >> >> >> >> Michel >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message -----=20 >> >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> >> To: "vortex-l" >> >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM >> >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> >> >> >> > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. >> >> > >> >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml >> >> > >> >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain = reactions. >> > The >> >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free = radicals >> > play >> >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The = chain >> >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, >> >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. = This > can >> > be >> >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by = some > of >> > the >> >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" >> >> > >> >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from = elementary >> >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of = the >> >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, = if > they >> >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead = to > the >> >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction = time and >> >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the = type of >> >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" >> >> >> > >> > >> >=20 >> >=20 >=20 > ------=_NextPart_000_0E49_01C68749.AB056E20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My spreadsheet finds at 25=B0 and=20 1atm:
 

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol=20 (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about=20 1477=B0C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic = properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change = kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of = spreadsheet

-571.66

-326.69

-474.31

 
Again I agree with your dG value = as you can=20 see at bottom right of the above table, but I suggest innumerable = calorimeters=20 have measured a thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole (enthalpy) rather = than 474 or=20 475 kJ/mole (Gibbs)
 
Michel
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42 = PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain = Reactions=20

> Michel Jullian wrote:
>>
>> Fred I = really meant=20 "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2:
>>
>> 2 H2 = + O2=20 ----> 2 H2O
>>
>
> Gibbs Free Energy from = CRC=20 tables.
> 
> HOH     - 56.687=20 (liquid)
> = OH          +=20 8.18
> HO-OH   - 28.78
>=20 H            =   =20 +48.58
>=20 H2            = ; =20 0.00
>=20 O            =   =20 + 55.39
>=20 O2            = ; =20 0.00
>
>
> 2 H2  (g) + O2 (g) ----->  2 = H2O=20 (liquid)
>
> 2 times -56.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole =3D - = 475 KJ=20 Gibbs Free Energy
> for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at = STP.
>=20
> Measured innumerable times in a bomb=20 calorimeter.
>>
>> How many joules per mole does this = produce,=20 and does this correspond to
> the
>> enthalpy change or = to the=20 Gibbs free energy change of the reaction?
>>
>> The = question=20 is only intended to solve the controversy one way or
> another, I=20
>> haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own = opinion of=20 what it
>> will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call = it a=20 trick question.
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> = -----=20 Original Message -----
>> From: "Frederick Sparber" = <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>=20 Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: Free = Radical=20 Chain Reactions
>>
>>
>> > Michel Jullian=20 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> BTW Fred, have you = given some=20 thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs
>> > = controversy?
>>=20 >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you = think,=20 the
>> >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy=20 change?
>> >>
>> > Is that a trick question,=20 Michel?
>> >
>> > The H-H bond is 498 = Kjoule/mole the=20 same as the O-O bond and the O-H
>> > bond..
>> = > Hence=20 overall,  H-H + O-O ---->  H-O-H   + O  nets = Zip=20 Gibbs or
> Enthalpy.
>> > But, O + Fe ---> = Fe-O:  Fe-O=20 (390 KJ/mole) minus  Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole)
>> > equals a = Gibbs=20 Free Energy of 390-100 =3D 290 KJ when you oxidize iron
>> > = with O=20 radicals.  :-)
>> >
>> > OTOH,  = H-O-H  2=20 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO  (382 KJ/mole) +
>> > = H-H =3D 498=20 - 382 =3D  116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy
>> > = with the=20 Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams.
>> >
>> > = http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf
>> >
>> > Fred.
>>=20 >>
>> >> Michel
>> >>
>> = >>=20 ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Frederick = Sparber"=20 <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> >> To: "vortex-l" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>=20 >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM
>> >> = Subject: Re:=20 Free Radical Chain Reactions
>> >>
>>=20 >>
>> >> > Actually  2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 = H2O has=20 about 14  reaction steps.
>> >> >
>> = >>=20 > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml>> >> >
>> >> > = "Another=20 important consideration is the formation of chain reactions.
>> = >=20 The
>> >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms = is also=20 that free radicals
>> > play
>> >> > a = leading=20 role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain
>> = >>=20 > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps:=20 initiation,
>> >> > propagation, branching (not always = present), and termination. This
> can
>> > = be
>>=20 >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and = pressure, by=20 some
> of
>> > the
>> >> > reactions = in the=20 following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:"
>> >> = >
>>=20 >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from=20 elementary
>> >> > reactions using free radicals as = the means=20 for decomposition of the
>> >> > reactant, and = intermediate=20 products. Chain branching reactions, if
> they
>> = >> >=20 occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead = to
>=20 the
>> >> > formation of increasing concentrations of=20 radicals. Reaction time and
>> >> > temperature have a = bearing=20 on radical concentration, and the type of
>> >> > = reaction=20 initiating the consumption of the reactant"
>> = >>
>>=20 >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>=20
> ------=_NextPart_000_0E49_01C68749.AB056E20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:35:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53IZPhG023289; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:35:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53IZLF5023234; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:35:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:35:21 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=WFieGzsTEMnoeBVqCsDsv3OyKwnAORB9s4ed7aWBrhAMuFrvU27A0EtEChwGIPun; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:35:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9405ca40e8c73fa1865198c762d45917190350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.216 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68663 X-Loop: vortex-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 How do they do that? My calculations are always using dG algebra like my mentors told me. BTW. I don't have Excel. :-( Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Michel Jullian To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/3/2006 12:13:36 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions My spreadsheet finds at 25° and 1atm: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol (exothermic) Spontaneous at 25°C. Equilibrium at about 1477°C. Molar masses and thermodynamic propertiesEnthalpy change kJ/molEntropy change J/K/molGibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet-571.66-326.69-474.31 Again I agree with your dG value as you can see at bottom right of the above table, but I suggest innumerable calorimeters have measured a thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole (enthalpy) rather than 474 or 475 kJ/mole (Gibbs) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2: >> >> 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O >> > > Gibbs Free Energy from CRC tables. > > HOH - 56.687 (liquid) > OH + 8.18 > HO-OH - 28.78 > H +48.58 > H2 0.00 > O + 55.39 > O2 0.00 > > > 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) -----> 2 H2O (liquid) > > 2 times -56.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole = - 475 KJ Gibbs Free Energy > for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at STP. > > Measured innumerable times in a bomb calorimeter. >> >> How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this correspond to > the >> enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the reaction? >> >> The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or > another, I >> haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of what it >> will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick question. >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> To: >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> >> >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs >> > controversy? >> >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the >> >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? >> >> >> > Is that a trick question, Michel? >> > >> > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H >> > bond.. >> > Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or > Enthalpy. >> > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole) >> > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = 290 KJ when you oxidize iron >> > with O radicals. :-) >> > >> > OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + >> > H-H = 498 - 382 = 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy >> > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. >> > >> > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf >> > >> > Fred. >> >> >> >> Michel >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> >> To: "vortex-l" >> >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 PM >> >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> >> >> >> > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction steps. >> >> > >> >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml >> >> > >> >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions. >> > The >> >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals >> > play >> >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain >> >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation, >> >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This > can >> > be >> >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some > of >> > the >> >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" >> >> > >> >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary >> >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the >> >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if > they >> >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to > the >> >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and >> >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of >> >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > > ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
How do they do that?
 
My  calculations are always using dG  algebra like my mentors told me. 
 
BTW. I don't have Excel. :-(
 
Fred
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/3/2006 12:13:36 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions

My spreadsheet finds at 25° and 1atm:
 

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 25°C. Equilibrium at about 1477°C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet

-571.66

-326.69

-474.31

 
Again I agree with your dG value as you can see at bottom right of the above table, but I suggest innumerable calorimeters have measured a thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole (enthalpy) rather than 474 or 475 kJ/mole (Gibbs)
 
Michel
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions

> Michel Jullian wrote:
>>
>> Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2:
>>
>> 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O
>>
>
> Gibbs Free Energy from CRC tables.
> 
> HOH     - 56.687 (liquid)
> OH          + 8.18
> HO-OH   - 28.78
> H               +48.58
> H2              0.00
> O               + 55.39
> O2              0.00
>
>
> 2 H2  (g) + O2 (g) ----->  2 H2O (liquid)
>
> 2 times -56.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole = - 475 KJ Gibbs Free Energy
> for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at STP.
>
> Measured innumerable times in a bomb calorimeter.
>>
>> How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this correspond to
> the
>> enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the reaction?
>>
>> The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or
> another, I
>> haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of what it
>> will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick question.
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com&g! t;
&g t;> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions
>>
>>
>> > Michel Jullian wrote:
>> >>
>> >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs
>> > controversy?
>> >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you think, the
>> >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change?
>> >>
>> > Is that a trick question, Michel?
>> >
>> > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H
>> > bond..
>> > Hence overall,  H-H + O-O ---->  H-O-H   + O  nets Zip Gibbs or
> Enthalpy.
>> > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O:  Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus  Fe-Fe (100 KJ/Mole)
>> > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = 290 KJ when you oxidize iron
>> > with O radicals.  :-)
>> >
>> > OTOH,  H-O-H  2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO  (382 KJ/mole) +
>> > H-H = 498 - 382 =  116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy
>> > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams.
>> >
>> > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf
>> >
>> > Fred.
>> >>
>> >> Michel
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> >> To: "vortex-l" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 ! PM
&g t;> >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Actually  2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14  reaction steps.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml
>> >> >
>> >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain reactions.
>> > The
>> >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free radicals
>> > play
>> >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The chain
>> >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: initiation,
>> >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and termination. This
> can
>> > be
>> >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, by some
> of
>> > the
>> >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:"
>> >> >
>> >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from elementary
>> >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition of the
>> >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, if
> they
>> >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they lead to
> the
>> >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time and
>> >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the type of
>> >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant"
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> < /BODY> ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:40:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53Idx99026525; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:39:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53IdvQd026501; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:39:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:39:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 14:39:50 -0400 Message-Id: <8C855543B615A16-60C-249BB@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <1ced01c6872e$c7293610$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <1ced01c6872e$c7293610$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68664 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene For the "numbers-folks" amongst-us, here is some useful background data for the WasserCar, <><><><><> Thanks, Mr. Beene! I have been meaning to put all this together in one post but have not had the time. Excellent post! Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:49:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53ImsBv000316; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:48:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53ImrrX032759; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:48:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:48:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <1cfc01c6873e$58810390$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-2200666318819634@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 11:48:45 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68665 X-Loop: vortex-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 > Our 12 "wall-plate" electrolysis cell is generating lots of > "Brown's Gas" or H + OH at 0.8 amperes 12 volts (9.6 watts) on > the > 11 series cells (~1.1 volts/cell) (10 floating plates) with the > NaHCO3-Borax mix. pH ~ 10.5. Can you get idea of the thermodynamic balance P-in to P-out ? This is very difficult with Brown's gas, admittedly, as it is hard to be sure what you have, and in what proportions, so measuring the volume of gas means nothing. One way might be to burn the gas in a controlled way (using a flame/spark arrestor of course, to protect the cell) and heat a large mass for a precise time - say a cast iron skillet. The delta-T should at least be accurate for purposes of making improvements in the same device. I know it is difficult to pull-off, but I would love to see a comparative study between this kind of BG set-up and something similar in design but with the Stanley Meyer parameters, using distilled water and the high voltage, milliamp current equal to the same ~10 watts, BUT using the neutral plates, which Meyer did not use. Maybe the two setups are incompatible, maybe synergistic. No way to tell without trying it in the same type configuration. That is on my list, pending the outcome of today's Lotto drawing One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12 hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte, because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 12:01:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53J0q0x006867; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:00:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53J0meK006811; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:00:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:00:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C68750.7C77FE90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68666 X-Loop: vortex-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_0E8A_01C68750.7C77FE90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans = see what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has = expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have = missed the language option) Michel PS About Excel, there are other spreasheet software around, some of = which are free and claim they can read xls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spreadsheets ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Frederick Sparber=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20 Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 8:35 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions=20 How do they do that? My calculations are always using dG algebra like my mentors told me. = =20 BTW. I don't have Excel. :-( Fred ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Michel Jullian=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/3/2006 12:13:36 PM=20 Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions=20 My spreadsheet finds at 25=B0 and 1atm: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol (exothermic) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about 1477=B0C. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Molar masses and thermodynamic properties Enthalpy change kJ/mol Entropy change J/K/mol Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol =20 Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet -571.66 =20 -326.69 =20 -474.31 =20 =20 Again I agree with your dG value as you can see at bottom right of = the above table, but I suggest innumerable calorimeters have measured a = thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole (enthalpy) rather than 474 or 475 kJ/mole = (Gibbs) Michel ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions=20 > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> Fred I really meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in O2: >> >> 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O >>=20 >=20 > Gibbs Free Energy from CRC tables. >=20 > HOH - 56.687 (liquid) > OH + 8.18 > HO-OH - 28.78 > H +48.58 > H2 0.00 > O + 55.39 > O2 0.00 >=20 >=20 > 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) -----> 2 H2O (liquid) >=20 > 2 times -5! 6.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole =3D - 475 KJ Gibbs Free = Energy > for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at STP. >=20 > Measured innumerable times in a bomb calorimeter. >> >> How many joules per mole does this produce, and does this = correspond to > the=20 >> enthalpy change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the = reaction? >> >> The question is only intended to solve the controversy one way or > another, I=20 >> haven't looked up the answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of = what it=20 >> will be (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick = question. >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message -----=20 >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> To: Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 PM >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> > Michel Jullian wrote: >> >> >> >> BTW Fred, have you given some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs >> > controversy? >> >> Which energy can be recovered from the reaction below do you = think, the >> >> enthalpy change or the Gibbs free energy change? >> >> >> > Is that a trick question, Michel? >> > >> > The H-H bond is 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and = the O-H=20 >> > bond.. >> > Hence overall, H-H + O-O ----> H-O-H + O nets Zip Gibbs or > Enthalpy. >> > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O: Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus Fe-Fe (100 = KJ/Mole) >> > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 =3D 290 KJ when you = oxidize iron >> >! with O radicals. :-) >> > >> > OTOH, H-O-H 2 x 498 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO (382 KJ/mole) + >> > H-H =3D 498 - 382 =3D 116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy >> > with the Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams. >> > >> > http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf >> > >> > Fred. >> >> >> >> Michel >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message -----=20 >> >> From: "Frederick Sparber" >> >> To: "vortex-l" >> >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:52 ! PM &g t;> >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions >> >> >> >> >> >> > Actually 2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14 reaction = steps. >> >> > >> >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml >> >> > >> >> > "Another important consideration is the formation of chain = reactions. >> > The >> >> > basic premise of chain reaction mechanisms is also that free = radicals >> > play >> >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant molecules. The = chain >> >> > reaction mechanism itself consists of several steps: = initiation, >> >> > propagation, branching (not always present), and = termination. This > can >! ;> > be >> >> > illustrated, for certain range of temperature and pressure, = by some > of >> > the >> >> > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation mechanism:" >> >> > >> >> > "To summarize, reaction mechanisms can be assembled from = elementary >> >> > reactions using free radicals as the means for decomposition = of the >> >> > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching = reactions, if > they >> >> > occur, take a very important role in the mechanism as they = lead to > the >> >> > formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction = time and >> >> > temperature have a bearing on radical concentration, and the = type of >> >> > reaction initiating the consumption of the reactant" >> >> >> > >> > >> &g! t;=20 >> >=20 >=20 > < /BODY> ------=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C68750.7C77FE90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own = mentor=20 told it, Fred.
 
You could try downloading the trial version of = CHEMIX=20 (Google it) ans see what their thermochemistry section gives for this = reaction?=20 Mine has expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason = (must have=20 missed the language option)
 
Michel
 
PS About Excel, there are other spreasheet = software=20 around, some of which are free and claim they can read xls:
http://en.wiki= pedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spreadsheets
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Frederick Sparber
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 = 8:35=20 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain = Reactions=20

How do they do that?
 
My  calculations are always using dG  algebra like my = mentors=20 told me. 
 
BTW. I don't have Excel. :-(
 
Fred
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Michel = Jullian
Sent: 6/3/2006 12:13:36 PM =
Subject: Re: Free Radical = Chain=20 Reactions

My spreadsheet finds at 25=B0 = and=20 1atm:
 

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(l) + 571.66 kJ/mol = (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about=20 1477=B0C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic = properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change = kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of = spreadsheet

-571.66

-326.69

-474.31

 
Again I agree with your dG = value as you=20 can see at bottom right of the above table, but I suggest = innumerable=20 calorimeters have measured a thermal energy of 572 kJ/mole=20 (enthalpy) rather than 474 or 475 kJ/mole (Gibbs)
 
Michel
 
----- Original Message ----- =
From: "Frederick Sparber" = <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:42=20 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain = Reactions=20

> Michel Jullian wrote:
>>
>> Fred I = really=20 meant "the reaction below", H2 combustion in = O2:
>>
>> 2=20 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O
>>
>
> Gibbs Free = Energy=20 from CRC tables.
> 
> HOH     - = 56.687=20 (liquid)
> = OH          +=20 8.18
> HO-OH   - 28.78
>=20 = H            =   =20 +48.58
>=20 = H2            = ; =20 0.00
>=20 = O            =   =20 + 55.39
>=20 = O2            = ; =20 0.00
>
>
> 2 H2  (g) + O2 (g) = ----->  2 H2O=20 (liquid)
>
> 2 times -5! 6.687 Kcal/mole or 2 x KJ/mole = =3D - 475=20 KJ Gibbs Free Energy
> for combustion of 2 moles of H2 at = STP.
>=20
> Measured innumerable times in a bomb=20 calorimeter.
>>
>> How many joules per mole does = this=20 produce, and does this correspond to
> the
>> = enthalpy=20 change or to the Gibbs free energy change of the=20 reaction?
>>
>> The question is only intended to = solve the=20 controversy one way or
> another, I
>> haven't = looked up the=20 answer. Admittedly I have my own opinion of what it
>> = will be=20 (enthalpy), so in this sense you can call it a trick=20 question.
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> = -----=20 Original Message -----
>> From: "Frederick Sparber" = <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com&g! = t;
&g t;> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 3:53 = PM
>>=20 Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain=20 Reactions
>>
>>
>> > Michel Jullian=20 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> BTW Fred, have you = given=20 some thought to our enthalpy vs Gibbs
>> >=20 controversy?
>> >> Which energy can be recovered from = the=20 reaction below do you think, the
>> >> enthalpy = change or the=20 Gibbs free energy change?
>> >>
>> > Is = that a=20 trick question, Michel?
>> >
>> > The H-H = bond is=20 498 Kjoule/mole the same as the O-O bond and the O-H
>> = >=20 bond..
>> > Hence overall,  H-H + O-O = ----> =20 H-O-H   + O  nets Zip Gibbs or
> = Enthalpy.
>>=20 > But, O + Fe ---> Fe-O:  Fe-O (390 KJ/mole) minus  = Fe-Fe=20 (100 KJ/Mole)
>> > equals a Gibbs Free Energy of 390-100 = =3D 290=20 KJ when you oxidize iron
>> >! with O radicals. =20 :-)
>> >
>> > OTOH,  H-O-H  2 x = 498=20 KJ/Mole + Ni ----> NiO  (382 KJ/mole) +
>> > H-H = =3D 498 -=20 382 =3D  116 KJ/mole. Easy to Compare Enthalpy
>> > = with the=20 Ellingham (enthalpy) Diagrams.
>> >
>> > = http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf
>> >
>> > = Fred.
>>=20 >>
>> >> Michel
>> = >>
>>=20 >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: = "Frederick=20 Sparber" <fjsparber@earthlink.net>
>> >> To: "vortex-l" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> >> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 = 4:52 !=20 PM
&g t;> >> Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain=20 Reactions
>> >>
>> >>
>> = >>=20 > Actually  2 H2 + O2 ----> 2 H2O has about 14  = reaction=20 steps.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml>> >> >
>> >> = > "Another=20 important consideration is the formation of chain = reactions.
>>=20 > The
>> >> > basic premise of chain reaction=20 mechanisms is also that free radicals
>> > = play
>>=20 >> > a leading role in the destruction of reactant = molecules. The=20 chain
>> >> > reaction mechanism itself consists = of=20 several steps: initiation,
>> >> > propagation, = branching=20 (not always present), and termination. This
> can
>! = ;> >=20 be
>> >> > illustrated, for certain range of = temperature=20 and pressure, by some
> of
>> > the
>> = >>=20 > reactions in the following Hydrogen oxidation = mechanism:"
>>=20 >> >
>> >> > "To summarize, reaction = mechanisms=20 can be assembled from elementary
>> >> > reactions = using=20 free radicals as the means for decomposition of the
>> = >>=20 > reactant, and intermediate products. Chain branching reactions, = if
> they
>> >> > occur, take a very = important role=20 in the mechanism as they lead to
> the
>> >> = >=20 formation of increasing concentrations of radicals. Reaction time=20 and
>> >> > temperature have a bearing on radical=20 concentration, and the type of
>> >> > reaction = initiating=20 the consumption of the reactant"
>> >>
>>=20 >
>> >
>> &g! t;
>>
> =
>=20
> <=20 /BODY>
------=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C68750.7C77FE90-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 12:59:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53JxQrY005318; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:59:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53JxOmu005301; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:59:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:59:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qnEmdd7+30Q5ijVjOmGmnI30uznD0PcvWNUbr7OWupemknbqFdXrX5yY8D6QpHR9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663195857729@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:58:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94082d67e7722e5c4130f46010a557c3ca1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68667 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel. In the reaction 2 H-H + O-O ----> 2 H-O-H you are breaking three 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV Bonds) = 1.490E6 joules input to make four 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds) = 1.99E6 joules for the 2 H-O-H molecules. Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - 1.49E6 = 498,000 Joules free energy. OTOH, 2 x 498,000 - 474,000 = 522,000 Joules, the higher calorimeter value in your spreadsheet vs the 474,000 joule/mole dG Free Energy. In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on "Water-based fuel for the ICE" this morning, he points to the Anomalous Free Energy that comes from using a lot less than 1/4th the energy (~ 1.0 - 2.5 eV or much less) to break the measured (5.17 eV) H-O-H bonds with emphasis on restricting recombination to the 5.17 eV H-H or O-O bonds in any electrolyzer if you want to maximize the combustion energy (making H-O-H bonds) from H, O, and/or OH radicals in an ICE. Reiterating using the Ellingham Diagrams for quick reference too. http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Michel.
 
In the reaction  2 H-H  + O-O ---->  2 H-O-H you are breaking  three 498,000 Joule/mole
(5.17 eV Bonds)  = 1.490E6 joules input to make four 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds)
= 1.99E6 joules for the 2 H-O-H molecules.
Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - 1.49E6 = 498,000 Joules free energy.
 
OTOH, 2 x 498,000 -  474,000 = 522,000 Joules, the higher calorimeter
value in your spreadsheet vs the 474,000 joule/mole dG Free Energy.
 
In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on "Water-based fuel for the ICE" this morning,
he points to the Anomalous Free Energy that comes from using a lot less than 1/4th the
energy (~ 1.0 - 2.5 eV or much less) to break the measured (5.17 eV) H-O-H
bonds with emphasis on restricting recombination  to the 5.17 eV H-H or O-O bonds
in any electrolyzer if you want to maximize the combustion energy
(making  H-O-H bonds) from H, O, and/or OH radicals in an ICE.
 
Reiterating using the Ellingham Diagrams for quick reference too.
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 13:10:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53K9qHg010713; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:09:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53K9ogm010686; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:09:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:09:50 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=fNRrxCbg/4ml3fAIhCMQssVG1aiBtU8a9X/Pq0GOr15gMyv/dUGt4vGOfKzhvMlz; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666320937659@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:09:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94065a5c6a98780c1b18617b9a80edddf02350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68668 X-Loop: vortex-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 > > > Our 12 "wall-plate" electrolysis cell is generating lots of > > "Brown's Gas" or H + OH at 0.8 amperes 12 volts (9.6 watts) on > > the > > 11 series cells (~1.1 volts/cell) (10 floating plates) with the > > NaHCO3-Borax mix. pH ~ 10.5. > > Can you get idea of the thermodynamic balance P-in to P-out ? This > is very difficult with Brown's gas, admittedly, as it is hard to > be sure what you have, and in what proportions, so measuring the > volume of gas means nothing. > My cohort 1800 miles distance as the crow flies isn't into calorimetry. Home depot sells those SS blank wall plates for about $1.30 each. or easier yet 1.5 to 2.0 inch diameter 1/4" to 1/2" holes "Fender Washers" stacked in a oversize PVC or clear acrylic tube using insulated rods and spacers puts you in the "Brown's Gas-HHO" business. Fred > > One way might be to burn the gas in a controlled way (using a > flame/spark arrestor of course, to protect the cell) and heat a > large mass for a precise time - say a cast iron skillet. The > delta-T should at least be accurate for purposes of making > improvements in the same device. > > I know it is difficult to pull-off, but I would love to see a > comparative study between this kind of BG set-up and something > similar in design but with the Stanley Meyer parameters, using > distilled water and the high voltage, milliamp current equal to > the same ~10 watts, BUT using the neutral plates, which Meyer did > not use. Maybe the two setups are incompatible, maybe synergistic. > No way to tell without trying it in the same type configuration. > That is on my list, pending the outcome of today's Lotto drawing > > > One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is > comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as > is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12 > hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no > electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is > drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte, > because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes > activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment. > > Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 13:55:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53KtAuS002053; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:55:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53Kt5Bk001995; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:55:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 13:55:05 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=pjWDxFVhPDz50SaYu5Cp4gYyhggIurJ0Y64+T2qcgGts7Xce/2ll5T4x9nOhgDQe; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663205446684@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:54:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94060a99cc010943eebcf50c32ee961932f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68669 X-Loop: vortex-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 We ran it for several hours with distilled water only at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? > > One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is > comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as > is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12 > hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no > electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is > drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte, > because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes > activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment. > > Jones BTW. Is John Herman "Le Petomain" an old vort John (Herman?) Schnurer? :-) herman@antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
We ran it for several hours with distilled water only
at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas
 
Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? 
>
> One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is
> comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as
> is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12
> hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no
> electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is
> drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte,
> because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes
> activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment.
>
> Jones
BTW. Is John Herman "Le Petomain" an old vort
 
John (Herman?) Schnurer? :-)
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 14:10:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53LA7Xj010852; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:10:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53L8El1009453; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:08:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:08:14 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Fk7Hs4XWTgjdGqrnCWNvx4b+/efkNsBQASbn3QALAJHkywXtO4Dn3qPcT2aGwXf1; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666321759845@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:07:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a0deb02debb28d08d495d9f781492d01350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68670 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, Jones. That "pretreatment" can be loading the water with H2CO3 - H" HCO3 - plus all the other "acid" atmospheric gases SO2 & NOx etc.and aldehydes. Ours was sealed at ATM pressure minus 5 inches Hg pressure. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/3/2006 2:55:45 PM Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE We ran it for several hours with distilled water only at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? > > One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is > comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as > is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12 > hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no > electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is > drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte, > because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes > activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment. > > Jones BTW. Is John Herman "Le Petomain" an old vort John (Herman?) Schnurer? :-) herman@antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, Jones.
 
That "pretreatment" can be loading the water with
H2CO3 - H" HCO3 -  plus all the other "acid" atmospheric
gases SO2 & NOx etc.and aldehydes.
 
Ours was sealed at ATM pressure minus 5 inches Hg pressure.
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/3/2006 2:55:45 PM
Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE

 
We ran it for several hours with distilled water only
at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas
 
Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? 
>
> One thing that I hope you will definitely try in your device is
> comparing the normal output - versus using "pretreated" water, as
> is done in the Joe Cell. Basically the pretreatment consists of 12
> hours of just the water sitting in an electric field, no
> electrolyte, connected to a battery charger, for instance. It is
> drawing no more that a few watts per hour without any electrolyte,
> because of the low conductivity - but nevertheless becomes
> activated somehow after hours of this pretreatment.
>
> Jones
BTW. Is John Herman "Le Petomain" an old vort
 
John (Herman?) Schnurer? :-)
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 14:39:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53LdOGv024854; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:39:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53LdIiV024771; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:39:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:39:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <1d3701c68756$2416f7a0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-22006663205446684@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:39:05 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68671 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred >We ran it for several hours with distilled water only at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas Ha - several hours isn't enough. The way you would "preconditon" the water for later use in the JC, is after about 12 hours - then use it for the ICE... obviously pure water won't draw enough current to be used without the preconditioning, and even then may require some electrolyte. Maybe the predcondtioning has something to do with actually changing the water structure (clathrate-like) instead of, or in addition to, absorbing gases from the atmosphere - or dissolving a surface film off the electrode. The Meyer power supply gives copious gas at milliamps but it is at least *2000* or more volts (up to 20,000 v supposedly in one incarnation), and has electronic controls, which cycles the pulse off - when breakdown occurs, which it does at a regular frequency, depending on the plate separation (about 250 Hz it seems in the demo). An optimized BG cell, like yours, at 10 watts should be compared in gas output to a 10 watt Meyer cell which is presumably operating at 2000 volts and 10 milliamps and 50% duty or whatever gives the same P-in. At that point - perhaps a hybrid can be imagined. In either case most of the actual "power" (the OU) is not coming from the P-in but from a surface effect, and certainly the Meyer cell would seem to benefit the most from more surface area. Please have a look at that Lawton video clip, if you haven't already. I was hoping Patrick would post the interesting parts of the Lawton pdf, if there is real data there - as I don't want to have to join another forum, just to get it. Yahoo gives me enough problems as it is. > Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? Well the incantation which needs to be heard is this. Does the "preconditioning" itself turn pure dieletric water into a conductive fluid, preumably no longer pure - but such that less voltage can be used for the same amount of gas, while still retaining the dieletric properties of pure water in order to get the "exploding capacitor effect" ? The story I have heard about Meyer's VW was that the cell was only using 200 watts to self-power at idle. Presumably, at less voltage when using a precondtioned water, the results would even be better - and perhaps with a large area of neutral plates, the net effect would be to push it from being "on occassion" self-powered to being "on demand"... But maybe you can do that with "only" BG techniques, who knows... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 14:46:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53LkMpG028501; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:46:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53LkLEj028484; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:46:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 14:46:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 17:45:24 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current In-reply-to: <0dfa01c68722$64256d10$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/68672 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With my limited knowledge of electricity I meant the latter. Anyway, can a load act as a resistor? Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > Harry, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you mean > "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the case > of a resistor..." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 15:42:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53Mfh5X025259; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:41:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53MffmM025238; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:41:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:41:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00d301c6875e$9764d080$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006663195857729@earthlink.net> Subject: dH vs dG (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 00:39:35 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00CF_01C6876F.5AB1F710" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68673 X-Loop: vortex-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_00CF_01C6876F.5AB1F710 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_00D0_01C6876F.5AB1F710" ------=_NextPart_001_00D0_01C6876F.5AB1F710 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Fred, http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/thermo/ : "estimating H from bond enthalpies=20 a.. strategy: imagine reaction as a) dissociation of reactants into = atoms, b) recombination of atoms into products.=20 1.. Add enthalpies for all product bonds=20 2.. Add enthalpies for all reactant bonds=20 3.. H is approximately the difference between the product and = reactant bond enthalpies=20 b.. limitations=20 a.. procedure doesn't account for molecular attractions/repulsions, = so doesn't work well for liquid/solid phase reactions=20 b.. bonds interact with each other within molecules, so bond = enthalpies really aren't additive " so you see, the 498 kJ/mol you have calculated for 2 H-H + O=3DO ----> = 2 H-O-H from your bond energy values (exact values from link above yield = (463 * 4) - ((436 * 2) + 502) =3D 478 ) is really an _approximation for = dH_, not for dG.=20 I will grant you that in the case of the present reaction = 2H2(g)+O2(g)->2H2O(l) the 478 kJ/mole calculated seem much closer to dG = (474 kJ/mole) than to dH (572 kJ/mole), but this is principally because = the (_intra_molecular) bond energies method disregards the = _inter_molecular attractions at play in liquid water (first limitation = listed above), which happen to have an energy of 44kJ/mole (the water = vaporization energy at STP ). If you add the 2*44=3D88kJ/mole intermolecular bonds energies for the = 2*H2O in the products, you get 478+88=3D566kJ/mole which is now much = closer to actual dH=3D572 kJ/mole. The bonds method works much better when all products and reactants are = gases, e.g. the same reaction where the water produced is gaseous = instead of liquid: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol (exothermic) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Spontaneous at 700=B0C. Equilibrium at about 5170=B0C. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Molar masses and thermodynamic properties Enthalpy change kJ/mol Entropy change J/K/mol Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol =20 Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet -483.64 =20 -88.86 =20 -397.18 =20 =20 here as you can see the bonds energies balance 478kJ/mole (same as in = previous reaction of course) is pretty close to the actual dH value 484 = kJ/mole, much closer than it is to the dG value 397kJ/mole. Let me know if you were still not convinced Fred, I have one more = argument in reserve. Michel ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Frederick Sparber=20 To: vortex-l=20 Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 9:58 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Michel. In the reaction 2 H-H + O-O ----> 2 H-O-H you are breaking three = 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV Bonds) =3D 1.490E6 joules input to make four 498,000 = Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds) =3D 1.99E6 joules for the 2 H-O-H molecules. Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - 1.49E6 =3D 498,000 Joules free energy. OTOH, 2 x 498,000 - 474,000 =3D 522,000 Joules, the higher calorimeter=20 value in your spreadsheet vs the 474,000 joule/mole dG Free Energy. In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on "Water-based fuel for the ICE" this = morning, he points to the Anomalous Free Energy that comes from using a lot less = than 1/4th the energy (~ 1.0 - 2.5 eV or much less) to break the measured (5.17 eV) = H-O-H=20 bonds with emphasis on restricting recombination to the 5.17 eV H-H or = O-O bonds in any electrolyzer if you want to maximize the combustion energy=20 (making H-O-H bonds) from H, O, and/or OH radicals in an ICE. Reiterating using the Ellingham Diagrams for quick reference too. http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf ------=_NextPart_001_00D0_01C6876F.5AB1F710 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Fred,
 
http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/thermo/<= FONT=20 face=3DArial size=3D2> :
 
"estimating 3DDelta=20H from=20 bond enthalpies
  • strategy: imagine reaction as a) dissociation of reactants into = atoms, b)=20 recombination of atoms into products.=20
    1. Add enthalpies for all product bonds
    2. Add enthalpies for all reactant bonds
    3. 3DDelta=20H=20 is approximately the difference between the product and reactant = bond=20 enthalpies
  • limitations=20
    • procedure doesn't account for molecular attractions/repulsions, = so=20 doesn't work well for liquid/solid phase reactions
    • bonds interact with each other within molecules, so bond = enthalpies=20 really aren't additive "
so you see, the 498 kJ/mol you have calculated for 2 H-H  + = O=3DO=20 ---->  2 H-O-H from your bond energy values (exact = values from=20 link above yield (463 * 4) - ((436 * 2) + = 502) =3D 478=20 ) is really an _approximation for dH_, = not for dG.=20
 
I will grant you that in the case of the present = reaction=20 2H2(g)+O2(g)->2H2O(l) the 478 kJ/mole calculated seem much = closer=20 to dG (474 kJ/mole) than to dH (572 kJ/mole), but this = is principally=20 because the (_intra_molecular) bond energies method disregards = the _inter_molecular attractions at play in liquid water (first = limitation=20 listed above), which happen to have an energy of 44kJ/mole = (the water=20 vaporization energy at STP ).
 
If you add the 2*44=3D88kJ/mole intermolecular bonds = energies=20 for the 2*H2O in the products, you get 478+88=3D566kJ/mole which is now = much=20 closer to actual dH=3D572 kJ/mole.
 
The bonds method works much better when all products and reactants = are=20 gases, e.g. the same reaction where the water produced is gaseous = instead of=20 liquid:

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol=20 (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 700=B0C. Equilibrium at about=20 5170=B0C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic = properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change = kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of = spreadsheet

-483.64

-88.86

-397.18

 
here as you can see the bonds energies balance 478kJ/mole (same as = in=20 previous reaction of course) is pretty close to the actual dH value 484 = kJ/mole,=20 much closer than it is to the dG value 397kJ/mole.
 
Let me know if you were still not convinced Fred, I have one more = argument=20 in reserve.
 
Michel
 

----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Frederick Sparber
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 = 9:58=20 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain = Reactions


Michel.

In the=20 reaction  2 H-H  + O-O ---->  2 H-O-H you are = breaking =20 three 498,000 Joule/mole
(5.17 eV Bonds)  =3D 1.490E6 joules = input to make=20 four 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds)
=3D 1.99E6 joules for the 2 = H-O-H=20 molecules.
Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - 1.49E6 =3D 498,000 Joules = free=20 energy.

OTOH, 2 x 498,000 -  474,000 =3D 522,000 Joules, the = higher=20 calorimeter
value in your spreadsheet vs the 474,000 joule/mole dG = Free=20 Energy.

In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on "Water-based fuel for = the=20 ICE" this morning,
he points to the Anomalous Free Energy that comes = from=20 using a lot less than 1/4th the
energy (~ 1.0 - 2.5 eV or much less) = to break=20 the measured (5.17 eV) H-O-H
bonds with emphasis on restricting=20 recombination  to the 5.17 eV H-H or O-O bonds
in any = electrolyzer if=20 you want to maximize the combustion energy
(making  H-O-H = bonds) from=20 H, O, and/or OH radicals in an ICE.

Reiterating using the = Ellingham=20 Diagrams for quick reference=20 too.

http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf
------=_NextPart_001_00D0_01C6876F.5AB1F710-- ------=_NextPart_000_00CF_01C6876F.5AB1F710 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Delta.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/images/Delta.gif R0lGODlhCwAKAPAAAP///wAAACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAALAAoAAAIWhB2nGLnsVpvPNWnviUB3TnVV MpVlAQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_00CF_01C6876F.5AB1F710-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 15:46:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53MkGWJ029874; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:46:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53MkD3I029846; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:46:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:46:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00dd01c6875f$3a5db360$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 00:44:09 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68674 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: Sure, such loads (e.g. electric heaters) are called resistive loads. But the GDPE cell which was being discussed is far from resistive! Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:45 AM Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current > > With my limited knowledge of electricity I meant the latter. > > Anyway, can a load act as a resistor? > > Harry > > Michel Jullian wrote: >> Harry, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you mean >> "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the >> case >> of a resistor..." > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:01:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53N1NTf005580; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:01:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53N1K26005550; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:01:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:01:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:01:19 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <335482hiuhmogga6fid1lijag3usv19clh@4ax.com> References: <410-2200666321759845@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-2200666321759845@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 3 Jun 2006 23:01:18 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k53N1IOC005528 Resent-Message-ID: <9jYyJD.A.qWB.AThgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68675 X-Loop: vortex-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 Sat, 3 Jun 2006 15:07:59 -0600: Hi, [snip] >BTW, Jones. > >That "pretreatment" can be loading the water with >H2CO3 - H" HCO3 - plus all the other "acid" atmospheric >gases SO2 & NOx etc.and aldehydes. > >Ours was sealed at ATM pressure minus 5 inches Hg pressure. [snip] Pretreatment could also put some metal ions from the anode into solution, helping to increase conductivity. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:03:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53N3XHu006947; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:03:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53N3W4K006924; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:03:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:03:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 19:02:36 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current In-reply-to: <00dd01c6875f$3a5db360$3800a8c0@zothan> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68676 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Do you mean the resistance is so small as to be immeasurable? Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > Sure, such loads (e.g. electric heaters) are called resistive loads. But the > GDPE cell which was being discussed is far from resistive! > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Veeder" > To: > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:45 AM > Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current > > >> >> With my limited knowledge of electricity I meant the latter. >> >> Anyway, can a load act as a resistor? >> >> Harry >> >> Michel Jullian wrote: >>> Harry, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you mean >>> "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the >>> case >>> of a resistor..." >> >> > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:12:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53NBmWZ011015; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:11:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53NBk35010979; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:11:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:11:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00ef01c68762$cbe40160$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 01:09:36 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68677 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: No, I mean that the cell's current is far from proportional to the voltage applied to it (it's more like a quadratic function) Enough science tutoring for today, good night :) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 2:02 AM Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current > Do you mean the resistance is so small as to be immeasurable? > > Harry > > Michel Jullian wrote: > >> Sure, such loads (e.g. electric heaters) are called resistive loads. But >> the >> GDPE cell which was being discussed is far from resistive! >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Harry Veeder" >> To: >> Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:45 AM >> Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current >> >> >>> >>> With my limited knowledge of electricity I meant the latter. >>> >>> Anyway, can a load act as a resistor? >>> >>> Harry >>> >>> Michel Jullian wrote: >>>> Harry, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you >>>> mean >>>> "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the >>>> case >>>> of a resistor..." >>> >>> >> >> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:20:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53NKCdt015504; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:20:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53NK8am015452; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:20:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:20:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00fa01c68763$f312de90$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006663195857729@earthlink.net> <00d301c6875e$9764d080$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: dH vs dG (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 01:17:57 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00F6_01C68774.B6600520" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68678 X-Loop: vortex-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_00F6_01C68774.B6600520 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_00F7_01C68774.B6600520" ------=_NextPart_001_00F7_01C68774.B6600520 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oops sorry Fred the gaseous reaction from the spreadsheet was at 700=B0C = (remnant from a previous reaction), at STP (25=B0C and 1atm) it is in = fact: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol (exothermic) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about 5170=B0C. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Molar masses and thermodynamic properties Enthalpy change kJ/mol Entropy change J/K/mol Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol =20 Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet -483.64 =20 -88.86 =20 -457.16 =20 =20 so dG is quite close to dH, which makes the example less conclusive = although the delta bonds 478 kJ/mole is still closer to the dH 484 = kJ/mole than to the dG 457 kJ/mole. Good night (for good this time), Michel ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Michel Jullian=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20 Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:39 AM Subject: dH vs dG (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Fred, http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/thermo/ : "estimating H from bond enthalpies=20 a.. strategy: imagine reaction as a) dissociation of reactants into = atoms, b) recombination of atoms into products.=20 1.. Add enthalpies for all product bonds=20 2.. Add enthalpies for all reactant bonds=20 3.. H is approximately the difference between the product and = reactant bond enthalpies=20 b.. limitations=20 a.. procedure doesn't account for molecular = attractions/repulsions, so doesn't work well for liquid/solid phase = reactions=20 b.. bonds interact with each other within molecules, so bond = enthalpies really aren't additive " so you see, the 498 kJ/mol you have calculated for 2 H-H + O=3DO = ----> 2 H-O-H from your bond energy values (exact values from link = above yield (463 * 4) - ((436 * 2) + 502) =3D 478 ) is really an = _approximation for dH_, not for dG.=20 I will grant you that in the case of the present reaction = 2H2(g)+O2(g)->2H2O(l) the 478 kJ/mole calculated seem much closer to dG = (474 kJ/mole) than to dH (572 kJ/mole), but this is principally because = the (_intra_molecular) bond energies method disregards the = _inter_molecular attractions at play in liquid water (first limitation = listed above), which happen to have an energy of 44kJ/mole (the water = vaporization energy at STP ). If you add the 2*44=3D88kJ/mole intermolecular bonds energies for the = 2*H2O in the products, you get 478+88=3D566kJ/mole which is now much = closer to actual dH=3D572 kJ/mole. The bonds method works much better when all products and reactants are = gases, e.g. the same reaction where the water produced is gaseous = instead of liquid: O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol (exothermic) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Spontaneous at 700=B0C. Equilibrium at about 5170=B0C. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Molar masses and thermodynamic properties Enthalpy change kJ/mol Entropy change J/K/mol Gibbs Free Energy change kJ/mol =20 Sources: c.f. bottom of spreadsheet -483.64 =20 -88.86 =20 -397.18 =20 =20 here as you can see the bonds energies balance 478kJ/mole (same as in = previous reaction of course) is pretty close to the actual dH value 484 = kJ/mole, much closer than it is to the dG value 397kJ/mole. Let me know if you were still not convinced Fred, I have one more = argument in reserve. Michel ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Frederick Sparber=20 To: vortex-l=20 Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 9:58 PM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Michel. In the reaction 2 H-H + O-O ----> 2 H-O-H you are breaking three = 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV Bonds) =3D 1.490E6 joules input to make four 498,000 = Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds) =3D 1.99E6 joules for the 2 H-O-H molecules. Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - 1.49E6 =3D 498,000 Joules free energy. OTOH, 2 x 498,000 - 474,000 =3D 522,000 Joules, the higher = calorimeter=20 value in your spreadsheet vs the 474,000 joule/mole dG Free Energy. In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on "Water-based fuel for the ICE" = this morning, he points to the Anomalous Free Energy that comes from using a lot = less than 1/4th the energy (~ 1.0 - 2.5 eV or much less) to break the measured (5.17 eV) = H-O-H=20 bonds with emphasis on restricting recombination to the 5.17 eV H-H = or O-O bonds in any electrolyzer if you want to maximize the combustion energy=20 (making H-O-H bonds) from H, O, and/or OH radicals in an ICE. Reiterating using the Ellingham Diagrams for quick reference too. http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf ------=_NextPart_001_00F7_01C68774.B6600520 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oops sorry Fred the gaseous reaction = from the=20 spreadsheet was at 700=B0C (remnant from a previous reaction), at STP = (25=B0C and=20 1atm) it is in fact:

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol=20 (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 25=B0C. Equilibrium at about=20 5170=B0C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic = properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change = kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of = spreadsheet

-483.64

-88.86

-457.16

 
so dG is quite close to dH, which makes = the example=20 less conclusive although the delta bonds 478 kJ/mole is still closer to = the dH=20 484 kJ/mole than to the dG 457 kJ/mole.
 
Good night (for good this = time),
Michel
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Michel = Jullian
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 = 12:39=20 AM
Subject: dH vs dG (was Re: Free = Radical=20 Chain Reactions)

Fred,
 
http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/thermo/<= FONT=20 face=3DArial size=3D2> :
 
"estimating 3DDelta=20H=20 from bond enthalpies
  • strategy: imagine reaction as a) dissociation of reactants into = atoms,=20 b) recombination of atoms into products.=20
    1. Add enthalpies for all product bonds=20
    2. Add enthalpies for all reactant bonds=20
    3. 3DDelta=20H=20 is approximately the difference between the product and reactant = bond=20 enthalpies
  • limitations=20
    • procedure doesn't account for molecular = attractions/repulsions, so=20 doesn't work well for liquid/solid phase reactions=20
    • bonds interact with each other within molecules, so bond = enthalpies=20 really aren't additive "
so you see, the 498 kJ/mol you have calculated for 2 H-H  + = O=3DO=20 ---->  2 H-O-H from your bond energy values (exact=20 values from link above yield (463 * = 4) - ((436=20 * 2) + 502) =3D 478 ) is really an = _approximation=20 for dH_, not for dG.
 
I will grant you that in the case of the present = reaction=20 2H2(g)+O2(g)->2H2O(l) the 478 kJ/mole calculated seem = much closer=20 to dG (474 kJ/mole) than to dH (572 kJ/mole), but this=20 is principally because the (_intra_molecular) bond energies=20 method disregards the _inter_molecular attractions at play = in liquid=20 water (first limitation listed above), which happen to have an = energy=20 of 44kJ/mole (the water vaporization energy at STP = ).
 
If you add the 2*44=3D88kJ/mole intermolecular = bonds energies=20 for the 2*H2O in the products, you get 478+88=3D566kJ/mole which is = now much=20 closer to actual dH=3D572 kJ/mole.
 
The bonds method works much better when all products and = reactants are=20 gases, e.g. the same reaction where the water produced is gaseous = instead of=20 liquid:

O2(g) + 2 H2(g) -> 2 H2O(g) + 483.636 kJ/mol=20 (exothermic)

Spontaneous at 700=B0C. Equilibrium at about=20 5170=B0C.

Molar masses and thermodynamic = properties

Enthalpy change kJ/mol

Entropy change J/K/mol

Gibbs Free Energy change = kJ/mol

Sources: c.f. bottom of = spreadsheet

-483.64

-88.86

-397.18

 
here as you can see the bonds energies balance 478kJ/mole (same = as in=20 previous reaction of course) is pretty close to the actual dH value = 484=20 kJ/mole, much closer than it is to the dG value 397kJ/mole.
 
Let me know if you were still not convinced Fred, I have one more = argument in reserve.
 
Michel
 

----- Original Message = -----
From:=20 Frederick Sparber
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 = 9:58=20 PM
Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain = Reactions


Michel.

In=20 the reaction  2 H-H  + O-O ---->  2 H-O-H you are=20 breaking  three 498,000 Joule/mole
(5.17 eV Bonds)  =3D = 1.490E6=20 joules input to make four 498,000 Joule/mole (5.17 eV bonds)
=3D = 1.99E6=20 joules for the 2 H-O-H molecules.
Hence, you should get 1.99E6 - = 1.49E6 =3D=20 498,000 Joules free energy.

OTOH, 2 x 498,000 -  474,000 = =3D 522,000=20 Joules, the higher calorimeter
value in your spreadsheet vs the = 474,000=20 joule/mole dG Free Energy.

In Jones Beene's' Excellent post on=20 "Water-based fuel for the ICE" this morning,
he points to the = Anomalous=20 Free Energy that comes from using a lot less than 1/4th the
energy = (~ 1.0 -=20 2.5 eV or much less) to break the measured (5.17 eV) H-O-H
bonds = with=20 emphasis on restricting recombination  to the 5.17 eV H-H or O-O=20 bonds
in any electrolyzer if you want to maximize the combustion = energy=20
(making  H-O-H bonds) from H, O, and/or OH radicals in an=20 ICE.

Reiterating using the Ellingham Diagrams for quick = reference=20 = too.

http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf
------=_NextPart_001_00F7_01C68774.B6600520-- ------=_NextPart_000_00F6_01C68774.B6600520 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Delta.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/images/Delta.gif R0lGODlhCwAKAPAAAP///wAAACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAALAAoAAAIWhB2nGLnsVpvPNWnviUB3TnVV MpVlAQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_00F6_01C68774.B6600520-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:31:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53NVPSx020236; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:31:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53NVMeE020210; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:31:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:31:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Still Another Bettery? Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:31:19 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <2.2.32.20060603070335.00b7ca98@pop.freeserve.net> In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060603070335.00b7ca98@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 3 Jun 2006 23:31:18 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k53NVJvW020160 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68679 X-Loop: vortex-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 Grimer's message of Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:03:35 +0100: Hi, [snip] >At 07:18 pm 02/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Terry >> >>http://www.physorg.com/news67796415.html  >>  >>"Russian scientists have invented a battery that can capture energy not >>only from the sun, but also from the stars, the head of a research >>institute at the Dubna Nuclear Institute, near Moscow, said.  [snip] The bit about capturing energy from the stars is obviously nonsense. There is no energy to capture, which anyone can plainly see simply by opening their eyes (literally). However if it really is twice as efficient in the infrared, then it may be converting ambient heat (from the air and Earth) into electric current. Some may remember that I have previously pointed out that a diode is the electrical equivalent of absolute zero. This device would be the embodiment of that concept. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:51:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53NoxRk029831; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:51:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53NovwK029815; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:50:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:50:57 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=n+6jPLdQ7CgQ+XdxgGroWLyZfJtTStK1j7rKV145cTFM2Ey9XiQlmGeGjnTT8iM/; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663235039303@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 17:50:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c8d2d3e3d6d9841953e9ac6a42ba99a3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.249 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68680 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > Fred > > >We ran it for several hours with distilled water only > at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas > > Ha - several hours isn't enough. The way you would "precondition" > the water for later use in the JC, is after about 12 hours - then > use it for the ICE... obviously pure water won't draw enough > current to be used without the preconditioning, and even then may > require some electrolyte. > The most unpredictable variable is the guy doing the experimenting. > > Maybe the preconditioning has something to do with actually > changing the water structure (clathrate-like) instead of, or in > addition to, absorbing gases from the atmosphere - or dissolving a > surface film off the electrode. > Or conditioning the metal surfaces with the dissolved acidic atmospheric gases. CO2 alone drops the pH to about 3.6.No problem getting it through the exit tube. OTOH, extraneous static electricity can "store" on the Helmholtz Layer- Water-Metal interface (that's what Electrochemical Supercapacitors are about) and neutralize H3O+ or H+ ions which can induce Water Clustering Seeding on the Residual OH- Ions. My Cohort said at one electrode "it looked like smoke coming off" when the cell was running. > > The Meyer power supply gives copious gas at milliamps but it is at > least *2000* or more volts (up to 20,000 v supposedly in one > incarnation), and has electronic controls, which cycles the pulse > off - when breakdown occurs, which it does at a regular frequency, > depending on the plate separation (about 250 Hz it seems in the > demo). > Meyer's Water Supercapacitor Design should give an "Avalanche" like that at breakdown. > > An optimized BG cell, like yours, at 10 watts should be compared > in gas output to a 10 watt Meyer cell which is presumably > operating at 2000 volts and 10 milliamps and 50% duty or whatever > gives the same P-in. > If I was doing the experiment I would take off the power supply and grab the Cat or a Wool Sweater and a Rubber Comb and see how much static electricity it could hold, and how much H or H2 and Cluster "Smoke" was being generated in the cell. Forever Amber rub? > > At that point - perhaps a hybrid can be imagined. In either case > most of the actual "power" (the OU) is not coming from the P-in > but from a surface effect, and certainly the Meyer cell would seem > to benefit the most from more surface area. > I've been saying that for weeks. > > Please have a look at that Lawton video clip, if you haven't > already. I was hoping Patrick would post the interesting parts of > the Lawton pdf, if there is real data there - as I don't want to > have to join another forum, just to get it. Yahoo gives me enough > problems as it is. > Can't do that. A friend sent the 4.5 megabyte clip on Klein's Fox news report that took 1/2 hour to download on my dial-up. > > > Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? > > Well the incantation which needs to be heard is this. > > Does the "preconditioning" itself turn pure dielectric water into a > conductive fluid, presumably no longer pure - but such that less > voltage can be used for the same amount of gas, while still > retaining the dielectric properties of pure water in order to get > the "exploding capacitor effect" ? > "Exploding Supercapacitor Effect is on the mark. > > The story I have heard about Meyer's VW was that the cell was only > using 200 watts to self-power at idle. Presumably, at less voltage > when using a preconditioned water, the results would even be > better - and perhaps with a large area of neutral plates, the net > effect would be to push it from being "on occasion" self-powered > to being "on demand"... > 200 watts multiplied by a lowly factor of 4 is one horsepower which is more than adequate for VW engine idle and reactor power. > > But maybe you can do that with "only" BG techniques, who knows... > BG with BiG Surface Area is Supercapacitor too. Fred > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 16:54:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k53NrtEH031885; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:53:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k53NrrDo031858; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:53:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 16:53:53 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=EWwiQeedTEEr5sqSK+LigRV23yodHCa8BUUSRcdBUjt6sXUBfFNgaMtw4HG1aE5H; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006663235341185@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 17:53:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408cba70a9f3e06a0da0baf9a99d7d9fda350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.249 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68681 X-Loop: vortex-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 Frederick Sparber's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 > 15:07:59 -0600: > Hi, > [snip] > >BTW, Jones. > > > >That "pretreatment" can be loading the water with > >H2CO3 - H" HCO3 - plus all the other "acid" atmospheric > >gases SO2 & NOx etc.and aldehydes. > > > >Ours was sealed at ATM pressure minus 5 inches Hg pressure. > [snip] > Pretreatment could also put some metal ions from the anode into > solution, helping to increase conductivity. > Yes and preconditioning the surface to enhance the Helmholtz Water Supercapacitor Layer too. Fred > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 18:25:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k541OeY3008019; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 18:24:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k541Obm9007983; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 18:24:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 18:24:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 11:24:29 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0ed482l8j99k3ikbbeq21p3g3j5b3qjmf2@4ax.com> References: <410-2200666315442889@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-2200666315442889@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 01:24:28 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k541OYRf007931 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68682 X-Loop: vortex-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 Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:54:42 -0600: Hi Fred, [snip] >BTW, anyone have a small Van De Graaff that could be >used to put some static charge on a Joe Cell? [snip] While not as high a voltage as a VDG, you could probably get the desired effect with the high voltage line from an old TV. (Don't touch while in operation!). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 19:05:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5425e28027478; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:05:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5425dcn027464; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:05:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:05:39 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=YACLFGiQJNP8yWWWfoWVMMxwSPkXMbNw8zvYhmFVMIx3NmTQToereuxaHeXTJB1I; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066042520777@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:05:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9407a45af1fc20fa6a78a94dde1ccff633f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.135 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68683 X-Loop: vortex-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 Frederick Sparber's message of Fri, 2 Jun 2006 > 19:54:42 -0600: > Hi Fred, > [snip] > >BTW, anyone have a small Van De Graaff that could be > >used to put some static charge on a Joe Cell? > [snip] > While not as high a voltage as a VDG, you could probably get the > desired effect with the high voltage line from an old TV. > (Don't touch while in operation!). > Not the Free Electrostatic electrons you want.for duplicating the charge buildup on a moving vehicle picking up free electrons from ground and air flowing over it and feeding into the Helmholtz Layer Interface (Water Supercapacitor) on the Joe Cell. Radio amateurs (like my cohort with about 66 years in the activity) also claim lots of electrostatic activity from the fan belt/s too. As I said a rubber comb or rod and a cat or wool sweater might do. A sheep and tall rubber boots are a no-no in the northern hemisphere. :-) Fred > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 19:18:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k542IKFJ000938; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:18:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k542IH0a000913; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:18:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:18:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:18:08 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-220066042520777@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220066042520777@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:18:07 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k542IC05000870 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68684 X-Loop: vortex-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 Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:05:20 -0600: Hi, [snip] >> While not as high a voltage as a VDG, you could probably get the >> desired effect with the high voltage line from an old TV. >> (Don't touch while in operation!). >> >Not the Free Electrostatic electrons you want. What difference does it make where they come from? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 19:44:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k542iPjI014750; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:44:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k542iOKt014736; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:44:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:44:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Paper about three explosions Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:44:22 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <27i482tjeai388nhefofmnks6kmq4kd9i8@4ax.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060602111429.03e20370@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060602111429.03e20370@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:44:22 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k542iMr3014714 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68685 X-Loop: vortex-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, 02 Jun 2006 11:16:32 -0400: Hi, [snip] >See: > >http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangXontheexplo.pdf Their w-s sound a lot like hydrino formation to me. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 20:00:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k542xmJ4023765; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:59:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k542xlSd023745; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:59:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 19:59:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on Meyer Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:59:44 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <00c101c68673$b9e34c40$6401a8c0@NuDell> In-Reply-To: <00c101c68673$b9e34c40$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:59:43 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k542xiTs023723 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68686 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 Jones Beene's message of Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:38:21 -0700: Hi, >Excerpts from: Electronics World & Wireless World (Jan 1991) also: >Infinite Energy 19:(1998) Obituary, and KeelyNet File MEYER1.ASC >and the famous UK panel evaluation, which Frank Grimer will >sympathize with. [snip] >"In a demonstration made before Professor Michael Laughton, Dean >of Engineering at Mary College, London, Admiral Sir Anthony >Griffin, a former controller of the British Navy, and Dr Keith >Hindley, a UK research chemist ... Meyer's cell, developed at the >inventor's home in Grove City, Ohio, produced far more >hydrogen/oxygen mixture than could have been expected by simple >electrolysis." [snip] >The real differences occur in the power supply to the cell. Meyer >uses an external inductance which appears to resonate with the >capacitance of the cell - pure water apparently possesses a >dielectric constant of about 5 - to produce a parallel resonant ^ other sources suggest a maximum value of 80. >circuit. This is excited by a high power pulse generator which, >together with the cell capacitance and a rectifier diode, forms a >charge pump circuit. Mark Goldes believes that Meyer himself did >not understand the electronics, and had them built by others, and ..yes, his brother (David?), who to the best of my knowledge is still around. I wonder if this sort of setup could ionize atoms in the same way that microwaves do (a la Mills)? If so then he may have been creating O++ in situ with the obvious (to Vorts) consequences. Another possibility is that hydrino molecular ions masquerading as deuterium nuclei in the water get liberated by the shock waves created by the pulses, and get reduced to neutral hydrino molecules, which could then "wander" into other atoms, and occasionally fuse with their nuclei. The net result would be a form of radiolysis. However this doesn't appear to explain why the cell is cold, unless for some reason the radiolysis/photolysis process were extremely efficient, and no recombination occurred. Or perhaps there was so much hydrino molecular ion in the water that it accounted for nearly all of the gas, and very little real radiolysis/photolysis was needed (this doesn't seem likely). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 20:13:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k543D8Gc000674; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:13:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k543D4n5000638; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:13:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:13:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 13:13:01 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.69] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:13:01 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k543D25x000586 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68687 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 +0200: Hi, [snip] >The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. > >You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans see what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have missed the language option) [snip] You may both find this of use :) http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 20:50:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k543oAGh016928; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:50:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k543o83c016915; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Ia8olIyIU80wIyyTMF0CBSBmPe4KD/oB109HzQAjxG/Ik/C5uQJwiW55hSYvTW5T; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:49:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ceef202472b1ffde7ee95f4b0f53c3c3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.34 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68688 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Reaction Kinetics: http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml Radical Multiplication. H2O + O ---> 2 OH 2 OH + H2O ---> 3 OH + H 3 OH + H2O ---> 4 OH + H 4 OH + H2O ---> 5 OH + H 5 OH + H2O ---> 6 OH + H 6 OH + H2O ---> 7 OH + H 5 H + 7 OH + n H2O ----> ?? This is why the use of split Hydrogen Peroxide Vapor (HO-OH (liquid) + Heat ---> O + OH + H + H2O Vapor) in the newer low temperature sterilizers can chew up almost any pathogen. Same thing in the Joe Cell? Fred > [Original Message] > From: Frederick Sparber > To: > Date: 6/3/2006 5:51:45 PM > Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE > > Jones Beene wrote: > > > > Fred > > > > >We ran it for several hours with distilled water only > > at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas > > > > Ha - several hours isn't enough. The way you would "precondition" > > the water for later use in the JC, is after about 12 hours - then > > use it for the ICE... obviously pure water won't draw enough > > current to be used without the preconditioning, and even then may > > require some electrolyte. > > > The most unpredictable variable is the guy doing the experimenting. > > > > Maybe the preconditioning has something to do with actually > > changing the water structure (clathrate-like) instead of, or in > > addition to, absorbing gases from the atmosphere - or dissolving a > > surface film off the electrode. > > > Or conditioning the metal surfaces with the dissolved acidic atmospheric > gases. > CO2 alone drops the pH to about 3.6.No problem getting it through > the exit tube. > OTOH, extraneous static electricity can "store" on the Helmholtz Layer- > Water-Metal interface (that's what Electrochemical Supercapacitors are > about) > and neutralize H3O+ or H+ ions which can induce Water Clustering Seeding > on the Residual OH- Ions. > My Cohort said at one electrode "it looked like smoke coming off" when the > cell was running. > > > > The Meyer power supply gives copious gas at milliamps but it is at > > least *2000* or more volts (up to 20,000 v supposedly in one > > incarnation), and has electronic controls, which cycles the pulse > > off - when breakdown occurs, which it does at a regular frequency, > > depending on the plate separation (about 250 Hz it seems in the > > demo). > > > Meyer's Water Supercapacitor Design should give an "Avalanche" like that at > breakdown. > > > > An optimized BG cell, like yours, at 10 watts should be compared > > in gas output to a 10 watt Meyer cell which is presumably > > operating at 2000 volts and 10 milliamps and 50% duty or whatever > > gives the same P-in. > > > If I was doing the experiment I would take off the power supply > and grab the Cat or a Wool Sweater and a Rubber Comb and see how much static > electricity it could hold, and how much H or H2 and Cluster "Smoke" > was being generated in the cell. > Forever Amber rub? > > > > At that point - perhaps a hybrid can be imagined. In either case > > most of the actual "power" (the OU) is not coming from the P-in > > but from a surface effect, and certainly the Meyer cell would seem > > to benefit the most from more surface area. > > > I've been saying that for weeks. > > > > Please have a look at that Lawton video clip, if you haven't > > already. I was hoping Patrick would post the interesting parts of > > the Lawton pdf, if there is real data there - as I don't want to > > have to join another forum, just to get it. Yahoo gives me enough > > problems as it is. > > > Can't do that. A friend sent the 4.5 megabyte clip on Klein's Fox news > report that took 1/2 hour to download on my dial-up. > > > > > Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? > > > > Well the incantation which needs to be heard is this. > > > > Does the "preconditioning" itself turn pure dielectric water into a > > conductive fluid, presumably no longer pure - but such that less > > voltage can be used for the same amount of gas, while still > > retaining the dielectric properties of pure water in order to get > > the "exploding capacitor effect" ? > > > "Exploding Supercapacitor Effect is on the mark. > > > > The story I have heard about Meyer's VW was that the cell was only > > using 200 watts to self-power at idle. Presumably, at less voltage > > when using a preconditioned water, the results would even be > > better - and perhaps with a large area of neutral plates, the net > > effect would be to push it from being "on occasion" self-powered > > to being "on demand"... > > > 200 watts multiplied by a lowly factor of 4 is one horsepower which is > more than adequate for VW engine idle and reactor power. > > > > But maybe you can do that with "only" BG techniques, who knows... > > > BG with BiG Surface Area is Supercapacitor too. > > Fred > > > > > Jones > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 20:59:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k543x4aC021980; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:59:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k543x2PK021950; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:59:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:59:02 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qKrkqcHP/RPCcXOY1FQTt0h+06CI27zIs1fM6cD+TBXv1WPXtlYc/9A7blJAl5HV; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200660435852293@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:58:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940371580ca5f035cbc41a1164d1339f27e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.34 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68689 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > In reply to Frederick Sparber's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 > 20:05:20 -0600: > Hi, > [snip] > >> While not as high a voltage as a VDG, you could probably get the > >> desired effect with the high voltage line from an old TV. > >> (Don't touch while in operation!). > >> > >Not the Free Electrostatic electrons you want. > > What difference does it make where they come from? If you can't figure that out the conversation is CLOSED. > [snip] > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 21:50:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k544o5Sm012312; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:50:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k544o09t012243; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:50:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:50:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:35:37 -0500 From: Standing Bear Subject: Re: A Nuclear future for Australia? In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <200412260235.37198.rockcast@earthlink.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline References: User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68690 X-Loop: vortex-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 Monday 22 May 2006 18:55, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Prime Minister, > > As well as having Uranium resources among the largest in the > World, Australia has about ...... And that is about as far as some would read. Put the word 'uranium' with a low population density continent thousands of miles from any help and very close to hand to Muslim invasion from the largest Muslim population in the world, and you have a recipe for invasion. The idea of more living space for Indonesia's teeming millions would be 'reason' enough in the new age of wars over the resource. Tis not energy that the Indonesians would seek, but food! Icing on the cake would be that Australia has a population saturated with pacifists and weaklings. Outside of a few tough talking second level politicians and some ambitious coast guard troops, Australia would fall virtually without a fight. This is the new Australia, not the old one of pioneers that won that continent from wilderness. The new australia is suburbs and shrimp cook-outs. Its people are soft office bunnies and couch potatoes that give in easily to officiousness. Look how easy they knuckled under to universal gun control. Look how quickly they with official connivance they made sure none of America's subs or carriers could visit there if they had nuclear power......yet they are willing to sell uranium to the Chinese! Those folks won't fight for anything, least of all their own hides. They will walk to their own slaughter like the Cambodians did in 1975 before the 'Angkha Loew' of Pol Pot! The gun control! Even that will be used against them. Gun registration means only the supporters of the regime will have a permit----a ready made pick up and execute list for an invader just like the Nazis did in Denmark in the beginning days of WWII. Nature abhors a vacuum. Australia is a power vacuum, a resource surplus,and a population vacuum. Balancing forces are nearby to level the situation. Many Australians may take issue with me, and their own politicians are trying to seek cover from the approaches next door by making overtures to China. That will only hasten Australia's invasion, as Indonesia may tolerate this plum next door for a while and bide its time until its needs for more living space or cropland become more pressing. However, if it sees a local competitor like China moving in with food and population problems of its own, then the situation becomes much more serious much sooner. Even now Australia uses a 'used tire' analogy to screen prospectiive new residents out. Are you a 'used up tire' (how OLD are you?)? Are you a 'quality tire' (do you have a million dollars?)? In this way they hope to fill their gold coasts with high rollers and their work forces with maybe a select few outsiders. It has not been enough! And the Muslims who will one day rule this land take a dim view of ostentatious wealth unless that wealthy person is some kind of sheik or sultan. I wouldn't want to be one of those 'high rollers' then! Of course the new rulers may have some use for the old population. They might make really good servants. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 21:54:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k544rpPL017694; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:53:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k544rn7Q017663; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:53:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:53:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 02:39:33 -0500 From: Pteranodon Subject: Re: Where Protons Go In-reply-to: <8C84F038BD0A210-578-1CCB5@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-to: rockcastle@lakeside1.net Message-id: <200412260239.33881.rockcastle@lakeside1.net> Organization: Rockcastle Associates MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline References: <8C84F038BD0A210-578-1CCB5@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68691 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 Friday 26 May 2006 13:47, hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > As Jones pointed out, sometimes protons simply aren't there. Maybe > they go here: > > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-05/du-sph052506.php > > One braneworld theorist mentioned here is Lisa Randall. Ahhhhh, Lisa > . . . > > http://physics.harvard.edu/people/facpages/randall.html > > Terry Suppose they go to this alternate reality set for a little while and then return to our universe at another place. Like travel through a kind of superspace. Standing Bear From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 22:54:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k545rjNM013349; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:53:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k545rg2L013292; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:53:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:53:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <011301c6879b$332bffc0$e79d163f@DFBGQZ91> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: References: Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 01:53:24 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68692 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current ----- Original Message ----- From: Harry Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 3:00 PM Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current >I don't know anything about this experiment, >but current is not essential for calculating the power. > >P = (V^2)/R > >since P =VI and I = V/R > >Harry What? In a highly nonlinear setup like an electrolytic cell, especially where we are considering "excess energy" output I'd say that current measurement is absolutely essential for a correct analysis. I'll also comment on another thing, this use of "NRG" in place of "energy"........ why is this being done? It makes any serious investigations look a lot like the pseudoscience that is out there on every Geocities/Yahoo page around the corner; is it so hard for people to type "energy"? --Kyle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 23:10:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k545tJbO014292; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:55:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k545tF02014259; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:55:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:55:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4482731F.4000509@usfamily.net> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 00:43:59 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: The Waterfuel cell References: <410-22006652134250487@earthlink.net> <003301c68656$09f37f20$6401a8c0@NuDell> <8C8547C775CD038-7F4-1C7F2@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C8547C775CD038-7F4-1C7F2@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <6CrjoD.A.veD.CXngEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68693 X-Loop: vortex-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 posted; > > Here's an interesting analysis of Meyer's patent: I met Stan at a Tesla conference in 1994. My brother, my engineer friend, my nephew and I drove to Ohio to see this marvel of technology. Stan did his stick and then asked us for $50,000, but he'd take 10% down. We declined. My engineer friend was quite taken in by Stan's demonstration. Yesterday he mentioned running an engine on water. I told him that I was still waiting to see a demonstration of this technological marvel. He replied that he "didn't need a demonstration because he knew that it would work." I think that translates as I believe that it will work. I'm still waiting. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 02:39:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k549cnpk019645; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:38:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k549clFI019619; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:38:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:38:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001001c687ba$a4b1f270$0300a8c0@user> From: "Noel D. Whitney" To: References: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:38:30 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68694 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Having spent both considerable time and money in working with Stan Meyer ,( Some photos on our web site www. quantumleap.ie ) I caution anyone believing in his technology beyond the "Fireing of interest" in the subject. Stan made great mileage on showing how little current went to the cell , but the actual shown current was only the current feeding the armature of the alternator to create the magnetic field! the alternator was rated in the region of 80 to 100 amps at 12V DC, so your talking about 1 to 1.2 Kw of power , relate this to the gas vol. and the whole question changes! I hope to make a joe cell when I complete my house move in September next , so am very interested in this line of enquiry I have considerable info on The Meyer cell if anyone is interested . By the way - last year Charlie Holbrook ( Stans "Lackey"- he he he! ) contacted me asking if I was interested in any of the equipment or developing it further - when I said yes - but there would be only money when results were independantly verified - Funny - he never called back ! Was it something I said :-) Regards to all Noel In Ireland----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 4:49 AM Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE > > Reaction Kinetics: > > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml > > Radical Multiplication. > H2O + O ---> 2 OH > 2 OH + H2O ---> 3 OH + H > 3 OH + H2O ---> 4 OH + H > 4 OH + H2O ---> 5 OH + H > 5 OH + H2O ---> 6 OH + H > 6 OH + H2O ---> 7 OH + H > 5 H + 7 OH + n H2O ----> ?? > This is why the use of split Hydrogen Peroxide Vapor > (HO-OH (liquid) + Heat ---> O + OH + H + H2O Vapor) > in the newer low temperature sterilizers can chew up almost any pathogen. > > Same thing in the Joe Cell? > > Fred > >> [Original Message] >> From: Frederick Sparber >> To: >> Date: 6/3/2006 5:51:45 PM >> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE >> >> Jones Beene wrote: >> > >> > Fred >> > >> > >We ran it for several hours with distilled water only >> > at about 1.9 milliamperes at 12 volts (24 milliwatts). nada gas >> > >> > Ha - several hours isn't enough. The way you would "precondition" >> > the water for later use in the JC, is after about 12 hours - then >> > use it for the ICE... obviously pure water won't draw enough >> > current to be used without the preconditioning, and even then may >> > require some electrolyte. >> > >> The most unpredictable variable is the guy doing the experimenting. >> > >> > Maybe the preconditioning has something to do with actually >> > changing the water structure (clathrate-like) instead of, or in >> > addition to, absorbing gases from the atmosphere - or dissolving a >> > surface film off the electrode. >> > >> Or conditioning the metal surfaces with the dissolved acidic atmospheric >> gases. >> CO2 alone drops the pH to about 3.6.No problem getting it through >> the exit tube. >> OTOH, extraneous static electricity can "store" on the Helmholtz Layer- >> Water-Metal interface (that's what Electrochemical Supercapacitors are >> about) >> and neutralize H3O+ or H+ ions which can induce Water Clustering Seeding >> on the Residual OH- Ions. >> My Cohort said at one electrode "it looked like smoke coming off" when >> the >> cell was running. >> > >> > The Meyer power supply gives copious gas at milliamps but it is at >> > least *2000* or more volts (up to 20,000 v supposedly in one >> > incarnation), and has electronic controls, which cycles the pulse >> > off - when breakdown occurs, which it does at a regular frequency, >> > depending on the plate separation (about 250 Hz it seems in the >> > demo). >> > >> Meyer's Water Supercapacitor Design should give an "Avalanche" like that > at >> breakdown. >> > >> > An optimized BG cell, like yours, at 10 watts should be compared >> > in gas output to a 10 watt Meyer cell which is presumably >> > operating at 2000 volts and 10 milliamps and 50% duty or whatever >> > gives the same P-in. >> > >> If I was doing the experiment I would take off the power supply >> and grab the Cat or a Wool Sweater and a Rubber Comb and see how much > static >> electricity it could hold, and how much H or H2 and Cluster "Smoke" >> was being generated in the cell. >> Forever Amber rub? >> > >> > At that point - perhaps a hybrid can be imagined. In either case >> > most of the actual "power" (the OU) is not coming from the P-in >> > but from a surface effect, and certainly the Meyer cell would seem >> > to benefit the most from more surface area. >> > >> I've been saying that for weeks. >> > >> > Please have a look at that Lawton video clip, if you haven't >> > already. I was hoping Patrick would post the interesting parts of >> > the Lawton pdf, if there is real data there - as I don't want to >> > have to join another forum, just to get it. Yahoo gives me enough >> > problems as it is. >> > >> Can't do that. A friend sent the 4.5 megabyte clip on Klein's Fox news >> report that took 1/2 hour to download on my dial-up. >> > >> > > Can you come with some appropriate incantations Jones? >> > >> > Well the incantation which needs to be heard is this. >> > >> > Does the "preconditioning" itself turn pure dielectric water into a >> > conductive fluid, presumably no longer pure - but such that less >> > voltage can be used for the same amount of gas, while still >> > retaining the dielectric properties of pure water in order to get >> > the "exploding capacitor effect" ? >> > >> "Exploding Supercapacitor Effect is on the mark. >> > >> > The story I have heard about Meyer's VW was that the cell was only >> > using 200 watts to self-power at idle. Presumably, at less voltage >> > when using a preconditioned water, the results would even be >> > better - and perhaps with a large area of neutral plates, the net >> > effect would be to push it from being "on occasion" self-powered >> > to being "on demand"... >> > >> 200 watts multiplied by a lowly factor of 4 is one horsepower which is >> more than adequate for VW engine idle and reactor power. >> > >> > But maybe you can do that with "only" BG techniques, who knows... >> > >> BG with BiG Surface Area is Supercapacitor too. >> >> Fred >> >> > >> > Jones >> > >> >> > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 03:28:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54ASNao010214; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:28:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54ASLNC010198; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:28:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:28:21 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=DPvmUvNwL6Xaj+fv8fOexmUB6ileIGLtyJLzss+eS+VTC0ZFWD0x3tBGwO1IrJ1P; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066041028014@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:28:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d620182a4911a2732f3c85ae28512695350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.44 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68695 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Noel's Website URL: http://www.quantumleap.ie/home.htm Noel D. Whitney wrote: > > Having spent both considerable time and money in working with Stan Meyer > ,( Some photos on our web site www. quantumleap.ie ) I caution anyone > believing in his technology beyond the "Fireing of interest" in the subject. > Stan made great mileage on showing how little current went to the cell , but > the actual shown current was only the current feeding the armature of the > alternator to create the magnetic field! > the alternator was rated in the region of 80 to 100 amps at 12V DC, so your > talking about 1 to 1.2 Kw of power , relate this to the gas vol. and the > whole question changes! > I hope to make a joe cell when I complete my house move in September next , > so am very interested in this line of enquiry > I have considerable info on The Meyer cell if anyone is interested . > By the way - last year Charlie Holbrook ( Stans "Lackey"- he he he! ) > contacted me asking if I was interested in any of the equipment or > developing it further - when I said yes - but there would be only money when > results were independantly verified - Funny - he never called back ! > Was it something I said :-) > > Regards to all > Noel In Ireland----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: "vortex-l" > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 4:49 AM > Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE > > > > > > Reaction Kinetics: > > > > http://www.cheresources.com/reactionkinetics3.shtml > > > > Radical Multiplication. > > H2O + O ---> 2 OH > > 2 OH + H2O ---> 3 OH + H > > 3 OH + H2O ---> 4 OH + H > > 4 OH + H2O ---> 5 OH + H > > 5 OH + H2O ---> 6 OH + H > > 6 OH + H2O ---> 7 OH + H > > 5 H + 7 OH + n H2O ----> ?? > > This is why the use of split Hydrogen Peroxide Vapor > > (HO-OH (liquid) + Heat ---> O + OH + H + H2O Vapor) > > in the newer low temperature sterilizers can chew up almost any pathogen. > > > > Same thing in the Joe Cell? > > > > Fred > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 03:41:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54Af6ex015800; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:41:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54Af4Y6015777; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:41:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:41:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <015d01c687c3$13744fc0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:38:24 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68696 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin, the NIST webbook, which I find much handier indeed than those CRC handbooks, doesn't solve the controversy which is "is the energy produced in a reaction equal to -dG or to -dH? (d=delta)" BTW I just found that I was wrong in thinking that my trial version of CHEMIX had expired, it seems it only counts down the days in which you actually use the software, nice ! :) So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed (copy-paste): 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, not to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 5:13 AM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 +0200: Hi, [snip] >The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. > >You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans see >what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has >expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have >missed the language option) [snip] You may both find this of use :) http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 04:44:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54BiCA2019029; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:44:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54BiABk019012; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:44:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:44:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <016701c687cb$e86609f0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> <015d01c687c3$13744fc0$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Recovered energy is lost enthalpy -dH (was Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 13:42:07 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68697 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (corrected the subject line, of course the produced energy is equal to _lost_ enthalpy -dH, not to enthalpy change dH which is _gained_ enthalpy) BTW there is another way to recover the ~572kJ found below: let's consider the reverse reaction, and pretend we don't know how much energy it absorbs: 2H2O(l) + E -> 2H2(g) + O2(g) (dissociation of water, can be done e.g. by electrolysis, as all of us here know quite well :) We know the electrolysis voltage threshold is 1.48 V, and we know that two electrons are transferred for each molecule of H2O dissociated. So for the 2 moles of H2O in the reaction, the total charge q transferred is 2*(2*NA)*e where e is the electron charge 1.6*10^(-19) C and NA is the number of molecules per mole (Avogadro's number 6.02*10^23). So the total energy needed to dissociate 2 moles of water is: E= V*q = 1.48*2*(2*NA)*e = 1.48 * 2 * (2 * 6.02 * (10^23)) * 1.6 * (10^-19) = 570 214.4 =~ 570 kJ =~572 kJ QED hence the "=" sign which is being increasingly used instead of an arrow in chemical equations, e.g. in the CHEMIX software: 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ <=> 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ = 2H2(g) + O2(g) Hope this makes sense. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: Michel Jullian To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Hi Robin, the NIST webbook, which I find much handier indeed than those CRC handbooks, doesn't solve the controversy which is "is the energy produced in a reaction equal to -dG or to -dH? (d=delta)" BTW I just found that I was wrong in thinking that my trial version of CHEMIX had expired, it seems it only counts down the days in which you actually use the software, nice ! :) So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed (copy-paste): 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, not to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 5:13 AM Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 +0200: Hi, [snip] >The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. > >You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans see >what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has >expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have >missed the language option) [snip] You may both find this of use :) http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 05:00:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54BxkwE027398; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:59:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54Bxinx027350; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:59:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 04:59:44 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=IDxG3tuhS5KSBAbsYnNTrIp1hAOL9ED/8RbYvL1O3Nw/0gx9/pSmxHZFm9zCyK6h; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006604115920666@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:59:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9401e4a818f64c9e999e0efb444c33d867f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.220 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68698 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > Hi Robin, the NIST webbook, which I find much handier indeed than those CRC > handbooks, doesn't solve the controversy which is "is the energy produced in > a reaction equal to -dG or to -dH? (d=delta)" > > BTW I just found that I was wrong in thinking that my trial version of > CHEMIX had expired, it seems it only counts down the days in which you > actually use the software, nice ! :) > > So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed > (copy-paste): > > 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ > > which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, not > to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) > I'm not sure, Michel. The heat of formation from the elements dH is 2 x 498,000 for 2 H2 molecules from 4 H atoms and 498,000 for an O2 molecule from 2 O atoms. Then you have to break 3 x 498,000 = 1.49E6 kJ to form 2 H2Omolecules from 4 H atoms + 2 O atoms ---> H-O-H + H-O-H (4 x 498 kJ) - (3 x 498 kJ) = 498 kJ Which implies that 571.6 kJ - 498 kJ = 73.6 kJ is the heat given up by the two H2O molecules when cooled from a hot gas to liquid H2O in the calorimeter???. Whereas -dG = for 2 H2O (liquid) is - 477 kJ going by my late edition CRC tables. And things are a lot simpler-quicker if you take H2 and O2 as 0.00 and pull the values off the Ellingham Diagrams (stored in my documents) for about any temperature from 0.0 to 2,000 C http://www.chem.mtu.edu/skkawatr/Ellingham.pdf Fred > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robin van Spaandonk > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 5:13 AM > Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > > > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 > +0200: > Hi, > [snip] > >The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. > > > >You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans see > >what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has > >expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have > >missed the language option) > [snip] > You may both find this of use :) > > http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 05:17:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54CHQ7D003665; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:17:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54CHOrg003639; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:17:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:17:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Gw+pk81hRg+nULKiuBI+QI9WQf4tlJEfF2WRb1oHz8Ia367YuZDmmOuw4fNyQqG9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200660412178772@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Recovered energy is lost enthalpy -dH (was Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:17:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404684cb76613231ff24e812d034cb226e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.220 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68699 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > Subject: Recovered energy is lost enthalpy -dH (was Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH) > Your subject line lengths are getting close to those of John Herman aka "La Petomain" aka JHS. :-) In this area, La is the tender gender and El is the Macho Hombre pardner. Santa Clause aka Santo Clause is a bit confusing. > (corrected the subject line, of course the produced energy is equal to > _lost_ enthalpy -dH, not to enthalpy change dH which is _gained_ enthalpy) > > BTW there is another way to recover the ~572kJ found below: let's consider > the reverse reaction, and pretend we don't know how much energy it absorbs: > Hess' Law is Sacrosanct isn't it? Good. Fred > > 2H2O(l) + E -> 2H2(g) + O2(g) > > (dissociation of water, can be done e.g. by electrolysis, as all of us here > know quite well :) > > We know the electrolysis voltage threshold is 1.48 V, and we know that two > electrons are transferred for each molecule of H2O dissociated. So for the 2 > moles of H2O in the reaction, the total charge q transferred is 2*(2*NA)*e > where e is the electron charge 1.6*10^(-19) C and NA is the number of > molecules per mole (Avogadro's number 6.02*10^23). So the total energy > needed to dissociate 2 moles of water is: > > E= V*q > = 1.48*2*(2*NA)*e > = 1.48 * 2 * (2 * 6.02 * (10^23)) * 1.6 * (10^-19) > = 570 214.4 =~ 570 kJ =~572 kJ QED > > hence the "=" sign which is being increasingly used instead of an arrow in > chemical equations, e.g. in the CHEMIX software: > > 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ > > <=> > > 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ = 2H2(g) + O2(g) > > Hope this makes sense. > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Michel Jullian > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:38 PM > Subject: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain > Reactions) > > > Hi Robin, the NIST webbook, which I find much handier indeed than those CRC > handbooks, doesn't solve the controversy which is "is the energy produced in > a reaction equal to -dG or to -dH? (d=delta)" > > BTW I just found that I was wrong in thinking that my trial version of > CHEMIX had expired, it seems it only counts down the days in which you > actually use the software, nice ! :) > > So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed > (copy-paste): > > 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ > > which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, not > to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robin van Spaandonk > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 5:13 AM > Subject: Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions > > > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:58:38 > +0200: > Hi, > [snip] > >The spreadsheet did the dH algebra like it's own mentor told it, Fred. > > > >You could try downloading the trial version of CHEMIX (Google it) ans see > >what their thermochemistry section gives for this reaction? Mine has > >expired, and was in Norwegian or something for some reason (must have > >missed the language option) > [snip] > You may both find this of use :) > > http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 05:48:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54Cltk7018079; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:47:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54ClrRn018049; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:47:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:47:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <017501c687d4$cda8b500$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006604115920666@earthlink.net> Subject: Energy given up is enthalpy loss -dH Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:45:47 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68700 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (changed the subject line again to confuse you further Fred ;) Fred wrote: >> So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed >> (copy-paste): >> >> 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ >> >> which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, > not >> to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) >> > I'm not sure, Michel. The heat of formation from the elements dH is > 2 x 498,000 for 2 H2 molecules from 4 H atoms and 498,000 for an O2 > molecule > from 2 O atoms. > Then you have to break 3 x 498,000 = 1.49E6 kJ to form 2 H2Omolecules > from 4 H atoms + 2 O atoms ---> H-O-H + H-O-H (4 x 498 kJ) - (3 x 498 kJ) > = 498 kJ > > Which implies that 571.6 kJ - 498 kJ = 73.6 kJ is the heat given up > by the two H2O molecules when cooled from a hot gas to liquid H2O > in the calorimeter???. _Moles_ of atoms/molecules you mean Fred. Yes that's about it. Had you used more accurate bond energies, instead of 73.6 kJ you would have found 88 kJ, i.e. twice the water condensation energy 44kJ per mole of H2O (1 mole of H2O = 18g = 6.02*10^23 molecules of H2O) Controversy solved? Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 06:04:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54D4YVV026898; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:04:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54D4WxQ026882; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:04:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:04:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=aLp0hWk9MsqVzti7yEFHQ4Tfc6DOgzBjkMyl7eo23NQa9Z7smnJ5x+mDVjaPRz7O; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200660413418106@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Energy given up is enthalpy loss -dH Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:04:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408eda703babbfc3a47838c03165345464350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.195 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68701 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: : Michel Jullian wrote > > > Fred wrote: > >> So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed > >> (copy-paste): > >> > >> 2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ > >> > >> which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, > > not > >> to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) > >> > > I'm not sure, Michel. The heat of formation from the elements dH is > > 2 x 498,000 for 2 H2 molecules from 4 H atoms and 498,000 for an O2 > > molecule > > from 2 O atoms. > > Then you have to break 3 x 498,000 = 1.49E6 kJ to form 2 H2Omolecules > > from 4 H atoms + 2 O atoms ---> H-O-H + H-O-H (4 x 498 kJ) - (3 x 498 kJ) > > = 498 kJ > > > > Which implies that 571.6 kJ - 498 kJ = 73.6 kJ is the heat given up > > by the two H2O molecules when cooled from a hot gas to liquid H2O > > in the calorimeter???. > > _Moles_ of atoms/molecules you mean Fred. Yes that's about it. Had you used > more accurate bond energies, instead of 73.6 kJ you would have found 88 kJ, > i.e. twice the water condensation energy 44kJ per mole of H2O (1 mole of H2O > = 18g = 6.02*10^23 molecules of H2O) > > Controversy solved? > Yes, but to show how the dH values vary check out this URL on Hess' Law. http://wine1.sb.fsu.edu/chm1045/notes/Energy/HessLaw/Energy04.htm Fred > > Michel > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 06:15:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54DFc05032342; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:15:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54DFbq2032326; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:15:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:15:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001001c687d8$ee54ac10$ba037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: A Nuclear future for Australia? Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:15:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C687AF.0494E050" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68702 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C687AF.0494E050 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000D_01C687AF.0494E050" ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C687AF.0494E050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankStanding Bear wrote.. Tis not energy that the Indonesians would seek,=20 but food!=20 After reading the width of the text I had to re-check to verify it was = Australia and not Texas as the focus.=20 And then I remembered Texas has already been invaded and captured by the = latinos. About all that can be added is soon as Australia becomes a = muslin nation they will discover the welfare system and dope smuggling = which will irrevocably change muslin culture. Ain't ya glad you live in = the city with a University culture like Parksie envisions.. or is that = Porksie? Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C687AF.0494E050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Standing Bear wrote..

 Tis not energy that the Indonesians would seek,
but = food! 

 

 

After reading the width of the text I had to re-check to verify it = was=20 Australia and not Texas as the focus.

And then I remembered Texas has already been invaded and captured by = the=20 latinos. About all that can be added is soon as Australia becomes a = muslin=20 nation they will discover the welfare system and dope smuggling which = will=20 irrevocably change muslin culture. Ain't ya glad you live in the = city =20 with a University culture like Parksie envisions.. or is that = Porksie?

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C687AF.0494E050-- ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C687AF.0494E050 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000b01c687d8$ed4dea70$ba037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C687AF.0494E050-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 06:16:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54DGCxr032607; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:16:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54DGB87032591; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:16:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:16:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c687d9$09b333f0$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> <001001c687ba$a4b1f270$0300a8c0@user> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 06:16:05 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68703 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Noel D. Whitney" Noel, thanks for the post. I had forgotten about your experience with Meyer. Looks like Stan Meyer has left a negative impression with many on vortex who follow this sort of thing, and there is no doubt he was a huckster, showman, and mentally ill, most likely. The larger question is - did he stumble onto any technology which might serve to add-to or improve-on the further advancement of the Brown's gas/ Joe Cell theme of ultra-efficient electrolysis? How did he power a VW with it (was that a fraud, also ?) Noel writes: > Stan made great mileage on showing how little current went to > the cell , but the actual shown current was only the current > feeding the armature of the alternator to create the magnetic > field! > the alternator was rated in the region of 80 to 100 amps at 12V > DC, so your talking about 1 to 1.2 Kw of power , relate this to > the gas vol. and the whole question changes! Did you view the cell powering an ICE, or just producing gas? Do you think there was zero energy anomaly in what you saw? Another problem here seems to be that Stan had a number of different types of cells - as his patent portfolio demonstrated. And it is clear that in these demos, he could not always get them to work as planned. The fact that they ever worked at all - if they did - could be a critical detail, before writing-off the work entirely. The most important question for moving beyond this sad chapter in the evolution of alternative energy is: can anything Meyer did be incorporated into the next generation of cells? Is the high voltage, low amps concept just a gimmick? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 07:16:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54EFk9T031849; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:15:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54EFfrq031745; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:15:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:15:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003201c687e1$58ea4fa0$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: OT: the "LifeBox" Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:15:34 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <6f1UGB.A.3vH.MsugEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68704 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There is a marvelous pop-sci book out now by Rudy Rucker, entitled "The Lifebox, the Seashell, and the Soul". It explores a scientific basis for spirituality - devoid of dogma and myth. You might think of it as quirky at first, but by next week , if you stick with it, you might think of it as modern-day prophecy. http://www.rudyrucker.com/lifebox/index.html even if you don't cotton-to the theme of the book, or Rucker's clinical writing style (regrettable in light of his great ideas), there are some way-cool software downloads here: http://www.rudyrucker.com/lifebox/downloads.htm OK. What is this key concept of this book: which the "lifebox" ? Well to put is succinctly, the lifebox is (or will become) the "soul" of future lifeforms on planet earth - in the long-awaited "rational" future of our disincarnated evolution (away from the flesh), so to speak. This is a book that should be required reading in Seminary, as it may become a future "gospel" for the next generation. The "good news," however, definitely takes a period of "adjustment" or attitude-re-engineering, shall we say. I had to put the book down for a week, after an initial speed-read, just to let the ideas sink-in before a further study. Basically and IMHO, at some point in the evolution of mankind - around the year 2012 if earth does not self-immolate, we will have affordable (terabyte, terahertz, son-of-Xbox) computers advanced enough to capture an individual's total though-process, personality, educational slant, day-by-day biography, like-and-dislike, quirks, and insight ... a machine which will grow and mature with every individual from childhood to (going offline physically) IOW - a soul but different from anything imaginable in ancient scripture, yet surprisingly comforting - after you live with the concept for several days. I would love to have access to the "lifebox" of not only my father, departed now for 40 years or grandparents and so on - but also to non-relatives. Imagine going online and spending time with long departed great thinkers or personal heroes. In the not-too-distant future, this will be an attainable (and probably universal)kind of immortality - and in keeping with Moore's Law, it will probably cost less than the average marble tombstone (but like the neoBeetle, it may have a built-in stem vase.) Shalom, Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 07:55:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54Et6mn019988; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:55:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54Et5jW019971; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:55:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:55:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <049601c687e6$da2a2220$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> <001001c687ba$a4b1f270$0300a8c0@user> <001e01c687d9$09b333f0$0253fea9@NuDell> Subject: MeyerRep: was Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 07:54:58 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68705 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: Dave Lawton has posted his Meyer Replication to the Daniel Dingel watercar site: http://tinyurl.com/h8xlw or http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YOeCRBElpmDS03hfEq6RFK-eb2zvBfpfNXdhIPRG5Hlcc4UPuWptbJiNHeqhFzEcQmxpJWESva_e298JZFzdGW4jCzqSFlxp/MeyerRep.pdf Good pics and nice device - but no relevant data as yet ;-( Makes on wonder, though, as this "seems" like enough gas to power an ICE - looks can be decieving, of course... BTW, this file alone is worth joining this group for - and Dingel has had more success than any JoeCell proponent - including a postive review by two engineers from BWM. A cursory review of the three JoeCell forum-sites appear to be that these are for true-believers and orgono-philes only. Don't waste your time. BTW#2, Dingel who as been at this for 37 years now - powers his cell - a converted 12 volt battery with a 2000 volt converted auto igntion coil - using the very same electrostatic technique as does Meyer. This is all in the public domain, now. No hocus pocus, no orgone. Makes one wonder if Stan did not copy Dan, however.... Is a WasserCar 'Beamer' in your future.... http://www.s-line.de/homepages/keppler/wasserauto.htm Check out the cover of the Geman Mag - what was hot-air about passing gentleman's gas ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 08:01:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54F1eVD024493; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:01:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54F1cdR024475; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:01:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:01:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <018501c687e7$7ccad2e0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200660413418106@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Energy given up is enthalpy loss -dH Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:59:28 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68706 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred wrote: ... >> Controversy solved? >> > Yes, but to show how the dH values vary check out this URL > on Hess' Law. > > http://wine1.sb.fsu.edu/chm1045/notes/Energy/HessLaw/Energy04.htm Yes indeed! Enthalpy variation is path-independent, which makes perfect sense since it results from bonds (intramolecular AND intermolecular) broken and made: what matters is the net energy balance between the final bonds in the final products and the initial bonds in the initial reactants (chemical bond energy is nothing but coulombic force potential energy, and heat is kinetic energy, and the sum of them must stay constant if some of the bond energy turns into heat like in the reaction we have been discussing) There is only so much bond energy in 2H2(g) and O2(g), and so much bond energy in H2O(l), net energy is the difference, whatever has happened in between (besides many things DO happen in between as you pointed out Fred). This makes me think of a nice exercise I wrote a few weeks ago to convince someone else of path-independence of produced (or absorbed) energy in a net reaction. Here it is it's quite relevant to what is discussed here, the lucky few here who have my spreadsheet (approved by Michael MacKubre, mind you) can do it without any table lookup nor calculations: ---------- 1/ In the water evaporation reaction H2O(l)->H2O(g), how much energy produced (or absorbed if negative) per g of water? 2/ Then try the same net reaction but with an intermediate step in the path: 2a/ Dissociate the liquid water: H2O(l)->H2(g) + 0.5 O2(g) (by electrolysis or whatever, it's irrelevant) How many J per g of H2O(l)? 2b/ Now recombine the gases to get vapor: H2(g) + 0.5 O2(g) -> H2O(g) (explosively, catalytically, it's irrelevant) How many J per g of H2O(g)? 3/ How many J net for 2a/ + 2b/ per g of water, how does it compare with the result for 1/? ---------- Cheers, Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 08:41:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54Fer8c014182; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:40:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54FemMR014138; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:40:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:40:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <019e01c687ec$f3442980$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <003201c687e1$58ea4fa0$0253fea9@NuDell> Subject: Re: the "LifeBox" Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 17:38:37 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68707 X-Loop: vortex-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! The tricky bits will be: - the capture of the thought mechanisms and the knowledge - their playback Otherwise there is no questioning that the computer power and storage will be there ok, and for cheap, someone calculated a few years back that an average PC was already equivalent to a chimpanzee in those respects. If the tricky bits are solved, this will offer a way to travel for cheap too, just transfer the data forget about the hardware we'll buy it there ;-) IMHO a more realistic prediction based on Moore's law is that we will talk equal to equal with machines in a few decades, and they will consider us as fancy pets (or antique machines?) in a few more decades. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 4:15 PM Subject: OT: the "LifeBox" > There is a marvelous pop-sci book out now by Rudy Rucker, entitled "The > Lifebox, the Seashell, and the Soul". It explores a scientific basis for > spirituality - devoid of dogma and myth. You might think of it as quirky > at first, but by next week , if you stick with it, you might think of it > as modern-day prophecy. > > http://www.rudyrucker.com/lifebox/index.html > > even if you don't cotton-to the theme of the book, or Rucker's clinical > writing style (regrettable in light of his great ideas), there are some > way-cool software downloads here: > > http://www.rudyrucker.com/lifebox/downloads.htm > > OK. What is this key concept of this book: which the "lifebox" ? > > Well to put is succinctly, the lifebox is (or will become) the "soul" of > future lifeforms on planet earth - in the long-awaited "rational" future > of our disincarnated evolution (away from the flesh), so to speak. > > This is a book that should be required reading in Seminary, as it may > become a future "gospel" for the next generation. The "good news," > however, definitely takes a period of "adjustment" or > attitude-re-engineering, shall we say. I had to put the book down for a > week, after an initial speed-read, just to let the ideas sink-in before a > further study. > > Basically and IMHO, at some point in the evolution of mankind - around the > year 2012 if earth does not self-immolate, we will have affordable > (terabyte, terahertz, son-of-Xbox) computers advanced enough to capture an > individual's total though-process, personality, educational slant, > day-by-day biography, like-and-dislike, quirks, and insight ... a machine > which will grow and mature with every individual from childhood to (going > offline physically) IOW - a soul but different from anything imaginable in > ancient scripture, yet surprisingly comforting - after you live with the > concept for several days. > > I would love to have access to the "lifebox" of not only my father, > departed now for 40 years or grandparents and so on - but also to > non-relatives. Imagine going online and spending time with long departed > great thinkers or personal heroes. > > In the not-too-distant future, this will be an attainable (and probably > universal)kind of immortality - and in keeping with Moore's Law, it will > probably cost less than the average marble tombstone (but like the > neoBeetle, it may have a built-in stem vase.) > > Shalom, > > Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 09:22:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54GLfHe003692; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:21:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54GLe40003672; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:21:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:21:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 11:20:46 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: heat after death 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/68708 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A question. Is it correct to say that in P&F's "heat after death" heat is being produced with only a voltage and no current? Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 09:23:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54GN3Ub004338; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:23:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54GN2XH004319; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:23:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:23:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:21:38 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Power vs Energy In-reply-to: <011301c6879b$332bffc0$e79d163f@DFBGQZ91> 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: <3s5IeC.A.aDB.mjwgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68709 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: We want power instead of energy. The power to do what we want. Significantly power is not conserved. A core value of the industrial revolution was to use power in a _particular_ way: to push and pull matter. The power to push and pull matter is often limited. This limitation is part of the current social/technological order rather than the natural order, but it has mistakenly been projected onto the natural order as the law of conservation of energy. It is as if industry were the natural order. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 10:21:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54HKFDr000784; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:20:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54HBobS028401; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:11:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:11:50 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TNhrCKMDbQ1e+DVnwetr7IWnFnhIqKNYeeoN+E9bhIVkjz42JpSshThbZ48hesN4; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006604165443422@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: heat after death Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:54:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94073c0adacf1fd03eb9c05160e7e544c32350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.53 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68710 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Most likely the Joe Cell Effect, Harry. > [Original Message] > From: Harry Veeder > To: > Date: 6/4/2006 10:22:19 AM > Subject: heat after death > > > A question. > Is it correct to say that in P&F's "heat after death" heat is being produced > with only a voltage and no current? > > Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 10:35:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54HZWL6011694; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:35:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54HZTjd011660; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:35:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:35:29 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=nPXHZH2ri899vE1AcpAv7Kfbn2kIVH6VHQGHSNOr9Ww3dnmiyxLsSEDwmewKcOoQ; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006604173452136@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Energy given up is enthalpy loss -dH Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:34:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94018754f7a5180a30fee37fc8471ccb8a2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.11 Resent-Message-ID: <6keZwB.A.H2C.gnxgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68711 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > > This makes me think of a nice exercise I wrote a few weeks ago to convince > someone else of path-independence of produced (or absorbed) energy in a net > reaction. > Here it is it's quite relevant to what is discussed here, the > lucky few here who have my spreadsheet (approved by Michael MacKubre, mind > you) can do it without any table lookup nor calculations: > I met Mike Mackubre at a meeting here in the fall of 2000. He struck me as... I reached for the last jelly roll when we were on coffee break. :-) Fred > ---------- > 1/ In the water evaporation reaction H2O(l)->H2O(g), how much energy > produced (or absorbed if negative) per g of water? > > 2/ Then try the same net reaction but with an intermediate step in > the path: > > 2a/ Dissociate the liquid water: H2O(l)->H2(g) + 0.5 O2(g) > (by electrolysis or whatever, it's irrelevant) > How many J per g of H2O(l)? > > 2b/ Now recombine the gases to get vapor: H2(g) + 0.5 O2(g) -> H2O(g) > (explosively, catalytically, it's irrelevant) > How many J per g of H2O(g)? > > 3/ How many J net for 2a/ + 2b/ per g of water, how does it compare > with the result for 1/? > ---------- > > Cheers, > Michel > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 10:49:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54HmYBZ019469; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:48:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54HmVTv019442; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:48:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:48:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <01e801c687fe$ce47e920$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006604173452136@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Energy given up is enthalpy loss -dH Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:46:23 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68712 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I would have done the same ;-) Michel Fred wrote: > He struck me as... I reached for the last jelly roll when we were > on coffee break. :-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 10:57:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54HufAE024861; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:56:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54Hud6C024845; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:56:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:56:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <050a01c68800$383d5940$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Fw: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 10:56:33 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <9_2_VC.A.IEG.X7xgEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68713 X-Loop: vortex-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 Grimer asked me to forward the message below, as he is having trouble connecting from 'jolly olde'.... ... which brings to mind another question regarding the international operation of vortex: often there are messages being quoted from "Michel Jullian", who from the name is possibly French, yet I am never getting the original message. Are others having this same problem of not getting some of these messages ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grimer" > My connection across the herring pond is very flaky at the > moment and I got the following message to Vortex returned as > undeliverable - Maybe cos it mentioned "detonator" and > "ammonium nitrate". I would be grateful if you could forward > it to Vortex-L for me. > Ta, > Frank ============================================================== > At 02:39 pm 03/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: > > >>Ha - several hours isn't enough. The way you would >>"precondition" >>the water for later use in the JC, is after about 12 hours - >>then >>use it for the ICE... obviously pure water won't draw enough >>current to be used without the preconditioning, and even then >>may >>require some electrolyte. >> >>Maybe the preconditioning has something to do with actually >>changing the water structure > > > I can believe that. The electric current will introduce an > asymmetry into the Beta-atmosphere compression which will by > a process analogous to creep (relaxation) transfer stress from > one level to another. Because of the slow transfer rate this > stress will be locked in for some significant time, > > It could, for example, raise the 4th power structure > of bulk water up to the 8th power structure of the > surface layers. In common parlance it builds up layers > of internal skin, scar tissue. > > This tissue then acts as a detonator to the bulk water > [cf. a detonator used with ammonium nitrate fertilizer > which is a topical subject at the moment. 8-) ] > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5044560.stm > > Cheers, > > Frank > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 11:38:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54IbZ8e015315; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:37:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54IbWC0015288; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:37:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:37:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Yik+M2xs9jP3IEOUyJCys4g0tcrzKC0v7dtRjQErsI5d1h3qfwMV+3eNwGULcZ9L; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006604183713516@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Photolysis of Water Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:37:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408612e3d85ad74e6994397b0fa70f0200350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.184 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68714 X-Loop: vortex-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 the early 70s I pursued using the ~ 1,000 watts per square meter solar insolation to split water laced with Bromine or Sodium, Potassium or Magnesium Bromide salts, but got hung up on separating the O2 and H2. Never thought about pulling the mix off to run an ICE. Perhaps a Mayonnaise jar on the window sill? This also jogs the memory of the rash of exploding pickle jars sitting on the window sills in Moscow a few years ago. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
In the early 70s I pursued using the ~ 1,000 watts per square meter
solar insolation to split water laced with Bromine or Sodium, Potassium or
Magnesium Bromide salts, but got hung up on separating the
O2 and H2.
Never thought about pulling the mix off to run an ICE.
Perhaps a Mayonnaise jar on the window sill?
This also jogs the memory of the rash of exploding
pickle jars sitting on the window sills in Moscow
a few years ago.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 12:06:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54J6gVk000622; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:06:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54J6e1L000600; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:06:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:06:40 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=dcu5JM4B0HqGtFsEXPw8K7UI5bg4rHMFjm5Jtzx1QaKchTxvhcNDj8T3U/kMyMK9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Fw: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 13:06:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94096dcd2b743c663758da090369bc1a205350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.229 Resent-Message-ID: <_2-Jq.A.PJ.A9ygEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68715 X-Loop: vortex-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: >... > > .... which brings to mind another question regarding the > international operation of vortex: often there are messages being > quoted from "Michel Jullian", who from the name is possibly > French, yet I am never getting the original message. > I would say that Michel Jullian is as French as Toulouse-Lautrec: http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/toulouse-lautrec/ Thumbnail photos better than the Watercar. :-) > Are others having this same problem of not getting some of these > messages ? > Not me. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 12:34:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54JYIgK017349; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:34:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54JYGrN017329; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:34:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:34:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> Subject: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:34:10 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68716 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: "Frederick Sparber" > Are others having this same problem of not getting some of these > messages ? Not me. Hmm.... This must be the dreaded "13th floor" kinda glitch ;-) Jones For the benefit of the cinema-challenged (most scientists, regrettably) - In the "13th Floor" a very thought-provoking film - the protagonist has created a "Sim" or simulated world - which gamers can jack-into... then to discover from various non sequiturs - really programming "glitches" - that his "real" world is also just a simulation. PKD does the same thing in a great story, the name of which escapes me at moment... but it involves "change" of a more worldly variety (ah... therein we have the source of most glitches) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 14:11:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54LAdxH009630; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:10:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54LAbEo009608; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:10:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:10:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:08:31 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68717 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: Could someone reply to this post so that Jones gets it? Jones, if it's only my posts and if the rest of the list gets them maybe it's your anti-spam which is also anti-me? You could try whitelisting my email address mj@exbang.com and see what gives. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 9:34 PM Subject: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > >> Are others having this same problem of not getting some of these messages >> ? > > Not me. > > Hmm.... This must be the dreaded "13th floor" kinda glitch ;-) > > Jones > > > For the benefit of the cinema-challenged (most scientists, regrettably) - > In the "13th Floor" a very thought-provoking film - the protagonist has > created a "Sim" or simulated world - which gamers can jack-into... then > to discover from various non sequiturs - really programming "glitches" - > that his "real" world is also just a simulation. PKD does the same thing > in a great story, the name of which escapes me at moment... but it > involves "change" of a more worldly variety (ah... therein we have the > source of most glitches) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 14:17:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54LGr6O013235; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:16:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54LGqbX013217; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:16:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:16:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:16:47 -0400 Message-Id: <8C856335296EA13-14E0-14FF3@mblkn-m19.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> Cc: jonesb9@pacbell.net X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.137 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68718 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: That can't be it. He should get the mail from the vortex-l mailer. His computer must be a francophobe . . . and I thought Jones was a liberal. ;-) Terry -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:08:31 +0200 Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Could someone reply to this post so that Jones gets it? Jones, if it's only my posts and if the rest of the list gets them maybe it's your anti-spam which is also anti-me? You could try whitelisting my email address mj@exbang.com and see what gives. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 9:34 PM Subject: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > >> Are others having this same problem of not getting some of these messages >> ? > > Not me. > > Hmm.... This must be the dreaded "13th floor" kinda glitch ;-) > > Jones > > > For the benefit of the cinema-challenged (most scientists, regrettably) - > In the "13th Floor" a very thought-provoking film - the protagonist has > created a "Sim" or simulated world - which gamers can jack-into... then > to discover from various non sequiturs - really programming "glitches" - > that his "real" world is also just a simulation. PKD does the same thing > in a great story, the name of which escapes me at moment... but it > involves "change" of a more worldly variety (ah... therein we have the > source of most glitches) ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 14:37:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54Lare4023712; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:36:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54LapEr023680; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:36:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:36:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <002101c6881e$f4a6db10$93027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: O.T.: the "Lifebox" Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:36:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68719 X-Loop: vortex-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_001D_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001E_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0" ------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankJones wrote.. There is a marvelous pop-sci book out now by Rudy Rucker, entitled=20 "The Lifebox, the Seashell, and the Soul". It explores a=20 scientific basis for spirituality - devoid of dogma and myth. You=20 might think of it as quirky at first, but by next week , if you=20 stick with it, you might think of it as modern-day prophecy. http://www.rudyrucker.com/lifebox/index.html even if you don't cotton-to the theme of the book, or Rucker's=20 clinical writing style (regrettable in light of his great ideas),=20 there are some way-cool software downloads here: Howdy Jones.. Thanks for the link and brief. Comparing posts between Snadin Bear ( = Australia) and Rucker it appears we have a " spread" of cards on the = table of the great game of life. Unfortunately, neither people nor life plays by the rules. Perhaps the = biggestdanger by year 1012 is a loss of a genration of basic technical = eduction. One break in the chain and we are back to the stone age from = the "puter" age.. HMMM Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Jones wrote..

There is a marvelous pop-sci book out now by Rudy Rucker, entitled =
"The=20 Lifebox, the Seashell, and the Soul". It explores a
scientific basis = for=20 spirituality - devoid of dogma and myth. You
might think of it as = quirky at=20 first, but by next week , if you
stick with it, you might think of = it as=20 modern-day prophecy.

http://www.rudyruck= er.com/lifebox/index.html

even=20 if you don't cotton-to the theme of the book, or Rucker's
clinical = writing=20 style (regrettable in light of his great ideas),
there are some = way-cool=20 software downloads here:

Howdy Jones..

Thanks for the link and brief. Comparing posts between Snadin Bear (=20 Australia) and Rucker it appears we have a " spread" of cards on the = table of=20 the great game of life.

Unfortunately, neither people nor life plays by the rules. Perhaps = the=20 biggestdanger by year 1012 is a loss of a genration of basic technical = eduction.=20 One break in the chain and we are back to the stone age from the "puter" = age..=20 HMMM

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001c01c6881e$f3c4b870$93027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C687F5.0AFDF2B0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 15:47:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54MlLbg030015; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:47:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54MlHE6029901; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:47:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:47:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 08:40:21 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5nn682peanh7s5t4ecpptum36mcnj69ha2@4ax.com> References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> <015d01c687c3$13744fc0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <015d01c687c3$13744fc0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.53.2] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 4 Jun 2006 22:40:20 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k54MeKeE027530 Resent-Message-ID: <91WSGB.A.4SH.yL2gEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68720 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:38:24 +0200: Hi, [snip] >So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed >(copy-paste): > >2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ > >which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, not >to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) According to:- >http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en delta Hgas = -241.826 kJ/mole and deltaHliquid = -285.830 kJ/mole. IOW both answers are correct, depending on whether the water forms as a vapor or as a liquid. As I understand it the difference is the heat of condensation + any heat derived from the cooling of the liquid. You need to look at the specific circumstances of any given experiment to determine which answer is "correct". In a car engine the water clearly forms as a vapor, and exits the engine as such. Unless waste heat is recovered from the exhaust, the energy of condensation is lost. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 15:51:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54MohLI032556; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:50:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54Mof2R032525; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:50:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:50:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <024001c68829$0229ac40$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: "Jones Beene" , , References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C856335296EA13-14E0-14FF3@mblkn-m19.sysops.aol.com> <056901c6881f$e71737a0$0253fea9@NuDell> Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 00:48:29 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68721 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones Tuttle receive this, directly? Via the list? Other strange thing, I received my own post to Vortex about one hour after Terry's reply to it! Bill may have an idea on what's going on? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Cc: "Michel Jullian" Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 11:43 PM Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel > Terry, > > That post from Michel never came thru - from the Vortex list server ... > but I emailed him directly to see if that gets there. Thanks for > forwarding the other one. > > Maybe the problem is on my end - that is - there is some secret French > list of potential subversives, like in 'Brazil' ... and... lo and behold, > the Tuttle "bug" struck-home ... Ha ...poetic justice, no? > > Acutally I did spend a summer in Provence a few years ago, but was never > in any trouble with the gendarmes... > > ...or maybe I have used my favorite Gallic phrase, "la loi de > l'emmerdement maximum" one-too-many times for the cyber-police ... > > Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 16:18:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k54NIDn2016582; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:18:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k54NICJ8016547; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:18:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:18:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <024e01c6882c$d5f85c80$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-2200666318351758@earthlink.net> <0e8d01c6873f$b94787c0$3800a8c0@zothan> <015d01c687c3$13744fc0$3800a8c0@zothan> <5nn682peanh7s5t4ecpptum36mcnj69ha2@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 01:15:57 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Resent-Message-ID: <1kMj1.A.UCE.yo2gEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68722 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin but we were talking about the liquid: >>2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ and the question was whether produced energy (in the form of heat or whatever e.g. electric power in a fuel cell) was dG for the liquid 474 kJ(and not 483 kJ, twice the dH for the gas you gave), or dH for the liquid 572 kJ, the controversy has finally been solved in favor of the latter cf later posts. Fred must be busy re-doing all his Joe Cell calculations in dH algebra ;) You're right of course about the difference between formation enthalpies of H2O(l) and H2O(g) being the heat of condensation (44kJ/mol) which is physically the energy of the H2O-H2O bonds, but there is no heat derived from the cooling since all these figures are only valid at 25° (and 1 atm). Getting late in this part of the world, good night all. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 12:40 AM Subject: Re: Produced energy is enthalpy change dH (was Re: Free Radical Chain Reactions) > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sun, 4 Jun 2006 12:38:24 > +0200: > Hi, > [snip] >>So here is CHEMIX's thermochemistry answer for the reaction we discussed >>(copy-paste): >> >>2H2(g) + O2(g) = 2H2O(l) + 571.6kJ >> >>which solves the controversy (produced energy is equal to -dH=572kJ/mol, >>not >>to -dG=474kJ/mol), doesn't it Fred? :))) > > According to:- > >>http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/form-ser.html.en-us.en > > delta Hgas = -241.826 kJ/mole and deltaHliquid = -285.830 kJ/mole. > > IOW both answers are correct, depending on whether the water forms > as a vapor or as a liquid. As I understand it the difference is > the heat of condensation + any heat derived from the cooling of > the liquid. You need to look at the specific circumstances of any > given experiment to determine which answer is "correct". > > In a car engine the water clearly forms as a vapor, and exits the > engine as such. Unless waste heat is recovered from the exhaust, > the energy of condensation is lost. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 19:48:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k552lnVT009349; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:47:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k552lknA009319; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:47:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:47:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 22:48:23 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Sun, 04 Jun 2006 22:48:25 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Sun, 04 Jun 2006 22:48:26 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68723 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OT: the "LifeBox" Jones Beene wrote: > ... > > Basically and IMHO, at some point in the evolution of mankind - > around the year 2012 if earth does not self-immolate, we will > have affordable (terabyte, terahertz, son-of-Xbox) computers > advanced enough to capture an individual's total though-process, > personality, educational slant, day-by-day biography, > like-and-dislike, quirks, and insight ... a machine which will > grow and mature with every individual from childhood to (going > offline physically) IOW - a soul but different from anything > imaginable in ancient scripture, yet surprisingly comforting - > after you live with the concept for several days. > > I would love to have access to the "lifebox" of not only my father, > departed now for 40 years or grandparents and so on - but also to > non-relatives. Imagine going online and spending time with long > departed great thinkers or personal heroes. > > ... > > Shalom, > > > Jones Hello, Jones. Not to burst your bubble or anything but before we can even think of capturing a human's thought processes, etc. and no matter what other hardware we have available, we are going to need computers that are several orders of magnitude smarter than we are. Right now we don't have a clue how to build computers that are close to being as smart as a two-year-old. Artificial Intelligence researchers have been working on this since the late 50s. Their predictions of success are usually set about 15-20 years in the future, paralleling hot fusion researchers' repeated predictions of when the first practical fusion power reactors will come on-line. But instead let's say we do -- somehow -- find out how to build such superintelligent computers ("superintelligences"). Within a short time -- months or weeks -- they'll be able to do all the neat stuff Rucker and you propose and much more as well. They're the last things humans will ever need to invent. Rucker probably references this point in time as the "Technological Singularity" or just "The Singularity". (If he doesn't, shame on him. I note the term isn't in his table of contents.) People have debated what the Singularity means and its philosophical implications for the future. And many people fear that at the cusp of the Singularity our superintelligent computers will somehow run amok and destroy humanity. Reams of text have been generated discussing this, e.g., "Why would they want to?" and suggestions about implementing Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics". All this seems to me to completely ignore the real danger: A superintelligence is (among other things) a weapon-generating machine. The first group or groups to get access to these machines will act to dominate humanity, if only to prevent others from doing so. One such group will succeed. It is likely during this conflict -- or to prevent challenges to the victor -- that most of the people on earth will be murdered. Even if not, the group that succeeds will either find a way to completely police the most minute human action or use superintelligence-generated methods such as nanotech to take direct control of all human brains. Maybe we'll all be convinced that Christ Jesus has returned to reign, or perhaps the 12th Iman instead. (I suppose both are possible simultaneously.) In any event, after superintelligence has yielded total hegemony to one group, "crimethink" (as defined by Orwell) will be impossible and the "singularity" (whatever it might mean) will also be impossible. It is dangerous to put infinite power into the hands of a fallible species. And maybe that's true for "new energy" as well. Fortunately, as I said above, we have no idea how to build a superintelligent computer. Summing up, no, Jones, it is unlikely that a LifeBox will ever be built or that any human being will ever be able to visit the essence of a deceased loved one inside the bowels of a computer. Sorry. -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 19:55:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k552tIvv016204; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:55:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k552tE2Q016152; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:55:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:55:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:55:10 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C856335296EA13-14E0-14FF3@mblkn-m19.sysops.aol.com> <056901c6881f$e71737a0$0253fea9@NuDell> <024001c68829$0229ac40$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <024001c68829$0229ac40$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.53.2] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Mon, 5 Jun 2006 02:55:09 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k552t9Ia016092 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68724 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Mon, 5 Jun 2006 00:48:29 +0200: Hi, [snip] >Does Jones Tuttle receive this, directly? Via the list? > >Other strange thing, I received my own post to Vortex about one hour after >Terry's reply to it! > >Bill may have an idea on what's going on? [snip] Since you are a "foreigner", it takes a while for the NSA to clear your email. ;^) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 20:33:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k553US8N003245; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 20:33:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k553FHxw027528; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 20:15:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 20:15:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060605031444419.66624B000082@mwinf3213.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 04:17:20 +0100 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 In-Reply-To: <1ced01c6872e$c7293610$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Resent-Message-ID: <57O4MC.A.DuG.FH6gEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68725 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Jones wrote: > > This may sound a bit cynical and/or paranoid, but it would not > surprise me if some of the inordinate amount of disinformation out > there was being promoted by special interests. Look at Chevron's > books close enough, and you just might may see big payments to the > Reich institute, or cases of Foster's fine brew being sent over to > Joe and his pals, etc... Sorry Patrick, one has to draw the > line somewhere, and for me it is above 'orgone' and about 2/3 of > Joe's B.S.... but then again, that appraisal may change tomorrow, > with even the tiniest bit of proof. Jones, I find the negative connotations - from a 'hard' science perspective - of the use of that particular label quite intriguing. Only a matter of a few weeks ago you were speculating here about muons, and there has also been some debate (not enough, IMHO) about hydrinos. I presume that such theories - rooted as they are, at least partly, in accepted science - provoke less consternation than talking about 'orgone', with all of it's associated baggage. I recognise that I too slightly recoil when I see such words. However, let's remember that it's the phenomenon that we are interested in, not how we label it. As Alex Schiffer says in the update to 'The Experimenters Guide to the Joe Cell', immediately after he discusses muons and hydrinos as possible explanations (!), "Again dear friends we are calling the same rose by a different name. At the end of the day it does not matter in the least as to what the name of the force is as long as we know its cause and not just use the effect as we have been doing." Let's concentrate on understanding the force - we can come up with a more 'acceptable' name for it later. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 21:40:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k554eCnU019445; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:40:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k554UH4W011020; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:30:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:30:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <05c301c68858$b7ce7ba0$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:30:03 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68726 X-Loop: vortex-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 Walter, > Summing up, no, Jones, it is unlikely that a LifeBox will ever > be built or that any human being will ever be able to visit the > essence of a deceased loved one inside the bowels of a computer. > Sorry. Don't be sorry, Walter - after all, you are only human and it's very normal for us hairless-apes, as the dominant species and top of the food-chain for now, to want and desire above all else for "things" to stay that way forever ... and you are merely expressing that expected sentiment - somewhat out of desperation, perhaps. But it is natural ... even if it is kind of a knee-jerk reaction. Logic, if it could ever be applied in a dispassionate way to our developmental history - might indicate otherwise, however... Hard to be objective, though - when it comes to the subject of something "special" about our kind of intelligence. Roger Penrose has been spinning his wheels on this task for some time, and despite arguments more convoluted than some of his tiling patterns, has largely failed to find any objective factor which will deny the same intelligence we have- to our equally complex creations, even if they are biological (in the sense of genetic engineering) as opposed to mechanical - or perhaps even a chimera. Many will always find it revolting to imagine that the intelligence which we prize so much - and is our defining characteristic as a species - is merely the "emergent property" of simple arithmetic - that is: the emergent property of an evolutionary increase in neutral capacity, combined with a few other "connections" in the Burke sense like fingers and vocal chords (as well as "connections" in the sense of society). Is that all there is? connections? Is that all there is .... to a brain? ...ask Miss Peggy (or maybe Miss Piggy) Jones I used to think Peggy Lee's plaintive song was hopelessly maudlin, but nowadays it seems ... err... hopefully maudlin? (and why was she always called "Miss" - some kind of codeword?) Peg sez: "I remember when I was a very little girl, our house caught on fire. I'll never forget the look on my father's face as he gathered me up in his arms and raced through the burning building out to the pavement. I stood there shivering in my pajamas and watched the whole world go up in flames. And when it was all over I said to myself, Is that all there is to a fire?" Chorus: Is that all there is, is that all there is If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing Let's break out the booze and have a ball If that's all there is And when I was 12 years old, my father took me to a circus, the greatest show on earth. There were clowns and elephants and dancing bears. And a beautiful lady in pink tights flew high above our heads. And so I sat there watching the marvelous spectacle. I had the feeling that something was missing. I don't know what, but when it was over, I said to myself, "is that all there is to a circus? Is that all there is, is that all there is If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing Let's break out the booze and have a ball If that's all there is I know what you must be saying to yourselves, if that's the way she feels about it why doesn't she just end it all? Oh, no, not me. I'm in no hurry for that final disappointment, for I know just as well as I'm standing here talking to you, when that final moment comes and I'm breathing my last breath, I'll be saying to myself Is that all there is, is that all there is If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing Let's break out the booze and have a ball If that's all there is From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 21:42:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k554frcP020920; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:41:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k554fpUm020903; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:41:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:41:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <05c801c68859$6c237dd0$0253fea9@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 21:35:06 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68727 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Patrick Vessey" Point taken... so long as there exists real proof that there is such a "force" ... nomen est numen? >Again dear friends we are calling the same rose > by a different name. At the end of the day it does not matter in > the least > as to what the name of the force is as long as we know its cause > and not > just use the effect as we have been doing." > > Let's concentrate on understanding the force - we can come up > with a more > 'acceptable' name for it later. > > Patrick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 23:15:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k556Elbm018395; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:14:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k556EjSY018373; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:14:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:14:45 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=k3fgQEeVXtO4gonvp33JtAr3wfPx80VvJhGhbm60UBUYPWvWqcRWg2PR/6Fao2u/CjjG2HQfjyV+HSCOJpUNoUv8btTD5t75D9w9zSMH059AylFPtqIJbZvv/XuK5MlW4R1xxQQRBsUUVl9zJAhY0F68IJulWK+mg5jHtLftnMc= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 02:14:43 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Really HOT H H and O plus Water for the ICE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_37406_25912753.1149488083117" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68728 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_37406_25912753.1149488083117 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear JB, Please let us know the answers to these confusing items in your message, below: (A) Is one mole of H 1 gram and one mole of H2 2 grams? (B) Who is-are "the seven sisters"? (C) Water then would yield, for one molecule .... 2 H and one O Correct? What is-are the mole weight of: i] H ii] H2 iii] O iv] O2 (D) If one burns two H and one O does one get one H2 O.. ? (E) What is the temperature? (F) if burning H H and O is HOT... what if you cool it with small droplets of water such as the "mist" from an atomizer? (G) if you do the ''cooling'' inside the piston and during combustion... then what is the expansion or ability to push the piston through its "expansion-combustion" stoke or cycle? OR: The H H and O are ''combustion-exploding'' and being "really HOT" ... and mist is introduced at the same time and the really hot hydrox then makes the mist into steam... What is the extra force developed....from the "really hot steam"....?.. this pre supposes one have a useful ratio of heat or ''really Hot'' reacting H H and O to little tiny water droplets of ''mist from atomizer''. _________________________ Thank you, Herma . On 6/3/06, Jones Beene wrote: > > For the "numbers-folks" amongst-us, here is some useful background > data for the WasserCar, and for hydrogen fuel in general, along > with ongoing commentary about the difference in using H2+O2 as > opposed to "common-manifold," or Brown's gas. > > One mole of hydrogen is two grams; the gram molecule of water is > 18 grams. Hydrogen relative mass in a water molecule is > 2x100/18=11.1%; oxygen relative mass is 16x100/18=88.9%. This > means that 111.1 grams of hydrogen and 888.9 grams of oxygen are > in every 1000 grams, or every one liter of water. The > computational problems seem to arise in getting the volume of gas > quantified, as H2 is both volatile and easily compressible. > > One liter of hydrogen gas at STP weighs 0.09 g; one liter of > oxygen weighs 1.47 g. It is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234 > liters of hydrogen gas and 888.89/1.47=605 liters of oxygen gas > from one liter of water liquid - and the "expansion ratio" is thus > 1839-to-1 when completely gasified as separate components. The > expansion ratio of water to steam is 1680-1, in contrast - so > there is a slight negative volumetric efficiency in burning a > stoichiometric mix. > Every gram of water contains 1.23 liters of hydrogen gas. Energy > consumption for production of 1000 liters of hydrogen gas, using > traditional methods is ~4 kWh and for one liter ~4 Wh. When looked > at from the perspective of the liquid, ~5Wh is applied to every > gram of water for complete hydrogen conversion using modern > traditional methods. > > The stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for burning hydrogen is in air > in an ICE is 34:1, based on volume of all gases at STP. At this > maximum air/fuel ratio, hydrogen will displace 29% of the > combustion chamber leaving only 71% for the air. As a result, the > energy content of this mixture will be less than it would be if > the fuel were gasoline (since gasoline is a liquid, it only > occupies a smaller volume of the combustion chamber, and thus > allows more air to enter). Of the air, approximately 21% is > oxygen, and most of the rest nitrogen - approximately a 4-1 ratio. > > This means that the volume of oxidizer is a limiting factor in a > traditional ICE burning H2, since only 14% of the volume can be > used of O2 in a stoichiometric situation. This situation results > in either the need for a larger engine, or supercharging to get a > similar output to the same engine fueled with gasoline. But there > are a number of possible alternative practical solutions, among > which the closed-cycle using a larger displacement, and > eliminating nitrogen, is perhaps the best - on paper- IF enough > fuel can be produced in an ongoing fashion by recycling a portion > of the engine output - converted to electricity. A very demanding > challenge, of course, and one which even the very suggestion - > inflames mainstream science - not to mention the 'Seven Sisters.' > > To show how difficult this goal appears to be - paper, consider: > The most modern traditional Electrolyzers consume 4.0 kWh per > cubic meter of this gas. Electrolysis takes place at a voltage of > ~2.0 V and current of hundreds of amperes for the gas necessary. > This much current produces much waste heat is in the electrolysis > cell, which is only about 85% efficient in the most modern > versions. > > When one cubic meter of hydrogen is burnt efficiently only 3.55 > kWh of energy is released - compared to the ~4 it took to make it, > and it gets worse from there. Hydrogen ICEs do have a > significantly higher Carnot efficiency, at least 40% which is > fully one third higher than their gasoline equivalent, but that > pales in comparison to the shortfall which is presented. BTW this > boost in efficiency goes back to the using the complex formula a > couple of paragraphs down. > > Even with the higher efficiency, when this H2 combustion heat is > converted to electricity, it is easy to see that no more than > about 25% of the electricity needed to self-power an ICE can > possibly be available, using the best traditional methods - high > current, low voltage electrolysis. But yet there are at least 150 > anecdotal, eye-witness claims for self-power using only water-fuel > on the internet. Is this all bunkum? What is going on? > > And since the goal is not just self-power, but enough "overage" to > use the engine for transportation, it is clear that a minimum COP > of about 8-to-1 is necessary. More likely, the goal should be 10-1 > improvement compared to normal electrolysis... which if true, begs > the question: what is the real power source. Short answer: if the > claims are true then it must involve either a nuclear reaction, > below ground state hydrogen (hydrino), or ZPE. But first realize > that nature does this on her own - and that is the importance of > "surface effects" and the Helmholtz layer - which arguably tap > into ZPE. > > Bond breaking always requires energy input, of course. Otherwise > everything would fall apart all by itself, but not necessarily > energy input above ambient or net input. In the case of hydrogen > bonding, the thermodynamics are distinctly different from > covalent. The natural molecular movements in water involve the > constant breaking and reorganization of individual hydrogen bonds > on a picosecond timescale, and the process must necessarily be > nearly lossless, due to the enormous "transaction volume." One > report in a respected physic journal indicated that the formula > for water, on this picosecond time scale, is more like H1.5-O than > H2-O (however that finding is in dispute) But the bottom line is > that to utilize this intrinsic OU feature of water-reality, which > is certainly a Casimir effect, we do not have to break the > hydrogen bond of water - so much as to limit recombination > following natural breakage !!! AHA - now we are getting a picture > of why the Meyer electrostatic situation might work - it is not > break the bond, as does traditional electrolysis, but is *limiting > recombination.* > > Let's backtrack first to the issue of theoretical thermodynamic > efficiency of an ICE which is based on the compression ratio of > the engine, and the specific-heat ratio of the fuel and the Carnot > "spread". The compression ratio limit of an engine is based on the > fuel's resistance to "knock." A lean hydrogen mixture is less > susceptible to knock than gasoline and therefore can tolerate > higher compression ratios. The specific-heat ratio is related to > the fuel's molecular structure. The less complex the molecular > structure, the higher the specific-heat ratio. Hydrogen = 1.4 has > a simpler molecular structure than gasoline and therefore its > specific-heat ratio is higher than that of conventional gasoline = > 1.1. However, either of these, burned in a more efficient > oxidizer, like peroxides or super-oxidated mixed gases, can > increase the effective specific heat dramatically. > > But the situation is not apples-to-apples, by any means, for two > reasons. In common manifold electrolysis (Brown's gas) there are > three gas streams - an anode gas (mostly O2), a cathode gas (most > H2) and a neutral-plate mixed gas (mixed peroxides ). In this > situation, the anode and cathode are conservative, like > traditional methods, but most of the energy derives from the > neutral-plate component - the mixed peroxides and superoxides, > which are subject to speedy recombination. > > The next step in the evolution towards a reliable water-fuel > system might well involve using the best feature of all of the > prior art - the Meyer capacitance cell, the Brown's gas neutral > plate design AND the Joe-cell contribution - which is the water > pretreatment regime (he copied the neutral plate design from > Brown). > > The next few months could be a promising time frame for this > grass-roots technology, and it is just too bad (for many of us) > that most of the action appears to be overseas nowadays .... and > even worse, that so much disinformation is mixed into the lore of > the WasserCar... to be expected perhaps for a subject first > explored by none other than Jules Verne - and the subject of a > David Mamet play. > > This may sound a bit cynical and/or paranoid, but it would not > surprise me if some of the inordinate amount of disinformation out > there was being promoted by special interests. Look at Chevron's > books close enough, and you just might may see big payments to the > Reich institute, or cases of Foster's fine brew being sent over to > Joe and his pals, etc... Sorry Patrick, one has to draw the > line somewhere, and for me it is above 'orgone' and about 2/3 of > Joe's B.S.... but then again, that appraisal may change tomorrow, > with even the tiniest bit of proof. > > Jones > > Progress is all a balancing act. Keeping an open-mind is > important, but remember that a sieve doesn't hold much water... > > ------=_Part_37406_25912753.1149488083117 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Dear JB,
 
 
     Please let us know the answers to these confusing items in your message, below:
 
     (A)  Is one mole of H 1 gram and one mole of
            H2 2 grams?
 
      (B) Who is-are "the seven sisters"?
 
 
    (C)  Water then would yield, for one molecule ....
 
           2 H and one O  Correct?
 
           What is-are the mole weight of:
 
            i]       H
            ii]       H2
            iii]      O
            iv]      O2
 
        (D)    If one burns two H and one O does
                   one get   one H2 O..  ?
 
         (E)  What is the temperature?
 
          (F)  if burning H H and O is HOT... what if you cool it  with small droplets of water such as the "mist"  from an atomizer?
 
       (G) if you do the ''cooling''  inside the piston and during combustion... then what is the expansion or ability to push the piston through its "expansion-combustion" stoke or cycle?    OR:  The H H and O are ''combustion-exploding'' and being "really HOT" ... and mist is introduced at the same time and the really hot hydrox then makes the mist into steam...   What is the extra force developed....from the "really hot steam"....?..  this pre supposes one have a useful ratio of heat or ''really Hot''  reacting  H H and O to little tiny water droplets of ''mist from atomizer''.
 
_________________________ 
 
      Thank you,
                         Herma
    .
  

 
On 6/3/06, Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:
For the "numbers-folks" amongst-us, here is some useful background
data for the WasserCar, and for hydrogen fuel in general, along
with ongoing commentary about the difference in using H2+O2 as
opposed to "common-manifold," or Brown's gas.

One mole of hydrogen is two grams; the gram molecule of water is
18 grams. Hydrogen relative mass in a water molecule is
2x100/18=11.1%; oxygen relative mass is 16x100/18=88.9%. This
means that 111.1 grams of hydrogen and 888.9 grams of oxygen are
in every 1000 grams, or every one liter of water. The
computational problems seem to arise in getting the volume of gas
quantified, as H2 is both volatile and easily compressible.

One liter of hydrogen gas at STP weighs 0.09 g; one liter of
oxygen weighs 1.47 g. It  is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234
liters of hydrogen gas and 888.89/1.47=605 liters of oxygen gas
from one liter of water liquid - and the "expansion ratio" is thus
1839-to-1 when completely gasified as separate components. The
expansion ratio of water to steam is 1680-1, in contrast - so
there is a slight negative volumetric efficiency in burning a
stoichiometric mix.
Every gram of water contains 1.23 liters of hydrogen gas. Energy
consumption for production of 1000 liters of hydrogen gas, using
traditional methods is ~4 kWh and for one liter ~4 Wh. When looked
at from the perspective of the liquid, ~5Wh is applied to every
gram of water for complete hydrogen conversion using modern
traditional methods.

The stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for burning hydrogen is in air
in an ICE is 34:1, based on volume of all gases at STP. At this
maximum air/fuel ratio, hydrogen will displace 29% of the
combustion chamber leaving only 71% for the air. As a result, the
energy content of this mixture will be less than it would be if
the fuel were gasoline (since gasoline is a liquid, it only
occupies a smaller volume of the combustion chamber, and thus
allows more air to enter). Of the air, approximately 21% is
oxygen, and most of the rest nitrogen - approximately a 4-1 ratio.

This means that the volume of oxidizer is a limiting factor in a
traditional ICE burning H2, since only 14% of the volume can be
used of O2 in a stoichiometric situation. This situation results
in either the need for a larger engine, or supercharging to get a
similar output to the same engine fueled with gasoline. But there
are a number of possible alternative practical solutions, among
which the closed-cycle using a larger displacement, and
eliminating nitrogen, is perhaps the best - on paper- IF enough
fuel can be produced in an ongoing fashion by recycling a portion
of the engine output - converted to electricity. A very demanding
challenge, of course, and one which even the very suggestion -
inflames mainstream science - not to mention the 'Seven Sisters.'

To show how difficult this goal appears to be - paper, consider:
The most modern traditional Electrolyzers consume 4.0 kWh per
cubic meter of this gas. Electrolysis takes place at a voltage of
~2.0 V and current of hundreds of amperes for the gas necessary.
This much current produces much waste heat is in the electrolysis
cell, which is only about 85% efficient in the most modern
versions.

When one cubic meter of hydrogen is burnt efficiently only 3.55
kWh of energy is released - compared to the ~4 it took to make it,
and it gets worse from there. Hydrogen ICEs do have a
significantly higher Carnot efficiency, at least 40% which is
fully one third higher than their gasoline equivalent, but that
pales in comparison to the shortfall which is presented. BTW this
boost in efficiency goes back to the using the complex formula a
couple of paragraphs down.

Even with the higher efficiency, when this H2 combustion heat is
converted to electricity, it is easy to see that no more than
about 25% of the electricity needed to self-power an ICE can
possibly be available, using the best traditional methods - high
current, low voltage electrolysis. But yet there are at least 150
anecdotal, eye-witness claims for self-power using only water-fuel
on the internet. Is this all bunkum? What is going on?

And since the goal is not just self-power, but enough "overage" to
use the engine for transportation, it is clear that a minimum COP
of about 8-to-1 is necessary. More likely, the goal should be 10-1
improvement compared to normal electrolysis... which if true, begs
the question: what is the real power source. Short answer: if the
claims are true then it must involve either a nuclear reaction,
below ground state hydrogen (hydrino), or ZPE. But first realize
that nature does this on her own - and that is the importance of
"surface effects" and the Helmholtz layer - which arguably tap
into ZPE.

Bond breaking always requires energy input, of course. Otherwise
everything would fall apart all by itself, but not necessarily
energy input above ambient or net input. In the case of hydrogen
bonding, the thermodynamics are distinctly different from
covalent. The natural molecular movements in water involve the
constant breaking and reorganization of individual hydrogen bonds
on a picosecond timescale, and the process must necessarily be
nearly lossless, due to the enormous "transaction volume." One
report in a respected physic journal indicated that the formula
for water, on this picosecond time scale, is more like H1.5-O than
H2-O (however that finding is in dispute) But the bottom line is
that to utilize this intrinsic OU feature of water-reality, which
is certainly a Casimir effect, we do not have to break the
hydrogen bond of water - so much as to limit recombination
following natural breakage !!! AHA - now we are getting a picture
of why the Meyer electrostatic situation might work - it is not
break the bond, as does traditional electrolysis, but is *limiting
recombination.*

Let's backtrack first to the issue of theoretical thermodynamic
efficiency of an ICE which is based on the compression ratio of
the engine, and the specific-heat ratio of the fuel and the Carnot
"spread". The compression ratio limit of an engine is based on the
fuel's resistance to "knock." A lean hydrogen mixture is less
susceptible to knock than gasoline and therefore can tolerate
higher compression ratios. The specific-heat ratio is related to
the fuel's molecular structure. The less complex the molecular
structure, the higher the specific-heat ratio. Hydrogen = 1.4 has
a simpler molecular structure than gasoline and therefore its
specific-heat ratio is higher than that of conventional gasoline =
1.1. However, either of these, burned in a more efficient
oxidizer, like peroxides or super-oxidated mixed gases, can
increase the effective specific heat dramatically.

But the situation is not apples-to-apples, by any means, for two
reasons. In common manifold electrolysis (Brown's gas) there are
three gas streams - an anode gas (mostly O2), a cathode gas (most
H2) and a neutral-plate mixed gas (mixed peroxides ). In this
situation, the anode and cathode are conservative, like
traditional methods, but most of the energy derives from the
neutral-plate component - the mixed peroxides and superoxides,
which are subject to speedy recombination.

The next step in the evolution towards a reliable water-fuel
system might well involve using the best feature of all of the
prior art - the Meyer capacitance cell, the Brown's gas neutral
plate design AND the Joe-cell contribution - which is the water
pretreatment regime (he copied the neutral plate design from
Brown).

The next few months could be a promising time frame for this
grass-roots technology, and it is just too bad (for many of us)
that most of the action appears to be overseas nowadays .... and
even worse, that so much disinformation is mixed into the lore of
the WasserCar... to be expected perhaps for a subject first
explored by none other than Jules Verne - and the subject of a
David Mamet play.

This may sound a bit cynical and/or paranoid, but it would not
surprise me if some of the inordinate amount of disinformation out
there was being promoted by special interests. Look at Chevron's
books close enough, and you just might may see big payments to the
Reich institute, or cases of Foster's fine brew being sent over to
Joe and his pals, etc...<g> Sorry Patrick, one has to draw the
line somewhere, and for me it is above 'orgone' and about 2/3 of
Joe's B.S.... but then again, that appraisal may change tomorrow,
with even the tiniest bit of proof.

Jones

Progress is all a balancing act. Keeping an open-mind is
important, but remember that a sieve doesn't hold much water...


------=_Part_37406_25912753.1149488083117-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 4 23:50:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k556niu3010282; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:49:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k556ng4l010258; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:49:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:49:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4483D3E5.1020609@usfamily.net> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 01:49:09 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Starlight battery References: <44827880.4010609@usfamily.net> <288301c68805$5933d160$650fa8c0@sterlings> In-Reply-To: <288301c68805$5933d160$650fa8c0@sterlings> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <3g3tBB.A.KgC.GQ9gEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68729 X-Loop: vortex-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, and Sterling D. Allan replied: >I would guess 1-2 years to market. > >----- Original Message ----- > >Dear Sterling; > >Someone posted your story about the Russian starlight battery on Vortex-L. I'm wondering if they will be available anytime soon. > > --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 00:07:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5576qDQ021632; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 00:06:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5576nCI021598; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 00:06:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 00:06:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060605070645898.DB69E4800083@mwinf3107.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060605070647.00b6c390@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, 05 Jun 2006 08:06:47 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68730 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:30 pm 04/06/2006 -0700, Jones wrote: . . >.................................. the emergent property of an >evolutionary increase in neutral capacity, ................... # You've got to accentuate the positive Eliminate the negative Latch on to the affirmative Don't mess with Neutral In-Between # ;-) > Oh, no, not me. I'm in no hurry for that final disappointment, > for I know just as well as I'm standing here talking to you, > when that final moment comes and I'm breathing my last breath, > I'll be saying to myself > > Chorus: > Is that all there is, is that all there is > If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing > Let's break out the booze and have a ball > If that's all there is On January 21, 2002 Norma Deloris Egstrom found out that it wasn't "all there is" - Let's pray she was delighted and not horrified. 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 03:06:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55A6P0R016699; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:06:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55A6Jvw016628; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:06:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:06:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE From: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk Reply-to: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Sender-IP-Address: 194.105.164.99 X-Mailer: Nameko 0.8.1 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 11:06:12 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68731 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Jones wrote: > > Point taken... so long as there exists real proof that there > is such a "force" Touché. Incidentally, I don't think that any of us can have been surprised to see the following posted yesterday: ---snip--- Date: Sun Jun 4, 2006 6:09 pm (PDT) From: "Sterling D. Allan" sterlingda@pureenergysystems.com Subject: Peter Stevens workshop caveat posted at beginning of: http://www.pureenergysystems.com/academy/JoeCell2006/ Present Status NEC is in process of securing a substitute presentation due to the lack of validation of Peter Stevens technology. If Peter pulls off the required validation, then he will go ahead and present. Otherwise, an alternative workshop will be given on a closely related topic. (June 4, 2006) Note about validation, or the lack thereof: Reference: http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Joe_Cell:Validation On April 25, 2006, the New Energy Congress requested that Peter Stevens allow two NEC representatives to view a working instance of a vehicle running exclusively on a Joe Cell, with fuel line disconnected. Peter said he would accommodate this request, and has been working to install a Joe Cell on a test bed engine. He thought he would have this ready to go within afew days. As of June 4, 2006, he still has not achieved the objective. ---ends--- However, babies and bathwater... Patrick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 03:32:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55AW2nX001368; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:32:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55AVwXY001343; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:31:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 03:31:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=IV0D0ZnmURDx8xKgZgPk7dFJVCg4aI9/C/EMh6Vx7jGUFLel9R46LgUdQ412T5jC; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <41126-22006615103135629@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 04:31:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94005d3ab6a3ac9613ff9d4bea720b74688350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.107 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68732 X-Loop: vortex-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 polarity (relative positivity and negativity) of two insulators in contact with each other depends on each material’s electron affinity. Insulators can be ranked by their electron affinities, and some illustrative values are listed in table 40.3. The electron affinity of an insulator is an important consideration for prevention programmes, which are discussed later in this article. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 40.3 Electron affinities of selected polymers* Charge Material Electron affinity (EV) -PVC (polyvinyl chloride)4.85 Polyamide 4.36 Polycarbonate 4.26 PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene)4.26 PETP (polyethylene terephthalate)4.25 Polystyrene 4.22 +Polyamide 4.08 * A material acquires a positive charge when it comes into contact with a material listed above it, and a negative charge when it comes into contact with a material listed below it. The electron affinity of an insulator is multifactorial, however. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Although there have been attempts to establish a triboelectric series which would rank materials so that those which acquire a positive charge upon contact with materials would appear higher in the series than those that acquire a negative charge upon contact, no universally recognized series has been established. When a solid and a liquid meet (to form a solid-liquid interface), charge transfer occurs due to the migration of ions that are present in the liquid. These ions arise from the dissociation of impurities which may be present or by electrochemical oxidation-reduction reactions. Since, in practice, perfectly pure liquids do not exist, there will always be at least some positive and negative ions in the liquid available to bind to the liquid-solid interface. There are many types of mechanisms by which this binding may occur (e.g., electrostatic adherence to metal surfaces, chemical absorption, electrolytic injection, dissociation of polar groups and, if the vessel wall is insulating, liquid-solid reactions.) Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers. This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time. Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly. In practice, electrification occurs only in liquids with resistivity greater than or less than , with the highest values observed for . Flowing liquids will induce charge accumulation in insulating surfaces over which they flow. The extent to which the surface charge density will build up is limited by (1) how quickly the ions in the liquid recombine at the liquid-solid interface, (2) how quickly the ions in the liquid are conducted through the insulator, or (3) whether surface or bulk arcing through the insulator occurs and the charge is thus discharged. Turbulent flow and flow over rough surfaces favour electrification." "A person wearing insulating shoes is a common example of an insulated conductor. The human body is an electrostatic conductor, with a typical capacitance relative to ground of approximately 150 pF and a potential of up to 30 kV. Because people can be insulating conductors, they can experience electrostatic discharges, such as the more or less painful sensation sometimes produced when a hand approaches a door handle or other metal object. When the potential reaches approximately 2 kV, the equivalent to an energy of 0.3 mJ will be experienced, although this threshold varies from person to person. Stronger discharges may cause uncontrollable movements resulting in falls. In the case of workers using tools, the involuntary reflex motions may lead to injuries to the victim and others who may be working nearby. Equations 6 to 8 in table 40.2 describe the time course of the potential. Actual arcing will occur when the strength of the induced electrical field exceeds the dielectric strength of air. Because of the rapid migration of charges in conductors, essentially all the charges flow to the discharge point, releasing all the stored energy into a spark. This can have serious implications when working with flammable or explosive substances or in flammable conditions. The approach of a grounded electrode to a charged insulating surface modifies the electric field and induces a charge in the electrode. As the surfaces approach each other, the field strength increases, eventually leading to a partial discharge from the charged insulated surface. Because charges on insulating surfaces are not very mobile, only a small proportion of the surface participates in the discharge, and the energy released by this type of discharge is therefore much lower than in arcs. The charge and transferred energy appear to be directly proportional to the diameter of the metal electrode, up to approximately 20 mm. The initial polarity of the insulator also influences charge and transferred energy. Partial discharges from positively charged surfaces are less energetic than those from negatively charged ones. It is impossible to determine, a priori, the energy transferred by a discharge from an insulating surface, in contrast to the situation involving conducting surfaces. In fact, because the insulating surface is not equipotential, it is not even possible to define the capacitances involved." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

"The polarity (relative positivity and negativity) of two insulators in contact with each other depends on each material’s electron affinity. Insulators can be ranked by their electron affinities, and some illustrative values are listed in table 40.3. The electron affinity of an insulator is an important consideration for prevention programmes, which are discussed later in this article.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Table 40.3      Electron affinities of selected polymers*

 

Charge

Material

Electron affinity (EV)

-

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

4.85

 

Polyamide

4.36

 

Polycarbonate

4.26

 

PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene)

4.26

 

PETP (polyethylene terephthalate)

4.25

 

Polystyrene

4.22

+

Polyamide

4.08

    

* A material acquires a positive charge when it comes into contact with a material listed above it, and a negative charge when it comes into contact with a material listed below it. The electron affinity of an insulator is multifactorial, however.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Although there have been attempts to establish a triboelectric series which would rank materials so that those which acquire a positive charge upon contact with materials would appear higher in the series than those that acquire a negative charge upon contact, no universally recognized series has been established.

 

When a solid and a liquid meet (to form a solid-liquid interface), charge transfer occurs due to the migration of ions that are present in the liquid. These ions arise from the dissociation of impurities which may be present or by electrochemical oxidation-reduction reactions. Since, in practice, perfectly pure liquids do not exist, there will always be at least some positive and negative ions in the liquid available to bind to the liquid-solid interface. There are many types of mechanisms by which this binding may occur (e.g., electrostatic adherence to metal surfaces, chemical absorption, electrolytic injection, dissociation of polar groups and, if the vessel wall is insulating, liquid-solid reactions.)

 

Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers.

 

This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time.

 

Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly. In practice, electrification occurs only in liquids with resistivity greater than   or less than , with the highest values observe! d for  .

 

Flowing liquids will induce charge accumulation in insulating surfaces over which they flow. The extent to which the surface charge density will build up is limited by (1) how quickly the ions in the liquid recombine at the liquid-solid interface, (2) how quickly the ions in the liquid are conducted through the insulator, or (3) whether surface or bulk arcing through the insulator occurs and the charge is thus discharged. Turbulent flow and flow over rough surfaces favour electrification."

 

 

"A person wearing insulating shoes is a common example of an insulated conductor. The human body is an electrostatic conductor, with a typical capacitance relative to ground of approximately 150 pF and a potential of up to 30 kV. Because people can be insulating conductors, they can experience electrostatic discharges, such as the more or less painful sensation sometimes produced when a hand approaches a door handle or other metal object. When the potential reaches approximately 2 kV, the equivalent to an energy of 0.3 mJ will be experienced, although this threshold varies from person to person. Stronger discharges may cause uncontrollable movements resulting in falls. In the case of workers using tools, the involuntary reflex motions may lead to injuries to the victim and others who may be working nearby. Equations 6 to 8 in table 40.2 describe the time course of the potential.

 

Actual arcing will occur when the strength of the induced electrical field exceeds the dielectric strength of air. Because of the rapid migration of charges in conductors, essentially all the charges flow to the discharge point, releasing all the stored energy into a spark. This can have serious implications when working with flammable or explosive substances or in flammable conditions.

 

The approach of a grounded electrode to a charged insulating surface modifies the electric field and induces a charge in the electrode. As the surfaces approach each other, the field strength increases, eventually leading to a partial discharge from the charged insulated surface. Because charges on insulating surfaces are not very mobile, only a small proportion of the surface participates in the discharge, and the energy released by this type of discharge is therefore much lower than in arcs.

 

The charge and transferred energy appear to be directly proportional to the diameter of the metal electrode, up to approximately 20 mm. The initial polarity of the insulator also influences charge and transferred energy. Partial discharges from positively charged surfaces are less energetic than those from negatively charged ones. It is impossible to determine, a priori, the energy transferred by a discharge from an insulating surface, in contrast to the situation involving conducting surfaces. In fact, because the insulating surface is not equipotential, it is not even possible to define the capacitances involved."

 

 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 04:20:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55BK93b027654; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 04:20:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55BK8Rq027640; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 04:20:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 04:20:08 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=N2x2/z+yyF14eSFxRxj2obZoXh1Ro8b4hDhIpx+uo6ObGDKa2l5IMWkxIJ2PsjKn; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <4139-22006615111942328@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:19:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404d470ed7820cbb54a4bd6b684a53272f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.8 Resent-Message-ID: <-Nuj9D.A.0vG.nNBhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68733 X-Loop: vortex-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 This is a Word Document that gave me a rough time getting the URL. www.ilo.org/encyclopedia/?doc&nd=857100211&nh=0 ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/5/2006 4:32:56 AM Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode "The polarity (relative positivity and negativity) of two insulators in contact with each other depends on each material’s electron affinity. Insulators can be ranked by their electron affinities, and some illustrative values are listed in table 40.3. The electron affinity of an insulator is an important consideration for prevention programmes, which are discussed later in this article. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 40.3 Electron affinities of selected polymers* Charge Material Electron affinity (EV) -PVC (polyvinyl chloride)4.85 Polyamide 4.36 Polycarbonate 4.26 PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene)4.26 PETP (polyethylene terephthalate)4.25 Polystyrene 4.22 +Polyamide 4.08 * A material acquires a positive charge when it comes into contact with a material listed above it, and a negative charge when it comes into contact with a material listed below it. The electron affinity of an insulator is multifactorial, however. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Although there have been attempts to establish a triboelectric series which would rank materials so that those which acquire a positive charge upon contact with materials would appear higher in the series than those that acquire a negative charge upon contact, no universally recognized series has been established. When a solid and a liquid meet (to form a solid-liquid interface), charge transfer occurs due to the migration of ions that are present in the liquid. These ions arise from the dissociation of impurities which may be present or by electrochemical oxidation-reduction reactions. Since, in practice, perfectly pure liquids do not exist, there will always be at least some positive and negative ions in the liquid available to bind to the liquid-solid interface. There are many types of mechanisms by which this binding may occur (e.g., electrostatic adherence to metal surfaces, chemical absorption, electrolytic injection, dissociation of polar groups and, if the vessel wall is insulating, liquid-solid reactions.) Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers. This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time. Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly. In practice, electrification occurs only in liquids with resistivity greater than or less than , with the highest values observe! d for . Flowing liquids will induce charge accumulation in insulating surfaces over which they flow. The extent to which the surface charge density will build up is limited by (1) how quickly the ions in the liquid recombine at the liquid-solid interface, (2) how quickly the ions in the liquid are conducted through the insulator, or (3) whether surface or bulk arcing through the insulator occurs and the charge is thus discharged. Turbulent flow and flow over rough surfaces favour electrification." "A person wearing insulating shoes is a common example of an insulated conductor. The human body is an electrostatic conductor, with a typical capacitance relative to ground of approximately 150 pF and a potential of up to 30 kV. Because people can be insulating conductors, they can experience electrostatic discharges, such as the more or less painful sensation sometimes produced when a hand approaches a door handle or other metal object. When the potential reaches approximately 2 kV, the equivalent to an energy of 0.3 mJ will be experienced, although this threshold varies from person to person. Stronger discharges may cause uncontrollable movements resulting in falls. In the case of workers using tools, the involuntary reflex motions may lead to injuries to the victim and others who may be working nearby. Equations 6 to ! 8 in table 40.2 describe the time course of the potential. Actual arcing will occur when the strength of the induced electrical field exceeds the dielectric strength of air. Because of the rapid migration of charges in conductors, essentially all the charges flow to the discharge point, releasing all the stored energy into a spark. This can have serious implications when working with flammable or explosive substances or in flammable conditions. The approach of a grounded electrode to a charged insulating surface modifies the electric field and induces a charge in the electrode. As the surfaces approach each other, the field strength increases, eventually leading to a partial discharge from the charged insulated surface. Because charges on insulating surfaces are not very mobile, only a small proportion of the surface participates in the discharge, and the energy released by this type of discharge is therefore much lower than in arcs. The charge and transferred energy appear to be directly proportional to the diameter of the metal electrode, up to approximately 20 mm. The initial polarity of the insulator also influences charge and transferred energy. Partial discharges from positively charged surfaces are less energetic than those from negatively charged ones. It is impossible to determine, a priori, the energy transferred by a discharge from an insulating surface, in contrast to the situation involving conducting surfaces. In fact, because the insulating surface is not equipotential, it is not even possible to define the capacitances involved." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
This is a Word Document that gave me a rough time getting the URL.
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/5/2006 4:32:56 AM
Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode

"The polarity (relative positivity and negativity) of two insulators in contact with each other depends on each material’s electron affinity. Insulators can be ranked by their electron affinities, and some illustrative values are listed in table 40.3. The electron affinity of an insulator is an important consideration for prevention programmes, which are discussed later in this article.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Table 40.3      Electron affinities of selected polymers*

 

Charge

Material

Electron affinity (EV)

-

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

4.85

 

Polyamide

4.36

 

Polycarbonate

4.26

 

PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene)

4.26

 

PETP (polyethylene terephthalate)

4.25

 

Polystyrene

4.22

+

Polyamide

4.08

    

* A material acquires a positive charge when it comes into contact with a material listed above it, and a negative charge when it comes into contact with a material listed below it. The electron affinity of an insulator is multifactorial, however.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Although there have been attempts to establish a triboelectric series which would rank materials so that those which acquire a positive charge upon contact with materials would appear higher in the series than those that acquire a negative charge upon contact, no universally recognized series has been established.

 

When a solid and a liquid meet (to form a solid-liquid interface), charge transfer occurs due to the migration of ions that are present in the liquid. These ions arise from the dissociation of impurities which may be present or by electrochemical oxidation-reduction reactions. Since, in practice, perfectly pure liquids do not exist, there will always be at least some positive and negative ions in the liquid available to bind to the liquid-solid interface. There are many types of mechanisms by which this binding may occur (e.g., electrostatic adherence to metal surfaces, chemical absorption, electrolytic injection, dissociation of polar groups and, if the vessel wall is insulating, liquid-solid reactions.)

 

Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers.

 

This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time.

 

Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly. In practice, electrification occurs only in liquids with resistivity greater than   or less than , with the highest values observe! d for  .

 

Flowing liquids will induce charge accumulation in insulating surfaces over which they flow. The extent to which the surface charge density will build up is limited by (1) how quickly the ions in the liquid recombine at the liquid-solid interface, (2) how quickly the ions in the liquid are conducted through the insulator, or (3) whether surface or bulk arcing through the insulator occurs and the charge is thus discharged. Turbulent flow and flow over rough surfaces favour electrification."

 

 

"A person wearing insulating shoes is a common example of an insulated conductor. The human body is an electrostatic conductor, with a typical capacitance relative to ground of approximately 150 pF and a potential of up to 30 kV. Because people can be insulating conductors, they can experience electrostatic discharges, such as the more or less painful sensation sometimes produced when a hand approaches a door handle or other metal object. When the potential reaches approximately 2 kV, the equivalent to an energy of 0.3 mJ will be experienced, although this threshold varies from person to person. Stronger discharges may cause uncontrollable movements resulting in falls. In the case of workers using tools, the involuntary reflex motions may lead to injuries to the victim and others who may be working nearby. Equations 6 to ! 8 in table 40.2 describe the time course of the potential.

 

Actual arcing will occur when the strength of the induced electrical field exceeds the dielectric strength of air. Because of the rapid migration of charges in conductors, essentially all the charges flow to the discharge point, releasing all the stored energy into a spark. This can have serious implications when working with flammable or explosive substances or in flammable conditions.

 

The approach of a grounded electrode to a charged insulating surface modifies the electric field and induces a charge in the electrode. As the surfaces approach each other, the field strength increases, eventually leading to a partial discharge from the charged insulated surface. Because charges on insulating surfaces are not very mobile, only a small proportion of the surface participates in the discharge, and the energy released by this type of discharge is therefore much lower than in arcs.

 

The charge and transferred energy appear to be directly proportional to the diameter of the metal electrode, up to approximately 20 mm. The initial polarity of the insulator also influences charge and transferred energy. Partial discharges from positively charged surfaces are less energetic than those from negatively charged ones. It is impossible to determine, a priori, the energy transferred by a discharge from an insulating surface, in contrast to the situation involving conducting surfaces. In fact, because the insulating surface is not equipotential, it is not even possible to define the capacitances involved."

 

 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 05:20:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55CKEG5001399; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:20:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55CKDrW001373; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:20:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:20:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001201c6889a$602ed1a0$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:19:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C68870.5EF99F10" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68734 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68870.5EF99F10 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000F_01C68870.5EF99F10" ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C68870.5EF99F10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Vorts.. Reviewing the various battery ideas mentioned I see no mention of the = importance of the shape, culture and environment of this amazing device. In it's its most elementary form the watermelon is the ideal of all = batteries. It is not only a battery it is contains an onboard computer, = a complex chemical laboratory, filtering system and a DNA recognition = ability. But Alas! Like humans, they are not immune to various = diseases, mostly black stem rot, etc. The seeds are positioned for electro-chemical stimulation of the = sugars.. except for the seedless variety( never sweet like seeded = melons). Over near Dime Box Texas, the melons are shaped differerent = from the Teneha, Timpson, BoBo and Blair( all due respect to music by = Tex Ritter) towns of deep east Texas. A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. Hmmm! Wonder if Peggy Lee and Tex Ritter even made a duet? Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C68870.5EF99F10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Vorts..
 
Reviewing the various battery ideas mentioned I see no mention of = the=20 importance of the shape, culture and environment of this amazing = device.
 
 In it's its most elementary form the watermelon is the ideal = of all=20 batteries. It is not only a battery it is contains an onboard computer, = a=20 complex chemical laboratory, filtering system and a DNA recognition = ability. But=20 Alas! Like humans, they are  not immune to various diseases, mostly = black=20 stem rot, etc.
 
The seeds are positioned for electro-chemical stimulation of the = sugars..=20 except for the seedless variety( never sweet like seeded melons).  = Over=20 near Dime Box Texas, the melons are shaped differerent from the Teneha, = Timpson,=20 BoBo and Blair( all due respect to music by Tex Ritter)  towns = of deep=20 east Texas.
 
A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's = lab.
 
 Hmmm! Wonder if Peggy Lee and Tex Ritter even made a = duet?
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C68870.5EF99F10-- ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C68870.5EF99F10 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000d01c6889a$47a95a60$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C68870.5EF99F10-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 06:55:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55DtQ0G032338; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:55:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55DtGlx032240; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:55:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:55:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005501c688a7$a4673120$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <2.2.32.20060605070647.00b6c390@pop.freeserve.net> Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:55:01 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <157lxD.A.l3H.CfDhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68736 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Grimer" > On January 21, 2002 Norma Deloris Egstrom found out that it > wasn't "all there is" And apparently she was a 'scientist' of sorts (Science of the Mind) http://www.scienceofmind.com/02january/january_02.htm "She consistently refused to sing a lyric devoid of hope "because I can't sing what I don't believe." When she considered recording the haunting lament "Is That All There Is?" by Lieber and Stoller, she knew it was based on Thomas Mann's essay "Disillusionment," but it didn't say that to Peggy." "To me," she explains, it was just the opposite. It said we go through one experience after another, some of them very negative. As we change each negative into a positive we learn, grow stronger, can go on to new experiences because there is always more. But I waited a whole year before introducing the song until I felt sure I could get this interpretation across. Finally, by changing the emphasis from 'Is That All There Is?' to 'Is That All There Is?' I was satisfied my listeners would understand the hopeful affirmation -- There is more!" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 07:11:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55EAA8x006824; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:11:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55DoHlO028800; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:50:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 06:50:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <069501c688a2$a8f9a3d0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <001201c6889a$602ed1a0$0100007f@xptower> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:19:17 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k55DoBln028681 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68735 X-Loop: vortex-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 watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. Don't know about that, but the reciprocal may well be true. The guy doesn't know how to measure electric power for one thing, he multiplies average current by average voltage! Michel (Jones let me know if you got this post) ----- Original Message ----- From: "RC Macaulay" To: Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 2:19 PM Subject: Battery shapes Howdy Vorts.. Reviewing the various battery ideas mentioned I see no mention of the importance of the shape, culture and environment of this amazing device. In it's its most elementary form the watermelon is the ideal of all batteries. It is not only a battery it is contains an onboard computer, a complex chemical laboratory, filtering system and a DNA recognition ability. But Alas! Like humans, they are not immune to various diseases, mostly black stem rot, etc. The seeds are positioned for electro-chemical stimulation of the sugars.. except for the seedless variety( never sweet like seeded melons). Over near Dime Box Texas, the melons are shaped differerent from the Teneha, Timpson, BoBo and Blair( all due respect to music by Tex Ritter) towns of deep east Texas. A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. Hmmm! Wonder if Peggy Lee and Tex Ritter even made a duet? Richard From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 07:32:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55EW6eM024126; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:32:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55EW4sW024090; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:32:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:32:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 10:31:58 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C856C3EF60CCF4-BD4-32EBB@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Torsion Fraud Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.70 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68737 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: http://torsionfraud.narod.ru/ Dr. E.P. Kruglyakov: "One of the goals of the Commission Against Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research is to determine the reasons for unjustified dissemination of nonexistent "torsion technologies". Recently, we launched a new investigation... The documents are evidence of the fact that we are dealing with a longstanding large-scale fraud which has nothing in common with science. The fraud has reached a grandiose level..." <><><><><> Named perps include Akimov, Shipov and our good friend Alexander Frolov! ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 08:21:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55FLJ6k029242; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:21:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55FLFvm029184; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:21:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:21:15 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=o3qZLsOPurQpMIcVGg0fu7ckRrSpkOIk5Nh4CoNKg56oXquPg3awoecTjkwp9XMq; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006615152055772@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:20:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9400032bafc706e7e6ce4c315e13e1d5571350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.94 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68738 X-Loop: vortex-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 Some info on the Electron Affinity of bulk water: http://www.chemistry.ohio-state.edu/~coe/bulkwater.pdf "Using cluster studies to approach the electronic structure of bulk water: Reassessing the vacuum level, conduction band edge, and bandgap of water." Some Electron Affinities (eV) from CRC: H 0.754 C 1.26 O 1.46 Na 0.547 K...0.50 Cr 0.66 Fe 0.15 Ni 1.16 Pd 0.56 CrO 1.22 FeO 1.50 O2 0.45 OH 1.83 HOO 1.08 O2Ar 0.52 OH(H2O) < 2.95 WO3 3.33 www.ilo.org/encyclopedia/?doc&nd=857100211&nh=0 "Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers. This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time. Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly" ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Some info on the Electron Affinity of bulk water:
 
 
"Using cluster studies to approach the electronic structure of bulk water:
Reassessing the vacuum level, conduction band edge, and bandgap of water."
 
Some Electron Affinities (eV) from CRC:
 
H   0.754
C   1.26
O   1.46
Na  0.547
K...0.50
Cr  0.66
Fe 0.15
Ni  1.16
Pd  0.56
CrO  1.22
FeO  1.50
O2  0.45
OH  1.83
HOO  1.08
O2Ar  0.52
OH(H2O)  < 2.95
WO3   3.33
 
 
"Since substances which dissolve (dissociate) are electrically neutral to begin with, they will generate equal numbers of positive and negative charges. Electrification occurs only if either the positive or the negative charges preferentially adhere to the solid’s surface. If this occurs, a very compact layer, known as the Helmholtz layer is formed. Because the Helmholtz layer is charged, it will attract ions of the opposite polarity to it. These ions will cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the compact Helmholtz layer. The thickness of the Gouy layer increases with the resistivity of the liquid. Conducting liquids form very thin Gouy layers.

 

This double layer will separate if the liquid flows, with the Helmholtz layer remaining bound to the interface and the Gouy layer becoming entrained by the flowing liquid. The movement of these charged layers produces a difference in potential (the zeta potential), and the current induced by the moving charges is known as the streaming current. The amount of charge that accumulates in the liquid depends on the rate at which the ions diffuse towards the interface and on the liquid’s resistivity (r). The streaming current is, however, constant over time.

 

Neither highly insulating nor conducting liquids will become charged-the first because very few ions are present, and the second because in liquids which conduct electricity very well, the ions will recombine very rapidly"

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 08:26:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55FPijt032171; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:25:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55FPbgD032109; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:25:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:25:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 11:24:41 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: heat after death In-reply-to: <410-22006604165443422@earthlink.net> 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/68739 X-Loop: vortex-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 haven't bothered to learn about the Joe Cell. Harry Frederick Sparber wrote: > Most likely the Joe Cell Effect, Harry. > > >> [Original Message] >> From: Harry Veeder >> To: >> Date: 6/4/2006 10:22:19 AM >> Subject: heat after death >> >> >> A question. >> Is it correct to say that in P&F's "heat after death" heat is being > produced >> with only a voltage and no current? >> >> Harry > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 09:06:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55FUbxG003105; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:30:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55FUXP1003058; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:30:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:30:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=hJ5vio9cDSe4pbUyU/YLpps3w1pchbO4Y9IYMb1OhxiPy41bxqBJo9GJpTyFwb4I; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006615153013164@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: heat after death Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:30:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940845ebe22ae837c2d28885cf6ecf16fa8350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.94 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68740 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Judging by your posts, I'd say you haven't bothered to learn much about anything. Fred > [Original Message] > From: Harry Veeder > To: > Date: 6/5/2006 9:26:30 AM > Subject: Re: heat after death > > I haven't bothered to learn about the Joe Cell. > Harry > > Frederick Sparber wrote: > > > Most likely the Joe Cell Effect, Harry. > > > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Harry Veeder > >> To: > >> Date: 6/4/2006 10:22:19 AM > >> Subject: heat after death > >> > >> > >> A question. > >> Is it correct to say that in P&F's "heat after death" heat is being > > produced > >> with only a voltage and no current? > >> > >> Harry > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 09:43:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55Ge7jQ018113; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:42:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55GYX6w014175; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:34:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:34:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00d001c688bd$e5b41a60$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-22006615152055772@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Helmholtz Layer electrode Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:34:20 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68742 X-Loop: vortex-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 reword that important paragraph, Fred: Because the Helmholtz layer of the electrode is charged, it will attract ions from the water of the opposite polarity to it and eventually these ions in water which are of much lower density, will rise to the top and cluster into a more diffuse layer, known as the Gouy layer, which rests on top of the surface of the Helmholtz layer electrodes.... Aha.. this is the infamous GOOey layer It is no doubt the "frothy layer" of bubbles forming on the top of the charging cells, in all of the videos.Now we have an 'official sounding' name, the Gouy Layer... One wonders if the OH(H2O) in that table in your post - takes the form of H HO - e- < >O H hope that image shows up on your mail program like it was writen in mine. This ion would have the effective formula of H3O2- .... a.k.a "hydroxide hydrate" and which was studied 25 years ago: http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=JCPSA6000078000005002498000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes And as you can see from the structure, although it is technically a negative ion, the electron is effectively shielded and encapsulated by the H2O on one side and the OH on the other ... Interesting, no? ... an ultra-ultra-capacitor (5 atom capacitor)??? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 09:54:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55GsJ2Q027743; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:54:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55GsET6027664; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:54:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:54:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:53:56 -0400 Message-Id: <8C856D7C4BC0EBE-BD4-335A1@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C856D27A456FD2-7F4-23930@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C856D27A456FD2-7F4-23930@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Water Injection Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.70 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k55GsCms027629 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68744 X-Loop: vortex-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 of the follow on comments are interesting.    Terry  <><><><><><><> As is this post on water injection found on another list: http://not2fast.wryday.com/thermo/water_injection/water_chemistry.txt ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 09:56:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55GUAvA011035; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:32:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55GLcPW005329; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:21:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:21:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:16:04 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C856D27A456FD2-7F4-23930@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Water Injection Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.72 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68741 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Water injection systems are often used in turbo charged cars to cool the compressed boost air which does the same as raising the octane, lessening the chance of preignition (spark knock). But is something more going on? Why not just use the Joe Cell charged water and this home made water injector: http://www.hackaday.com/entry/1234000393047637/ Some of the follow on comments are interesting. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:04:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55GqP8Z026613; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:52:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55GqKZb026526; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:52:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:52:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060605124608.03f5c600@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:51:49 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: 13 Glitches and counting: was Water-based fuel In-Reply-To: <024001c68829$0229ac40$3800a8c0@zothan> References: <410-2200660419626457@earthlink.net> <054501c6880d$dae941b0$0253fea9@NuDell> <021a01c6881b$08c43a10$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C856335296EA13-14E0-14FF3@mblkn-m19.sysops.aol.com> <056901c6881f$e71737a0$0253fea9@NuDell> <024001c68829$0229ac40$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/68743 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: >Does Jones Tuttle receive this, directly? Via the list? My Eudora e-mail anti-spam feature deleted Jullian's messages. My guess is that this is because they included a small graphic. I fixed it so this will not happen again, but anyway, messages including small graphics do look like spam. The Eudora ver. 7.0 anti-spam features work well, by the way. It is no problem rescuing actual messages that are accidentally tagged as spam, and once you do that it seldom happens again for that author or that topic. >Other strange thing, I received my own post to Vortex about one hour after >Terry's reply to it! That often happens with the eskimo.com remailer. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:08:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55H8BFG005085; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:08:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55H86ZX005048; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:08:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:08:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:07:05 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: heat after death In-reply-to: <410-22006615153013164@earthlink.net> 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/68746 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > Judging by your posts, I'd say you haven't bothered to > learn much about anything. > > Fred I learn to further my interests. However, it is evident my interests do not always coincide with your interests. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:09:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55H9904005909; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:09:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55H97c4005873; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:09:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:09:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001201c688c2$bd3ca8e0$0300a8c0@user> From: "Noel D. Whitney" To: References: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> <001001c687ba$a4b1f270$0300a8c0@user> <001e01c687d9$09b333f0$0253fea9@NuDell> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:08:59 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68747 X-Loop: vortex-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 - I regretfully never saw the car run - I examined it extensively as a "non Moving" item he had the injectors on it and showed me on dismantled - they were works of art but again nothing worked and we allways got excuses and reasons why he could not show. My contract with him was to build 2 "proof of concept" machines - they were to be Hydrogen Burners for boiler opperation ( To replace Heavy fuel Oil units ) One of these was for European showing ( 230 volt 50hz operation , and the other was for USA use - 110 Volt 60 Hz etc ( They are shown on our web site) He was to provide the basic Mk 1 water splitting circuitry, but when we shipped the above unit , the excuses started So we walked. He made extensive demonstration of the video of the car running with Charlie Holbrook sitting on the back and Stan driving, I felt that he had run the car on Hydrogen BUT he may have started witha build up of gas volume and pressure and only ran for a very short distance and at a constand speed - = very low HP - Poss as low as 10 or 12 Hp Comments on previous posts implied that maybe he did do a Jimmy Durante -" Found the lost cord ," but the probs seems to be he lost it again and could not find it a second time ! Charlie Holbrook once said he saw stan run a bucket of water to gas in 5 minutes ! maybe - Maybe not. I think the Hi volts , low amps is just a gimmick - as in fact from my previous post , it was high current but spoken of as low current , hi volts to impress poss. investors and interested parties. The Hi Volt , low currect also enabled him to go for a patent if this concept was not previously patented Interestingly - He covered all the bases with his some 27 patents , some of which will soon be out or nearly so. He made a lot of money from investor and possibly sent a lot of it outside the USA. What was the use of the "central Electrode" in the browns gas unit ?? I seem to have missed that point? Rgds to all Noel in Ireland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 2:16 PM Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noel D. Whitney" > > Noel, thanks for the post. I had forgotten about your experience with > Meyer. > > Looks like Stan Meyer has left a negative impression with many on vortex > who follow this sort of thing, and there is no doubt he was a huckster, > showman, and mentally ill, most likely. The larger question is - did he > stumble onto any technology which might serve to add-to or improve-on the > further advancement of the Brown's gas/ Joe Cell theme of ultra-efficient > electrolysis? How did he power a VW with it (was that a fraud, also ?) > > Noel writes: > >> Stan made great mileage on showing how little current went to the cell , >> but the actual shown current was only the current feeding the armature of >> the alternator to create the magnetic field! >> the alternator was rated in the region of 80 to 100 amps at 12V DC, so >> your talking about 1 to 1.2 Kw of power , relate this to the gas vol. and >> the whole question changes! > > Did you view the cell powering an ICE, or just producing gas? Do you think > there was zero energy anomaly in what you saw? > > Another problem here seems to be that Stan had a number of different types > of cells - as his patent portfolio demonstrated. And it is clear that in > these demos, he could not always get them to work as planned. The fact > that they ever worked at all - if they did - could be a critical detail, > before writing-off the work entirely. > > The most important question for moving beyond this sad chapter in the > evolution of alternative energy is: can anything Meyer did be incorporated > into the next generation of cells? Is the high voltage, low amps concept > just a gimmick? > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:26:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55HPm60017881; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:25:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55H4KA1002509; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:04:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:04:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00df01c688c2$0bd94860$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <8C856D27A456FD2-7F4-23930@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Water Injection Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:04:01 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68745 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Water Injection > Water injection systems are often used in turbo charged cars to > cool the compressed boost air which does the same as raising the > octane, lessening the chance of preignition (spark knock). But > is something more going on? > Why not just use the Joe Cell charged water and this home made > water injector: > > http://www.hackaday.com/entry/1234000393047637/ > > Some of the follow on comments are interesting. Very sharp! Holy-ram.... Inject the "preconditioned" or charged-water, instead of normal water, and one can dispense with a lot of the problems of getting the water ions into the combustion chamber "just-in-time" ...? The problem would be keeping them from being neutralized by the injector itself. Wonder if that can be solved by floating it (and the engine too) at a negative potential? Come to think of it... this is all so sharp that it is merging into the idea of Jimmy Lee (of Sharper Image fame) ... except it is going one-better for both Jimmy and Joe and Yull. BTW, as posted before by Mark Goldes, a few years back Jimmy Lee slapped a Sharper Image ionizer onto this VW diesel truck: http://www.zenion.com/news.html and reported incredible mileage (something like ~100 MPG ?) before the valves burned-out (after a few days, due to ionic corrosion)... His patent is close to expiring now. You really need a ceramic valveless engine for proper implementation of charged-water-fuel, at least eventually. That is why these guys in Oz are using el-cheapo engines, and that necessity is causing mixed results as the engine itself has been through the wringer, as they say. If the thing runs on water, and you want some verification - then you better get the eye-witnesses there PDQ, because the lifetime of valves, under charged-oxidizing conditions, is measured in hours. Fortunately old, oil-encrusted valves probably last longer than new ones. I vote for a ceramic Wankel as the ideal way to go for the long term ... If the Prius cost $1 billion to engineer, this baby will be pushing ten - but who cares if it runs on water? actually who cares if it gets 100 MPG on gasoline + charged water? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:27:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55HEkMa009814; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:14:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55HEcqq009711; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:14:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:14:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:13:35 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Battery shapes In-reply-to: <069501c688a2$a8f9a3d0$3800a8c0@zothan> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68748 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: >> A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. > > Don't know about that, but the reciprocal may well be true. The guy doesn't > know how to measure electric power for one thing, he multiplies average > current by average voltage! > > Michel As a rough estimate is the calculated value necessarily misleading? Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 10:51:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55HYnk8024590; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:34:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55HYlWt024567; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:34:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:34:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:33:46 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current In-reply-to: <00ef01c68762$cbe40160$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/68749 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OK, if you know the correct functional relationship between V, I and R, then you should still be able to calculate the power by measuring the voltage and the resistance... or am I over looking something? Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > No, I mean that the cell's current is far from proportional to the voltage > applied to it (it's more like a quadratic function) > > Enough science tutoring for today, good night :) > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Veeder" > To: > Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 2:02 AM > Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current > > >> Do you mean the resistance is so small as to be immeasurable? >> >> Harry >> >> Michel Jullian wrote: >> >>> Sure, such loads (e.g. electric heaters) are called resistive loads. But >>> the >>> GDPE cell which was being discussed is far from resistive! >>> >>> Michel >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Harry Veeder" >>> To: >>> Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:45 AM >>> Subject: Re: Scientists? We note voltage..but no mention of current >>> >>> >>>> >>>> With my limited knowledge of electricity I meant the latter. >>>> >>>> Anyway, can a load act as a resistor? >>>> >>>> Harry >>>> >>>> Michel Jullian wrote: >>>>> Harry, what makes you think the load acted as a resistor? Or did you >>>>> mean >>>>> "current is not always essential for calculating the power, e.g. in the >>>>> case >>>>> of a resistor..." >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 11:08:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55I7or9013942; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:07:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55I7inV013869; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:07:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:07:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <011201c688ca$e834bee0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-2200660434945847@earthlink.net> <001001c687ba$a4b1f270$0300a8c0@user> <001e01c687d9$09b333f0$0253fea9@NuDell> <001201c688c2$bd3ca8e0$0300a8c0@user> Subject: Re: Water-based fuel for the ICE Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:07:27 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68750 X-Loop: vortex-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 Noel, Thanks for the update. It seems that your personal experience with Meyer was a huge disappointment, and with suspicion of a scam, but also some evidence of a potential energy anomaly, which fits-in with what others have said. One hopes that now, with additional information from others, and by focusing on the small grain of truth which Meyer may have serendipitously discovered, but was unable to advance due to his paranoia or other mental defects, that we can still use that work to advance a compound or hybrid technique - if of course there ever was anything to it. > What was the use of the "central Electrode" in the browns gas > unit ?? I seem to have missed that point? In the Brown's Gas Cell geometry, which is using a stack of stainless plates instead of concentric tubes, only the end plates are actively charged from the power supply itself, and all of the numerous central "neutral plates" between the two end plates, are (nominally) uncharged and insulated. If there is excess energy, it is coming from these plates most likely. But the neutral plates do get an effective capacitance-charge inductively with an equally divided voltage drop. The Joe-Cell does something similar, using only two or three neutral tubes, instead of 10 or more plates. It is probably NOT as efficient as the Brown's gas setup, due to lower Helmholtz surface area - as a basic design parameter. However, the key feature of the J.C. , and its big advantage over the others in practice, seems to be in the use of "preconditioned" or charged water. If you watch the Steven's videos, he shows a naive way to charge, but it is far from optimum, according to others who have taken it to the next level. The optimum charge would start with pure water and be an overnight connection to a 12 v. battery-charger. At first, almost no current would pass but after 10-12 hours, you may have added maybe a net kilowatt per liter or less to the "fuel" which was formerly pure water. At least this is the way it is being presented. No detectable gas is emitted during charging and little or no water loss. There is substantial discoloration and froth. The charging cell can be the same unit as the engine cell, but it is more convenient to have them separate and generally the charging cell has more spacing between tubes. If this charged water has been converted into some kind of a liquid ultra-capacitor, then that would be the easiest explanation for what is going on. Then there is the hydrino, orgone, helionon, muonium, ... etc... but the simplest explanation may be the best - a liquid ultracapacitor Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 11:46:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55IkXHg006152; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:46:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55IkVn9006128; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:46:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:46:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:44:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k55IkRbA006076 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68751 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Depending on the waveforms, it can be as misleading as yielding 10W, or even 0W, instead of 100W. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" To: Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:13 PM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > Michel Jullian wrote: > >>> A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. >> >> Don't know about that, but the reciprocal may well be true. The guy doesn't >> know how to measure electric power for one thing, he multiplies average >> current by average voltage! >> >> Michel > > > As a rough estimate is the calculated value necessarily misleading? > > Harry > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 12:49:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55JnDMS009915; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:49:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55JnAL5009875; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:49:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:49:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:43:57 -0400 Message-Id: <8C856EF8547E908-1144-69AA@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C856D27A456FD2-7F4-23930@mblkn-m08.sysops.aol.com> <00df01c688c2$0bd94860$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <00df01c688c2$0bd94860$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Water Injection Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.67 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k55Jn6e2009831 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68752 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene The problem would be keeping them from being neutralized by the injector itself. Wonder if that can be solved by floating it (and the engine too) at a negative potential?  <><><><><><> The how about one of those ultrasonic vaporizers and send it into the air intake? BTW, you can get stainless steel valves if you're worried about corrosion. Oh, and I came across a .wmv version of the Horizon show "It Runs on Water": http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html Stan the Man is in Part III. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 13:03:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55JrG0e012459; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:53:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55JrEWT012424; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:53:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:53:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:52:02 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Battery shapes In-reply-to: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68753 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Eating a slice of watermelon on a hot summer's day is definitely an OU experience. ;-) Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 14:12:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55LCMPX026920; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:12:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55LCKEW026896; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:12:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:12:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> From: "jonfli" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:12:15 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <1COP0C.A.MkG.04JhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68754 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase angles are taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means of comparing input and output power/energy with devices producing complex output waveforms when powered by batteries or DC supplies. Modern digital sampling scopes such as JLN uses are reasonably accurate within 5% or so on their average measurements however, the internal power computing functions leave something to be desired on the lower cost samplers! IMHO, I prefer average measurements! Jon F. > Depending on the waveforms, it can be as misleading as yielding 10W, or > even 0W, instead of 100W. > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Veeder" > To: > Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:13 PM > Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > >> Michel Jullian wrote: >> >>>> A watermelon is as close to OU as anything produced in JLN's lab. >>> >>> Don't know about that, but the reciprocal may well be true. The guy >>> doesn't >>> know how to measure electric power for one thing, he multiplies average >>> current by average voltage! >>> >>> Michel >> >> >> As a rough estimate is the calculated value necessarily misleading? >> >> Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 14:46:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55LkASQ013786; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:46:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55Lk8MQ013765; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:46:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:46:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:46:06 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Battery shapes In-Reply-To: <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <6yTzBB.A.BXD.gYKhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68755 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: jonfli wrote: >Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. >Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase >angles are taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means . . . Do sophisticated meters usually take these things into account? Or do they finesse the problem by taking zillions of samples? I do not know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say calorimetry is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the oldest method of measuring energy. As Fleischmann says, in some ways it is still the best method of measuring radioactivity, for example. Microcalorimeters measure the impact of individual cosmic rays. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 15:27:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55MRRZu003339; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:27:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55MRQSR003330; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:27:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:27:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060605222718245.3BE9C3C00085@mwinf3212.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060605222719.00b5c504@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, 05 Jun 2006 23:27:19 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Water Injection Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68756 X-Loop: vortex-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 03:43 pm 05/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: [snip] > Oh, and I came across a .wmv version of the > Horizon show "It Runs on Water": > > http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html > > Stan the Man is in Part III. Very interesting. I found the 'Stan the Man' bit entirely plausible. The secret is obviously in the box of electronics. Stan is hitting the water at some high power differential of dnL/dtn and possibly even transferring strain energy from some higher level d(n+m)L/dt(n+m) to the "splitting" level. Think of the Carnot cycle and the fact that one can move from isothermal (power 1) to adiabatic (power 5/3) merely by increasing the rate of compression. Increasing the rate by orders of magnitude will reach even deeper structures in materials than the acceleration and jerk of the classic Carnot cycle. I doubt that it's very difficult to relicate what Meyer did. The prime requirement is belief that it can be done. The only problem is, if this Group does finally understand exactly what is happening in Stan's device, we might all finish up being Malloved - or perhaps that should be Meyered since mired better conveys the impression of being dropped in the merde. Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 16:13:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55NCrHf027429; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:12:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55NCqTi027413; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:12:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:12:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <018101c688f5$8dc3eaf0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Hydroxide-Hydrate UltraCapacitor Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:12:43 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68757 X-Loop: vortex-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 an alternative "fuel" can be made from pure water by slow application of electric charge, as has been claimed by a few of the more advanced practitioners using recently improved Browns Gas (BG) or Joe Cell (JC) systems, then that fuel likely already has a name in mainstream science: the Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion. This is a most unusual species. CAVEAT: It should be added to every post of this nature: there is nothing approaching scientific proof of this - but plenty of persistent anecdotal accounts that some alternative "fuel" made from water can self-power an ICE, with no or little fossil fuel (perhaps lubrication oil). If true, this means that at least a COP of 7-8 is happening, calculated on the net P-in to P-out, including the water conditioning. The huge problem: How could this have been overlooked previously? The only way would be if something like the reciprocating engine plays a critical role - and the "fuel" is only active in that circumstance. Most Bizarre but it does fit in with the idea of a electromechanical "exploding capacitor". This species in question, the Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion OH(H2O)- may takes the geometric form of H HO - e- < >O H Although, as Fred Sparber has shown, there are many other hydrated species which may be present in electrolyzed water, this one stands out for several reasons. The situation is far from "either/or" and certainly peroxides are there and dozens of other superoxidizers. This particular ion is an attractive candidate due to the "nested charge" requiring just five atoms, which would have the effective formula of H3O2- As you can see from the proposed simplified structure above, it is technically a negative ion, but the electron is effectively shielded and encapsulated by the H2O on one side and the OH on the other ... Unique, no? ... as it possibly indicates enhanced comparative stability over any "bare" ion (one with an "exposed" charge). And an "ultra-ultra-capacitor" (5 atom capacitor) would be very powerful, even if the effective internal charge is only about one volt. If it were more than one volt, then H2/O2 would preferentially form. In fact, the very slow application of a low voltage-gradient in the "manufacture" of the fuel may be the key to this. Depending on the externally expressed charge and near-field of this species, there would need to be a positive charge counterbalance. Hydronium would be the most likely candidate for that, but it has a "bare" charge so there could be instability but there are other candidates - and it is all a mix anyway. Perhaps in the paired polar ion - there is some special "fit" in whatever is found to be the most active mix. For instance if all three protons of hydronium were aligned with the Oxygen opposed forming a tetrahedron, and the end oxygen atom of the Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion were nested into that 3-proton triangular cavity, such that an ionic bound combination forms in a minimum space - consequently it could exhibit special stability and still yield about 2 eV when forced into sudden charge-annihilation by the ICE collapsing action. If this kind of capacitor were to be "exploded" - to use the direct analogy to an exploding electrolytic capacitor (on the macro scale) then the question arises as to how much energy is available from this, compared with gasoline combustion. The OH(H2O)- ion has a molecular weight of 35 and hydronium (H3O) 19 so in total this discharge might give two eV net energy per 54 amu. Gasoline combustion resulting in CO2 gives more energy per amu - ostensibly - until you realize that for every O there are 4 nitrogens, so the net energy of gasoline in air is actually less per net amu then is a water-fuel capacitor alone, in this grossly oversimplified comparison. This only goes to show that this "natural" fuel, which is little more then electrolyzed-water - has, shall we dare say- an unrecognized 'potential' in the context of an exploding capacitor. The proximate energy source is broken hydrogen bonds, and the ultimate source must involve the Casimir force. It is still troubling that this has situation not been seen by mainstream science before now - if it has any validity - and that such a very high COP could have gone undetected for so long... ...unless, of course, the tropical hurricane provides some of that evidence from nature herself. The prior non-detection would be even more troubling - but then again, mainstream science has never faced the necessity of pursuing every possible angle for energy in situations where they "knew" that anomalous energy could not possibly exist... and anyway, science normally does not use an ICE in as a standard conversion technique... which is fodder for another post. Adjust your spam filters accordingly Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 16:59:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k55NwwZD018194; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:58:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k55Nwvf7018178; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:58:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:58:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008401c688fb$b5af2100$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 01:56:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k55Nwo5M018106 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68758 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Jed Rothwell" To: Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:46 PM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > jonfli wrote: > >>Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? No, none of those will do. As for the phase angle stuff (cos phi) it is only ok for sinusoidal waveforms. > > I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. That's the way! And then averaging those is ok. Average of products is not the same as product of averages :) Note the sampling rate must be adapted to the waveforms frequency content, or reciprocally (if attachments were allowed I would have posted a picture illustrating the latter, I'll have to set up a web site for such things) >>Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase >>angles are taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means . . . > > Do sophisticated meters usually take these things into account? Or do > they finesse the problem by taking zillions of samples? I do not > know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by > diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then > measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say Never understood how this worked when you explained it before Jed, how does one concretely divert a fraction of the power, please post more details on this if you think it's competitive with the i v sample, multiply and integrate method of modern electronic meters. Michel > calorimetry is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the > oldest method of measuring energy. As Fleischmann says, in some ways > it is still the best method of measuring radioactivity, for example. > Microcalorimeters measure the impact of individual cosmic rays. > > - Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 18:08:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5618PBZ020563; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:08:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5618NUj020548; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:08:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:08:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:54:12 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68759 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Jed Rothwell" Subject: Re: Battery shapes > jonfli wrote: > >>Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? > > I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. > > >>Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase angles are >>taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means . . . No, no, no -- not in the realm of wideband noise as in plasma electrolysis. Taking phase into account is just a first step. You also have to include peak factor and the simple instruments can't handle more than about 3:1. There is a Texas Instrument portable oscilliscope with a 100 Mhz bandwidth and two totally isolated inputs which can measure instantaneous I and E. You grab a windows worth of the waveform and the instrument will calculate the instantnaeous power for each sample and integrate ***not average*** them to a true power measurement. It will also plot instantaneous power. Naudin used this some years ago in his studies of the Newman machine. More recent photos show another instrument whose specs indicate that it has similar capabilities. The TI scope costs about two kilobucks. These instruments do what Jed prefers, per his comment above. > Do sophisticated meters usually take these things into account? Or do they > finesse the problem by taking zillions of samples? Zillions of sampes is not finessing the problem. It is doing it correctly, fundamentally. I do not > know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by > diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then > measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say calorimetry > is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the oldest method of > measuring energy. That method is an older one, used by Hewlett Packard years ago, and perhaps by other instrument makers. It is also fundamental but is fussy to use, for the input signals have to be amplified to drive the heater, and those ampolifiers have themselves bandwidth and saturation problems. It's not a slam-dunk. As in many cases, you have to not only understand what you are trying to measure, but how the measruign device actually works. The hand held meters are really designed for 60 Hz near sinusoidal measurement and can give serious errors if used otherwise. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 19:52:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k562qhH5014085; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 19:52:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k562qb8G014035; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 19:52:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 19:52:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001b01c68914$3efb84e0$7d027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 21:52:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01C688EA.555115E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <_-znKD.A.LbD.03OhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68760 X-Loop: vortex-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_0017_01C688EA.555115E0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0018_01C688EA.55542320" ------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C688EA.55542320 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankMike Carroll wrote.. > jonfli wrote: > >>Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? > > I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. > > >>Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase angles = are=20 >>taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means . . . No, no, no -- not in the realm of wideband noise as in plasma = electrolysis.=20 Taking phase into account is just a first step. You also have to include = peak factor and the simple instruments can't handle more than about 3:1. = There is a Texas Instrument portable oscilliscope with a 100 Mhz = bandwidth=20 and two totally isolated inputs which can measure instantaneous I and E. = You grab a windows worth of the waveform and the instrument will = calculate=20 the instantnaeous power for each sample and integrate ***not average*** = them=20 to a true power measurement. It will also plot instantaneous power. = Naudin=20 used this some years ago in his studies of the Newman machine. More = recent=20 photos show another instrument whose specs indicate that it has similar=20 capabilities. The TI scope costs about two kilobucks. These instruments = do=20 what Jed prefers, per his comment above. > Do sophisticated meters usually take these things into account? Or do = they=20 > finesse the problem by taking zillions of samples? Zillions of sampes is not finessing the problem. It is doing it = correctly,=20 fundamentally. I do not > know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by=20 > diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then=20 > measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say = calorimetry=20 > is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the oldest method = of=20 > measuring energy. That method is an older one, used by Hewlett Packard years ago, and = perhaps=20 by other instrument makers. It is also fundamental but is fussy to use, = for=20 the input signals have to be amplified to drive the heater, and those=20 ampolifiers have themselves bandwidth and saturation problems. It's not = a=20 slam-dunk. As in many cases, you have to not only understand what you = are=20 trying to measure, but how the measruign device actually works. The hand = held meters are really designed for 60 Hz near sinusoidal measurement = and=20 can give serious errors if used otherwise. Mike Carrell=20 Thanks Mike for the enlightenment. For some time I remained mystified = over a Draenitz unit we were using for power studies. We had been = experiencing some horrendus in plant power spikes we finally traced to = the lack of grounding rings around some large loads starting across the = line. I wasn't familar with the TI unit. The Draenitz costs about 9k = back in the early '80s. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C688EA.55542320 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Mike Carroll wrote..

> jonfli wrote:
>
>>Er, what other measurement = would you=20 prefer? RMS, Peak...?
>
> I prefer lots and lots of = instantaneous=20 power measurements.
>
>
>>Average measurements are=20 equivalent to DC if the relative phase angles are
>>taken into = account=20 and therefore are the most accurate means . . .

No, no, no -- not = in the=20 realm of wideband noise as in plasma electrolysis.
Taking phase into = account=20 is just a first step. You also have to include
peak factor and the = simple=20 instruments can't handle more than about 3:1.
There is a Texas = Instrument=20 portable oscilliscope with a 100 Mhz bandwidth
and two totally = isolated=20 inputs which can measure instantaneous I and E.
You grab a windows = worth of=20 the waveform and the instrument will calculate
the instantnaeous = power for=20 each sample and integrate ***not average*** them
to a true power=20 measurement. It will also plot instantaneous power. Naudin
used this = some=20 years ago in his studies of the Newman machine. More recent
photos = show=20 another instrument whose specs indicate that it has similar =
capabilities.=20 The TI scope costs about two kilobucks. These instruments do
what = Jed=20 prefers, per his comment above.

> Do sophisticated meters = usually take=20 these things into account? Or do they
> finesse the problem by = taking=20 zillions of samples?

Zillions of sampes is not finessing the = problem. It=20 is doing it correctly,
fundamentally.


 I do = not
>=20 know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by =
>=20 diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then =
>=20 measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say = calorimetry=20
> is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the oldest = method of=20
> measuring energy.

That method is an older one, used by = Hewlett=20 Packard years ago, and perhaps
by other instrument makers. It is = also=20 fundamental but is fussy to use, for
the input signals have to be = amplified=20 to drive the heater, and those
ampolifiers have themselves bandwidth = and=20 saturation problems. It's not a
slam-dunk. As in many cases, you = have to not=20 only understand what you are
trying to measure, but how the = measruign device=20 actually works. The hand
held meters are really designed for 60 Hz = near=20 sinusoidal measurement and
can give serious errors if used=20 otherwise.

Mike Carrell

Thanks Mike  for the enlightenment. For some time I remained = mystified=20 over a Draenitz unit we were using for power studies. We had been = experiencing=20 some horrendus in plant power  spikes we finally traced to the lack = of=20 grounding rings around some large loads starting across the line. I = wasn't=20 familar with the TI unit. The Draenitz costs about 9k back in = the=20 early '80s.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0018_01C688EA.55542320-- ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C688EA.555115E0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001601c68914$3e11c120$7d027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C688EA.555115E0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 20:30:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k563UV82001265; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:30:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k563URI5001234; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:30:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:30:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> From: "jonfli" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:30:21 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68761 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Mike Carrell" To: > > >> jonfli wrote: >> >>>Er, what other measurement would you prefer? RMS, Peak...? >> >> I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. >> >> >>>Average measurements are equivalent to DC if the relative phase angles >>>are taken into account and therefore are the most accurate means . . . > > No, no, no -- not in the realm of wideband noise as in plasma > electrolysis. Taking phase into account is just a first step. You also > have to include peak factor and the simple instruments can't handle more > than about 3:1. There is a Texas Instrument portable oscilliscope with a > 100 Mhz bandwidth and two totally isolated inputs which can measure > instantaneous I and E. You grab a windows worth of the waveform and the > instrument will calculate the instantnaeous power for each sample and > integrate ***not average*** them to a true power measurement. The integrated instantaneous power sample calculations are what I was referring to when I said " however, the internal power computing functions leave something to be desired on the lower cost samplers!" I use a Tek TDS 3034 and even Tek admits that the "internal" math calculations between selected channels on this model leave a lot to be desired relative to accuracy. What does yield accuracy however on complex waveforms with this scope, is to take the mean (average) of a selected portion(s) using the vertical cursors and do the math yourself. Jon F >It will also plot instantaneous power. Naudin used this some years ago in >his studies of the Newman machine. More recent photos show another >instrument whose specs indicate that it has similar capabilities. The TI >scope costs about two kilobucks. These instruments do what Jed prefers, per >his comment above. > >> Do sophisticated meters usually take these things into account? Or do >> they finesse the problem by taking zillions of samples? > > Zillions of sampes is not finessing the problem. It is doing it correctly, > fundamentally. > > > I do not >> know. The meter I read about (that Mizuno uses) fixes the problem by >> diverting a tiny fraction of the power into a joule heater and then >> measuring the heat. In other words, by calorimetry! People say >> calorimetry is hard but they fall back on it in the end. It is the oldest >> method of measuring energy. > > That method is an older one, used by Hewlett Packard years ago, and > perhaps by other instrument makers. It is also fundamental but is fussy to > use, for the input signals have to be amplified to drive the heater, and > those ampolifiers have themselves bandwidth and saturation problems. It's > not a slam-dunk. As in many cases, you have to not only understand what > you are trying to measure, but how the measruign device actually works. > The hand held meters are really designed for 60 Hz near sinusoidal > measurement and can give serious errors if used otherwise. > > Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 20:52:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k563qf2X012221; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:52:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k563qY9U012173; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:52:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:52:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 23:52:58 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Mon, 05 Jun 2006 23:53:06 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Mon, 05 Jun 2006 23:53:07 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: <-ImY2B.A.E-C.CwPhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68762 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Hi Walter, > > Don't be sorry, Walter - after all, you are only human > and it's very normal for us hairless-apes, as the > dominant species and top of the food-chain for now, to > want and desire above all else for "things" to stay that > way forever ... and you are merely expressing that > expected sentiment - somewhat out of desperation, > perhaps. But it is natural ... even if it is kind of a > knee-jerk reaction. > > Logic, if it could ever be applied in a dispassionate > way to our developmental history - might indicate > otherwise, however... > > Hard to be objective, though - when it comes to the > subject of something "special" about our kind of > intelligence. Roger Penrose has been spinning his wheels > on this task for some time, and despite arguments more > convoluted than some of his tiling patterns, has largely > failed to find any objective factor which will deny the > same intelligence we have- to our equally complex > creations, even if they are biological (in the sense of > genetic engineering) as opposed to mechanical - or > perhaps even a chimera. > > Many will always find it revolting to imagine that the > intelligence which we prize so much - and is our > defining characteristic as a species - is merely the > "emergent property" of simple arithmetic - that is: the > emergent property of an evolutionary increase in neutral > capacity, combined with a few other "connections" in the > Burke sense like fingers and vocal chords (as well as > "connections" in the sense of society). Is that all there > is? connections? > > Is that all there is .... to a brain? ...ask Miss Peggy > (or maybe Miss Piggy) > > Jones Hi, Jones. I presume you at least agree with me that creating a LifeBox will require superintelligence. But I think you misjudge me in my opinion on the possibility of superintelligence. First, I do not doubt that our metaphysical minds are solely the products of our physical brains. Penrose tries to explain one mystery (the mind; consciousness) in terms of another (quantum theory), while I'm fairly sure that the mind is not mysterious in that sense. Even if there were a connection, quantum theory IS a physical theory. And I agree that intelligence is an emergent property of the brain. But the many thousands of structures and processes in the brain that give rise to it are the product of hundreds of millions of years of evolution. It's simply not simple. Evolution might be able of creating superintelligence if we gave it an evolutionary time scale in which to work. That is, at least several million years. It would also need an environment in which intelligence would be heavily selected for. AI researchers thought they could get by with less. With ungrounded purely-syntactic "facts" and inference rules. With production rules. With ultra-simplistic "neural nets". With fuzzy logic. With genetic algorithms. With ever-faster computers and ever-more memory. They were wrong. Though all these methods work, they are not enough. AFAIKS, there really is no short-cut. To create a superintelligence we will have to at least understand regular intelligence at a detailed level -- and all the levels in-between. A task that will require many decades of work rather than just a couple. With no guarantee of success or that success will be enough to go further. I do expect this work will be done. And that superintelligence might one day come to be. Lastly, Jones, I note you really didn't address my main argument. Who will be the first to gain access to superintelligent machines (or superintelligent meat or whatever), however they come to be? People with money and power, probably via governments. Organized religious fanatics. Or just plain criminals. That is: Not you or me. And I really doubt that if and when these people get access to these magic machines, capable of delivering to them ultimate power over all humankind, I sincerely doubt they will act with our best interests at heart. Of course history provides some counterexamples; not a lot. But if this fearful hairless ape errs, he errs on the side of caution. Best wishes to you my friend. -Walter P.S. My late father loved Peggy Lee; hers was the last music he listened to. He was an organist and choirmaster. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 21:01:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5641EFU016012; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 21:01:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5641D7j015995; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 21:01:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 21:01:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 00:00:07 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Battery shapes In-reply-to: <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68763 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: So is Naudin incomptent when it comes to calculating power output? (That is what Michel Jullien seem to imply.) Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 23:06:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5665uwB014351; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:05:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5665sN7014319; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:05:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:05:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00c401c6892e$fa0cc680$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:03:30 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5665n8p014269 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68764 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Mike Carrell" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 2:54 AM Subject: Re: Battery shapes >>> I prefer lots and lots of instantaneous power measurements. >> >> That's the way! And then averaging those is ok. ... > the instrument will calculate > the instantnaeous power for each sample and integrate ***not average*** them > to a true power measurement. They integrate over a time interval to get total energy (joules) in that interval, and then they divide by the time interval to get... (fill in the blank Mike ;) Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 5 23:57:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k566vfgU007928; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:57:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k566veT3007911; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:57:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 23:57:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 02:58:19 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Tue, 06 Jun 2006 02:58:21 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Tue, 06 Jun 2006 02:58:22 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68765 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: POSSIBLY DUPLICATE POST ----------------------- Jones Beene wrote: > Hi Walter, > > Don't be sorry, Walter - after all, you are only human > and it's very normal for us hairless-apes, as the > dominant species and top of the food-chain for now, to > want and desire above all else for "things" to stay that > way forever ... and you are merely expressing that > expected sentiment - somewhat out of desperation, > perhaps. But it is natural ... even if it is kind of a > knee-jerk reaction. > > Logic, if it could ever be applied in a dispassionate > way to our developmental history - might indicate > otherwise, however... > > Hard to be objective, though - when it comes to the > subject of something "special" about our kind of > intelligence. Roger Penrose has been spinning his wheels > on this task for some time, and despite arguments more > convoluted than some of his tiling patterns, has largely > failed to find any objective factor which will deny the > same intelligence we have- to our equally complex > creations, even if they are biological (in the sense of > genetic engineering) as opposed to mechanical - or > perhaps even a chimera. > > Many will always find it revolting to imagine that the > intelligence which we prize so much - and is our > defining characteristic as a species - is merely the > "emergent property" of simple arithmetic - that is: the > emergent property of an evolutionary increase in neutral > capacity, combined with a few other "connections" in the > Burke sense like fingers and vocal chords (as well as > "connections" in the sense of society). Is that all there > is? connections? > > Is that all there is .... to a brain? ...ask Miss Peggy > (or maybe Miss Piggy) > > Jones Hi, Jones. I presume you at least agree with me that creating a LifeBox will require superintelligence. But I think you misjudge me in my opinion on the possibility of superintelligence. First, I do not doubt that our metaphysical minds are solely the products of our physical brains. Penrose tries to explain one mystery (the mind; consciousness) in terms of another (quantum theory), while I'm fairly sure that the mind is not mysterious in that sense. Even if there were a connection, quantum theory IS a physical theory. And I agree that intelligence is an emergent property of the brain. But the many thousands of structures and processes in the brain that give rise to it are the product of hundreds of millions of years of evolution. It's simply not simple. Evolution might be able of creating superintelligence if we gave it an evolutionary time scale in which to work. That is, at least several million years. It would also need an environment in which intelligence would be heavily selected for. AI researchers thought they could get by with less. With ungrounded purely-syntactic "facts" and inference rules. With production rules. With ultra-simplistic "neural nets". With fuzzy logic. With genetic algorithms. With ever-faster computers and ever-more memory. They were wrong. Though all these methods work, they are not enough. AFAIKS, there really is no short-cut. To create a superintelligence we will have to at least understand regular intelligence at a detailed level -- and all the levels in-between. A task that will require many decades of work rather than just a couple. With no guarantee of success or that success will be enough to go further. I do expect this work will be done. And that superintelligence might one day come to be. Lastly, Jones, I note you really didn't address my main argument. Who will be the first to gain access to superintelligent machines (or superintelligent meat or whatever), however they come to be? People with money and power, probably via governments. Organized religious fanatics. Or just plain criminals. That is: Not you or me. And I really doubt that if and when these people get access to these magic machines, capable of delivering to them ultimate power over all humankind, I sincerely doubt they will act with our best interests at heart. Of course history provides some counterexamples; not a lot. But if this fearful hairless ape errs, he errs on the side of caution. Best wishes to you my friend. -Walter P.S. My late father loved Peggy Lee; hers was the last music he listened to. He was an organist and choirmaster. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 01:27:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k568RIR4020124; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 01:27:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k568RGVc020104; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 01:27:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 01:27:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 18:27:12 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.50] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:27:12 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k568RD3S020078 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68766 X-Loop: vortex-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, If we ever get to the point where we can make hydrinos small enough, (or collect small ones), then here are two nice clean fusion reactions based upon plentiful materials:- Hy + N15 -> C12 + He4 + 4.96 MeV (this is essentially the last step of the CNO reaction). The N15 isotope would need to be separated from normal Nitrogen, however that shouldn't be too difficult. Hy2 + O18 -> C12 + 2 He4 + 9 MeV Hy2 is a severely shrunken hydrino molecule. Once again, the O18 would need to be separated from normal Oxygen. There is enough O18 in the oceans to provide us with energy at our current rate of use for 285 billion years. :) The previous reaction may actually take place in two steps:- Hy + O18 -> N15 + He4 + 4 MeV, followed by the first reaction. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 02:08:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5698Brv010832; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 02:08:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56988ZC010804; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 02:08:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 02:08:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:05:58 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56982JB010748 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68767 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin, I am not familiar with hydrino fusion concepts, any pointers welcome. The idea is that the hydrino nucleus (proton) can approach the target nucleus close enough for fusion thanks to the screening effect of it's closely orbiting electron? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10:27 AM Subject: Two clean reactions > Hi, > > If we ever get to the point where we can make hydrinos small > enough, (or collect small ones), then here are two nice clean > fusion reactions based upon plentiful materials:- > > Hy + N15 -> C12 + He4 + 4.96 MeV > > (this is essentially the last step of the CNO reaction). The N15 > isotope would need to be separated from normal Nitrogen, however > that shouldn't be too difficult. > > Hy2 + O18 -> C12 + 2 He4 + 9 MeV > > Hy2 is a severely shrunken hydrino molecule. Once again, the O18 > would need to be separated from normal Oxygen. There is enough O18 > in the oceans to provide us with energy at our current rate of use > for 285 billion years. :) > > The previous reaction may actually take place in two steps:- > > Hy + O18 -> N15 + He4 + 4 MeV, followed by the first reaction. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 03:36:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56AaLcj019652; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 03:36:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56AaJrj019640; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 03:36:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 03:36:19 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=r5H3dIgrKsWtlPhzs2rNHl1Gjjv25WqxddYg/8r43UVxAT6Sqdmo0sNCfeRkIygm; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200662610360461@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OH(H2O) Water Clusters and Quasicrystals Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:36:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ed2fa0426b065aa8bae2e401d9c0ba78350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.78 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68768 X-Loop: vortex-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 http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/19/10533 "Water clusters: Untangling the mysteries of the liquid, one molecule at a time " Abstract of Article: "Extensive terahertz laser vibration-rotation-tunneling spectra and mid-IR laser spectra have been compiled for several isotopomers of small (dimer through hexamer) water clusters. These data, in conjunction with new theoretical advances, quantify the structures, force fields, dipole moments, and hydrogen bond rearrangement dynamics in these clusters. This new information permits us to systematically untangle the intricacies associated with cooperative hydrogen bonding and promises to lead to a more complete molecular description of the liquid and solid phases of water, including an accurate universal force field." Patricia A. Thiel (She alluded to these for water in her 1987 co-authored paper on water-metal interaction) http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pthiel/quasicrystals.html "Quasicrystals are well-ordered structures which fall outside the realm of conventional crystallography. Essentially, the materials were regarded as useless curiosities following their discovery by Schechtman in 1984--although the fact of their existence was highly controversial. While practical uses for the bulk materials remain elusive today, recent work has shown that coatings of quasicrystals can have spectacular properties. The properties which are especially exciting include low coefficients of friction, good wear-resistance, and good oxidation-resistance. Furthermore, quasicrystalline films can be prepared in an environmentally-benign manner, which makes them an attractive alternative to conventional, chemically-based platings for machine parts. Applications of these materials are not purely in the realm of the potential; they exist already in the realm of the marketplace. Today, non-stick cookware can be purchased which contains a quasicrystal coating, rather than a Teflon coating, and which is impervious to scratching by metal utensils." http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pthiel/Recent_Publications.html P. A. Thiel Introduction to The Surface Science of Quasicrystals: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pthiel/QC_PDF/PSS69.pdf ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
"Water clusters: Untangling the mysteries of the liquid, one molecule at a time "
 
Abstract of Article:
"Extensive terahertz laser vibration-rotation-tunneling spectra and mid-IR laser spectra have been compiled for several isotopomers of small (dimer through hexamer) water clusters. These data, in conjunction with new theoretical advances, quantify the structures, force fields, dipole moments, and hydrogen bond rearrangement dynamics in these clusters. This new information permits us to systematically untangle the intricacies associated with cooperative hydrogen bonding and promises to lead to a more complete molecular description of the liquid and solid phases of water, including an accurate universal force field."
 
Patricia A. Thiel  (She alluded to these for water in her 1987 co-authored paper on water-metal interaction)
 
 
"Quasicrystals are well-ordered structures which fall outside the realm of conventional crystallography. Essentially, the materials were regarded as useless curiosities following their discovery by Schechtman in 1984--although the fact of their existence was highly controversial. While practical uses for the bulk materials remain elusive today, recent work has shown that coatings of quasicrystals can have spectacular properties. The properties which are especially exciting include low coefficients of friction, good wear-resistance, and good oxidation-resistance. Furthermore, quasicrystalline films can be prepared in an environmentally-benign manner, which makes them an attractive alternative to conventional, chemically-based platings for machine parts. Applications of these materials are not purely in the realm of the potential; they exist already in the realm of the marketplace. Today, non-stick cookware can be purchased which contains a quasicrystal coating, rather than a Teflon coating, and which is impervious to scratching by metal utensils."
 
 
P. A. Thiel  Introduction to The Surface Science of Quasicrystals:
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 04:11:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56BB8qS003532; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:11:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56BB66R003507; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:11:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:11:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <012c01c68959$98c5eac0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:08:53 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56BAtgq003428 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68769 X-Loop: vortex-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 name is Jullian with an "a". If by "incomptent" you mean "doesn't compute well" yes that's what I "seemed to imply" ;-) BTW the fact that power is not equal to Iav*Vav in the general case (I'll let you find an obvious example where P is not zero whereas Iav or Vav is null, which would make the Iav*Vav method infinitely underestimate input power i.e. overestimate the COP), and so can't be relied on when dealing with spiky currents and voltages, applies to all electrical power measurements, whether input or output. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Veeder" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 7:00 AM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > So is Naudin incomptent when it comes to calculating power output? (That is > what Michel Jullien seem to imply.) > > Harry > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 04:33:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56BXGBH014752; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:33:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56BXFsu014739; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:33:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:33:15 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=frakY4i3kj/HBj1hygU9KSwnAZAcOuYXLQYRFgHBWaeOlyfjhel9iZ3ePfF/rnia; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200662611325165@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Hydroxide-Hydrate UltraCapacitor Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 05:32:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94035bbe59386fcf2e589eeeb20dc67265c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.78 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68770 X-Loop: vortex-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 Build around (shield) your Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion OH(H2O)- with H3O+ and these water clusters,Jones. :-) Water Clusters Article: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/19/10533 Trimer Pix: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/19/10533/F5 Pentamer Pix: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/19/10533/F10 Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Build around  (shield) your Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion OH(H2O)-
with H3O+ and these water clusters,Jones. :-)
 
Water Clusters Article:
 
 
 
Trimer Pix:
 
 
 
Pentamer Pix:
 
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 04:58:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56BwdRg027646; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:58:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56BwQwv027515; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:58:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 04:58:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydroxide-Hydrate UltraCapacitor From: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk Reply-to: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Sender-IP-Address: 194.105.164.99 X-Mailer: Nameko 0.10.0 Message-Id: Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 12:58:20 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68771 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Fred wrote: > > Build around (shield) your Hydroxide Hydrate negative ion > OH(H2O)- > with H3O+ and these water clusters,Jones. :-) I am sufficiently intrigued to see where Fred and Jones go with this to suggest that I hold fire on posting any alternative JC theories for now, lest they prove distracting. However, would it be helpful in the current context for me to provide a summary of the various (yes, there are more than one) water pre-treatment regimes proposed for the JC? The techniques are a tad more involved than Jones has previously suggested. Patrick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:02:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56E0fUg016137; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:02:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56DvFjp013786; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:57:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:57:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001701c68971$101c7cd0$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <00c401c6892e$fa0cc680$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:48:08 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68773 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Michel Jullian" Subject: Re: Battery shapes > the instrument will calculate >> the instantnaeous power for each sample and integrate ***not average*** >> them >> to a true power measurement. > > They integrate over a time interval to get total energy (joules) in that > interval, and then they divide by the time interval to get... (fill in the > blank Mike ;) I thnk you are right. RMS is used for measurements of I or E independantly, but where instantaneous I and E are available as in the TI instrument, integration of the intantaneous I*E product will gibve a correct average, but averaging I and E separately will not. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:02:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56E0fUi016137; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:02:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56Ctj4R028438; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 05:55:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 05:55:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 22:55:37 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.50] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:55:38 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56Ctctw028394 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68772 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:05:58 +0200: Hi, [snip] >Hi Robin, I am not familiar with hydrino fusion concepts, any pointers welcome. > >The idea is that the hydrino nucleus (proton) can approach the target nucleus close enough for fusion thanks to the screening effect of it's closely orbiting electron? > >Michel Precisely. Outside the orbit of the shrunken electron, the Hydrino is a neutral entity. In that respect it somewhat resembles a fat neutron. However when tunneling into another nucleus, the shrunken electron would usually be left behind, so the actual reaction would be a proton fusion reaction. It may even prove possible for the shrunken electron to form a bond between the proton and the other nucleus, resulting in a mini-molecule a hundred times smaller than a hydrogen atom. Needless to say, it probably wouldn't last long before fusion occurred. An analogy might be the muonic-molecule. Muon catalyzed fusion occurs very rapidly at a distance of the Bohr Radius (BR) x (me/mu) ~= 256 F. According to Mills, the radius of the Hydrino goes as the inverse of the shrinkage level, i.e. the smallest would be BR/137 ~= 386 F. According to me it goes as the inverse square of the level, which would mean that to get to 256 F, it would have to shrink to level 15. I was looking at CNO reactions in stars today, and I noticed that at about 3E7 K the power output is about 3 kW / m^3. At that temperature the average approach distance is 3300 F. Let the Boltzmann tail take it 10 times closer on occasion, that's 330 F. With a level 15 Hydrino we are already there. IOW we could have 3 kW / m^3 fusion based on the CNO cycle, right here on Earth. (Mimicking the fusion rate at the core of a blue giant, and that at "room temperature" (well I suspect it would be a bit warmer ;). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:09:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56E99L7022502; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:09:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56E97SF022454; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:09:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:09:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002801c68972$c23f4040$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: Subject: Re: Hydroxide-Hydrate UltraCapacitor Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:08:59 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68775 X-Loop: vortex-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: > However, would it be helpful in the current context for me to > provide a summary of the various (yes, there are more than one) > water pre-treatment regimes proposed for the JC? The techniques > are a tad more involved than Jones has previously suggested. > > Patrick Yes, Please do list those techniques in as much detail as you have available -as you are probably tuned-in to all of that wider range of input. As for the pretreatment info posted yesterday, the input comes from a reliable source in Oz going back to the old Dingel forum, before the current hoopla. He appears in one of the current videos but does not want to be identified by name. He owns a Steven's cell, thinks orgone is bunkum, and probably wants to be a "player" in that business eventually. He claims to have invented the long-pretreatment technique and to use water-fuel daily with zero fossil fuel. He also claims to have been threatened and is fearful of even Stevens and has ceased posting to internet forums. Conspiracy theories abound, making me suspicious that they are not just setting up a convenient kind of save-face excuse. I have encouraged him to write to Sterling Allan or do a public demo in Sydney with the Press or to write Robin, a vortexian who is keenly interested in all of this or to contact a university professor. However, methinks the threats are working - but that they are internecine - dollar-sign-denominated... they all know that there is something of great potential value to it, that nagging problems exist, that they are not there yet, but they all want a piece of some future action. The proper water pretreatment may be the key to this, and may make it into a viable technology. But maybe the best use for it is as a booster - to improve gasoline mileage - and forget about the water-only possibility. This is not to say that the "capacitor effect" - if that is indeed the operative modality, and cannot be achieved without the long pretreatment period - but only that the pretreatment seems to elevate a hit-or-miss technique into a robust technique. At least that is the claim. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:17:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56EHXBf029433; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:17:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56EHR68029367; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:17:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:17:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,214,1146456000"; d="scan'208"; a="1195104071:sNHT26065302" Message-ID: <924922008.1149603438051.JavaMail.root@fepweb14> Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 7:17:18 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: OT: the "LifeBox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68776 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---- Walter Faxon wrote: ... > Who > will be the first to gain access to superintelligent machines (or > superintelligent meat or whatever), however they come to be? People with > money and power, probably via governments. Organized religious fanatics. > Or just plain criminals. ... > -Walter My bet is on the philosophers, who will immediately suppress the ultimate answer: "42". ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:53:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56E0fUe016137; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:02:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56DvJFN013832; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:57:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:57:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001801c68971$103dc070$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:51:03 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68774 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Harry Veeder" Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > So is Naudin incomptent when it comes to calculating power output? (That > is > what Michel Jullien seem to imply.) I haven't followed this thread closely. In looking at other of Naudin's experiments, it is quite clear to me that he understrands the issues and has instruments capable of making correct measurements of a range of electrical conditions. What he has done in the experiment at issue I don't know. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 07:54:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56EsJ2x027030; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:54:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56EsIwD027005; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:54:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 07:54:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:00:07 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.50] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:00:07 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56EsFNQ026954 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68777 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:05:58 +0200: Hi, BTW, previously I wrote:- [snip] >> Hy2 + O18 -> C12 + 2 He4 + 9 MeV [snip] however probably more likely is:- Hy2 + O18 -> O16 + He4 + 16 MeV Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 08:21:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56FKfWZ014257; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:20:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56FKdVF014226; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:20:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:20:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00cf01c6897c$c04141d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:20:31 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <8cx7fC.A.JeD.G1ZhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68778 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Robin van Spaandonk" > however probably more likely is:- > Hy2 + O18 -> O16 + He4 + 16 MeV Sodden thought: this reaction in the context of the WasserCar. As posted a few months ago, the heavy isotope of oxygen: O-18 (18O) is far more ubiquitous in nature than many realize. It is 15 time more prevalent in natural water than is deuterium, for instance but the interesting part is that it is eneriched naturally in biological life (osmosis in plants will enrich). Bet non-Vo readers didn't know that curious factoid. This isotope could have gone under the radar in the big Labs because the 16O variety of the atom is especially stable in nuclear terms - so why look further? However, if the 18O nucleus was 'deformed' or had some kind of nuclear meta-stability, then who knows...? BUT the most curious thing of all. The slightly enriched water is being marketed now even claim to be "O-18 enriched" ... this water is available from a company advertising on the web specifically as a health gimmick. Three guesses where the company is located. NSW ? NSW ? NSW ? Maybe they don't call it Oz for nothing... Nah... you don't think those characters are pouring the stuff into their Joe_Cells... do ya? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 09:00:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56G0FeV011719; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:00:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56FsXhg006548; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:54:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:54:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 11:54:29 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85798A0FDA294-16D4-12CFF@mblkn-m04.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Tesla EV Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.68 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68779 X-Loop: vortex-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.greencarcongress.com/2006/06/tesla_motors_cl.html Tesla Motors Closes $40M Round; Funding to Support Launch of Electric Sportscar 1 June 2006 Tesla Motors announced the completion of its $40 million Series C financing led by VantagePoint Venture Partners, one of the largest CleanTech investors in Silicon Valley, and by Elon Musk, founder of Paypal and CEO of SpaceX. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 09:26:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56GQIxn029582; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:26:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56GQG7N029562; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:26:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:26:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <020801c68985$ebb80840$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <00cf01c6897c$c04141d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:26:09 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68780 X-Loop: vortex-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 clarify: > As posted a few months ago, the heavy isotope of oxygen: O-18 > (18O) is far more ubiquitous in nature than many realize. It is > 15 time more prevalent in natural water than is deuterium, for > instance but the interesting part is that it is eneriched > naturally in biological life (osmosis in plants will enrich). One in every 6000 molecules of sea water is HDO instead of H2O. It is erroneous to call this molecule "heavy water" however which technically is a double substituion, or DDO: and nonexistent in seawater for all practical purposes. Five in every thousand molecules of sea water (.5 %) has an 18O oxygen isotope instead of 16O. That is rather extraordinary considering the nuclear stability of 16O. Surface water has less as the lighter isotope evaporates first and is retained in any osmotic process. The mass difference is substantial. The water in some fruits and plants is enriched, reportedly, to a full 1 percent 18O. Otherwise it is very expensive to buy it from an isotope distributor. Jones BTW, to show how far afield this kind of "grasping at straws" reasoning, often resorted-to in the endless search for energy-alternatives can get you... Eucalyptus tree leaves are said to be especially enriched in 18O, and this is the preffered food of the Koala. The leaves are undigestible to other animals and of very low nutritional quality. Bacteria hosted by the Koala however, apparently convert this non-food item into energy for the host. Ergo: some might be tempted to suggest that the extra 18O could be playing a role... now how crazy is that Not this crazy: A Koala walks into a restaurant, sits down and orders the veggie special. After he has finished eating, the waiter brings him his bill. The koala then shoots the waiter, and departs. The fearless restaurant owner runs over and stops him at the getaway gum-tree. "You can't come into my restaurant, eat my food, shoot my waiter and then walk out like you own the place! Who do you think you are?" The Koala says... "Hmm...a Koala? look it up, pops" The owner pulls out his pocket dictionary and looks up koala. It say, "Marsupial. Eats shoots and leaves". From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 10:21:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56HKN9n000615; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:20:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56HIWZ9031895; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:18:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:18:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> From: "jonfli" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:18:22 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68781 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since I'm not involved in any type of plasma electrolysis and the measurement of the resultant waveforms, I thought I would research various techniques by those that do. Below are quotes from a document titled " The Law of Electric Circuit" by Ph. M. Kanarev. "It appears from the analysis that average power in each section of the electric circuit is equal to a product of average voltage, which is applied across this section, by average value of current. It is the law of electric circuit." . . . "It is the law of electric circuit, which has been checked with the help of many experiments being carried out by us. We do not know if there is an enunciation of this law in modern electrical engineering, but without this law it is impossible to make a correct analysis of power engineering of mixed systems where energy is transferred and consumed continuously and by pulses." This document may be found at- http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/articles/TheLaw1.zip I'm not a fan of the small handheld meters for such measurements due to inaccuracy, but the DSP based scopes today are quite capable of making average (plus many other) measurements on complex waveforms. Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the typical electrolysis cells appear to be most nearly "resistive" relative to their waveforms with very little or no phase shift. If any phase shift is present, the cell will be shuttling a portion of it's energy flow thru the reactive elements and may IMO, possibly create false heat measurements due to reactive heating of the conductive elements making up the device. Jon F From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 10:32:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56HW3Pv008346; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:32:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56HW2iT008332; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:32:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:32:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <020801c68985$ebb80840$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions LOL! Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 10:31:53 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2006 17:31:56.0719 (UTC) FILETIME=[1BD943F0:01C6898F] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68782 X-Loop: vortex-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, This triggered the best laugh I've had in awhile! Hilarious. The book for writers with that wonderful title is always on my wife's desk... Mark >From: "Jones Beene" >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: >Subject: Re: Two clean reactions >Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:26:09 -0700 > >To clarify: > >>As posted a few months ago, the heavy isotope of oxygen: O-18 (18O) is >>far more ubiquitous in nature than many realize. It is 15 time more >>prevalent in natural water than is deuterium, for instance but the >>interesting part is that it is eneriched naturally in biological life >>(osmosis in plants will enrich). > > > >One in every 6000 molecules of sea water is HDO instead of H2O. It is >erroneous to call this molecule "heavy water" however which technically is >a double substituion, or DDO: and nonexistent in seawater for all practical >purposes. > >Five in every thousand molecules of sea water (.5 %) has an 18O oxygen >isotope instead of 16O. That is rather extraordinary considering the >nuclear stability of 16O. Surface water has less as the lighter isotope >evaporates first and is retained in any osmotic process. The mass >difference is substantial. > >The water in some fruits and plants is enriched, reportedly, to a full 1 >percent 18O. Otherwise it is very expensive to buy it from an isotope >distributor. > >Jones > >BTW, to show how far afield this kind of "grasping at straws" reasoning, >often resorted-to in the endless search for energy-alternatives can get >you... > >Eucalyptus tree leaves are said to be especially enriched in 18O, and this >is the preffered food of the Koala. The leaves are undigestible to other >animals and of very low nutritional quality. Bacteria hosted by the Koala >however, apparently convert this non-food item into energy for the host. >Ergo: some might be tempted to suggest that the extra 18O could be playing >a role... > >now how crazy is that > >Not this crazy: A Koala walks into a restaurant, sits down and orders the >veggie special. After he has finished eating, the waiter brings him his >bill. The koala then shoots the waiter, and departs. The fearless >restaurant owner runs over and stops him at the getaway gum-tree. "You >can't come into my restaurant, eat my food, shoot my waiter and then walk >out like you own the place! Who do you think you are?" > >The Koala says... "Hmm...a Koala? look it up, pops" > >The owner pulls out his pocket dictionary and looks up koala. It say, >"Marsupial. Eats shoots and leaves". > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 10:53:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56Hqp0s022209; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:52:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56HqoUr022186; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:52:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:52:50 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=c+2Tt89X6hRVGIkIImLDdKhzzSphQ8SuOPIIgg+Cmep4vz5eZVimHbK8zDRmb50H; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006626175237383@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:52:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e543195e34911480836e7b26c7398841350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.165 Resent-Message-ID: <8oUzvC.A.laF.xDchEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68783 X-Loop: vortex-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 clarify: > > > As posted a few months ago, the heavy isotope of oxygen: O-18 > > (18O) is far more ubiquitous in nature than many realize. It is > > 15 time more prevalent in natural water than is deuterium, for > > instance but the interesting part is that it is enriched > > naturally in biological life (osmosis in plants will enrich). > I gather you are hinting that O-18 is Hy-Hydride in an O-16 nucleus, right? > > > One in every 6000 molecules of sea water is HDO instead of H2O. It > is erroneous to call this molecule "heavy water" however which > technically is a double substituion, or DDO: and nonexistent in > seawater for all practical purposes. > Yes, And Two possible end of Muon Decay Paths according to my 1991-1992 CRC are e- ( neutrino e) (neutrino u) e+ e- and (e- e+ e-) with 53 Mev/c giving room for possibly heavier (* e-) particles than Ps- (Electronium) like 1864 or 37270 eV or so? > > Five in every thousand molecules of sea water (.5 %) has an 18O > oxygen isotope instead of 16O. That is rather extraordinary > considering the nuclear stability of 16O. Surface water has less > as the lighter isotope evaporates first and is retained in any > osmotic process. The mass difference is substantial. > > The water in some fruits and plants is enriched, reportedly, to a > full 1 percent 18O. Otherwise it is very expensive to buy it from > an isotope distributor. > Also a news item in the land of Oz. "Local Man Charged With Battery". > > Jones > > BTW, to show how far afield this kind of "grasping at straws" > reasoning, often resorted-to in the endless search for > energy-alternatives can get you... > > Eucalyptus tree leaves are said to be especially enriched in 18O, > and this is the preffered food of the Koala. The leaves are > undigestible to other animals and of very low nutritional quality. > Bacteria hosted by the Koala however, apparently convert this > non-food item into energy for the host. Ergo: some might be > tempted to suggest that the extra 18O could be playing a role... > > now how crazy is that > > Not this crazy: A Koala walks into a restaurant, sits down and > orders the veggie special. After he has finished eating, the > waiter brings him his bill. The koala then shoots the waiter, and > departs. The fearless restaurant owner runs over and stops him at > the getaway gum-tree. "You can't come into my restaurant, eat my > food, shoot my waiter and then walk out like you own the place! > Who do you think you are?" > > The Koala says... "Hmm...a Koala? look it up, pops" > > The owner pulls out his pocket dictionary and looks up koala. It > say, "Marsupial. Eats shoots and leaves". > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 10:58:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56HwQLH026569; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:58:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56HwOnj026543; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:58:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:58:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:57:03 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Battery shapes In-reply-to: <012c01c68959$98c5eac0$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/68784 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > The name is Jullian with an "a". Sorry, too much watermelon. > If by "incomptent" you mean "doesn't compute > well" yes that's what I "seemed to imply" ;-) > > BTW the fact that power is not equal to Iav*Vav in the general case (I'll let > you find an obvious example where P is not zero whereas Iav or Vav is null, AC? > which would make the Iav*Vav method infinitely underestimate input power i.e. > overestimate the COP), and so can't be relied on when dealing with spiky > currents and voltages, applies to all electrical power measurements, whether > input or output. > Then I guess you shouldn't estimate electrical input power from V and Iav. You should estimate it from V and R? It is important to remember that there are other kinds of power besides electrical power. In the end if enough heat is produced the most effective way of converting the heat into electrical power, might be through a boiler and a steam driven turbine. Harry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Veeder" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 7:00 AM > Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > >> >> So is Naudin incomptent when it comes to calculating power output? (That is >> what Michel Jullien seem to imply.) >> >> Harry >> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 11:00:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56I05kx027490; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:00:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56HxxkS027407; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:59:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:59:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:59:51 -0400 Message-Id: <8C857AA24A2E515-1FB8-162A4@mblkn-m07.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <00cf01c6897c$c04141d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <020801c68985$ebb80840$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <020801c68985$ebb80840$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.71 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56HxtOD027340 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68785 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene The owner pulls out his pocket dictionary and looks up koala. It say, "Marsupial. Eats shoots and leaves".   <><><><><><> It was a Panda in the book: http://tinyurl.com/zhobo http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592400876/002-7756518-1567225?v=glance& n=283155 Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 11:25:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56IPZma011600; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:25:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56IPXTL011569; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:25:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:25:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:25:26 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C857ADB781F6E4-1144-97CD@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: We Must Be Gettin' Close Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.67 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56IPVCd011545 Resent-Message-ID: <_6Ggy.A.t0C.cichEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68786 X-Loop: vortex-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 MIBs have attacked again: http://pesn.com/2006/06/02/9500276_Water_fuel_experimenter_threatened/ http://tinyurl.com/ncu58 Water Fuel Experimenter and Team Threatened Ken Rasmussen's research team has been working on a process that turns out to have similarities to the super-efficient electrolysis process being developed by Professor Kanarev. Rasmussen's work ceased after a member of the team was threatened at gunpoint. by Sterling D. Allan Pure Energy Systems News Copyright © 2006 VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, USA -- On May 16, a technician who was one of a team of garage experimenters investigating a hydrogen-on-demand technology was run off the road near a rural intersection and accosted by four white, middle-aged males in black suits, carrying Glocks and Mac tens. The assailants were driving a late model, black Lincoln Town Car. This is sounding like a bad B-movie. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 11:29:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56ITIIY013739; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:29:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56ITDaf013676; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:29:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:29:13 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=n6yTrxykSIlysD8JBU2fDeXqEbqDVwY8U8s7axd1ImAqFkpM1GZBnxb575lGclwV; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006626182854938@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:28:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408c45649a3f936b71d4f6c8b1999288f4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.221 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68787 X-Loop: vortex-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. I wrote: > > Yes, And Two possible end of Muon Decay Paths according to my 1991-1992 CRC > are e- ( neutrino e) (neutrino u) e+ e- and (e- e+ e-) with 53 Mev/c giving > room for possibly heavier (* e-) particles than Ps- (Electronium) like > 1864 or 3727 eV or so? The 53 MeV/c calculates to about 1.98 times electron rest mass. CRC gives the Muon mass as 105.65837 +/- 0.000034 MeV The 1864 or 3727 eV refers to possible fractional orbit energy release. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 12:09:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56J8U23003699; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:08:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56J8RCT003661; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:08:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:08:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <026601c6899c$92e0d730$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <00cf01c6897c$c04141d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <020801c68985$ebb80840$6401a8c0@NuDell> <8C857AA24A2E515-1FB8-162A4@mblkn-m07.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:08:18 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68788 X-Loop: vortex-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 was a Panda in the book: > http://tinyurl.com/zhobo Busted ! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 12:58:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56Jw5ls029379; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:58:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56Jw3Mk029359; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:58:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:58:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <02d901c689a3$8179de40$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-22006626182854938@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:57:56 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68789 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Frederick Sparber" > giving room for possibly heavier (* e-) particles than Ps- > (Electronium) like 1864 or 3727 eV or so? The 53 MeV/c > calculates to about 1.98 times electron rest mass. CRC gives the > Muon mass as 105.65837 +/- 0.000034 MeV > The 1864 or 3727 eV refers to possible fractional orbit energy > release. Yes... and amidst all the other possibilitites, there is still that argon/muon reciprocality thing... but that energy level was 3672 eV ... close enough for government work? Jones "Local Man Charged With Battery"... Ha...that's good. If a water-engine inventor from Oz, arriving for a US demo, gets beat to a pulp (Rodney King style) by hired-thug PetroMafia enforcers as he leaving the LA airport - can the thugs be charged with "Impersonating an Officer." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 13:34:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56KYT0r016250; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:34:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56KYS7v016236; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:34:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:34:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:34:25 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: SSE conference schedule Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68790 X-Loop: vortex-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 annual SSE conference is coming up. It's not to late to jump in a plane and go to Salt Lake City by thursday morning. (From Seattle a ticket is around $350, so I'm tempted myself.) Actually, the conference is about 45min south of Salt Lake City, at the Utah Valley State College in Orem. Schedule of Events - 25th Annual Meeting of the Society for Scientific Exploration - June 7-10, Orem, Utah http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/25th.php Wednesday, June 7 * Welcome Reception 19:00 - 22:00 Thursday, June 8 Session 1: General Anomalies * 09:00 - 09:10 Welcome & Announcements * 09:10 - 09:20 Dinsdale Award Presentation * 09:20 - 10:05 Dinsdale lecture: The Role of Anomalies in Scientific Research * 10:05 - 10:25 Mark Urban-Lurain, Promoting Scientific Thinking in Students Who Are Predisposed to Accepting Anomalous Phenomena * 10:25 - 10:45 Break * 10:45 - 11:05 Roger Nelson, Focused Data Mining in the GCP Database * 11:05 - 11:25 Michael Franklin, Elizabeth Kendall, and Larissa Vassilieva, The Effects of genetically healthy and weakened Caenorhabditis elegans on a field Random Event Generator (REG). * 11:25 - 11:45 George Bass, Oscillatory Chemical Reactions and the Origin of Life * 11:45 - 12:05 Marsha Adams, Pondering the Puzzle: Earth Lights, Pre-Earthquake Lights, and Artifacts Lunch * 12:05 - 13:45 Session 2: Anomalous Consciousness Studies * 13:45 - 14:05 Dong Shen, Unexpected Behavior of Matter in conjunction with Human Consciousness * 14:05 - 14:25 Thomas Anderson, Directing the Intention * 14:25 - 14:45 Richard Blasband, Objectification of the Effect of Intention on Water * 14:45 - 15:05 Arthur Hastings, The production of an experience similar to the psychoactive drug MDMA (Ecstasy) through post-hypnotic suggestion * 15:05 - 15:25 William Roll, The Janus Face of the Mind * 15:25 - 15:45 Break * 15:45 - 16:05 Lew Hollander, The Portal, Source-Consciousness Tuning Of the Jahn-Dunne Filter * 16:05 - 16:25 Jinchuan Shen, The Powers of the Mind: Amazing Phenomena from China and their Implications for Physics and Physiology * 16:25 - 16:45 Kevin Walsh, Effect of Subject Bias on Psi: Self-Fulfilling Prophecies * 16:45 - 17:05 Nelson Abreu and Vincent Herzog., Punctuated Progressive Relaxation Procedure for Will-Induced, Lucid Out-Of-Body Experience * 17:05 - Adjuornment Young Investigators Meeting Friday, June 9 Session 3: Medicine and Healing * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements * 09:05 - 09:50 Larry Dossey, Thinking Unthinkable Things: Exploring the Spectrum of Health * 09:50 - 10:10 K. C. Blair, Modern Medicine: An Illusion * 10:10 - 10:30 Henry Bauer, How Many Anomalies to Shake a Paradigm? The Case of HIV/AIDS Theory * 10:30 - 10:50 Break * 10:50 - 11:35 Erin Elster, Head Trauma, Disease Onset, and Upper Cervical Care: An Innovative Approach to Address Disease by Correcting Trauma-Induced Upper Cervical Injuries * 11:35 - 11:55 William Bengston, Placebo Effect, Type II Errors, and Resonance: Some Implications from Healing Research for Experimental Methods * 11:55 - 12:15 Jeffrey Denburg, Paul Burgess, Ronald Hughen, and Malcolm Southwood, Alteration of Growth of Cultured Neurons by the Conscious Intent of an Energy Healer * 12:15 Meeting adjourns for the day to allow for lunch and excursion * hh:mm Excursion Saturday, June 10 Session 4: Anomalous Physics and Related Topics * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements * 09:05 - 09:50 James DeMeo, Dayton Miller's Discovery of the Dynamic Ether Drift * 09:50 - 10:10 Thomas Van Flandern, What the Repeal of the Universal Speed Limit Tells Us About the Physical Nature of the Gravitational Field and of Inertia * 10:10 - 10:30 Danielle Graham, Experimental Data Demonstrating Human-Generated Augmentation of Ambient Gravitational and Geomagnetic Fields * 10:30 - 10:50 Break * 10:50 - 11:10 Dale Graff, Breaking the Time Barrier: Implications of Precognitive Dreaming * 11:10 - 11:30 John Peterson, Collecting Global Intuitive Images for Prediction of Major Events * 11:30 - 12:15 York Dobyns, Retrocausal Information Flow and the Physical Consequences of Knowing the Future 12:15 - 14:00 Lunch Session 5: Survival Research and Other Consciousness Topics * 14:00 - 14:05 Last Minute Announcements * 14:05 - 14:50 Jim Tucker, Children Who Claim To Remember Previous Lives: Past, Present, and Future Research * 14:50 - 15:10 Rosemarie Pilkington, The Bindelhof Case * 15:10 - 15:30 Mike Wilson, Bryan Williams, Tim Harte, and William Roll , The Daniel Experiment: Contributions to the Sitter Group Experiments using Field RNG and MESA Environmental Recordings * 15:30 - 15:50 Break * 15:50 - 15:10 William Dowling and Garret Moddel, Puzzle Test of Morphic Resonance * 15:10 - 16:30 Elliott Hedman, Tyler Mangin, and Garret Moddel, The Experimenter Effect in Remote Staring * 16:30 - 16:50 Bryan Williams and William Roll, Psi, Place Memory, and Laboratory Space * 16:50 - 17:10 Pedro Machin and Nelson Abreu, Consciental Asymmetry: Toward a Non-Reductionistic Framework and Ontology of Brain Function Laterality Business Meeting * Begins immediately after last presentation and continues until business is finished Banquet * 7:00 PM A "Must Attend" Event! Download the Registration Form (pdf) and register today! ((((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( (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 Tue Jun 6 13:55:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56Kt9X7026205; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:55:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56Kt85R026183; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:55:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 13:55:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 16:54:58 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C857C29B5CFBBE-2590-328C7@mblkn-m01.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: [OT] The Words that Trigger Echelon Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.65 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <_2oTVC.A.DZG.ruehEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68791 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since Jones has been black listed by "someone": http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/05/31/what_are_those_words/ ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 14:01:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56L0iB3029108; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:00:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56L0gTh029089; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:00:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:00:42 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=fscD80jtuiTra0caobVVojHygd0x/X86/2YddVw9AqxOanU8GGrhkMNEqR/pxweu; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200662621027854@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:00:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a70eaeb792d0e5c2260c743c65792d1a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.180 Resent-Message-ID: <3F0-xC.A.YGH.6zehEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68792 X-Loop: vortex-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. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > > > giving room for possibly heavier (* e-) particles than Ps- > > (Electronium) like 1864 or 3727 eV or so? The 53 MeV/c > > calculates to about 1.98 times electron rest mass. CRC gives the > > Muon mass as 105.65837 +/- 0.000034 MeV > > > The 1864 or 3727 eV refers to possible fractional orbit energy > > release. > > Yes... and amidst all the other possibilities, there is still > that argon/muon reciprocality thing... but that energy level was > 3672 eV ... close enough for government work? > Why not primordial or solar hydrinos added to K-39 to make it Radioactive K-40 (1.25E9 year half-life) which can decay Beta minus to Ca-40 or Beta + or EC to Ar-40? Not to mention all the other Nuclei they could be hiding in. :-) Fred > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 14:16:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56LGM57004341; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:16:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56LGKWB004317; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:16:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:16:20 -0700 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:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=mUXYHGbzqIJN1WOLNo8l64NkwPTpjvD+H+XZrHPa+pQ+zOCmuXr8BYVrwOzmIC/Qo6IDHKtgo1p1qUCz2mKh3zT4oKWnwvuAQCVVLYG9HDhsUketP228UQR666nQAXQV90j37vBuB4QbizdsWsbdmIpavIFggxY9HUIP00DLixY= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:16:18 -0700 From: "leaking pen" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: SSE conference schedule In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_30920_32437022.1149628578344" References: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68793 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: ------=_Part_30920_32437022.1149628578344 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline i was almost tempted to make a road trip of it until you said orem. i hit = a cow on a road trip in 96 about a mile south of there, pulled into town, stayed the night at a hotel, informed the local authorities about it, and was arrested for not reporting the collision at the time (1 am...) yeah, forgive me for staying FAAAAR away. On 6/6/06, William Beaty wrote: > > > The annual SSE conference is coming up. It's not to late to jump in a > plane and go to Salt Lake City by thursday morning. (From Seattle a > ticket is around $350, so I'm tempted myself.) > > Actually, the conference is about 45min south of Salt Lake City, at > the Utah Valley State College in Orem. > > > Schedule of Events - > 25th Annual Meeting of the Society for Scientific Exploration - > June 7-10, Orem, Utah > http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/25th.php > > Wednesday, June 7 > > * Welcome Reception 19:00 - 22:00 > > > > Thursday, June 8 > > Session 1: General Anomalies > > * 09:00 - 09:10 Welcome & Announcements > * 09:10 - 09:20 Dinsdale Award Presentation > * 09:20 - 10:05 Dinsdale lecture: The Role of Anomalies in Scientific > Research > * 10:05 - 10:25 Mark Urban-Lurain, Promoting Scientific Thinking in > Students Who Are Predisposed to Accepting Anomalous Phenomena > * 10:25 - 10:45 Break > * 10:45 - 11:05 Roger Nelson, Focused Data Mining in the GCP Database > * 11:05 - 11:25 Michael Franklin, Elizabeth Kendall, and Larissa > Vassilieva, The Effects of genetically healthy and weakened Caenorhabditi= s > elegans on a field Random Event Generator (REG). > * 11:25 - 11:45 George Bass, Oscillatory Chemical Reactions and the > Origin of Life > * 11:45 - 12:05 Marsha Adams, Pondering the Puzzle: Earth Lights, > Pre-Earthquake Lights, and Artifacts > > > Lunch > > * 12:05 - 13:45 > > > Session 2: Anomalous Consciousness Studies > > * 13:45 - 14:05 Dong Shen, Unexpected Behavior of Matter in conjunctio= n > with Human Consciousness > * 14:05 - 14:25 Thomas Anderson, Directing the Intention > * 14:25 - 14:45 Richard Blasband, Objectification of the Effect of > Intention on Water > * 14:45 - 15:05 Arthur Hastings, The production of an experience > similar to the psychoactive drug MDMA (Ecstasy) through post-hypnotic > suggestion > * 15:05 - 15:25 William Roll, The Janus Face of the Mind > * 15:25 - 15:45 Break > * 15:45 - 16:05 Lew Hollander, The Portal, Source-Consciousness Tuning > Of the Jahn-Dunne Filter > * 16:05 - 16:25 Jinchuan Shen, The Powers of the Mind: Amazing > Phenomena from China and their Implications for Physics and Physiology > * 16:25 - 16:45 Kevin Walsh, Effect of Subject Bias on Psi: > Self-Fulfilling Prophecies > * 16:45 - 17:05 Nelson Abreu and Vincent Herzog., Punctuated > Progressive Relaxation Procedure for Will-Induced, Lucid Out-Of-Body > Experience > * 17:05 - Adjuornment Young Investigators Meeting > > > Friday, June 9 > > > > > Session 3: Medicine and Healing > > * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements > * 09:05 - 09:50 Larry Dossey, Thinking Unthinkable Things: Exploring > the Spectrum of Health > * 09:50 - 10:10 K. C. Blair, Modern Medicine: An Illusion > * 10:10 - 10:30 Henry Bauer, How Many Anomalies to Shake a Paradigm? > The Case of HIV/AIDS Theory > * 10:30 - 10:50 Break > * 10:50 - 11:35 Erin Elster, Head Trauma, Disease Onset, and Upper > Cervical Care: An Innovative Approach to Address Disease by Correcting > Trauma-Induced Upper Cervical Injuries > * 11:35 - 11:55 William Bengston, Placebo Effect, Type II Errors, and > Resonance: Some Implications from Healing Research for Experimental Metho= ds > * 11:55 - 12:15 Jeffrey Denburg, Paul Burgess, Ronald Hughen, and > Malcolm Southwood, Alteration of Growth of Cultured Neurons by the Consci= ous > Intent of an Energy Healer > * 12:15 Meeting adjourns for the day to allow for lunch and excursion > * hh:mm Excursion > > > Saturday, June 10 > > > > > Session 4: Anomalous Physics and Related Topics > > * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements > * 09:05 - 09:50 James DeMeo, Dayton Miller's Discovery of the Dynamic > Ether Drift > * 09:50 - 10:10 Thomas Van Flandern, What the Repeal of the Universal > Speed Limit Tells Us About the Physical Nature of the Gravitational Field > and of Inertia > * 10:10 - 10:30 Danielle Graham, Experimental Data Demonstrating > Human-Generated Augmentation of Ambient Gravitational and Geomagnetic Fie= lds > * 10:30 - 10:50 Break > * 10:50 - 11:10 Dale Graff, Breaking the Time Barrier: Implications of > Precognitive Dreaming > * 11:10 - 11:30 John Peterson, Collecting Global Intuitive Images for > Prediction of Major Events > * 11:30 - 12:15 York Dobyns, Retrocausal Information Flow and the > Physical Consequences of Knowing the Future > > > 12:15 - 14:00 Lunch > > > Session 5: Survival Research and Other Consciousness Topics > > * 14:00 - 14:05 Last Minute Announcements > * 14:05 - 14:50 Jim Tucker, Children Who Claim To Remember Previous > Lives: Past, Present, and Future Research > * 14:50 - 15:10 Rosemarie Pilkington, The Bindelhof Case > * 15:10 - 15:30 Mike Wilson, Bryan Williams, Tim Harte, and William > Roll , The Daniel Experiment: Contributions to the Sitter Group Experimen= ts > using Field RNG and MESA Environmental Recordings > * 15:30 - 15:50 Break > * 15:50 - 15:10 William Dowling and Garret Moddel, Puzzle Test of > Morphic Resonance > * 15:10 - 16:30 Elliott Hedman, Tyler Mangin, and Garret Moddel, The > Experimenter Effect in Remote Staring > * 16:30 - 16:50 Bryan Williams and William Roll, Psi, Place Memory, an= d > Laboratory Space > * 16:50 - 17:10 Pedro Machin and Nelson Abreu, Consciental Asymmetry: > Toward a Non-Reductionistic Framework and Ontology of Brain Function > Laterality > > > Business Meeting > > * Begins immediately after last presentation and continues until > business is finished > > > Banquet > > * 7:00 PM > > > A "Must Attend" Event! > > Download the > < > http://www.scientificExploration.org/meetings/2006/SSE-meeting2006-regist= ration.pdf>Registration > Form (pdf) and register today! > > > > ((((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( (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 > > --=20 "Monsieur l'abb=E9, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to ma= ke it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire ------=_Part_30920_32437022.1149628578344 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
i was almost tempted to make a road trip of it until you said orem.&nb= sp; i hit a cow on a road trip in 96 about a mile south of there, pulled in= to town, stayed the night at a hotel, informed the local authorities about = it, and was arrested for not reporting the collision at the time (1 am...)&= nbsp;=20
 
yeah, forgive me for staying FAAAAR away.

 
On 6/6/06, W= illiam Beaty <billb@eskimo.com> wrote:

The annual SSE conference is= coming up.  It's not to late to jump in a
plane and go to Sal= t Lake City by thursday morning.  (From Seattle a
ticket is around $350, so I'm tempted myself.)

Actually, the con= ference is about 45min south of Salt Lake City, at
the Utah Valley State= College in Orem.


Schedule of Events -
25th Annual Meeting of= the Society for Scientific Exploration -
June 7-10, Orem, Utah
http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/25th.php=

Wednesday, June 7

   * Welcome Reception 19:00= - 22:00



Thursday, June 8

Session 1: General Anomalies
   * 09:00 - 09:10 Welcome & Announcements
   *= 09:10 - 09:20 Dinsdale Award Presentation
   * 09:20 - 10:05 = Dinsdale lecture: The Role of Anomalies in Scientific Research
   * 10:05 - 10:25 Mark Urban-Lurain, Promoting Scientific Th= inking in Students Who Are Predisposed to Accepting Anomalous Phenomena
=    * 10:25 - 10:45 Break
   * 10:45 - 11:05 Roger Ne= lson, Focused Data Mining in the GCP Database
   * 11:05 - 11:25 Michael Franklin, Elizabeth Kendall, and L= arissa Vassilieva, The Effects of genetically healthy and weakened Caenorha= bditis elegans on a field Random Event Generator (REG).
   * 1= 1:25 - 11:45 George Bass, Oscillatory Chemical Reactions and the Origin of = Life
   * 11:45 - 12:05 Marsha Adams, Pondering the Puzzle: Earth = Lights, Pre-Earthquake Lights, and Artifacts


Lunch

 =   * 12:05 - 13:45


Session 2: Anomalous Consciousness Studie= s

   * 13:45 - 14:05 Dong Shen, Unexpected Behavior of Mat= ter in conjunction with Human Consciousness
   * 14:05 - 14:25 Thomas Anderson, Directing the Intention   * 14:25 - 14:45 Richard Blasband, Objectification of the Eff= ect of Intention on Water
   * 14:45 - 15:05 Arthur Hastings, = The production of an experience similar to the psychoactive drug MDMA (Ecst= asy) through post-hypnotic suggestion
   * 15:05 - 15:25 William Roll, The Janus Face of the Mind   * 15:25 - 15:45 Break
   * 15:45 - 16:05 Lew Ho= llander, The Portal, Source-Consciousness Tuning Of the Jahn-Dunne Filter   * 16:05 - 16:25 Jinchuan Shen, The Powers of the Mind: Amazi= ng Phenomena from China and their Implications for Physics and Physiology
   * 16:25 - 16:45 Kevin Walsh, Effect of Subject Bias on Psi= : Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
   * 16:45 - 17:05 Nelson Abreu a= nd Vincent Herzog., Punctuated Progressive Relaxation Procedure for Will-In= duced, Lucid Out-Of-Body Experience
   * 17:05 - Adjuornment Young Investigators Meeting

<= br>Friday, June 9




Session 3: Medicine and Healing
   * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements
   * 09:05 - 09:50= Larry Dossey, Thinking Unthinkable Things: Exploring the Spectrum of Healt= h
   * 09:50 - 10:10 K. C. Blair, Modern Medicine: An Illusion<= br>   * 10:10 - 10:30 Henry Bauer, How Many Anomalies to Shake a = Paradigm? The Case of HIV/AIDS Theory
   * 10:30 - 10:50 Break=
   * 10:50 - 11:35 Erin Elster, Head Trauma, Disease Onset, a= nd Upper Cervical Care: An Innovative Approach to Address Disease by Correc= ting Trauma-Induced Upper Cervical Injuries
   * 11:35 - 11:55 William Bengston, Placebo Effect, Type II = Errors, and Resonance: Some Implications from Healing Research for Experime= ntal Methods
   * 11:55 - 12:15 Jeffrey Denburg, Paul Burgess,= Ronald Hughen, and Malcolm Southwood, Alteration of Growth of Cultured Neu= rons by the Conscious Intent of an Energy Healer
   * 12:15 Meeting adjourns for the day to allow for lunch an= d excursion
   * hh:mm Excursion


Saturday, June 10<= br>



Session 4: Anomalous Physics and Related Topics

&= nbsp;  * 09:00 - 09:05 Announcements
   * 09:05 - 09:50 James DeMeo, Dayton Miller's Discovery of = the Dynamic Ether Drift
   * 09:50 - 10:10 Thomas Van Flandern= , What the Repeal of the Universal Speed Limit Tells Us About the Physical = Nature of the Gravitational Field and of Inertia
   * 10:10 - 10:30 Danielle Graham, Experimental Data Demonst= rating Human-Generated Augmentation of Ambient Gravitational and Geomagneti= c Fields
   * 10:30 - 10:50 Break
   * 10:50 - 11= :10 Dale Graff, Breaking the Time Barrier: Implications of Precognitive Dre= aming
   * 11:10 - 11:30 John Peterson, Collecting Global Intuitive= Images for Prediction of Major Events
   * 11:30 - 12:15 York= Dobyns, Retrocausal Information Flow and the Physical Consequences of Know= ing the Future


12:15 - 14:00 Lunch


Session 5: Survival Research and Oth= er Consciousness Topics

   * 14:00 - 14:05 Last Minute Ann= ouncements
   * 14:05 - 14:50 Jim Tucker, Children Who Claim T= o Remember Previous Lives: Past, Present, and Future Research
   * 14:50 - 15:10 Rosemarie Pilkington, The Bindelhof Case   * 15:10 - 15:30 Mike Wilson, Bryan Williams, Tim Harte, and = William Roll , The Daniel Experiment: Contributions to the Sitter Group Exp= eriments using Field RNG and MESA Environmental Recordings
   * 15:30 - 15:50 Break
   * 15:50 - 15:10 Will= iam Dowling and Garret Moddel, Puzzle Test of Morphic Resonance
 &n= bsp; * 15:10 - 16:30 Elliott Hedman, Tyler Mangin, and Garret Moddel, The E= xperimenter Effect in Remote Staring
   * 16:30 - 16:50 Bryan Williams and William Roll, Psi, Plac= e Memory, and Laboratory Space
   * 16:50 - 17:10 Pedro Machin= and Nelson Abreu, Consciental Asymmetry: Toward a Non-Reductionistic Frame= work and Ontology of Brain Function Laterality


Business Meeting

   * Begins immediately after= last presentation and continues until business is finished


Banq= uet

   * 7:00 PM


A "Must Attend" Even= t!

Download the
<http://www.scientificExploration.org/meetings/= 2006/SSE-meeting2006-registration.pdf>Registration Form (pdf) and re= gister today!



((((((((((((((((((((((( (  (   &nb= sp;(o)    )  ) )))))))))))))))))))))))
Wil= liam J. Beaty          &n= bsp;   http:= //staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
Research Engineer   &n= bsp;         UW Chem Dept, &nb= sp;Bagley Hall RM74
beaty@chem.washington.edu<= /a>     Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
ph:206-54= 3-6195 fax:206-685-8665



--
"Monsieur l'abb=E9, I detest what you write, but I would give = my life to make it possible for you to continue to write"  V= oltaire=20 ------=_Part_30920_32437022.1149628578344-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 14:32:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56LVt9h015109; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:31:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56LVqFD015061; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:31:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:31:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060606213141718.AF8091C00085@mwinf3103.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Joe Cell Water Pretreatment Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 22:34:02 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 In-Reply-To: <011201c688ca$e834bee0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68794 X-Loop: vortex-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 has been gleaned from multiple (surprisingly consistent) sources - I've pointed out where there are differences of opinion. I'm sorry that it's not strictly narrative, but hopefully I've covered most of the ground. The aims of JC water pretreatment are getting the stuff that we don't want out of the liquid, and getting the orgone in (I'll continue to use the 'O' word, where it makes sense in this context ;-). These aims are achieved through judicious application of electrical potential and/or power, either within the cell itself, or in a larger 'charging vat'. As with many things JC related, there are different opinions on how to pretreat your cell water. However, the basic objective is to take the water to what's known as 'stage 3'. Stages 1, 2 and 3 are expanded on in the extract from Schiffer, further down this post. The pretreatment will not necessarily follow sequentially through the 3 stages - a cell may 'start' at stage 3 or, conversely, never make it that far. Once at stage 3, a cell will stay clean - both the water and the cell itself - and should neither produce any precipitate nor surface scum. Nobody has ever publicly provided an analysis of stage 3 water. I've personally cajoled a number of people who appear to have reached it, but have always received a reply that was one or more of (1) analysis would cost too much, (2) they don't buy into 'this science thing' or (3) claimed fear of my motives, MIB etc. However, the observable properties of stage 3 water are well documented, and may give us a clue as to what is going on. This treated water is (sometimes very) redox negative, and has a soapy feel and altered surface tension (ringing any bells?). This water can also be poured from one container to another without losing its 'charge'. The main thing that folks aim at to determine arrival at stage 3 is the type of bubbles produced when the cell is powered into electrolysis - masses of pure white bubbles that sit on the cell surface for hours after it's powered off. pH has been suggested as another indicator of cell status. However, as the orgonites believe that it's possible to construct either acid or alkali cells, we're probably better off ignoring it. Water height should be to the top of the inner cylinders, *not* over them. Many (but not all) sources suggest that a cell being charged should be electrically insulated from ground. The electrical supply should be linear DC. The consensus of opinion amongst the 'old timers' is to start with 1 amp from a 12 volt supply through the cell during charging, when both electrodes are connected. Alex Schiffer recommends using electrolyte to get to this ratio; others either don't worry too much about it or ratchet up the voltage as required. Schiffer's methodology calls for brief current flow through the cell followed by long periods of 'resting', repeated over many days. Stevens is very insistent on the power of 'negative electricity'. The cathode is connected to the power source for a duration. The anode is then also briefly connected, before being removed. Finally, the cathode is disconnected. He believes something important is going on when only the cathode is connected. An alternative approach originated with Bernie Heere - he suggests 'cooking' the cell. People following his advice typically connect their 110v/240v mains straight to the cell via a FWBR, speeding up the process somewhat! This method obviously causes vigorous electrolysis whereas, in the slower versions, electrolysis is claimed to not be a particularly important aspect of the charging process. As suggested above, there are several treatment regimes that have been proposed by different individuals. All supposedly lead to the same result, but vary greatly in effort and time - and possibly in the end result, as we only know about the *observable* aspects of stage 3 water... I make no apologies for reproducing the lengthy quotes below. The foregoing is only my take on the main points - what follows is "from the horse's mouth". Peter Stevens has recently restated his methodology thus: ---quote--- You can use water out of the tap as long as you largely clear it of the chemicals put in there by the water company (alum, chlorine, flourides etc.}. To do this you can use a cell. Put your tap water in the cell then do the procedure described above under “Applying Electricity” [PV - redundant comment]. Put the negative of your 12volt battery, battery charger or 12 volt dc supply on for between 2 and 20 minutes at the base of the cell, then put on the positive at the top of the cell’s outer cylinder for between 2 and 3 minutes leaving the negative in place, then take off the positive and leave negative on for up to an hour. Pour the water into a glass container or plastic bucket. Repeat. After 24 hours what will happen is the chemicals in the water in the bucket will have become solids; some will have dropped to the bottom and some will have risen to the top, depending on what charge they acquired in the process. Pour off the solids at the top, then pour the middle (clean) water into your cell, then throw away the stuff in the bottom. You can use pulsed dc for this, but flat dc is better because it works faster. You can do the same process as above with a charging vat but you will wind up with a good deal more water and no need to fiddle about with repeating your charge procedure. In passing, and while we are talking about charging vats, those cones that you see in The Experimenters Guide to the Joe Cell come from milk/cream separators as used in dairies [PV - Joe originally used multiple nested cones as electrodes for charging]. No electrolyte should be added. ---ends--- An even lengthier process is suggested by Alex Schiffer, which can take weeks. I've quoted an extensive portion here, as some of the notes reinforce what I've said earlier: ---quote--- The charging process is separated in three distinct stages that I call Stage 1, 2 and 3. These stages have some obvious differences and also some subtle ones . With experience you will know immediately if the cell is charged, but in your early attempts you will have to rely on my photographs and description or visit someone with a working cell. Do not listen to armchair scientists. One look is worth a thousand words. For the rest of your charging process, you will be only connecting your power source to the cell for a maximum of 5 minutes at a time. As Orgone lags electricity by about 30 seconds, you will know the state of the cell in less than a minute. Do not be tempted to leave the power connected to the cell for long periods! Yes, I know that you are in a hurry and more is better, but in this case you only generate heat, steam, waste power and overheat the cell. You can pick the failures by seeing their cells running non-stop for days with 20 or more amps turning the water to steam, etching the cylinders and ending up with a barrel full of scum. What else would you expect? After all, electrolysis is time and current related. If you have had the misfortune of having your cell left on for a long period with high current, you have probably destroyed your cylinders. You cannot polish this etching or plating out. Yes, you throw the cell away and start again. I bet you don't do it next time! DANGER! Do not charge any cell that is totally sealed! The cell will explode, with all the related consequences. Always remove the lid or unplug the car cell before doing any charging. I repeat, an airtight seal IS NOT REQUIRED! At no stage do I prescribe any form of airtight container. Stage 1. This stage is plain old electrolysis. Due to us passing a direct current through a liquid that contains ions, chemical changes will occur. In our case, you will see small bubbles and a cloud of activity that is greater nearest the outside of the inner negative cylinder. The important observation points are that the activity is greatest nearest the central cylinder and gets progressively less as we move outward via the different chambers formed by the rest of the cylinders. Additionally, within a short period of turning the power off, all activity stops, the water becomes clear and the bubbles disappear. Summary stage 1. Every fool and his dog gets to this stage. The secret is not to increase the electrolyte and thus the current and/or leaving the cell on for days on end. Be patient, leave the cell on for no longer than 5 minutes, turn the power source off, remove the leads to the cell, and put the top on the test cell, or partially block off the exit of the car cell. It does not have to be airtight! Go and do something else. It is like waiting for a tree to grow from the seed. Do this on a daily basis for days or a week or longer until you get to stage 2. You will find that the more "alive" the water is , the quicker is the seeding of the cell. I have found that the storage, age, and source of the water all affect the seeding speed. I have also found that by changing the structure of the water by various means e.g., vortexing, shaking, filtering, etc., you can greatly enhance the water quality to make it more " alive ". Stage 2. You will now notice on your initial powering up of the cell, that the bubbles are getting larger and the white cloud of tiny bubbles in the water are much smaller or more transparent. Also in stage 1, you had the action occurring mainly in the proximity of the central cylinder. Now the bubbles form in a regular fashion irrespective of location in the cell. More importantly, on turning the power off from the cell, the bubbles do not go away immediately but stay there for minutes rather than seconds as in stage 1. Also, the top of the water assumes a glazed look and the meniscus is higher due to a change in the surface tension of the water. At this stage you may have some brownish material amongst your bubbles. Don't panic. It is only the impurities being removed from the cell. I find that if I wipe the top surface of the water with a paper towel, the bubbles and the deposit will adhere to the paper and can easily be removed. Top up the cell, if required, after the above cleaning, so that again, only the top-edges of the cylinders are just showing. Note. All topping up of the cell at any stage is done with plain juvenile water only. No more electrolyte is added! In cleaning the top of the cell as described, it has been observed that some people react unfavorably with the cell. If so, keep that person away, or if it is you, try changing your hand, i.e., use your right instead of your left or vice verse. If the presence of your hand seems to collapse the surface bubbles, I would suggest you have a friend do the work for you. Summary stage 2. Very similar to stage 1, but now we have a more even bubble distribution and an increase of surface tension and a longer presence of the bubbles when the power is turned off. If you look in the bottom of your glass test cell, you will have no scum and the water will be crystal clear. At this stage the Orgone force has seeded the cell, but as yet, is not breeding. With the right cell, water and operator, it is possible to go straight to stage 2 on the first turn on of your new cell. I have this occurring every time with modified juvenile water. Stage 3. Not many people get to this stage, or what is worse, get here incorrectly. If you get here following the above steps, your water is still crystal clear with no deposits in the sump. If you get here by brute force, you will have stripped appreciable amounts of material from the cylinders and this material will now deposit on the insulators and hang around as a colloid and finally form in the sump as a deposit. The low resistance insulators and the metallic colloid will create a more leaky cell that will cause endless mysterious car stoppages or refusal of the car to start, etc. Right, the miracle of Nature is now breeding in your cell. Upon turning your power on to the cell, within 30 seconds copious beautiful white bubbles will rise from all the surface area of the cell. Before these bubbles cover the water surface, you will notice a slowly rotating and pulsing front in all cylinders, that is synchronized and has a regular rhythm of about 2 pulses per second and a clockwise rotation speed of about 1 revolution every 2 seconds. These effects are very hard to observe for a first time viewer that does not know what to look for. I find it easier to watch these effects with the aid of a fluorescent light, as the 100 cycles per second pulsations of the light "strobe" the water surface and help the observation. The bubbles may overflow the container and show great surface tension. But one of the definite proofs that the cell is breeding is that, on turning the power source off and coming back the next day, most of the bubbles will still be on top of the water as opposed to stage 1 or stage 2 where they disappeared in minutes. Please have a look at my photo sequence. Summary stage 3. There is no way that you can mistake this stage once you have seen it. Some lucky people can feel the living energy and can react with it, Reich's " Y factor ". For the rest of you normal people, the signs are radically different. The bubbles are larger and pure white, the surface tension is greater, the bubbles are pulsating and most importantly the surface tension remains days after the power has been removed. Additional note for the desperate electronically inclined individual. Please note. I do not recommend any additional tests or measurements, your eyes and brains should suffice, but if you are in trouble, you may measure the voltage across the cell after it has been left standing with the power off for at least 24 hours. A live cell will have a residual voltage, or more correctly, a self generated voltage of around 1 Volt. A stage 1 cell measured under similar conditions will read .1 to .2 of a Volt. Remember, that unless you know what you are doing, these voltage measurements can be very misleading due to probe materials and battery effects that can easily mask your true measurement. As the cell reaches the maximum density of Orgone that it can hold, the result of the breeding process is the conversion of this excess Orgone into the formation of electricity. As such, electrical measurement with the correct instruments is a very valuable method in the verification of the efficiency of the cell. If you are conversant with Reich's work, you may care to make an Orgone meter and thus remove all guesswork. This meter is fully described on a few web sites as mentioned in my bibliography. ---ends--- Recently, and possibly as a reaction against the effort involved (particularly using Schiffer's method), a 'quick and dirty' approach has been devised by Bernie Heere. Again, it does produce the same stage 3 observable artifacts: ---quote--- Now that interest in the cells is once again at a high level and many new people are assembling cells, I’ve been trying to come up with charging techniques to help all these new cellers get their cells to stage 3, and not have this interest all die off because of frustration. That being said, I’d like to first do some myth debunking. 1. Stage 3 water is ultra pure. This one is easy – Pure water is an insulator. It is impossible to get current through pure water. What stage 3 water really is in fact, is water with all the anions and cat ions precipitated out. That is all elements with a net charge in solution. The remaining ions are electrically neutral in solution. I’m suggesting that the water used by our Aussie friends is loaded with neutral elements, since they can apparently get 1 amp of current through their cells with only 12 volts. In other words, I’m suggesting that stage 3 water will have a neutral PH of close to 7. When current is applied the PH of the water in the inner ring will shift to slightly acidic, and the outer ring will shift toward the alkaline. This is once again caused by the fact that the remaining non-neutral elements in the water will still be attracted to the different potentials. I’m not positive of this PH conjecture, but after much reading of other’s opinions, and my own experiments, I think this is true. If I’m not mistaken, electrically neutral water is also good to drink – free radicals and all that. 2. You need a charging vat for serious cell work. Not necessarily true. I think the same ends can be achieved with 2 simple SS plates in a glass container, or even in any cell, for the reasons specified above. 3. You need to have a bottom bolt to introduce the negative into the cell. While this is a proven way to go, it’s not really necessary, and adds greatly to the cost and complexity of a cell. Just get the negative connected to the bottom of the center cylinder any way you can. An insulated SS wire or strap is fine. Just run it up next to the container. The same goes for the welded bottom. It’s nice, but it complicates things, and it forces the use of the bottom bolt to support the inner cylinders. Without the welded bottom all the cylinders can be supported with spacers. It’s probably best to have an SS bottom on the cell but it can simply be held there with whatever means are convenient to the builder. I use PVC end caps and o-rings, which seem to work fine, until the unit is subjected to vacuum. Than you need to back the o-rings up with something like sikaflex or other caulking. To prevent air leaks. 4. Stainless steel that is non-magnetic. This is probably necessary, even for a cell that is not used to charge water. The reason, I think, is because the ferromagnetism causes magnet fields to be built up when current flows through the cell that directly counter the desired magnetic fields. This causes the charged ions to be repelled, when we actually want them to concentrate and precipitate out during the charging process. 5. Short duration charging cycles. This is the key to the whole thing. As I’ ve mentioned above, the charging involves getting rid of all the charged elements. There are 2 very obvious ways to do this. The first would be to start with distilled water and introduce only the desired impurities. Anybody with any chemistry background should be able to look at a chart of the elements and come up with a good guess as to what might work. The second way is to force the undesirable elements to precipitate out of the water. This is the traditional way in the Joe Cell world, whether you use a charging vat, a cell, or some other esoteric means to charge the water. All this is well and good, but what does it mean in the real world, or just how do you accomplish this. Here is a simple and effective technique that I think will work well. At least it has for me in a couple cells. First you want to cook the cell. By that I mean simply charge it for a long time. What this does is concentrates the charged ions near the positive or negative (relatively speaking) plates. The ions will then cluster and precipitate out of solution. As far as how long to do this, my best guess is until the water gets hot to the touch. I think boiling the water would be counter-productive because the agitation would probably disperse the clusters. Once this stage is reached, immediately coarse filter the water into a glass or SS container using something like an old t-shirt. Try to avoid lint. Now rinse any remaining sludge out of the cell. Tap water should be fine for this. Get as much of this undesirable water out of the cell as you can in a short time by simply inverting it and let it drain for a few minutes/ Now fine filter the water back into the cell. A couple thicknesses of paper towel should work fine. The water in the cell should now be very clear, but it could have some coloration. Not to worry, this is caused by the desirable impurities in the water. Now just let the water cool to room temperature and try a normal charging cycle. You should see stage 3 bubbles start to form very quickly. If they don’t, I think it simply indicates that your starting water was very contaminated and you need to repeat the process to clear it some more. The closer cylinder spacing of my test/charging cell really does this well. The water becomes a really sludgy mess with a lot of precipitates. After one pass through this process the cell now really produces lots of stage three bubbles. For cells with the normal 1” spacing on the cylinders, this appears to be a slower process, and several passes will probably be required. I tried one with 2,3,4, and 5” cylinders, and it’s producing some stage 3 bubbles after one pass. I think one more cycle through the process will prep the water enough to take it into a good stage 3. Alex Schiffers was always pushing filtering, and now I think I understand why it helps. If you don’t filter after each charging cycle, a lot of the undesired materials simply get re-dissolved back into the water. The idea of “cooking” the water this way is really nothing new, just a way to speed up the process and filter off a lot with each cycle. I don’t think the heat that builds up is a necessary part of this process, so it’s possible that by controlling the buildup with an ice pack might allow for an even longer charging cycle, and get larger cells to get the water prepped to stage 3 levels in a single pass. Higher current should speed up the process as well. ---ends--- I realise that there is a considerable amount of information above. If any clarifications are needed, please ask - I've an awful lot of JC docs cluttering up my HD... Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.2/357 - Release Date: 06/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 14:47:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56Ll4pB025105; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:47:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56Ll0VO025063; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:47:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:47:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:46:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56LkptF024999 Resent-Message-ID: <72oaIB.A.jHG.UffhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68795 X-Loop: vortex-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 Law of Electric Circuit", hilarious :) "...without this law it is impossible...", when you have no imagination that is, or when you have too much maybe? Never trust someone who makes up an ad hoc law of electricity to measure input power in an excess heat device :) Also there is no such thing as reactive heating, by definition. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "jonfli" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 7:18 PM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > Since I'm not involved in any type of plasma electrolysis and the > measurement of the resultant waveforms, I thought I would research various > techniques by those that do. Below are quotes from a document titled " The > Law of Electric Circuit" by Ph. M. Kanarev. > > "It appears from the analysis that average power in each section of the > electric circuit is equal to a product of average voltage, which is applied > across this section, by average value of current. It is the law of electric > circuit." > . > . > . > "It is the law of electric circuit, which has been checked with the help of > many experiments being carried out by us. > > We do not know if there is an enunciation of this law in modern electrical > engineering, but without this law it is impossible to make a correct > analysis of power engineering of mixed systems where energy is transferred > and consumed continuously and by pulses." > > This document may be found at- > > http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/articles/TheLaw1.zip > > > I'm not a fan of the small handheld meters for such measurements due to > inaccuracy, but the DSP based scopes today are quite capable of making > average (plus many other) measurements on complex waveforms. > > Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the typical electrolysis cells > appear to be most nearly "resistive" relative to their waveforms with very > little or no phase shift. If any phase shift is present, the cell will be > shuttling a portion of it's energy flow thru the reactive elements and may > IMO, possibly create false heat measurements due to reactive heating of the > conductive elements making up the device. > > > Jon F > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 15:45:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k56MirpO019745; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:44:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k56Mipbp019726; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:44:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:44:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <021901c689ba$ce2e9700$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:44:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k56MimfL019692 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68796 X-Loop: vortex-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: ... > Precisely. Outside the orbit of the shrunken electron, the Hydrino > is a neutral entity. In that respect it somewhat resembles a fat > neutron. However when tunneling into another nucleus, the shrunken > electron would usually be left behind, so the actual reaction > would be a proton fusion reaction. > It may even prove possible for the shrunken electron to form a > bond between the proton and the other nucleus, resulting in a > mini-molecule a hundred times smaller than a hydrogen atom. > Needless to say, it probably wouldn't last long before fusion > occurred. An analogy might be the muonic-molecule. > > Muon catalyzed fusion occurs very rapidly at a distance of the > Bohr Radius (BR) x (me/mu) ~= 256 F. 0.5E-10 x 1/200 = 0.25E-12 = 250E-15, OK but may I suggest fm rather than "F" (symbol for Farad) I recall reading that muon catalyzed fusion couldn't produce excess heat, is this true, and why? > According to Mills, the radius of the Hydrino goes as the inverse > of the shrinkage level, i.e. the smallest would be BR/137 ~= 386 > F. > According to me it goes as the inverse square of the level, which > would mean that to get to 256 F, it would have to shrink to level > 15. Why such a discrepancy? What's the radius law for normal hydrogen levels? > I was looking at CNO reactions in stars today, Not from too close I hope! CNO reactions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_cycle > and I noticed that > at about 3E7 K the power output is about 3 kW / m^3. > At that temperature the average approach distance is 3300 F. Let > the Boltzmann tail take it 10 times closer on occasion, that's 330 > F. With a level 15 Hydrino we are already there. IOW we could have > 3 kW / m^3 fusion based on the CNO cycle, right here on Earth. > (Mimicking the fusion rate at the core of a blue giant, and that > at "room temperature" (well I suspect it would be a bit warmer ;). This would be nice, all is needed is sufficiently shrunken hydrinos, but how do you get those? Cheers, Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 17:54:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k570rxTq018878; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:54:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k570rwg4018855; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:53:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:53:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 20:53:49 -0400 Message-Id: <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68797 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian Also there is no such thing as reactive heating, by definition. <><><><><><> Thank you. I appreciate hearing the voice of sanity. The NFPA has insisted that KVA be used in calculating the conductor size for the NEC in lieu of KW. Absolute insanity. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 20:24:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k573OgEJ000733; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:24:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k573OSjR000636; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:24:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:24:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 13:24:23 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <021901c689ba$ce2e9700$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <021901c689ba$ce2e9700$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.53.245] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Wed, 7 Jun 2006 03:24:23 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k573ONUw000573 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68798 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:44:44 +0200: Hi Michel, [snip] >0.5E-10 x 1/200 = 0.25E-12 = 250E-15, OK but may I suggest fm rather than "F" (symbol for Farad) ...also the symbol for Fermi ( 1E-15 m). > >I recall reading that muon catalyzed fusion couldn't produce excess heat, is this true, and why? Yes, it's true. The problem is that the production of negative muons relies on energetic protons (from an accelerator), which is so inefficient that the energy release from the resulting fusion reactions can't compensate. However if the resulting fast neutrons were used in a fission reactor, all actinides could be used with 100% burn up. This would extend the U stockpile 10-100 fold, and leave no Pu for weapons. It could also dispose of existing Pu. BTW, Hydrinos don't suffer the same problem as muons because they release energy while being produced, rather than consuming it. > >> According to Mills, the radius of the Hydrino goes as the inverse >> of the shrinkage level, i.e. the smallest would be BR/137 ~= 386 >> F. >> According to me it goes as the inverse square of the level, which >> would mean that to get to 256 F, it would have to shrink to level >> 15. > >Why such a discrepancy? What's the radius law for normal hydrogen levels? Linear according to Mills (AFAIK), quadratic according to me and the rest of the World. [snip] >This would be nice, all is needed is sufficiently shrunken hydrinos, but how do you get those? [snip] With long term confinement of a Hydrogen Argon/Helium plasma. (Or you "mine" them from fresh rain water from a thunderstorm that has sprites/jets soon after impact of a CME with the atmosphere). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 20:54:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k573sKkL016514; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:54:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k573sJAT016502; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:54:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 20:54:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 13:54:15 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> In-Reply-To: <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.53.245] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Wed, 7 Jun 2006 03:54:14 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k573sFE4016452 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68799 X-Loop: vortex-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 jonfli's message of Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:18:22 -0700: Hi, [snip] >Since I'm not involved in any type of plasma electrolysis and the [snip] >Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the typical electrolysis cells >appear to be most nearly "resistive" relative to their waveforms with very >little or no phase shift. [snip] Plasma electrolysis cells have extremely high frequency and very spiky voltages and currents. It is impossible to speak of phase, as the frequency components are pretty much random. That's why I have in the past suggested that the best way to deal with them is to use a very low pass filter between the actual cell and the power supply. E.g. two large capacitors with a heavy ferrite core inductor between them (also a small high frequency capacitor on the cell side). That way, voltage and current (or power) can be measured on the supply side, and should be reasonably accurate. At worst, input power measurements will be a little too high due to resistance losses in the inductor. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 6 23:11:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k576Axfn022042; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:10:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k576Auw5022018; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:10:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:10:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:10:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k576AqRN021988 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68800 X-Loop: vortex-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 but this is different, for fire prevention you are concerned about Joule heating of the wire, this is resistive heating by definition, so what matters is current in the wire. The load could be perfectly reactive ie consume 0 W and still provoke Joule heating of the wire. So wire size depends on A, and since the V are known (115V), it makes sense that the VA _of the load_ be used in calculating the conductor size . Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 2:53 AM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > Also there is no such thing as reactive heating, by definition. > > <><><><><><> > > Thank you. I appreciate hearing the voice of sanity. The NFPA has > insisted that KVA be used in calculating the conductor size for the NEC > in lieu of KW. Absolute insanity. > > Terry > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 00:27:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k577QY3W027662; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:26:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k577QWp0027641; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:26:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:26:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <027501c68a03$b19c8e00$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:26:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k577QUCl027600 Resent-Message-ID: <8cJP3D.A.1vG.o-nhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68801 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 5:54 AM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > In reply to jonfli's message of Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:18:22 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] >>Since I'm not involved in any type of plasma electrolysis and the > [snip] >>Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the typical electrolysis cells >>appear to be most nearly "resistive" relative to their waveforms with very >>little or no phase shift. > [snip] > Plasma electrolysis cells have extremely high frequency and very > spiky voltages and currents. It is impossible to speak of phase, > as the frequency components are pretty much random. > That's why I have in the past suggested that the best way to deal > with them is to use a very low pass filter between the actual cell > and the power supply. Absolutely Robin :) This is the only way to go when the frequency contents exceeds measurement capabilities, which is the case in GDPE's nanosecond scale energetic events. > E.g. two large capacitors with a heavy > ferrite core inductor between them (also a small high frequency > capacitor on the cell side). That way, voltage and current (or > power) can be measured on the supply side, and should be > reasonably accurate. You would get LC ringing with this, plus losses in the ferrite. I have proposed a simple no-ringing lossless power smoothing scheme to the CMNS group, it should be tried soon. I can't tell you more for now as the situation is getting complicated wrt publishing. Michel > At worst, input power measurements will be a > little too high due to resistance losses in the inductor. > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 03:33:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57AWlg5017828; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 03:32:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57AWjiH017804; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 03:32:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 03:32:45 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TFT9gBUQq/J/vij4Y5ZMg9jZqVS+CRLxiIvcSMvXl7cga2Dk4k6R3CWVuhe4/3Cw; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006637103231970@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Children's Science Exam Answers Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 04:32:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e71e63ca30824d8c460a71793f44021f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.135 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68802 X-Loop: vortex-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 > Q: Name the four seasons. > A: Salt, pepper, mustard and vinegar. > > Q: Explain one of the processes by which water can > be made safe to drink. > A: Flirtation makes water safe to drink because it > removes large pollutants > like grit, sand, dead sheep and canoeists. > > Q: How is dew formed? > A: The sun shines down on the leaves and makes them > perspire. > > Q: How can you delay milk turning sour? (brilliant, > love this!) > A: Keep it in the cow. > > Q: What causes the tides in the oceans? > A: The tides are a fight between the Earth and the > Moon. All water tends to > flow towards the moon, because there is no water on > the moon, and nature > hates a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins in this > fight. > > Q: What are steroids? > A: Things for keeping carpets still on the stairs. > > Q: What happens to your body as you age? > A: When you get old, so do your bowels and you get > intercontinental. > > Q: What happens to a boy when he reaches puberty? > A: He says good-bye to his boyhood and looks forward > to his adultery. > > Q: Name a major disease associated with cigarettes > A: Premature death. > > Q: How are the main parts of the body categorized? > (e.g., abdomen.) > A: The body is consisted into three parts - the > brainium, the borax and the > abdominal cavity. The brainium contains the brain; > the borax contains the > heart and lungs, and the abdominal cavity contains > the five bowels, A, E, I, > O, and U. > > Q: What is the fibula? > A: A small lie. > > Q: What does "varicose" mean? (I do love this > one...) > A: Nearby. > > Q: Give the meaning of the term "Caesarean Section" > A: The Caesarean Section is a district in Rome. > > Q: What does the word " benign" mean?' > A: Benign is what you will be after you be eight ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 

> Q: Name the four seasons.
> A: Salt, pepper,  mustard and vinegar.
>
> Q: Explain one of the processes by which water can
> be made safe to drink.
> A: Flirtation makes water safe to drink because it
> removes large pollutants
> like grit, sand, dead sheep and canoeists.
>
> Q: How is dew formed?
> A: The sun shines down on the leaves and makes  them
> perspire.
>
> Q: How can you delay milk turning sour? (brilliant,
> love  this!)
> A: Keep it in the cow.
>
> Q: What causes the tides in the oceans?
> A: The tides are a fight between the Earth and the
> Moon. All water tends  to
> flow towards the moon, because there is no water on
> the moon, and  nature
> hates a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins in this
> fight.
>
> Q:  What are steroids?
> A: Things for keeping carpets still on the stairs.
>
> Q: What happens to your body as you age?
> A: When you get old, so do  your bowels and you get
> intercontinental.
>
> Q: What happens to a boy when  he reaches puberty?
> A: He says good-bye to his boyhood and looks forward
> to  his adultery.
>
> Q: Name a major disease associated with cigarettes
> A:  Premature death.
>
> Q: How are the main parts of the body categorized?
> (e.g., abdomen.)
> A: The body is consisted into three parts - the
> brainium,  the borax and the
> abdominal cavity. The brainium contains the brain;
> the  borax contains the
> heart and lungs, and the abdominal cavity contains
> the  five bowels, A, E, I,
> O, and U.
>
> Q: What is the fibula?
> A: A small  lie.
>
> Q: What does "varicose" mean? (I do love this
> one...)
> ! A: Nearb y. 
>
> Q: Give the meaning of the term "Caesarean Section"
> A: The Caesarean  Section is a district in Rome.
>
> Q: What does the word " benign" mean?'
> A: Benign is what you will be after you be eight ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 04:50:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57Bo7sn025128; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 04:50:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57BmJsJ024049; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 04:48:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 04:48:19 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=E1WLSuwK0zVZgq3rLAS2OVfwPu6rZqJPQP4fwvzg9gC3+au4EkVN38I+9Gp8zLKx; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200663711480524@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Muons and Argon-40 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 05:48:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a3a58f48403db54592d93a0313f398d2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.1 Resent-Message-ID: <_gQGQB.A.r3F.D0rhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68803 X-Loop: vortex-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 >From an article on Muon Beams: Pion +/- 139.5669 MeV/c2 decay to produce one muon neutrino and one muon; Muon +/- 105.658389(34) MeV/c2 "So far this discussion has been equally applicable to positive and negative particles, but this ends when either pions or muons are stopped in matter due to the different chemical nature of negatively and positively charged particles in matter. Negative pions that stop in the target behave like heavy electrons and rapidly cascade down to tightly bound orbitals where they almost always undergo capture by the nucleus instead of decaying to negative muons. Positive pions that have come to rest in solids take up interstitial positions between atoms so they are too far from nuclei to be captured; as far as (physics)is concerned their lifetime is unaffected by any properties of the target material. " Seawater (mostly) or primordial? 19-K-40 (radioisotope) +Pion - -----> 18-Ar-40 * (Stable?) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
From an article on Muon Beams:
 
Pion +/-   139.5669 MeV/c2  decay to produce one muon neutrino and one muon;
Muon +/- 105.658389(34) MeV/c2
 
"So far this discussion has been equally applicable to positive and negative particles, but this ends when either pions or muons are stopped in matter due to the different chemical nature of negatively and positively charged particles in matter. Negative pions that stop in the target behave like heavy electrons and rapidly cascade down to tightly bound orbitals where they almost always undergo capture by the nucleus instead of decaying to negative muons. Positive pions that have come to rest in solids take up interstitial positions between atoms so they are too far from nuclei to be captured; as far as (physics)is concerned their lifetime is unaffected by any properties of the target material. "
 
Seawater (mostly) or primordial?
 
19-K-40 (radioisotope) +Pion -   -----> 18-Ar-40 *   (Stable?)
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 05:33:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57CXPaV016208; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 05:33:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57CXNbK016181; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 05:33:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 05:33:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 08:33:18 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.70 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <3yZZnD.A.s8D.SeshEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68804 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian So wire size depends on A, and since the V are known (115V), it makes sense that the VA _of the load_ be used in calculating the conductor size . <><><><><><> Not if you know the PF. For example, I have a 20 KVA UPS that has an aribitrary PF rating of roughly 0.8; so, in reality, it is a roughly a 15 kW UPS. Now, the electrical dudes design the load cables for 20 KVA or 167 A when it is absolutely impossible for the device to supply more than 125 A (at 120 V). Insane. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 06:07:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57D6rYU001063; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 06:06:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57D6kjU001008; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 06:06:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 06:06:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <02d401c68a33$317d53a0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <021901c689ba$ce2e9700$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:06:29 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57D6X7F000907 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68805 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin, fm being an accepted symbol both for the Fermi and the official unit femtometer it stands for only one thing, that's why I prefer it to F. You seem to be quite into this Mills stuff, what's the evidence for hydrinos or hydrino excess heat outside of Mill's lab? Have you yourself done any experiments? Cheers, Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 5:24 AM Subject: Re: Two clean reactions > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:44:44 > +0200: > Hi Michel, > [snip] >>0.5E-10 x 1/200 = 0.25E-12 = 250E-15, OK but may I suggest fm rather than "F" (symbol for Farad) > > ...also the symbol for Fermi ( 1E-15 m). > >> >>I recall reading that muon catalyzed fusion couldn't produce excess heat, is this true, and why? > > Yes, it's true. The problem is that the production of negative > muons relies on energetic protons (from an accelerator), which is > so inefficient that the energy release from the resulting fusion > reactions can't compensate. > > However if the resulting fast neutrons were used in a fission > reactor, all actinides could be used with 100% burn up. This would > extend the U stockpile 10-100 fold, and leave no Pu for weapons. > It could also dispose of existing Pu. > > BTW, Hydrinos don't suffer the same problem as muons because they > release energy while being produced, rather than consuming it. > >> >>> According to Mills, the radius of the Hydrino goes as the inverse >>> of the shrinkage level, i.e. the smallest would be BR/137 ~= 386 >>> F. >>> According to me it goes as the inverse square of the level, which >>> would mean that to get to 256 F, it would have to shrink to level >>> 15. >> >>Why such a discrepancy? What's the radius law for normal hydrogen levels? > > Linear according to Mills (AFAIK), quadratic according to me and > the rest of the World. > [snip] >>This would be nice, all is needed is sufficiently shrunken hydrinos, but how do you get those? > [snip] > With long term confinement of a Hydrogen Argon/Helium plasma. > > (Or you "mine" them from fresh rain water from a thunderstorm that > has sprites/jets soon after impact of a CME with the atmosphere). > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 07:06:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57E6cQH006758; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:06:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57E6ZFO006706; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:06:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:06:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001601c68a3b$8e30e370$c4037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:06:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C68A11.A3E79C60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68806 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68A11.A3E79C60 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0013_01C68A11.A3E92300" ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C68A11.A3E92300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Vorts.. =20 Great insight spoken here. Meanwhile back at the ranch.. This nation has a nightmare staring us in the face with the the = continued increase in electric power consumption. The summer hasn't = started in earnest and we are receiving reports of motor failures of our = submersible units like no other year to date.A large submersible = electric motor is like a canary in a coal mine as for a warning signal = of extremely dirty electric power. The scope and randomness of the = problems are mounting and in certain areas we can face some real = nightmare scenarios. The electric power grid is a basic of our existence from lighting to = grocery store computer checkout. The system goes down and we revert to = the stone age instantly. While all eyes are focused on gasoline = supplies.. without electric power ya get no "bomba" at the pump... = unless you want to siphon the gas outa the underground tank.. ughh! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C68A11.A3E92300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Vorts..
 
Great insight spoken here. Meanwhile back at the ranch..
 
This nation has a nightmare staring us in the face with the the = continued=20 increase in electric power consumption. The summer hasn't started in = earnest and=20 we are receiving reports of motor failures of our submersible units like = no=20 other year to date.A large submersible electric motor is like a canary = in a coal=20 mine as for a warning signal of extremely dirty electric = power. The=20 scope and randomness of the problems are mounting and in certain areas = we can=20 face some real nightmare scenarios.
The electric power grid is a basic of our existence from lighting = to=20 grocery store computer checkout. The system goes down and we revert to = the stone=20 age instantly. While all eyes are focused on gasoline = supplies.. without=20 electric power ya get no "bomba" at the pump... unless you = want to=20 siphon the gas outa the underground tank.. ughh!
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C68A11.A3E92300-- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C68A11.A3E79C60 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001101c68a3b$8c72b8b0$c4037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C68A11.A3E79C60-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 07:28:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57ESTpO022883; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:28:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57ESRQ1022851; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:28:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:28:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,217,1146456000"; d="scan'208"; a="417773273:sNHT36841812" Message-ID: <1949216238.1149690472181.JavaMail.root@fepweb05> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 7:27:52 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Battery shapes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <48SjB.A.5kF.LKuhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68807 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---- RC Macaulay wrote: > This nation has a nightmare staring us in the face with > the the continued increase in electric power consumption. > The summer hasn't started in earnest and we are receiving > reports of motor failures of our submersible units like no > other year to date.A large submersible electric motor is > like a canary in a coal mine as for a warning signal of > extremely dirty electric power. The scope and randomness > of the problems are mounting and in certain areas we can > face some real nightmare scenarios. > > The electric power grid is a basic of our existence from > lighting to grocery store computer checkout. The system > goes down and we revert to the stone age instantly. While > all eyes are focused on gasoline supplies.. without > electric power ya get no "bomba" at the pump... unless > you want to siphon the gas outa the underground tank.. > ughh! > > Richard Howdy Richard, I think Republican Senator David Vitter said it best, as recently quoted on CNN.COM: "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one." Was he urging congress to discuss plans on how to improve our nation's Energy supply? No. Was he urging debate on finding solutions to the thorny Illegal emigration issue? No. Was he urging debate on Terrorism and the collection of intelligence against U.S. citizens? No. Of course not. He was urging congress to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages. Yes, indeedee, THAT'S what we reeeelly need in this country to make things right again. And, oh yes, don't forget that other amendment - to ban flag burning as well! Our government working tirelessly to make things better for its citizens. What a gas. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 07:37:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57EbEVL028674; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:37:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57EbD5K028653; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:37:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:37:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:40:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57Eb6Ec028585 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68808 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > So wire size depends on A, and since the V are known (115V), it makes > sense that > the VA _of the load_ be used in calculating the conductor size . > > <><><><><><> > > Not if you know the PF. For example, I have a 20 KVA UPS that has an > aribitrary PF rating of roughly 0.8; so, in reality, it is a roughly a > 15 kW UPS. You're right Terry: the power factor is defined as the ratio of power to Irms*Vrms > Now, the electrical dudes design the load cables for 20 KVA > or 167 A when it is absolutely impossible for the device to supply more > than 125 A (at 120 V). Insane. I don't understand why it is absolutely impossible, is the load's power factor unity i.e. is it purely resistive? If the load's power factor is equal to 0.8 which is typical of computer power supplies, the dudes are right I am afraid. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 08:28:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57FS3A9025898; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:28:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57FS2Uq025877; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:28:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:28:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:27:59 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8585E17D9BA74-BD4-397FD@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: The Weirding Way Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.70 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68809 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: While furthering the research on the Canadian ZPE patent, I came across the SASER: http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/split/779-1.html "A New Kind of Acoustic Laser Sound amplification by stimulated emission of raciation, or SASER, is the acoustic analog of a laser. Instead of a feedback-built potent wave of electromagnetic radiation, a saser would deliver a potent ultrasound wave. " Reminds me of the sound weapons of "Dune". Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 08:29:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57FT5ki026386; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:29:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57FT3BQ026366; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:29:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:29:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:28:59 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.70 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <8kG-Y.A.6bG.-CvhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68810 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian I don't understand why it is absolutely impossible, is the load's power factor unity i.e. is it purely resistive? If the load's power factor is equal to 0.8 which is typical of computer power supplies, the dudes are right I am afraid. <><><><><><> The UPS IGBT switches are not designed for a sustained 167 A output. It's a game the manufacturer's play. Almost everyone makes a 15 kW UPS which they *used* to call a 17 kVA (nominal) UPS assuming a 0.9 PF. Then one day another manufacturer advertized the same UPS as a 20 kVA (nominal) and in small print at the bottom he stated that he assumed 0.8 PF. Careful of any spec which says "nominal", BTW. :-) Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 09:00:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57G09j9013272; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:00:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57FoMSe007286; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:50:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:50:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Subject: OT: Smoke and Mirrors -> WAS -> RE: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:50:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-reply-to: <1949216238.1149690472181.JavaMail.root@fepweb05> Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57FoDUE007146 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68811 X-Loop: vortex-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 a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell Just more smoke and mirrors to keep the public off balance and distract attention from the truly important stuff. 911, WMD, Iraq, Gas Prices, Bird Flu, Marriage Amendment... all have not added up to what they were each portrayed to be. You play those cards often enough a pattern of behavior emerges. Poke too hard at any of them and the house of cards falls down. http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-propaganda.html#divert The key is to not take your eye off the truly important stuff. The power machine works public opinion to it's own end... not Republican or Democrat or conservative or liberal. The common denominator is the power brokers at the root off all these groups. Not collusion or conspiracy between them per se, but a collective goal to divide and control... they are all harmoniously pulling on the oars together in unison. The hot list for a free and strong society: 1) Energy Supplies & Systems 2) Food & Water 3) Manufacturing Capability 4) Civil Liberty 5) Border Security If the news story don't fit, don't give a spit. 8^) -j -----Original Message----- From: OrionWorks [mailto:orionworks@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 9:28 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Battery shapes ---- RC Macaulay wrote: > This nation has a nightmare staring us in the face with > the the continued increase in electric power consumption. > The summer hasn't started in earnest and we are receiving > reports of motor failures of our submersible units like no > other year to date.A large submersible electric motor is > like a canary in a coal mine as for a warning signal of > extremely dirty electric power. The scope and randomness > of the problems are mounting and in certain areas we can > face some real nightmare scenarios. > > The electric power grid is a basic of our existence from > lighting to grocery store computer checkout. The system > goes down and we revert to the stone age instantly. While > all eyes are focused on gasoline supplies.. without > electric power ya get no "bomba" at the pump... unless > you want to siphon the gas outa the underground tank.. > ughh! > > Richard Howdy Richard, I think Republican Senator David Vitter said it best, as recently quoted on CNN.COM: "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one." Was he urging congress to discuss plans on how to improve our nation's Energy supply? No. Was he urging debate on finding solutions to the thorny Illegal emigration issue? No. Was he urging debate on Terrorism and the collection of intelligence against U.S. citizens? No. Of course not. He was urging congress to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages. Yes, indeedee, THAT'S what we reeeelly need in this country to make things right again. And, oh yes, don't forget that other amendment - to ban flag burning as well! Our government working tirelessly to make things better for its citizens. What a gas. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 09:17:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57GHHa8024697; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:17:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57GHFqW024666; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:17:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:17:15 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=GLMvQyaR6CPlIz/UPCPzqyEsj2dhXtqXASVAiunclPNEGQ37bdSOe2i+KL8MZTZS; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200663716165490@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Muons and Argon-40 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:16:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b44c8e11c1b736226e008e1ed2ac1df3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.49 Resent-Message-ID: <6x3xcB.A.SBG.KwvhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68812 X-Loop: vortex-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 Muon +/- decay to produce one electron neutrino and one electron Given the copious production of Positron-Electron pairs inherent throughout the universe since t zero and on the earth from Solar Energetic Particle insolation and Cosmic Ray Cascades in the atmosphere plus Positron emission from natural and man-made nuclear radiation, I have to vote for ubiquitous stable mass ~2e Ps- "Electronium " (*e-) or stable (e- e+ e-) as the only possible particle to form the so-called (elusive-nebulous) "Fractional Orbit Hydrino". Science (the laws of physics) by popular vote. :-) Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/7/2006 5:53:32 AM Subject: Re: Muons and Argon-40 >From an article on Muon Beams: Pion +/- 139.5669 MeV/c2 decay to produce one muon neutrino and one muon; Muon +/- 105.658389(34) MeV/c2 "So far this discussion has been equally applicable to positive and negative particles, but this ends when either pions or muons are stopped in matter due to the different chemical nature of negatively and positively charged particles in matter. Negative pions that stop in the target behave like heavy electrons and rapidly cascade down to tightly bound orbitals where they almost always undergo capture by the nucleus instead of decaying to negative muons. Positive pions that have come to rest in solids take up interstitial positions between atoms so they are too far from nuclei to be captured; as far as (physics)is concerned their lifetime is unaffected by any properties of the target material. " Seawater (mostly) or primordial? 19-K-40 (radioisotope) +Pion - -----> 18-Ar-40 * (Stable?) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Muon +/- decay to produce one electron neutrino and one electron
Given the copious production of Positron-Electron pairs inherent
throughout the universe since t zero and on the earth from
Solar Energetic Particle insolation and Cosmic Ray Cascades in the
atmosphere plus Positron emission from natural and man-made
nuclear radiation, I have to vote for ubiquitous stable mass ~2e  Ps- "Electronium "
(*e-) or stable (e- e+ e-) as the only possible particle to form the so-called (elusive-nebulous)
"Fractional Orbit Hydrino".
 
Science (the laws of physics) by popular vote.  :-)
 
Fred
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/7/2006 5:53:32 AM
Subject: Re: Muons and Argon-40

From an article on Muon Beams:
 
Pion +/-   139.5669 MeV/c2  decay to produce one muon neutrino and one muon;
Muon +/- 105.658389(34) MeV/c2
 
"So far this discussion has been equally applicable to positive and negative particles, but this ends when either pions or muons are stopped in matter due to the different chemical nature of negatively and positively charged particles in matter. Negative pions that stop in the target behave like heavy electrons and rapidly cascade down to tightly bound orbitals where they almost always undergo capture by the nucleus instead of decaying to negative muons. Positive pions that have come to rest in solids take up interstitial positions between atoms so they are too far from nuclei to be captured; as far as (physics)is concerned their lifetime is unaffected by any properties of the target material. "
 
Seawater (mostly) or primordial?
 
19-K-40 (radioisotope) +Pion -   -----> 18-Ar-40 *   (Stable?)
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 09:29:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57GSqV0031666; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:28:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57GSnkm031627; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:28:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:28:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:28:40 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57GSjV1031587 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68813 X-Loop: vortex-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 allow me to disagree. I understand the UPS manufacturers rating game, I have played it myself, but it is not misleading in fact, it is not even a little cheating as you imply: if the 15 kW UPS you mention has to spit out 15 kW, it _will do it_ of course, and if it's load has a power factor of 0.75 as is quite common, the rms current will _actually be 167 A_ (15000/(120*0.75)), so it will _really_ be outputting 167*120=20 kVA. And the wires will heat up as if the 167A were real, which they are. The UPS rating only misleads the dudes who think that Pavg=Urms*Irms, and those deserve to be misled anyway ;) Controversy solved? Michel P.S. As for the UPS's IGBTs or Mosfets, they often paradoxically prefer this kind of load (rectifier+filter, PF=0.6 to 0.8) to a purely resistive load drawing the same kW. Mine did in any case, as such loads only drew current when they were saturated :) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 5:28 PM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > I don't understand why it is absolutely impossible, is the load's power > factor > unity i.e. is it purely resistive? If the load's power factor is equal > to 0.8 > which is typical of computer power supplies, the dudes are right I am > afraid. > > <><><><><><> > > The UPS IGBT switches are not designed for a sustained 167 A output. > > It's a game the manufacturer's play. Almost everyone makes a 15 kW UPS > which they *used* to call a 17 kVA (nominal) UPS assuming a 0.9 PF. > Then one day another manufacturer advertized the same UPS as a 20 kVA > (nominal) and in small print at the bottom he stated that he assumed > 0.8 PF. > > Careful of any spec which says "nominal", BTW. :-) > > Terry > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 09:36:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57GaB0s003706; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:36:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57Ga9x1003679; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:36:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:36:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:36:04 -0400 Message-Id: <8C858679A9A881D-D48-3638D@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.74 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68814 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:28:40 +0200 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Terry allow me to disagree. I understand the UPS manufacturers rating game, I have played it myself, but it is not misleading in fact, it is not even a little cheating as you imply: if the 15 kW UPS you mention has to spit out 15 kW, it _will do it_ of course, and if it's load has a power factor of 0.75 as is quite common, the rms current will _actually be 167 A_ (15000/(120*0.75)), so it will _really_ be outputting 167*120=20 kVA. And the wires will heat up as if the 167A were real, which they are. The UPS rating only misleads the dudes who think that Pavg=Urms*Irms, and those deserve to be misled anyway ;) Controversy solved? Michel P.S. As for the UPS's IGBTs or Mosfets, they often paradoxically prefer this kind of load (rectifier+filter, PF=0.6 to 0.8) to a purely resistive load drawing the same kW. Mine did in any case, as such loads only drew current when they were saturated :) <><><><><><> You're most welcome to disagree; however shifting the phase between the voltage and the current does not contribute to ohmic heating of the branch conductor. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 09:54:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57GriXb014029; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:53:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57Grh2r014012; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:53:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:53:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <033401c68a52$eb522b60$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C858679A9A881D-D48-3638D@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:53:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57Grdhi013959 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68815 X-Loop: vortex-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: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 6:36 PM Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:28:40 +0200 > Subject: Re: Battery shapes > > Terry allow me to disagree. I understand the UPS manufacturers rating > game, I > have played it myself, but it is not misleading in fact, it is not even > a little > cheating as you imply: if the 15 kW UPS you mention has to spit out 15 > kW, it > _will do it_ of course, and if it's load has a power factor of 0.75 as > is quite > common, the rms current will _actually be 167 A_ (15000/(120*0.75)), so > it will > _really_ be outputting 167*120=20 kVA. And the wires will heat up as if > the 167A > were real, which they are. > > The UPS rating only misleads the dudes who think that Pavg=Urms*Irms, > and those > deserve to be misled anyway ;) > > Controversy solved? > > Michel > > P.S. As for the UPS's IGBTs or Mosfets, they often paradoxically prefer > this > kind of load (rectifier+filter, PF=0.6 to 0.8) to a purely resistive > load > drawing the same kW. Mine did in any case, as such loads only drew > current when > they were saturated :) > > <><><><><><> > > You're most welcome to disagree; however shifting the phase between the > voltage and the current does not contribute to ohmic heating of the > branch conductor. > > Terry Thanks Terry. The above is quite right but in the case of typical rectifier+capacitor loads the low power factor is due to shape rather than phase of the current (brief capacitor refill current pulses at voltage peaks). But this increases RMS current all the same, and RMS current is what heats the wire: Pw=Rw*Irms^2. This is a fact. If you care to reread my previous post in this light you will realize you have unjustly criticized your electrical dudes :) Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 10:05:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57H5Q9g021284; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:05:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57H5OJR021232; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:05:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:05:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060607101017.030d0198@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 10:11:05 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: CQ CQ CQ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_495233125==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68816 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_495233125==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Dear Vortices, I had a long talk with plasma physicist yesterday. I had been confused about the comparison of measuring energy in HF vs CF. I'd like to share what I came up with as an understanding and see if there are any disagreements or comments. I'll get to the bottom line first. It seems that people in CF use a different "accounting" method than those in HF. In CF, of one considers an experiment that consumes 10 watts of electrical energy in, and it shows 11 watts of heat energy out, then one normally writes that as 10% excess power. In HF, they'll put 10MW in to heat up the tokamak, and get 6.7MW of "fusion energy" out, in the form of alpha and neutron emission. Their total energy out then, is 16.7MW. They call this Q=0.67 In CF-type accounting, this would be considered 67% excess power. In HF-type accounting, they would call the calculations from the CF cell above as showing Q=0.10 Steve --=====================_495233125==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Dear Vortices,

I had a long talk with plasma physicist yesterday.

I had been confused about the comparison of measuring energy in HF vs CF.

I'd like to share what I came up with as an understanding and see if there are any disagreements or comments.

I'll get to the bottom line first. It seems that people in CF use a different "accounting" method than those in HF.



In CF, of one considers an experiment that consumes 10 watts of electrical energy in, and it shows 11 watts of heat energy out, then one normally writes that as 10% excess power.

In HF, they'll put 10MW in to heat up the tokamak, and get 6.7MW of "fusion energy" out, in the form of alpha and neutron emission. Their total energy out then, is 16.7MW.

They call this Q=0.67

In CF-type accounting, this would be considered 67% excess power.

In HF-type accounting, they would call the calculations from the CF cell above as showing Q=0.10


Steve --=====================_495233125==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 10:14:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57HDunW025933; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:14:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57HDsOa025911; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:13:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:13:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 13:13:46 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8586CDEEE24B1-D48-36515@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C858679A9A881D-D48-3638D@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> <033401c68a52$eb522b60$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <033401c68a52$eb522b60$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.74 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <9vwWC.A.sUG.RlwhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68817 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian Thanks Terry. The above is quite right but in the case of typical rectifier+capacitor loads the low power factor is due to shape rather than phase of the current (brief capacitor refill current pulses at voltage peaks). But this increases RMS current all the same, and RMS current is what heats the wire: Pw=Rw*Irms^2. This is a fact. If you care to reread my previous post in this light you will realize you have unjustly criticized your electrical dudes :) <><><><><><> Well, sure, if it deviates from a sinusoid. I was trying to use this as an example. My bad. I'm sorry for this rant which is really off topic; but, we're facing a real problem in many of our contracts. In our industry, we often must budget five years in advance. In the past five years we have seen tremendous rise in commodity prices. Today Cu is trading at the $3.60 per pound area. This is up from about $1 per pound two years ago. The NFPA requires branch circuits to be rated for the KVA load which includes real and reactive power. However, reactive power does not contribute to ohmic heating. The NFPA was changed because PF were not always known so they took the safe approach. Here in the transit industry, we know our PFs for all our loads; however, I can't convince them that they do not have to increase their conductor sized to meet this NFPA requirement. Besides, we're not even subject to the NFPA. Because we're talking hundreds of miles of 750 kcm Cu conductors here, we're talking about millions of wasted $$. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 11:18:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57IIXRI024119; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:18:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57IIWwS024105; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:18:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:18:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <04ce01c68a5e$bfcf9890$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Revised WaterFuel data and commentary Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:18:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68818 X-Loop: vortex-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 revised, longer (not quite book-length ) but still useful set of reference data and speculation for water-based fuel. Others have been sending interesting additional details and the background concepts are maturing and evolving almost daily. The attempt is to cover all the bases, should an anomaly be proven, but the emphasis is focused clearly on the perceived difference between "burning" H2 + O2 as opposed to exploiting the electrical advantages of "common-manifold," or Brown's gas (BG) capacitance. I stress the non-combustion aspects ("exploding capacitor" or mechanical failure) of BG, as that phenomenon may NOT be subject to the same thermodynamic laws and restraints as combustion ... because, of course, it is "not exactly" combustion. Starting with the basics: one mole of hydrogen gas equals two grams; water is 18 grams/mole. Water enriched in 18O is 20 grams/mole, argon is 40. Notice that the argon is a monatomic molecule occupying much less space than two molecules of water vapor with the same molar weight and may have the anomalous property of "efficient radiation." Most of these "fringe" concepts like efficient-radiation and IPE (induced photon emission) can be found in some speculative detail in the vortex archives (and nowhere else): http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/maillist.html Hydrogen relative mass in a water molecule is 2x100/18=11.1%; oxygen relative mass is 16x100/18=88.9%. This means that 111.1 grams of hydrogen and 888.9 grams of oxygen are in every 1000 grams, or every one liter of water. The computational problems seem to arise in getting the volume of gas quantified, as H2 is both volatile and easily compressible. One liter of hydrogen gas at STP weighs 0.09 g; one liter of oxygen weighs 1.47 g. One thousand liters is a cubic meter. It is possible to produce 111.11/0.09=1234 liters of hydrogen gas and 888.89/1.47=605 liters of oxygen gas from one liter of water liquid - and the "expansion ratio" is thus 1839-to-1 when completely gasified as separate components. The expansion ratio of water to steam is 1680-1, in contrast - so there is a slight negative volumetric efficiency in burning a stoichiometric mix. Every gram of water contains 1.23 liters of hydrogen gas and every gram of H2 has ~3 ^23 molecules, each with 2 electrons. Each electrons carries 1^-19 coulombs charge. 1g/hour H2 production requires 9.6^4 coulombs or ~27Amps of charge expenditure, in theory and when accomplished by "brute force". However, in nature there are copious free protons in water, but the "freedom" is dependent on the time-scale of observation. In principle, water can be split by limiting recombination, but in magnetic fields of up to 20T. water cannot be split this way. Theoretically, the minimum cell voltage threshold for splitting water is 1.23V for "slow" separation and this will actively cool the remaining water. 1g/hour H2 requires 27*1.23=33.21 Watts, and at this voltage input returns about 15% energy more when burned. It is the only fully documented case of macro overunity in mainstream physics, but at this voltage the rate of formation is very low. More voltage is always needed in practice - at least 20 percent higher and usable OU is not feasible on a large scale. To get 35 kWhr electrical equivalent of hydrogen output, which is about what is needed for a large automobile at the speed limit, you would need 25,000 Amps of current, generating 1kg/hour of gas at slightly less than 2 volts, if everything else is optimized. That is a tremendous amount of current for onboard use and highlights the "impossibility" of doing this by conventional methods. Energy consumption for production of 1000 liters of hydrogen gas, using advanced traditional methods is ~5+ kWh or about ~70 % efficient in practice. When looked at from the perspective of the liquid, ~5Wh is applied to every gram of water for complete hydrogen separation. The volume of oxidizer is the limiting factor in a traditional ICE burning H2, since only 14% of the volume can be used of O2 in a stoichiometric situation based on volume of all gases at STP. At the maximum air/fuel ratio, hydrogen is so buoyant that it will displace 29% of the combustion chamber leaving only 71% for the air. As a result, the energy content of this mixture will be less than it would be if the fuel were gasoline (since gasoline is a liquid, it only occupies a smaller volume of the combustion chamber, and thus allows more air to enter). Of the air, approximately 21% is oxygen, 1% is argon, and the rest is mostly nitrogen - approximately a 4-1 ratio to oxygen. This situation results in either the need for a larger engine for "straight" hydrogen burning, or supercharging to get a similar output to the same engine fueled with gasoline. But there are a number of possible alternative, among which is the closed-cycle using an argon carrier gas, eliminating nitrogen. This is perhaps the best solution on paper- IF enough capacitive-fuel can be produced in an ongoing fashion by recycling a portion of the engine's electrical output and by starting with precharged "fuel" (even if the precharging is done onboard in a separate subsystem. A very demanding challenge, of course, and one which even the very suggestion of it having been done by garage tinkerers - inflames the mainstream science establishment, so to speak, and for good reason. To show how difficult this goal of self-power appears to be - on paper, consider the hydrogen-auto situation above needing 25000 amps. This much current produces parasitic waste heat and when one cubic meter of hydrogen is burnt efficiently only 3.5 kWh of heat energy is released - compared to the ~5 it took to make it, and it gets worse from there. Hydrogen ICEs do have a significantly higher Carnot efficiency, at least 40-45% fully one third higher than their gasoline equivalent, but that pales in comparison to the shortfall which is presented IF there is no 'additional source' of energy being utilized. The additional source of energy, if it is supplied by mechanical failure of capacitance, may relate to the Casimir force acting on hydrogen bonds, or else to the formation of "below ground state" hydrino, or many other hypothetical possibilities alone or in combination - which will not be explored here, except to state that in a situation where capacitance is added into the equation, various synergies come into play. The electrical charge of one mole of electrons (approximately 6×10^23, or Avogadro's number) is known as a faraday and a capacitor has a value of one farad when one coulomb or C of stored charge causes a potential difference of one volt across its terminals. One faraday equals 96.5 kC (the Faraday constant). In terms of Avogadro - one coulomb is equal to approximately 10^-5 elementary charges, so for every 16 grams of water, the maximum theoretical charge which can be stored is surely far less than the ~96.5/3 kC, three being the minimum molecules per one volt "idealized" capacitor, but if one-in-a-hundred water molecules participate, and are thusly charged in the 12 hour conditioning process, this would provide something like ~2000 Farads/g of conditioned water fuel... whoa! In theory, because of the Helmholtz-layer "free" charging, far less input would be needed to get that or whatever capacitance level is actually there. Without such a powerful "natural" boost, but with the higher efficiency of H2 combustion, when heat is converted to electricity, it is easy to see that no more than about 25-30% of the electricity needed to self-power an ICE and propel it at speed can possibly be available from 'in situ' electric generation, using the best traditional method - which is high current, low voltage electrolysis. But yet there are at least 150 anecdotal, eye-witness claims for self-powered vehicles using only water-fuel (on the internet) going back 30 years. What is going on (assuming that coordinated mass fraud, or mass-delusion is not taking place)? Since the goal is not just self-power, but enough "overage" to use the engine for transportation, it is possible (or at least is worthy of further investigation) that a COP of about 6-8 has been achieved - on "occasion" in some of these reports. Impossible ? perhaps, but is it coincidental that a water "ultracapacitor" composed initially of 3 molecules of water, rearranged by long exposure to an electric field and Helmholtz electrodes, such that it takes the form of one hydronium attached to one hydronium hydrate ion may have an unusually high annihilation energy - which is the full 13.6 eV IP of hydrogen is derived in optimum circumstances of a high compression engine. Since acquiring the ~one +/- capacitance for these paired ions (in the preconditioning phase) is likely to be about 60% efficient, then that energy difference (capacitance P-in to heat P-out) can account for the full COP of 6-8, in theory. Or expressed another way, the enthalpy value would be 285.8 kJ/mole for H2 and sits in stark contrast to strength of the "first" or the H-OH hydrogen bond which is only 40 kJ/mole and can be essentially "free". BTW the "second H-bond" in water is much stronger and is generally assumed to be covalent. In the case of hydrogen bonding in water, the thermodynamics issues are distinctly different from covalent bonding. The natural molecular movements in water involve the constant breaking and reorganization of individual hydrogen bonds on a picosecond timescale, and the process must necessarily be nearly lossless, due to the enormous "transaction volume." One report in a respected physic journal: http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/648.html indicates that the formula for water, on this picosecond time scale, is more like H1.5-O than H2-O (however that finding is in dispute, as is the contradictory experiment, so the jury is still out on the details) But the bottom line is that to utilize the "free proton" as an intrinsic OU feature of water-reality, which is certainly a Casimir effect, we do not have to break the hydrogen bond of water - so much as to limit recombination following natural breakage ! AHA - now we are getting a picture of why the Meyer electrostatic situation might work - it is not breaking the bond, as does traditional electrolysis by brute force, but is *limiting recombination.* The Helmholtz optimized cell may do this in a slower, more robust and more elegant fashion Let's backtrack first to the issue of theoretical thermodynamic efficiency of an ICE: which is based on the compression ratio of the engine, and the specific-heat ratio of the fuel and the Carnot "spread" and the compressibility of the gas. The compression ratio limit of an engine is based on the fuel's resistance to "knock" or preignition. A lean hydrogen mixture is less susceptible to knock than gasoline or even diesel - and therefore the fuel can tolerate higher compression ratios. The specific-heat ratio is related to the fuel's molecular structure. The less complex the molecular structure, the higher the specific-heat ratio. Hydrogen = 1.4 has a simpler molecular structure than gasoline and therefore its specific-heat ratio is higher than that of conventional gasoline = 1.1. However, either of these, burned in a more efficient oxidizer, like peroxides or super-oxidated mixed gases, can increase the effective specific heat. Hydrogen-fueled compression ignition engines are sparsely mentioned in the technical literature because the auto-ignition temperature is too high. For diesel fuel it is only 251C but the auto-ignition temperature of hydrogen, surprisingly, is 585C and therefore needs assistance, usually in the form of a spark plug. This is another reason for its superb efficiency - in that despite the very high flame speed, preignition and knock is not an insurmountable problem, even at extremely high compression ratios and very lean mixes. Plus steam has far superior compressibility numbers than CO2. Any fuel is hazardous and needs due care, but hydrogen's hazards are different and generally tractable. It's extremely buoyant, 14.4 times lighter than air and 12 times more volatile than gasoline, so leaking hydrogen rapidly disperses up and away from its source. When ignited, hydrogen burns rapidly with a nonluminous flame that doesn't readily scorch at a distance, emitting only one-tenth the radiant heat (UV) of a hydrocarbon fire and burning 7% cooler than gasoline. The sensory perception is of an "implosion" due to flame speed and fast cooling of the steam. More energy is shed in the UV - part of its combustion efficiency. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe with the highest energy content per unit of weight- 52,000 British Thermal Units (Btu) per pound (or 120.7 kilojoules per gram). When burned with oxygen, the only by-products are heat and water. When burned with air, some oxides of nitrogen (or NOx) are formed. Specific heat of water: 1 calorie/degree temperature rise (very high - can absorb a good deal of heat but maintain temperature (1 calorie = 4.184 joules). Latent heat of vaporization is high 2.452 k J (586 cal) - helps cooling of engine by vaporization. Water has low viscosity because hydrogen bonds constantly make-and-break on a picosecond scale. Cohesion: water molecules attract each other (hydrogen bonds) causes surface tension; a column of water can be pulled from above like a rope (a column of water has 1/4th the tensile strength of a copper wire of similar diameter). Adhesion: because it is polar, water can attract molecules of other polar substances. Water as a solvent dissolves polar substances, ionizes covalent compounds because of its extraordinarily high dielectric constant when pure (dielectric constant = capacity to neutralize attraction between charges). Ionization of water: water dissociates naturally into H+ and OH- ions. The pH of water is considered to be neutral pH = 7, meaning that H+ ion concentration = 10^-7 moles/l and OH- ion concentration is also 10^-7 moles/l . When CO2 is dissolved pH of water can be as low as 4. In a perfect capacitance situation, the pH of charged water should remain near 7. If it is high or lower, it will be less potent. In common manifold electrolysis (Brown's gas) there are three gas streams merging into one - an anode gas (mostly O2), a cathode gas (most H2) and a neutral-plate mixed gas (mixed peroxides). In this situation, the anode and cathode are energy-conservative, like traditional methods, but the (excess) energy, if there is any, derives from the neutral-plate component - the mixed peroxides, hydronium and superoxides, which may be bound ions in a capacitance arrangement, and are subject to speedy recombination. Visually, it can be seen that this neutral plate gas is most of the output of a such a cell- but very few systems use it quickly enough - and the capacitance is allowed to neutralize without the benefit of the explosiveness which is possible. This probably demands a high compression engine situation to optimize. The next step in the evolution towards a reliable water-fuel system might well involve using the best feature of all of the prior art - the Meyer capacitance cell, the Brown's gas neutral plate design, enhanced to benefit from maximum Helmholtz capacitance AND the Joe-cell-variant contribution - which is the water pretreatment regime. It rests on logic alone to envision that if enough energy is available from electrolyzing water into a capacitance fuel (as opposed to splitting water), then the best implementation will be closed cycle. There will be no need for air and the NOx pollutant. Instead an argon carrier gas will be used. It also goes on logic alone that if such an engine is possible - it will never be turned off, once started, except for repair. It will be comparatively tiny and sized to recharge onboard hybrid batteries and/or power the owner's home at night (unless he has two of them). It can be either home-based or transportable, or both depending on the owners needs and resources. It will be made of exotic ceramics, possibly a Wankel design and it will run 24/7! There have been some alarmist warnings - as to what will happen if massive amounts of ZPE are converted into useful energy in 3-space. Will gravity be somehow affected, etc. Let's delay that huge issue until it can be shown in rock-solid demonstrations that it is even possible. All we have now is anecdote. Even after investing a few hours of time on this document, I must admit that it is extremely unlikely, but even if the chance of it being correct is miniscule - the payoff is so important to society that almost any sacrifice is worth it. The next few months could be a promising time frame for the maturation of this grass-roots technology, and it is just too bad (for many of us) that most of the action appears to be overseas nowadays .... and even worse, that so much disinformation is getting mixed into the lore of the WasserCar. To be expected perhaps for a subject first explored by none other than Jules Verne - and the subject of a David Mamet play. I hope that this effort does not add more of it .... ... and speaking of 'play' it's now time to get 'discharged' from all this speculative verbiage, and go 'let off a little steam' ... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 11:34:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57IY3Ba032266; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:34:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57IY0mw032223; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:34:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:34:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:32:18 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: CQ CQ CQ In-reply-to: <6.2.0.14.2.20060607101017.030d0198@mail.newenergytimes.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_tjGH74Y2oZ0UcIrRTtNYtg)" 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/68819 X-Loop: vortex-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. --Boundary_(ID_tjGH74Y2oZ0UcIrRTtNYtg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT You have to be careful. Sometimes people say power when they are really referring to energy and vice versa. Harry Steven Krivit wrote: Dear Vortices, I had a long talk with plasma physicist yesterday. I had been confused about the comparison of measuring energy in HF vs CF. I'd like to share what I came up with as an understanding and see if there are any disagreements or comments. I'll get to the bottom line first. It seems that people in CF use a different "accounting" method than those in HF. In CF, of one considers an experiment that consumes 10 watts of electrical energy in, and it shows 11 watts of heat energy out, then one normally writes that as 10% excess power. In HF, they'll put 10MW in to heat up the tokamak, and get 6.7MW of "fusion energy" out, in the form of alpha and neutron emission. Their total energy out then, is 16.7MW. They call this Q=0.67 In CF-type accounting, this would be considered 67% excess power. In HF-type accounting, they would call the calculations from the CF cell above as showing Q=0.10 Steve --Boundary_(ID_tjGH74Y2oZ0UcIrRTtNYtg) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Re: CQ CQ CQ You have to be careful.
Sometimes people say power when they are really referring to energy and vice versa.

Harry



Steven Krivit wrote:

Dear Vortices,

I had a long talk with plasma physicist yesterday.

I had been confused about the comparison of measuring energy in HF vs CF.

I'd like to share what I came up with as an understanding and see if there are any disagreements or comments.

I'll get to the bottom line first. It seems that people in CF use a different "accounting" method than those in HF.



In CF, of one considers an experiment that consumes 10 watts of electrical energy in, and it shows 11 watts of heat energy out, then one normally writes that as 10% excess power.

In HF, they'll put 10MW in to heat up the tokamak, and get 6.7MW of "fusion energy" out, in the form of alpha and neutron emission. Their total energy out then, is 16.7MW.

They call this Q=0.67

In CF-type accounting, this would be considered 67% excess power.

In HF-type accounting, they would call the calculations from the CF cell above as showing Q=0.10


Steve

--Boundary_(ID_tjGH74Y2oZ0UcIrRTtNYtg)-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 11:40:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57Ief8g003199; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:40:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57IedRZ003172; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:40:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:40:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:40:35 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85878FF74313B-D48-36A1C@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002e01c688d0$11c0c920$3800a8c0@zothan> <023701c688e4$b8932590$8afea8c0@Jonz> <7.0.1.0.2.20060605173535.03d9ee40@mindspring.com> <000b01c68905$b1644c60$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <028a01c68919$8ac609e0$8afea8c0@Jonz> <034c01c6898d$36eb6b70$8afea8c0@Jonz> <020301c689b2$b72272f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C857E3F91C0133-578-3781E@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <026001c689f9$1fa029d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85845B06E46A0-BD4-39077@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <02de01c68a37$e967dbd0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8585E3BB9BAC4-BD4-3980C@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> <031a01c68a4f$6feefaa0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C858679A9A881D-D48-3638D@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> <033401c68a52$eb522b60$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8586CDEEE24B1-D48-36515@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C8586CDEEE24B1-D48-36515@mblkn-m10.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.74 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k57Ieb1J003148 Resent-Message-ID: <48BLf.A.gx.m2xhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68820 X-Loop: vortex-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 in the transit industry, we know our PFs for all our loads; however, I can't convince them that they do not have to increase their conductor sized to meet this NFPA requirement. Besides, we're not even subject to the NFPA. Because we're talking hundreds of miles of 750 kcm Cu conductors here, we're talking about millions of wasted $$.      <><><><><><> For the record, Michel is right in that the reactive power wants to return to the load via the transmission system and contributes to conductor heating. Our client wants to raise the conductor diameters over the initial design and cites the NFPA. However, our traction power engineers argue that a 20% safety factor inherent in the design is more than enough. The NFPA is very conservative in conductor heating issues. Turns out the engineers have already proposed adding negative VAR devices over larger copper (PF correcting capacitors). Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 11:55:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57IsmLr010930; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:54:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57IslLD010911; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:54:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:54:47 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=K1Jc6+0172VSCiWn/z6mF6hxIkCq1dQzD+o+vMsNo/79YiPava/+d0WJrVUP8Pys; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006637185433350@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: CQ CQ CQ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:54:33 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d80fcabcdaf3a3c7f372546e0de607ba26c9b5e52464f59f68350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.111.157 Resent-Message-ID: <6TD3T.A.ZqC.2DyhEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68821 X-Loop: vortex-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 aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) To: Vortex Date: 6/7/2006 11:30:17 AM Subject: CQ CQ CQ June 07, 2006 It reads "dah dit dah dit, dah dah dit dah" in Morse code. In wireless telegraphy, a telegrapher sends out this code signal along with its station ID repeatedly to attract other wireless monitors to elicit a response. Another Morse code to elicit emergency response was, dit dit dit, dah dah dah, dit dit dit --- SOS. -ak- > [Original Message] > From: Michel Jullian > To: > Date: 6/7/2006 2:16:39 PM > Subject: CMNS: Re: CQ CQ CQ > > > > Yes Steve you're right, Q=0.67 is the same as COP=1.67. More here: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_energy_gain_factor > > Michel > > P.S. What does CQ CQ CQ mean? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 12:12:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57JC36v019151; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:12:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57JC2uN019121; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:12:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:12:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060607121725.03472a20@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:17:37 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: CQ CQ CQ In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060607101017.030d0198@mail.newenergytimes.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/68822 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: mea culpa, power, not energy At 12:32 PM 6/7/2006, you wrote: >You have to be careful. >Sometimes people say power when they are really referring to energy and >vice versa. > >Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 13:36:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57KaLgh001741; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:36:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57Ka9XX001650; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:36:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:36:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060607163504.03d48400@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060607103551.03fb3458@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:36:03 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy 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/68823 X-Loop: vortex-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 sent this earlier but it did not appear to come through. It is unimportant, but I am curious to see whether there is a problem with Vortex.] Terry wrote: >Thank you. I appreciate hearing the voice of sanity. The NFPA has >insisted that KVA be used in calculating the conductor size for the >NEC in lieu of KW. Now that's a challenging set of acronyms! It took me several Google lookups to figure out this has nothing to do with National Federation of Paralegal Associations or the National Fluid Power Association, or, ummm . . . NEC Corp. or the New England Conservatory of Music. I think: NFPA = National Fire Protection Association, and the standards issued by ANSI. KVA = kilovolt amps (apparent AC power) NEC = National Electric Code KW = kilowatt (easy) >Absolute insanity. Or AI for short. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 14:54:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k57LsYwd014158; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:54:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k57LsXqx014140; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:54:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:54:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 17:52:44 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy In-reply-to: <7.0.1.0.2.20060607163504.03d48400@mindspring.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/68824 X-Loop: vortex-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 sent this earlier but it did not appear to come through. It is > unimportant, but I am curious to see whether there is a problem with Vortex.] > > Terry wrote: > >> Thank you. I appreciate hearing the voice of sanity. The NFPA has >> insisted that KVA be used in calculating the conductor size for the >> NEC in lieu of KW. > > Now that's a challenging set of acronyms! It took me several Google > lookups to figure out this has nothing to do with National Federation > of Paralegal Associations or the National Fluid Power Association, > or, ummm . . . NEC Corp. or the New England Conservatory of Music. I think: > > NFPA = National Fire Protection Association, and the standards issued by ANSI. > > KVA = kilovolt amps (apparent AC power) > > NEC = National Electric Code > > KW = kilowatt (easy) > > >> Absolute insanity. > > Or AI for short. > > - Jed > > Oh...I thought KW meant Kate Winslet. :-/ Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 17:20:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k580K7am014445; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 17:20:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k580K1Co014367; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001401c68a91$3d2b59a0$8e027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Battery shapes Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 19:19:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C68A67.532CD730" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68825 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C68A67.532CD730 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0011_01C68A67.532E5DD0" ------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C68A67.532E5DD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blankhohlraum wrote.. I'm sorry for this rant which is really off topic; but, we're facing a=20 real problem in many of our contracts. In our industry, we often must=20 budget five years in advance. In the past five years we have seen=20 tremendous rise in commodity prices. Today Cu is trading at the $3.60=20 per pound area. This is up from about $1 per pound two years ago. The NFPA requires branch circuits to be rated for the KVA load which=20 includes real and reactive power. However, reactive power does not=20 contribute to ohmic heating. The NFPA was changed because PF were not=20 always known so they took the safe approach. Here in the transit industry, we know our PFs for all our loads;=20 however, I can't convince them that they do not have to increase their=20 conductor sized to meet this NFPA requirement. Besides, we're not even=20 subject to the NFPA. Because we're talking hundreds of miles of 750=20 kcm Cu conductors here, we're talking about millions of wasted $$. Howdy h. Saw our first engineer's approval for use of aluminun electric power = cable in lieu of copper for service in Houston for public works. For = some years the use of aluminun wire was not permitted. Supposedly with = the proper " conductive gel" applied to the cable ends installed into = the lugs prevent electrolysis from acting when aluminun is in contact = with silver plated copper buss. The question then becomes the insurance = restrictions clauses. There are now only three giant copper producers = since the Aussies rose to becoem the 3rd big guy on the block. The = nation of Chile should be getting rich off copper ore.. but.. well.. = errr.. seems there is the usual " slippage" in the books. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C68A67.532E5DD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
hohlraum wrote..

I'm sorry for this rant which is really off topic; but, we're facing = a=20
real problem in many of our contracts.  In our industry, we = often must=20
budget five years in advance.  In the past five years we have = seen=20
tremendous rise in commodity prices.  Today Cu is trading at = the $3.60=20
per pound area.  This is up from about $1 per pound two years=20 ago.

The NFPA requires branch circuits to be rated for the KVA = load which=20
includes real and reactive power.  However, reactive power does = not=20
contribute to ohmic heating.  The NFPA was changed because PF = were not=20
always known so they took the safe approach.

Here in the = transit=20 industry, we know our PFs for all our loads;
however, I can't = convince them=20 that they do not have to increase their
conductor sized to meet this = NFPA=20 requirement.  Besides, we're not even
subject to the = NFPA. =20 Because we're talking hundreds of miles of 750
kcm Cu conductors = here, we're=20 talking about millions of wasted $$.

<rant over>

Howdy h.

Saw our first engineer's approval for use of aluminun electric power = cable in=20 lieu of copper for service in Houston for public works. For some years = the use=20 of aluminun wire was not permitted. Supposedly with the proper " = conductive gel"=20 applied to the cable ends installed into the lugs prevent electrolysis = from=20 acting when aluminun is in contact with silver plated copper buss. The = question=20 then becomes the insurance restrictions clauses. There are now only = three giant=20 copper producers since the Aussies rose to becoem the 3rd big guy on the = block.=20 The nation of Chile should be getting rich off copper ore.. but.. well.. = errr..=20 seems there is the usual " slippage" in the books.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0011_01C68A67.532E5DD0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C68A67.532CD730 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000f01c68a91$3be5e150$8e027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C68A67.532CD730-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 18:22:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k581M5Mt012864; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:22:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k581M3Oc012839; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:22:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 18:22:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 21:21:55 -0400 Message-Id: <8C858B110B9CDAB-1B38-2E4@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <001401c68a91$3d2b59a0$8e027841@xptower> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <001401c68a91$3d2b59a0$8e027841@xptower> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Battery shapes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68827 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay For some years the use of aluminun wire was not permitted. <><><><><> Nope, we be one of dem. T ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 20:54:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k583s8vu024699; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 20:54:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k583s3qQ024636; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 20:54:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 20:54:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:54:33 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:54:42 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 07 Jun 2006 23:54:44 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: <_fx12B.A.0AG.b95hEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68828 X-Loop: vortex-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 sent this earlier but it did not appear to come > through. It is unimportant, but I am curious to see > whether there is a problem with Vortex.] There may indeed be a problem. At least two of my mailings to Vortex did not post but also did not bounce. Also I'm confused about some postings of Michel Jullian which are referenced by other posters but appear neither in the mail archives (www.mail-archive.com) nor in the mailed message summaries. E.g., in the post: Re: CQ CQ CQ Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:57:13 -0700 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Akira Kawasaki) unless Michel "replies" to other than the original poster. It might be useful for the Vortex server to number individual posts to aid in tracking things. But perhaps I am just confused. I don't know how (via email) to ensure that my posts are properly threaded. The main Vortex page doesn't mention this. Other message boards have this built-in. What do you guys do? -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 22:16:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k585FmOC030462; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:15:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k585FjHI030437; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:15:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:15:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <03f401c68aba$95f8f9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:15:40 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k585FfHj030400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68829 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Walter Faxon" To: Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:54 AM Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy > Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> [I sent this earlier but it did not appear to come >> through. It is unimportant, but I am curious to see >> whether there is a problem with Vortex.] > > > There may indeed be a problem. At least two of my mailings to Vortex did > not post but also did not bounce. > > Also I'm confused about some postings of Michel Jullian which are > referenced by other posters but appear neither in the mail archives > (www.mail-archive.com) nor in the mailed message summaries. E.g., in the > post: > > Re: CQ CQ CQ > Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:57:13 -0700 > from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Akira Kawasaki) > > unless Michel "replies" to other than the original poster. This one is not a bug, it's just that Akira double posted (booh, thanks for the Morse codes though ;-) a reply he made to me in another mailing list (CMNS) where Steve had also started a "CQ CQ CQ" thread. BTW I finally Googled it up, CQ originally comes from French sécu(rité) surprisingly, not from "seek you", "come quick" nor "Collin' Quinney" ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CQ_(call) Michel > > It might be useful for the Vortex server to number individual posts to aid > in tracking things. > > But perhaps I am just confused. I don't know how (via email) to ensure > that my posts are properly threaded. The main Vortex page doesn't mention > this. Other message boards have this built-in. What do you guys do? > > -Walter > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 7 23:25:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k586Ot2Q031511; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 23:24:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k586OpsX031475; Wed, 7 Jun 2006 23:24:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 23:24:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060608062439654.9FAEA3400086@mwinf3116.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060608062441.0093bc58@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 07:24:41 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k586Og7l031385 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68830 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:15 am 08/06/2006 +0200, you wrote: > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Walter Faxon" >To: >Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:54 AM >Subject: Re: Battery shapes - second copy > > >> Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >>> [I sent this earlier but it did not appear to come >>> through. It is unimportant, but I am curious to see >>> whether there is a problem with Vortex.] >> >> >> There may indeed be a problem. At least two of my mailings to Vortex did >> not post but also did not bounce. >> >> Also I'm confused about some postings of Michel Jullian which are >> referenced by other posters but appear neither in the mail archives >> (www.mail-archive.com) nor in the mailed message summaries. E.g., in the >> post: >> >> Re: CQ CQ CQ >> Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:57:13 -0700 >> from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Akira Kawasaki) >> >> unless Michel "replies" to other than the original poster. > >This one is not a bug, it's just that Akira double posted (booh, thanks for the Morse codes though ;-) a reply he made to me in another mailing list (CMNS) where Steve had also started a "CQ CQ CQ" thread. BTW I finally Googled it up, CQ originally comes from French sécu(rité) surprisingly, not from "seek you", "come quick" nor "Collin' Quinney" ;-) >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CQ_(call) > >Michel I've now found a cached version of the original at Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CQ_%28call%29" which reads, The CQ call was originally used by landline telegraphy operators in the UK. French was, and still is, the official language for international postal services, and the word sécurité was used to mean 'safety' or 'pay attention'. It is still used in this sense in international telecommunications. The letters CQ, when pronounced in French, resemble the first two syllables of sécurité, and were therefore used as shorthand for the word. In English-speaking countries, the origin of the abbreviation was popularly changed to the phrase "seek you", or later, when used in the CQD distress call, to the command "come quick". CQ was adopted by the Marconi company in 1904 for use in wireless (spark) telegraphy, and was adopted internationally at the 1912 London Radiotelegraph Convention, and is still used. Seems genuine enough and since it was last edited in March I can't imagine why it's been pulled. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 03:20:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58AJvZe032679; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:19:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58AHGfm031635; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:17:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:17:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Cart before the horse Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 17:15:27 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4ijf829g9jvif2gv9h1ovjaq3dgpb91jia@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.57] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:15:27 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k58AH2uO031488 Resent-Message-ID: <3ecRgD.A.PuH.rk_hEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68831 X-Loop: vortex-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, http://www.physorg.com/news68373280.html If they let the wind farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they wouldn't need a military. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 03:37:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58AbI10007516; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:37:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58AYbQS006309; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:34:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 03:34:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <048401c68ae7$1c34ab10$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <4ijf829g9jvif2gv9h1ovjaq3dgpb91jia@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Cart before the horse Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 12:34:23 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k58AYY5e006275 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68832 X-Loop: vortex-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 Robin, Good point! List manager, don't know if this has been asked before but would it be possible at all to automatically prefix the lists' emails with [Vo] or something to distinguish them from lesser stuff? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:15 AM Subject: Cart before the horse > Hi, > > http://www.physorg.com/news68373280.html > > If they let the wind farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they > wouldn't need a military. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 05:04:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58C4csj018051; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 05:04:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58C4aq2018038; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 05:04:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 05:04:36 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TD/u06Qmrv9ikBs6m1ACvT8B1dgNl1bA3eYxCedU2gPlMmR9TG58Yypt9S1s77q6; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066481242286@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 06:04:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409342adfba8e52e2659405edae9b4544c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.123 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68833 X-Loop: vortex-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 potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg. The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripital force (Fc) mv^2/r with a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2: mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2 r = kq^2/mv^2 It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r = 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2 equal 3.1E6 meters/sec (the square root of 2 (1.414) times c/137). But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity requirements n (c/137) velocity v = 4.378E6 meters/sec and radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters and potential V = kq/r' = 218 volts. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
The potential  V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r
from a particle with charge + q equals  V = k*q/r  independent
of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo
 
Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential
at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a  regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg.
 
The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2  = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that
point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance
r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius).
 
OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripital force (Fc) mv^2/r with
a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2:
 
mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2   r = kq^2/mv^2
 
It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the
bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r
= 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of  v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2
equal 3.1E6 meters/sec  (the square root of 2 (1.414)  times c/137).
 
But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity
requirements n (c/137)  velocity  v = 4.378E6 meters/sec  and
radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters
and  potential V = kq/r'  = 218 volts.
 
Fred
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 06:19:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58DJP2D029236; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 06:19:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58DJNI0029207; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 06:19:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 06:19:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <04d501c68afe$20e124b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066481242286@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:19:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k58DJAkj029081 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68834 X-Loop: vortex-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 Fred, a very good idea to do such maths after the hydrino radiuses law discussion! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:04 PM Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo > > Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential > at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg. Indeed. > > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). Where does this come from? > > OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripital force (Fc) mv^2/r with Centripetal > a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2: > > mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2 r = kq^2/mv^2 Yes, I suppose relativistic effects can be neglected at c/137, and QM effects ignored for now. The rest is not obvious to me, maybe you will have enlightened me when I'll be back? (must be off right now) Michel > > It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the > bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r > = 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2 > equal 3.1E6 meters/sec (the square root of 2 (1.414) times c/137). > > But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity > requirements n (c/137) velocity v = 4.378E6 meters/sec and > radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters > and potential V = kq/r' = 218 volts. > > Fred From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 07:14:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58EDhnW002406; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:13:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58EDgVZ002386; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:13:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:13:42 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=MXVfKgv4yC8boNf1a/cZeXJocLdHwTDwsp5fpBY6qlQi0fOTDs6F8BnJB3EB3/QM; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006648141318351@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:13:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409887bff44e50bcaaa8370173cb843831350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.55 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68835 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > Hi Fred, a very good idea to do such maths after the hydrino radiuses law discussion! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: "vortex-l" > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:04 PM > Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits > > > > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r > > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent > > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo > > > > Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential > > at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg. > > Indeed. > > > > > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that > > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance > > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). > > Where does this come from? > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. For the purest a "Group Velocity" invoking the "Fine Structure Constant "Alpha" = 0.00729729 where c is the speed of light "Phase Velocity" or mcr = hbar = [h/2(pi)] > > > > > OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripetal force (Fc) mv^2/r with > > a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2: > > > > mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2 r = kq^2/mv^2 > > Yes, I suppose relativistic effects can be neglected at c/137, and QM effects ignored for now. The rest is not obvious to me, maybe you will have enlightened me when I'll be back? (must be off right now) > Relativistic "Gamma" = E (kinetic)/Eo (mc^2) + 1 = [1/1- (v^2/c^2)]^1/2 doesn't get very pronounced at 218 eV (3.488E-17 joules) where mc^2 for the regular electron equal 8.19E-14 Joule: (3.488E-17/8.19E-14) + 1 = 1.000425 less yet for a mass 2 * electron (Electronium) mass. I'm trying to enlighten myself on where an Electronium (stable/bound Ps- particle) ground state orbit will be. Then show that when it is shaken loose from atoms/molecules and taken up by the H+ ion,with release of energy exceeding the 13.6 eV bohr ground state, it is what Mills is calling a 'Fractional Orbit Electron-Hydrino". Without writing a book and unsettling the orthodox scientific establishment. :-) Fred > > Michel > > > > > It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the > > bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r > > = 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2 > > equal 3.1E6 meters/sec (the square root of 2 (1.414) times c/137). > > > > But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity > > requirements n (c/137) velocity v = 4.378E6 meters/sec and > > radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters > > and potential V = kq/r' = 218 volts. > > > > Fred From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 07:27:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58EQlxQ011528; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:26:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58EQgT4011449; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:26:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:26:42 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=fNcEEfCOSLkHIPqiwlOrlE70KLq21Ta2AqT+2uuIEIkAYsfZa/X2sQVJjc0RQhg4; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006648142624491@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:26:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c9aa39d7be0332f491632c509cd55aea350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.55 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68836 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Might the Joe Cell "Processing/Electrolysis" be setting up conditions where the "combustion" in an ICE effects the uptake of Electronium by H+ ions? > [Original Message] > From: Frederick Sparber > To: > Date: 6/8/2006 8:14:27 AM > Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits > > Michel Jullian wrote: > > > > Hi Fred, a very good idea to do such maths after the hydrino radiuses law > discussion! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Frederick Sparber" > > To: "vortex-l" > > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:04 PM > > Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits > > > > > > > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r > > > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent > > > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo > > > > > > Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same > potential > > > at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg. > > > > Indeed. > > > > > > > > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that > > > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance > > > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). > > > > Where does this come from? > > > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. For the purest > a "Group Velocity" invoking the "Fine Structure Constant "Alpha" = > 0.00729729 > where c is the speed of light "Phase Velocity" or mcr = hbar = [h/2(pi)] > > > > > > > > OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripetal force (Fc) mv^2/r with > > > a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2: > > > > > > mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2 r = kq^2/mv^2 > > > > Yes, I suppose relativistic effects can be neglected at c/137, and QM > effects ignored for now. The rest is not obvious to me, maybe you will have > enlightened me when I'll be back? (must be off right now) > > > Relativistic "Gamma" = E (kinetic)/Eo (mc^2) + 1 = [1/1- (v^2/c^2)]^1/2 > doesn't > get very pronounced at 218 eV (3.488E-17 joules) where mc^2 for the regular > electron equal 8.19E-14 Joule: (3.488E-17/8.19E-14) + 1 = 1.000425 less > yet > for a mass 2 * electron (Electronium) mass. > > I'm trying to enlighten myself on where an Electronium (stable/bound Ps- > particle) ground state > orbit will be. Then show that when it is shaken loose from atoms/molecules > and > taken up by the H+ ion,with release of energy exceeding the 13.6 eV bohr > ground state, > it is what Mills is calling a 'Fractional Orbit Electron-Hydrino". > > Without writing a book and unsettling the orthodox scientific > establishment. :-) > > Fred > > > > > > Michel > > > > > > > > It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the > > > bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r > > > = 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2 > > > equal 3.1E6 meters/sec (the square root of 2 (1.414) times c/137). > > > > > > But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity > > > requirements n (c/137) velocity v = 4.378E6 meters/sec and > > > radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters > > > and potential V = kq/r' = 218 volts. > > > > > > Fred > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 07:30:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58ETSnF012903; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:29:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58ETRMG012887; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:29:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:29:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Subject: RE: Cart before the horse Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 09:29:23 -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 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <048401c68ae7$1c34ab10$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68837 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Not sure what email program you are using, but a simple filter that puts messages addressed to "vortex-l@eskimo.com" into a created folder called say... 'VORTEX' will parse the in bound mail nicely for you. 8^) -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian [mailto:mj@exbang.com] Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:34 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Cart before the horse Hi Robin, Good point! List manager, don't know if this has been asked before but would it be possible at all to automatically prefix the lists' emails with [Vo] or something to distinguish them from lesser stuff? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin van Spaandonk" To: Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:15 AM Subject: Cart before the horse > Hi, > > http://www.physorg.com/news68373280.html > > If they let the wind farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they > wouldn't need a military. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 08:34:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58FY5Eb024290; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:34:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58FY43F024261; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:34:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:34:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005c01c68b10$f7bb6970$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Polywater & WaterFuel Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:33:59 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68838 X-Loop: vortex-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 remember the so-called "Polywater" scandal forty years ago? It was one of the first times in which the "mainstream physics" establishment exerted the combined-silencing-power of higher-authority influence to squelch the laboratory research of a few quasi-competent scientists "on the fringe" because the experiment was difficult to reproduce, and unsettling. Even today, some consider that the episode was a "bad rap" and that there was something to it - "other than" mineral-leaching at work. But like the Inquisition, the mainstream squeezed "confessions" out of the perps, to prove that they were in error ... go figure. Curiously, in the early days of CF - the label: the "next polywater" scandal was given to the emerging field, following the MIT report "doctoring." Cold Fusion - the "next polywater" scandal. Makes any respectable PhD want to shy away from that subject, now doesn't it? The thought just occurred... given the way the initial experiments were performed, there is every expectation that the Helmholtz layer which can exist even on contaminated insulators like Pyrex or quartz capillaries - at submicron distances following "conditioning" - could have been creating the two natural paired ions, *hydronium and hydroxide-hydrate* which eventually link via Van de Waals forces into a polymer-like string of linear ionic capacitors, given enough time... In a curious coincidence (returning for a moment to the even more scandalous subject of vehicles powered by so-called WaterFuel), my source tells me that the "fuel grade" of preconditioned water he uses is "thick like syrup" after an overnight conditioning. More B.S. from Oz ? another case of 'mineralization,' disguising itself as something else? or ... the rebirth of what was "really going on" 40-years ago in a field that perhaps never should have been ostracized so impetuously, based on the word of "higher authority": Polywater? That incident was one of the first well-known cases of 'blacklisting' and as it turns out, some high-profile scientists are definitely discovered to be "cheats" - as was the recent incident with the Korean geneticist - but there is too much power on the "official" end of the spectrum as well - and if the "mainstream" has let us down, once again, by snubbing waterfuel, based on preconceived "impossibility" as happened in LENR - then maybe society should demand a mandatory-muzzle with every PhD degree. Jones Ref: From the Wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater Polywater was a hypothetical polymerized form of water that was the subject of much scientific controversy during the late 1960s. The Soviet physicist Nikolai Fedyakin, working at a small government research lab in Kostroma, Russia, had performed measurements on the properties of water that had been condensed in or repeatedly forced through narrow quartz capillary tubes. Some of these experiments resulted in what was seemingly a new form of water with a higher boiling point, lower freezing point, and much higher viscosity than ordinary water, about that of a syrup. [snip] When the experiments that had produced polywater were repeated with rigorously cleaned glassware, the anomalous properties of the resulting water vanished, and even the scientists who had originally advanced the case for polywater agreed that it did not exist. This took a few years longer in the Soviet Union, where the scientists still clung to the idea. Hello ! did they cave? Can anyone not envision that the "rigorous cleaning" itself may have eliminated the causative agent for what was really happening - as it was possibly the Helmholtz activator, most like some calcium mineral. By the way - all the proponents say that Stainless Steel electrodes do not work until a whitish surface layer builds up... Hmm... or is that too a "red herring"? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 10:09:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58H8dwq022375; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:08:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58H8csA022358; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:08:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:08:38 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=bfmtUFW+8Hd16Z7OQ8pD2e6b0K4HRknmFGHeqGhpKuIAZ/nRIf3Nq0l9dPGO3JpQ; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066481782529@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Wilson Cloud Chamber, Bubble Chamber and Aqueous Ions Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:08:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9400769f8e7a77fe3ec9185d28a7e1a5a71350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.161 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68839 X-Loop: vortex-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 Water molecules coalesce around charged aqueous ions or aqueous ion hydrates. If they do it there they will do it in a Joe Cell. (mostly when it's cool?) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Water molecules coalesce around charged aqueous ions or
aqueous ion hydrates.
If they do it there they will do it in a Joe Cell. (mostly when it's cool?)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 10:30:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58HU4jC004585; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:30:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58HPuRU001736; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:25:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 10:25:56 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=sEHJZO69o8ttx1YjLVf4lwcSKqBmENz39b0Ovq4X/65OGrnFXZDiUK5rvKJrIF73; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006648172528737@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Wilson Cloud Chamber, Bubble Chamber and Aqueous Ions Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:25:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402ac5423504ab21b9d8ac84f90bc86fa9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.45 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68840 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW if negative ion clusters stack up enough that hydrogen bonding exceeds the coulomb repulsion force they should mimic or be Ken Shoulders' "Charge Clusters". ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/8/2006 11:08:14 AM Subject: Re: Wilson Cloud Chamber, Bubble Chamber and Aqueous Ions Water molecules coalesce around charged aqueous ions or aqueous ion hydrates. If they do it there they will do it in a Joe Cell. (mostly when it's cool?) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW if negative ion clusters stack up enough
that hydrogen bonding exceeds the coulomb repulsion
force they should mimic or be Ken Shoulders' "Charge Clusters".
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/8/2006 11:08:14 AM
Subject: Re: Wilson Cloud Chamber, Bubble Chamber and Aqueous Ions

Water molecules coalesce around charged aqueous ions or
aqueous ion hydrates.
If they do it there they will do it in a Joe Cell. (mostly when it's cool?)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 11:17:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58IHAYW000781; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:17:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58IH8Fq000763; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:17:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:17:08 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=QjSAGcc7TdWLhsaElJtPqV7EZ4BqK9zGVmPEN0+jgUAvgA4wLNTGAqbZXUOFhZT7; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006648181651853@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Calcium Carbide< Nitride, Cyanamide, Cyanogen, HCN & Orgone Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 12:16:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b56233ee4bc6f211f746522aeb4a2365350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.14 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68841 X-Loop: vortex-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 These refractory compounds likely present in the cosmic dust that formed our solar system dissolved in the primordial sea formed polyacetylene (which can add H2O to form simple sugars.and/or acrylic acid) which, can react with the ammonia formed when calcium nitride reacts with water to form amino acids and when the cyanogen and hydrogen cyanide RNA and DNA formed. What will happen if you dissolve them in Orgone-ized Joe Cells? A tiger in your tank? ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
These refractory compounds likely present in the cosmic dust that formed our
solar system dissolved in the primordial sea formed polyacetylene (which can add H2O to
form simple sugars.and/or acrylic acid) which, can react with the ammonia
formed when calcium nitride reacts with water to form amino acids and when
the cyanogen and hydrogen cyanide RNA and DNA formed.
 
What will happen if you dissolve them in Orgone-ized Joe Cells?
 
A tiger in your tank?
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 11:51:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58IoGhL019586; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:51:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58IjuZX016799; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:45:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:45:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00dc01c68b2b$c54c14b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <8C8585E17D9BA74-BD4-397FD@mblkn-m06.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: The Weirding Way Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:45:50 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68842 X-Loop: vortex-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: > While furthering the research on the Canadian ZPE patent, I came > across the SASER: http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/split/779-1.html > "A New Kind of Acoustic Laser" Hah! Science writing at its absolute worst ! Apparently the AIP, with their persistent "fish-wrap" level of journalism, wants become the "National Enquirer" of Physics. Methinks they are there, already... This is NOT sound. It is IR by definition. Ultrasound is sound with a frequency greater than the upper limit of human hearing, approximately 20,000 hertz. The upper limit is in the low megaherz range. Infrared (IR) radiation is of a wavelength longer than that of visible light but shorter than microwaves. The name means "below red" (from the Latin infra, "below"), red being the color of visible light of longest wavelength. The definition applies to both photons and phonons. These guys and maybe AIP want to install a new defintion of sound apparently. Why do we need that ? This device a terahertz laser, on which there are many "pesky" patents and tons of (glossed over and uncreditied) prior art - and has it zero to do with ultrasound, except that it is 'phonon' instead of 'photon'... ...and it is tempting to call everything sound which involves phonons, if you have a selfish incentive. Big mistake. They are probably trying to dodge IP issues. Whoever wrote this, if Phil Schewe and Ben Stein are not aliases, are due a public spanking followed by an hour in the corner with with a cone-hat for stupidity. They even admit: "In these wells, really just carefully confined planar regions, electrons can be excited by parcels of ultrasound, which typically possess millielectronvolts of energy, equivalent to a frequency of 0.1-1 terahertz." Hello... That is "not just wrong." ... what you have is heat, not sound. Signed, Harry Tuttle Nit-Picker deluxe Recently inducted (indicted) into the Physics Hall of Infamy From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 13:31:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58KV355008181; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:31:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58KV1g8008163; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:31:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:31:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <013b01c68b3a$74119070$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Cc: Subject: There are Suits & there are suits Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:30:58 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68843 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick Vessey send me this most intriguing site about "nanobubbles" http://personal.chem.usyd.edu.au/Phil.Attard/nanobubble/QA.htm in which you can learn: What makes Olympic swimmers in suits faster? ...and perhaps a bit more... James Tyrrell and Phil Attard of the University of South Australia set out to obtain molecular scale images of water repellent surfaces using a scanning probe microscope. The motivation for the work was to find `nanobubbles', which are thought to be the cause of the long range attractions between such hydrophobic surfaces in water. (See 'Physical Review' Letters Focus:`Small Attractive Bubbles'). Such nanobubbles, which are smaller than the wavelength of light, had not previously been seen, and there existence and longevity was in doubt. The striking images produced by Tyrrell and Attard reveal bubbles about 30nm in height, which is comparable to the range of the attractions that they measured. The bubbles had lifetimes of the order of hours, and rapidly reformed when disturbed. Did you catch that Robin? ... about 30 nm ... hmm and in water ... a nice-sized energy 'hole' one might imagine, or nearly so ... the search goes on. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 14:30:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58LUZcK003776; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:30:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58LUXJO003766; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:30:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:30:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060608173005.03e7bb38@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060608114538.03fbfad8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 17:30:25 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_29963296==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <1XlbuD.A.u6.5bJiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68844 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_29963296==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed [SECOND COPY. Something is wrong with eskimo.com, I think.] Jones Beene wrote: >Even today, some consider that the episode was a "bad rap" and that >there was something to it - "other than" mineral-leaching at work. >But like the Inquisition, the mainstream squeezed "confessions" out >of the perps, to prove that they were in error ... go figure. That is not my impression from the Franks book. (Franks, F., Polywater. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1981) As far as I know, in the end the researchers themselves concluded that their initial findings were incorrect, and they retracted. Science was more forgiving back then. Several of the people who worked on probably water are still welcome in the establishment, and some still say it was one of the most fascinating and valuable experiences of their careers. Apparently, no mea culpa was demanded of them. No one in cold fusion would get away with saying something like that! - Jed --=====================_29963296==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" [SECOND COPY. Something is wrong with eskimo.com, I think.]

Jones Beene wrote:

Even today, some consider that the episode was a "bad rap" and that there was something to it - "other than" mineral-leaching at work. But like the Inquisition, the mainstream squeezed "confessions" out of the perps, to prove that they were in error ... go figure.

That is not my impression from the Franks book. (Franks, F., Polywater. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1981) As far as I know, in the end the researchers themselves concluded that their initial findings were incorrect, and they retracted. Science was more forgiving back then.

Several of the people who worked on probably water are still welcome in the establishment, and some still say it was one of the most fascinating and valuable experiences of their careers. Apparently, no mea culpa was demanded of them. No one in cold fusion would get away with saying something like that!

- Jed
--=====================_29963296==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 14:43:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58LglMG009381; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:42:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58LggQL009339; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:42:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:42:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060608214237459.7025B2400084@mwinf3201.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060608214238.00b89818@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, 08 Jun 2006 22:42:38 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: <6yrV3.A.0RC.RnJiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68845 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:30 pm 08/06/2006 -0400, Jed wrote: >Several of the people who worked on probably water ... Or even walked on "probably water"... 8-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 15:05:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58M4i54020144; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:04:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58M4cuq020010; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:04:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:04:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Two clean reactions Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 08:04:30 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <011d01c68948$6cc358b0$3800a8c0@zothan> <021901c689ba$ce2e9700$3800a8c0@zothan> <02d401c68a33$317d53a0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <02d401c68a33$317d53a0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.52.6] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 8 Jun 2006 22:04:29 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k58M4Uf0019916 Resent-Message-ID: <-Y4tyD.A.V4E.z7JiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68846 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:06:29 +0200: Hi Michel, [snip] >Hi Robin, > >fm being an accepted symbol both for the Fermi and the official unit femtometer it stands for only one thing, that's why I prefer it to F. Fair enough, I'll try to remember to stick to fm in future. > >You seem to be quite into this Mills stuff, what's the evidence for hydrinos or hydrino excess heat outside of Mill's lab? Have you yourself done any experiments? I did work with a small group to try to get a car to run on an argon helium hydrogen mix, but the engine was old, and leaked like a sieve. We gave up on it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 15:14:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58MEQQf026133; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:14:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58MEPBt026113; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:14:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:14:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <019301c68b48$e63d21b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060608173005.03e7bb38@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:14:23 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <1Ags6D.A.9XG.AFKiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68847 X-Loop: vortex-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: Jed Rothwell > That is not my impression from the Franks book. (Franks, F., > Polywater. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1981) As far as I know, > in the end the researchers themselves concluded that their > initial findings were incorrect, and they retracted. Science was > more forgiving back then. Yes. They did "retract" so to speak, but... and the Franks' book was a decent, err 'felicitous' account of it all, but let's not forget that this was the cold war, and a huge embarassment to USSR-Science, so we can never be sure whether any of the recanting on the Russian-end was voluntary - or ... whether it related solely to the fact that the "effect" went away, when ultraclean caplillaries were used (nor whether the next lab-venue for some of them was Ice-9 research in Siberia... ) Apologies for the 'Inquisition' reference - hyperbole - of course. Siberia is preferable, one imagines, to burning at the stake... And certainly, the whole scenario may be totally unrelated to the context in which I was trying to shoehorn it - which was Waterfuel. Time will tell. Yet, it is still fascinating that nobody denies that there was some initial anomaly which did disappear in pristine conditions YET ... it did reappear when the apparatus was not contaminated. That means only that water was not solely responsible, but NOT that water was not somehow unchanged itself, in an unusual way. And the technology was not available then to determine precisely what was happening in its fullest extent - i.e. in addition to mineralization... if there was an additional factor, which there may - or may not have been. Like Michelson-Morley, the full truth may still be "out-there" and it is not necessarily "case closed" ... if you add-in things learned since. The polywater incident spawned a number of tongue-in-cheek episode of Star Trek, where it was 'real' which will keep it going as a meme for sometime to come (along with di-lithium). Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 15:16:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58MGelf027616; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:16:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58MGdlG027596; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:16:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:16:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060608221637130.1FE8A8000082@mwinf3214.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060608221637.00ade9d4@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, 08 Jun 2006 23:16:37 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: water & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68848 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones Beene Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:35:49 -0700 > Ref: From the Wiki entry: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater > Polywater was a hypothetical polymerized form > of water that was the subject of much scientific > controversy during the late 1960s. The Soviet > physicist Nikolai Fedyakin, working at a small > government research lab in Kostroma, Russia, > had performed measurements on the properties > of water that had been condensed in or > repeatedly forced through narrow quartz capillary > tubes. Some of these experiments resulted in > what was seemingly a new form of water with a > higher boiling point, lower freezing point, > and much higher viscosity than ordinary water, > about that of a syrup. I believe there is a connection between polywater and Stan Meyer's Water_fuel_cell_capacitor since in both cases the water is being subjected to an intense biaxial pressure by the equivalent of a solid paten with negative feedback. This will have the effect of "disking" the water which is the stuff obeying the 2D Casimir 8th power law. For an explanation of platen negative feedback see the Infinite Energy magazine article on "Aether Vacua and Cold Fusion" Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 15:41:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58MfPZV007298; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:41:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k58MfOcG007283; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:41:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:41:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060608224118350.558022C00086@mwinf3101.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060608224119.009cebd0@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, 08 Jun 2006 23:41:19 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68849 X-Loop: vortex-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 Jones Beene Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:35:49 -0700 > Ref: From the Wiki entry: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater > Polywater was a hypothetical polymerized form > of water that was the subject of much scientific > controversy during the late 1960s. The Soviet > physicist Nikolai Fedyakin, working at a small > government research lab in Kostroma, Russia, > had performed measurements on the properties > of water that had been condensed in or > repeatedly forced through narrow quartz capillary > tubes. Some of these experiments resulted in > what was seemingly a new form of water with a > higher boiling point, lower freezing point, > and much higher viscosity than ordinary water, > about that of a syrup. > I believe there is a connection between polywater and Stan Meyer's Water_fuel_cell_capacitor since in both cases the water is being subjected to an intense biaxial pressure by the equivalent of a solid paten with negative feedback. This will have the effect of "disking" the water which is the stuff obeying the 2D Casimir 8th power law. For an explanation of platen negative feedback see the Infinite Energy magazine article on "Aether Vacua and Cold Fusion" Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 18:01:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5910mVP012127; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:00:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5910gxY012093; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:00:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:00:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <056f01c68b60$1f1d4110$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Calling for list manager attention (was Re: Cart before the horse) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:00:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5910eeB012068 Resent-Message-ID: <4o_IeD.A.58C.6gMiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68850 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sure but then people who only watch their inbox like me will miss the posts, or they will check them rarely. So, why not a [Vo] prefix, list manager? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Steck" To: Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 4:29 PM Subject: RE: Cart before the horse > Not sure what email program you are using, but a simple filter that puts > messages addressed to "vortex-l@eskimo.com" into a created folder called > say... 'VORTEX' will parse the in bound mail nicely for you. > > 8^) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian [mailto:mj@exbang.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:34 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Cart before the horse > > > Hi Robin, > > Good point! > > List manager, don't know if this has been asked before but would it be > possible at all to automatically prefix the lists' emails with [Vo] or > something to distinguish them from lesser stuff? > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robin van Spaandonk" > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:15 AM > Subject: Cart before the horse > > >> Hi, >> >> http://www.physorg.com/news68373280.html >> >> If they let the wind farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they >> wouldn't need a military. >> >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ >> >> Competition provides the motivation, >> Cooperation provides the means. >> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 18:32:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k591Vo65027334; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:31:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k591Vkoi027288; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:31:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:31:46 -0700 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:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=RL5zBTQ+j87TeMLCbhPD8r6Nb7ZuALNOjMFR43wJtdDS/9aRtEi5REiDp5Kvne6eF8EOvunxCx7XZ0K4Zlnb8fhbHXyLpd+EbkkxkeqsBlwmSz1AXjNeawLkERzbjKQAHzchtwClpQOEsBdtQZlVQHtz2JiO+5rGV9KRiTpu32Y= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 18:31:44 -0700 From: "leaking pen" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calling for list manager attention (was Re: Cart before the horse) In-Reply-To: <056f01c68b60$1f1d4110$3800a8c0@zothan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_27569_33277188.1149816704088" References: <056f01c68b60$1f1d4110$3800a8c0@zothan> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68851 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_27569_33277188.1149816704088 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline i believe list manager would be bill beaty, and from what i can see, he doesnt always go through all the emails. you might wanna try him directly On 6/8/06, Michel Jullian wrote: > > Sure but then people who only watch their inbox like me will miss the > posts, or they will check them rarely. > > So, why not a [Vo] prefix, list manager? > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Steck" > To: > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 4:29 PM > Subject: RE: Cart before the horse > > > > Not sure what email program you are using, but a simple filter that put= s > > messages addressed to "vortex-l@eskimo.com" into a created folder calle= d > > say... 'VORTEX' will parse the in bound mail nicely for you. > > > > 8^) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michel Jullian [mailto:mj@exbang.com] > > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:34 AM > > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Subject: Re: Cart before the horse > > > > > > Hi Robin, > > > > Good point! > > > > List manager, don't know if this has been asked before but would it be > > possible at all to automatically prefix the lists' emails with [Vo] or > > something to distinguish them from lesser stuff? > > > > Michel > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Robin van Spaandonk" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:15 AM > > Subject: Cart before the horse > > > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> http://www.physorg.com/news68373280.html > >> > >> If they let the wind farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they > >> wouldn't need a military. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Robin van Spaandonk > >> > >> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > >> > >> Competition provides the motivation, > >> Cooperation provides the means. > >> > > > > --=20 "Monsieur l'abb=E9, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to ma= ke it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire ------=_Part_27569_33277188.1149816704088 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline i believe list manager would be bill beaty, and from what i can see, he doe= snt always go through all the emails. you might wanna try him directly
=
On 6/8/06, M= ichel Jullian <mj@exbang.com>= ; wrote:
Sure but then people who only wa= tch their inbox like me will miss the posts, or they will check them rarely= .

So, why not a [Vo] prefix, list manager?

Michel

-----= Original Message -----
From: "John Steck" <johnsteck@tetrahelix.com>
To: < vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent:= Thursday, June 08, 2006 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: Cart before the horse
<= br>
> Not sure what email program you are using, but a simple filter = that puts
> messages addressed to "vortex-l@eskimo.com" into a created folder called
> say... = 'VORTEX' will parse the in bound mail nicely for you.
>
> 8^)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Jullian [m= ailto:mj@exbang.com]
> Sent: Thu= rsday, June 08, 2006 5:34 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: Cart before the horse
><= br>>
> Hi Robin,
>
> Good point!
>
> List = manager, don't know if this has been asked before but would it be
> p= ossible at all to automatically prefix the lists' emails with [Vo] or
> something to distinguish them from lesser stuff?
>
> M= ichel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robi= n van Spaandonk" <rvansp= aa@bigpond.net.au >
> To: <vortex-l@es= kimo.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:15 AM
> Subj= ect: Cart before the horse
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> http://www.ph= ysorg.com/news68373280.html
>>
>> If they let the win= d farms proceed and displace fossil fuels, they
>> wouldn't need a= military.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaando= nk
>>
>> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
>>
>> Competi= tion provides the motivation,
>> Cooperation provides the means.
>>
>




--
"Monsieur l'abb=E9, I= detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for yo= u to continue to write"  Voltaire=20 ------=_Part_27569_33277188.1149816704088-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 19:14:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k592Du7B021907; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:13:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k592DsgO021879; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:13:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:13:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000e01c68b6a$55ac7e80$ac037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Calling for list manager attention Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:13:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68B40.6C4FE160" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68852 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68B40.6C4FE160 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68B40.6C4FE160" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68B40.6C4FE160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Vorts, Many of us have began to experience "missing" posts and other e-mails we = know was sent us. Couple these "glitches" with a suspicion the net is = under scrutiny and it makes you wonder if there is somebody out there = that is a whole lot smarter than us playing with us. Perhaps it is Big = Brother's Mother. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68B40.6C4FE160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Vorts,
 
Many of us have began to experience "missing" posts and = other=20 e-mails we know was sent us. Couple these "glitches" with a suspicion = the net is=20 under scrutiny and it makes you wonder if there is somebody out there = that is a=20 whole lot smarter than us playing with us. Perhaps it is Big Brother's=20 Mother.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68B40.6C4FE160-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68B40.6C4FE160 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c68b6a$551e4840$ac037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68B40.6C4FE160-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 21:26:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k594Plpi024498; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:25:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k594Pjqc024479; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:25:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:25:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:25:43 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4tth82ll54ga227m81mkvk0a0kjfu8abvp@4ax.com> References: <005c01c68b10$f7bb6970$6401a8c0@NuDell> In-Reply-To: <005c01c68b10$f7bb6970$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.52.6] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:25:42 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k594PghX024453 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68853 X-Loop: vortex-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, 8 Jun 2006 08:33:59 -0700: Hi, [snip] >In a curious coincidence (returning for a moment to the even more >scandalous subject of vehicles powered by so-called WaterFuel), my >source tells me that the "fuel grade" of preconditioned water he >uses is "thick like syrup" after an overnight conditioning. [snip] I suspect that the syrup was dissolved NaSiO3. "Waterglass" can get very thick and gooey (my mother used to preserve eggs in it :). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 22:01:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5950gQb010286; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 22:00:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k594oLOJ005261; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:50:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 21:50:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609045002571.8B99E1C00084@mwinf3204.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060609045003.00ba3b0c@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, 09 Jun 2006 05:50:03 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: <54TmCD.A.6RB.L4PiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68854 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:41 pm 08/06/2006 +0100, you wrote: > From Jones Beene > Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:35:49 -0700 > > > Ref: From the Wiki entry: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater > > Polywater was a hypothetical polymerized form > of water ... and much higher viscosity than > ordinary water, about that of a syrup. The higher viscosity makes perfect sense. There is a well known example of this of this phenomena (to Soil Mechanicians at any rate). Clays can be divided into two broad classes; that where the shape of the mineral grains tends to the spherical and that where the shape tends to the flakey. For grains of equal mass the Liquid and Plastic Limits are much higher for the flakey than for the spherical. No doubt about it to my mind. Polywater is real. I think we should all stand and sing a little hymn to honour the resurrection of Polly Water. # Polly put the kettle on Polly put the kettle on Polly put the kettle on We'll all have tea Suki take it off again Suki take it off again Suki take it off again We'll all have none Polly put it back again Polly put it back again Polly put it back again We'll all have tea # And for Vortexians who may not know the tune, they will find a midi rendition at: ------------------------------------------------- http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/pollyput.htm ------------------------------------------------- Cheers, Frank Grimer ..and many thanks to Jones for making this James Burkian connection between Polywater & WaterFuel. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 8 23:13:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k596DewW015727; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:13:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k596DaSu015691; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:13:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:13:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609061332772.BCABDB800083@mwinf3211.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060609061334.00beea48@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, 09 Jun 2006 07:13:34 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68855 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:30 pm 08/06/2006 -0400, Jed wrote: > Jones Beene wrote: > >> Even today, some consider that the episode was a "bad rap" >> and that there was something to it - "other than" >> mineral-leaching at work. But like the Inquisition, the >> mainstream squeezed "confessions" out of the perps, to >> prove that they were in error ... go figure. > That is not my impression from the Franks book. > (Franks, F., Polywater. > Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1981) Wel you wouldn't expect to get that impression from the Franks book, would you Jed? I mean to say, look who the publishers are. "Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press". I'm with Jones - And I've gone and figured. 8-) Frank [not to be confused with Franks ;-) ] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 00:51:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k597o9WT025665; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:50:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k597emVP020898; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:40:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:40:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609074035657.A07CBB400087@mwinf3013.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060609074037.0099dad4@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, 09 Jun 2006 08:40:37 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: <0auPvB.A.ZGF.-XSiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68856 X-Loop: vortex-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 priceless!!! 8-) ================================================ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res= 9A00E2DE133BF933A0575BC0A967948260 ------------------------------------------------ ... Felix Franks, a British biophysicist and leading authority on the behavior of water, tells his story clearly, in spare prose. In the early 1960's, an obscure Soviet chemist named Nikolai Fedyakin was studying the behavior of water sealed in very narrow glass tubes (called capillaries). He found that secondary columns of water often developed spontaneously in upper parts of the tube where no water had been. These upper columns grew slowly at the expense of the lower, primary columns. ... ================================================ So the water evaporates - But what evapourates? The flakey surface phase evapourates. And what is this surface phase? Why the 8th power vapour phase as described on Professor Chaplin's water site. Poor old Franks has hoisted himself on his own petard. Bouquets for the Ruskies. Brickbats for Harvard. My daughter-in-law will be pleased. Cheers, 8-) Frank ............................................. If the Men in Black are reading this, let's hope that some of them are bright enough to recognise its significance - although the Ruskies deserve to get there first. ............................................. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 00:58:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k597w3Yk029841; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:58:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k597vxmx029795; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:57:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:57:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609075757578.8D4881C00081@mwinf3006.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060609075758.00999cc8@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, 09 Jun 2006 08:57:58 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: <-XVSuB.A.fRH.HoSiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68857 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Even more from the NYT article: ====================================== American and British scientists were skeptical at first, and interest grew slowly. But Mr. Deryagin's appearance at several meetings and the activity of a few English boosters prompted an increasing attention that burst into furious activity when, in 1969, four scientists at the United States Bureau of Standards published a spectrum for ''anomalous water'' showing several new bands that do not appear at all in the spectrum of ordinary water. (In infrared spectroscopy, a substance is bombarded with infrared radiation. It absorbs this radiation at wavelengths corresponding to the energies of vibration of the various chemical bonds that it contains. The resulting spectrum displays peaks that correspond to the wavelengths at which the substance has absorbed radiation. Molecular structure can be inferred from the energies of vibration.) The Bureau of Standards scientists searched 100,000 spectra by computer and ascertained that theirs corresponded with nothing previously known. They also claimed - and now the ruckus truly began - that the physical structure best corresponding to their new spectrum was pure water in a new, polymerized form, or ''polywater,'' as they christened it. (Polymers are compounds of high molecular weight formed by the conjunction of many smaller molecules.) In polywater, the four scientists claimed, water molecules formed long chains or hexagonal rings. ====================================== Well what are "hexagonal rings" if not flakes. One thing for sure, we don't need to do any more research. It's already been done. One thing even more fun than standing on other men's shoulder is treading on other men's toes. Oh the schadenfreude, the schadenfreude. Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 01:18:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k598HbX3007978; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:17:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k598HZrt007954; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:17:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:17:35 -0700 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:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type; b=sDia8SxrCdvCplrtxs16LqHqd61668Hm82Stod2NGAZ+nVEGYOp6TghRyoiGADfrMf4DwR7+ia8YcZRDDcr+1fCj7ao+ty2irkmxjWgVEHctnpUi8eB7DfQ9szcf/+YUEWuMV+ho+1jl4JpgHbkimDWU/DR7+tGGfKBohsxJylc= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:17:32 -0400 From: "john herman" To: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk Subject: Joe AND basic information Cc: vortex-l MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_17215_16426422.1149841052134" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68858 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_17215_16426422.1149841052134 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Patrick and Vo, In keeping with the idea of not repeating earlier letters, please let me ask the following: (A) What is "joe Cell" and how is it different from a standard electrolytic cell? (A) -[1] I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information [2] How much current and voltage are used to arrive at how much H2 and O2? [3] What is the electrolyte? [4] What are the advantages... again...I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information...please. (B) Has anyone actually made measure of volts-amps and gas output? (B)-[1] how were the measures made? [2] was temperature measured? Thanmks, Herma On 6/6/06, Patrick Vessey wrote: > > The following has been gleaned from multiple (surprisingly consistent) > ------=_Part_17215_16426422.1149841052134 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

 
Dear Patrick and Vo,
 
   In keeping with the idea of not repeating earlier letters, please let me ask the following:
 
(A)  What is "joe Cell" and how is it different from a standard electrolytic cell?
 
    (A) -[1] I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information
 
[2]   How much current and voltage are used to arrive at how much H2 and O2?
[3]   What is the electrolyte?
[4]   What are the advantages... again...I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information...please.
 
(B)  Has anyone actually made measure of volts-amps and gas output?
(B)-[1] how were the measures made?
[2] was temperature measured?
 
                  Thanmks,
 
               Herma 
 

 
On 6/6/06, Patrick Vessey <patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
The following has been gleaned from multiple (surprisingly consistent)
------=_Part_17215_16426422.1149841052134-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 01:30:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k598UE22015964; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:30:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k598J1A5008628; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:19:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 01:19:01 -0700 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:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type; b=huzrkQ7Thswpajht5aopuLBUZ5tTwxhmxgJlANv+lempZnvmPaTc5O9sRtWgPeRDxIrt3xG1hgQHx5OhRZnmT1yPwQqpBuX9NXiDjVcEGVNFD/8UqKFeD053bsAGqwjJBsWRtXudZkTSTlTUyEW405UaNnErgvDb6QY2r5VF1Ls= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:18:56 -0400 From: "john herman" To: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk Subject: WHY would one need to? Joe AND basic information Cc: vortex-l MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_17227_14178009.1149841136379" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68859 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_17227_14178009.1149841136379 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Why would one need to "pre treat" water???? On 6/9/06, john herman wrote: > > > > Dear Patrick and Vo, > > In keeping with the idea of not repeating earlier letters, please let > me ask the following: > > (A) What is "joe Cell" and how is it different from a standard > electrolytic cell? > > (A) -[1] I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple > information > > [2] How much current and voltage are used to arrive at how much H2 and > O2? > [3] What is the electrolyte? > [4] What are the advantages... again...I am NOT asking what is > claimed.... I am asking for simple information...please. > > (B) Has anyone actually made measure of volts-amps and gas output? > (B)-[1] how were the measures made? > [2] was temperature measured? > > Thanmks, > > Herma > > > > On 6/6/06, Patrick Vessey wrote: > > > > The following has been gleaned from multiple (surprisingly consistent) > > > ------=_Part_17227_14178009.1149841136379 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Why would one need to "pre treat" water????

On 6/9/06, john herman <hermajohn@gmail.com> wrote:

 
Dear Patrick and Vo,
 
   In keeping with the idea of not repeating earlier letters, please let me ask the following:
 
(A)  What is "joe Cell" and how is it different from a standard electrolytic cell?
 
    (A) -[1] I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information
 
[2]   How much current and voltage are used to arrive at how much H2 and O2?
[3]   What is the electrolyte?
[4]   What are the advantages... again...I am NOT asking what is claimed.... I am asking for simple information...please.
 
(B)  Has anyone actually made measure of volts-amps and gas output?
(B)-[1] how were the measures made?
[2] was temperature measured?
 
                  Thanmks,
 
               Herma 
 

 
On 6/6/06, Patrick Vessey <patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk > wrote:
The following has been gleaned from multiple (surprisingly consistent)

------=_Part_17227_14178009.1149841136379-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 02:37:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k599anRb019629; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 02:36:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k599alWf019607; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 02:36:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 02:36:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609093643220.35AC21C000EC@mwinf3001.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Cc: Subject: RE: Joe AND basic information Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:39:24 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68860 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Herma, > (A) What is "joe Cell" and how is it different from a standard electrolytic cell? As a grumpy old man, my initial response to your questions was DYOR - 5 minutes with Google would have answered them... However, Vorts are (mostly ;-) known for their friendly and helpful ways. To save you having to join one of the many chattering groups out there, I've put a file that should provide some useful background here: http://www.vbpl.fsnet.co.uk/vo/jc/JCbasics.pdf Ignore the guff at the start of the file - the useful JC info is some way down. In all seriousness, if you have any further question, do please ask. Patrick [NB not the Patrick who authored the file that I've linked to] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 07/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 03:08:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59A8HAC003682; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:08:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59A8EXp003651; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:08:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:08:14 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=NVa6ld5DAnmzUreLgch+D8s3PZ1HyvYtKVawlm+R1mGQAwA+qVSAwPWmxYhzOBaQ; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665910746676@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:07:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fe4ae9b0bd8c336f2e49f06607df0c5a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.135 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68861 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules. Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832 joules per second putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347. 5,347 to 1 Free Energy ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules.
 
Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or
twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832  joules per second
putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator
means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347.
 
5,347 to 1 Free Energy  ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission
yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus.
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 03:43:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59AhfYm022615; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:43:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59AhW7x022489; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:43:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 03:43:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=MVFqNpKdgE5yVuGZ4Q632Pik2Wp6GfqYDrqnCIaNdjybRkVyHnc7DZbH4F+2YuzL; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006659104312356@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: Re; Mileage On The Cheap Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:43:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94049982366a84426014b9cc5aa4c125159350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.127 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68862 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, if that Bonus comes from "burning" one water molecule per 4,277 eV/molecule gained. 240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27 water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons in 2 hours. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/9/2006 4:08:45 AM Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules. Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832 joules per second putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347. 5,347 to 1 Free Energy ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, if that Bonus comes from "burning" one water molecule
per 4,277 eV/molecule  gained.
 
240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27
water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons
in 2 hours.  :-)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/9/2006 4:08:45 AM
Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap

A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules.
 
Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or
twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832  joules per second
putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator
means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347.
 
5,347 to 1 Free Energy  ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission
yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus.
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 04:39:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59BK0WV010539; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:20:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59BJwDZ010499; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:19:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 04:19:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=iTcGqqxxnuKYgWXmqpQNgH1YawhwaBw4wwwwvELxjDyv2og6dOGaFwZdpXgn13WY; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006659111926466@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: Re; Mileage On The Cheap Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 05:19:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ddfbea8ea6570a181db25b4324a7df73350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.185 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68863 X-Loop: vortex-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 Oh Crap. The chocolate from my coffee and donuts hasn't kicked in yet. 120,000,000/(4,277*1.6E-19) = 3.5E23 H2O molecules used in an hour = 3.5E23*18*1.66E-24 = 10.5 grams H2O/hour. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/9/2006 4:44:07 AM Subject: RE: Re; Mileage On The Cheap BTW, if that Bonus comes from "burning" one water molecule per 4,277 eV/molecule gained. 240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27 water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons in 2 hours. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/9/2006 4:08:45 AM Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules. Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832 joules per second putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347. 5,347 to 1 Free Energy ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Oh Crap.
 
The chocolate from my coffee and donuts hasn't kicked in yet.
 
120,000,000/(4,277*1.6E-19) = 3.5E23  H2O molecules used in
an hour =  3.5E23*18*1.66E-24 = 10.5 grams H2O/hour.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/9/2006 4:44:07 AM
Subject: RE: Re; Mileage On The Cheap

BTW, if that Bonus comes from "burning" one water molecule
per 4,277 eV/molecule  gained.
 
240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27
water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons
in 2 hours.  :-)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/9/2006 4:08:45 AM
Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap

A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules.
 
Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or
twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832  joules per second
putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator
means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347.
 
5,347 to 1 Free Energy  ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission
yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus.
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 05:31:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59CEZvd009636; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 05:14:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59CEWH2009586; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 05:14:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 05:14:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=FQsg+H5hfMLchMwSgXFr++wMY9KMcf4cNxOyyxLkpkG85UOox/I7bHb+7WaCP12L; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006659121410118@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re; Mileage On The Cheap Revised Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:14:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ce8b6fd516d37390dc8cfccf1af662cc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.159 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68864 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules. The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg. The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripital force (Fc) mv^2/r with a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2: mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2 r = kq^2/mv^2 It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r = 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2 equal 3.1E6 meters/sec (the square root of 2 (1.414) times c/137). But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity requirements n (c/137) velocity v = 4.378E6 meters/sec and radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters and potential V = kq/r' = 218 volts. If the particle goes to any n*c/137 fractional orbit velocity the potential (or energy release) by proton uptake can be several KeV. A 1% relativistic gamma factor will kick in at about 10 KeV. The EUV photon release can trigger additional bond-splitting in neighboring molecules. Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832 joules per second putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347. 5,347 to 1, Free Energy ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus. If the energy only comes from "burning" at 1.25 eV per water molecule. 240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27 water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons of water in 2 hours. OTOH, if there is a 4,277 eV energy gain per molecule: 120,000,000/(4,277*1.6E-19) = 3.5E23 H2O molecules used in an hour = 3.5E23*18*1.66E-24 = 10.5 grams H2O/hour. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A gallon of petrol contains 115,000 BTU or 120 million Joules.
The potential  V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r
from a particle with charge + q equals  V = k*q/r  independent
of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo
 
Hence an electron of mass 2 * 9.1E-31 kg (Electronium) has the same potential
at r = 5.29E-11 meters as a  regular electron with mass 9.1E-31 kg.
 
The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2  = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that
point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance
r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius).
 
OTOH, in order to equate an orbital centripital force (Fc) mv^2/r with
a balancing electrostatic force (Fes) kq^2/r^2:
 
mv^2/r = kq^2/r^2   r = kq^2/mv^2
 
It seems that a particle with mass 2m * v^2 will orbit at 1/2 the
bohr orbit radius of an electron with a potential V * q/0.5r
= 54.4 volts at an orbital velocity of  v = [2 V*q/0.5r * (1/2m)]^1/2
equal 3.1E6 meters/sec  (the square root of 2 (1.414)  times c/137).
 
But, in order to satisfy quantum integers of c/137 velocity
requirements n (c/137)  velocity  v = 4.378E6 meters/sec  and
radius r' = kq^2/2mv^2 = 6.61E-12 meters
and  potential V = kq/r'  = 218 volts.
 
If the particle goes to any n*c/137 fractional orbit velocity
the potential (or energy release) by proton uptake can
be several KeV.
 
A  1% relativistic gamma factor will kick in at about 10 KeV.
 
The EUV photon release can trigger additional bond-splitting
in neighboring molecules.
 
 
Assuming a 30 mpg vehicle on a one hour trip at 60 mph uses 2 gallons or
twice that 120 million Joules (240 million joules) or 66,832 joules per second
putting in 12.5 volts at 1.0 ampere (12.5 watts or joules/sec) off the alternator
means a Free Energy multiplier of 66,632/12.5 = 5,347.
 
5,347 to 1, Free Energy ROI on 1.25 eV per bond fission
yielding 5,347/1.25 = 4,277 eV/Bond Energy Bonus.
 
If the energy only comes from "burning" at 1.25 eV per water molecule.
 
240,000,000/(1.25*1.6E-19) = 240,000,000/2E-19 =1.2E27
water molecules consumed = 36 kg or about 10 gallons
of water in 2 hours.
 
OTOH, if there is a 4,277 eV energy gain per molecule:
 
120,000,000/(4,277*1.6E-19) = 3.5E23 H2O molecules used in
an hour = 3.5E23*18*1.66E-24 = 10.5 grams H2O/hour.
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 06:33:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59DXWjW025024; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:33:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59DXSlD024932; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:33:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:33:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001c01c68bc9$40203de0$65037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Mileage On the Cheap Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:33:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C68B9F.560336F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68865 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68B9F.560336F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C68B9F.560336F0" ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C68B9F.560336F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Vorts, It is a well known fact that adding a mist to the intake can enhance the = performance and increase fuel mileage of an auto. Elementary example is when I travel to Houston ( 100 miles) during a = streamy hot rainy day I average 24 mpg at 55 mph, stay the night and = travel home on a hot dry day and average 20 mpg at 55 mph.. Shucks ! = everybody has done that! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C68B9F.560336F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Vorts,
 
It is a well known fact that adding a mist to the intake can = enhance the=20 performance and increase fuel mileage of an auto.
Elementary example is when I travel to Houston ( 100 miles) during = a=20 streamy hot rainy day I average 24 mpg at 55 mph, stay the night and = travel home=20 on a hot dry day and average 20 mpg at 55 mph.. Shucks = !   =20 everybody has done that!
 
Richard
------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C68B9F.560336F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C68B9F.560336F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001701c68bc9$3eb31950$65037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C68B9F.560336F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 06:59:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59Dx9DM010430; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:59:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59Dx7Pg010401; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:59:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:59:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060609135858999.F3ECA6400086@mwinf3109.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060609135901.00baa9ac@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, 09 Jun 2006 14:59:01 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Mileage On the Cheap Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68866 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:33 am 09/06/2006 -0500, Richard wrote: > Howdy Vorts, > > It is a well known fact that adding a mist > to the intake can enhance the performance > and increase fuel mileage of an auto. > > Elementary example is when I travel to > Houston ( 100 miles) during a streamy hot > rainy day I average 24 mpg at 55 mph, stay > the night and travel home on a hot dry day > and average 20 mpg at 55 mph.. Shucks ! > everybody has done that! It's nice to have a piece of anecdotal evidence from a Vort to add to the collection. But I bet you didn't realise you were actually being refuelled by 8th Power Vapour as you rode along. Frank Perhaps someone should register "8th Power" as a trade mark, eh! 8-) [What was it ACC said at the beginning of that programme? ;-) ] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 07:08:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59E8ZJp018536; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 07:08:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59E8V1M018506; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 07:08:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 07:08:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=WRZlNRjMLCjBrt4ErbZGfpstq+jOMEekVtQOAL0++j/veMDpraGI9AbwYUeblNkZ; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <411-2200665914816485@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mileage On the Cheap Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:08:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94055de242da6fe8029536b738c1e3e048d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.97 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68867 X-Loop: vortex-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 Howdy yourself, Richard. Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty days due to cooling of the compression stoke air by vaporization of the added water or is there something in the water mist-droplets giving some free energy? Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is when driving on snowy ones. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/9/2006 7:34:42 AM Subject: Re: Mileage On the Cheap Howdy Vorts, It is a well known fact that adding a mist to the intake can enhance the performance and increase fuel mileage of an auto. Elementary example is when I travel to Houston ( 100 miles) during a streamy hot rainy day I average 24 mpg at 55 mph, stay the night and travel home on a hot dry day and average 20 mpg at 55 mph.. Shucks ! everybody has done that! Richard ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Blank
Howdy yourself, Richard. 
 
Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty days due to cooling
of the compression stoke air by vaporization of the added water or is there
something in the water mist-droplets giving some free energy?
 
Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is when driving on snowy ones.
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/9/2006 7:34:42 AM
Subject: Re: Mileage On the Cheap

Howdy Vorts,
 
It is a well known fact that adding a mist to the intake can enhance the performance and increase fuel mileage of an auto.
Elementary example is when I travel to Houston ( 100 miles) during a streamy hot rainy day I average 24 mpg at 55 mph, stay the night and travel home on a hot dry day and average 20 mpg at 55 mph.. Shucks !    everybody has done that!
 
Richard
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- ------=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: Blank Bkgrd.gif Content-Id: <410-2200665914869921@13071999> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_94915C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 08:22:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59FKxgF028991; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:22:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59F6IAq020596; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:06:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:06:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006501c68bd6$3d3edcf0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: Tiny bubbles... Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 08:06:08 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68868 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Don Ho lives... (you shouldn't be saying that in every neighborhood) Despite the attempt at sci-levity above, "tiny bubbles" in water can be a very serious, if not invigorating subject, especially if you favor the "hydrino explanation" for certain anomalies which are starting to be reported 'en masse' in those areas where Joe-Cell builders abound (mostly Oz, a few in Germany and the USA). In the hydrino theory of R. Mills, and in cosmology in general, the mass energy of 27.2 eV is an important value. According To Fred's handy rule of thumb, to get a wavelength in nm from a photon energy level, divide 1242 by energy in eV. For 27.2 eV the associated wavelength is 45.66 nm and for the equally important level in cosmology (due to helium) 54.4 eV we find the associated wavelength of 22.8 nm. As mentioned and misquoted yesterday, James Tyrrell and Phil Attard of the University of South Australia in this report have documented nanobubbles: http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v87/i17/e176104 "Images of Nanobubbles on Hydrophobic Surfaces and Their Interactions" They have discovered close packed and irregular nanobubbles, forming near certain surfaces in water - which bubbles have a radius of curvature of the order of 100 nm. (not the 30 nm mentioned previously). Such nanobubbles, are smaller than the wavelength of visible light, but in the UV range where hydrinos may be activated or formed. These bubbles, in practice, could be forced into a more compact state in the operation of an ICE, due to the normal compression ratio, which is about 10-1. Given that the energies in certain water preconditioning cells, or JoeCells is much too low to form hydrinos without major help, but given that a population of solar-derived primordial hydrinos - must almost assuredly be accumulating in the oceans of earth over geologic time - the stage is set. If hydrinos are in fact real, then perhaps a (yet another) formative hypothesis is emerging from all of this disparate information - to explain the impossible. Perhaps even, under the right circumstances the so-called "orgone" is a real entity and perhaps orgone=hydrinos. BillB has also mentioned this possibility in an essay on Eskimo.com, mentioned in a previous post. The details are fuzzy, but in the situation in which the nanobubble, and the primordial hydrino are found together in an electric field - there is probably no better catalyst for secondary hydrino formation than a pre-existing but highly shrunken hydrino of the solar variety - or else the solar variety is just being "encouraged" to emerge from whatever atomic species in which it was lurking. There are other possibilities. As Fred reminds us, the lower orbital of a hydrino may ... or perhaps MUST consist of the heavy lepton - electronium, and not a normal electron in a tighter orbital - as only such a heavy lepton would preserve the original angular momentum of the lost electron and still give off anomalous energy. This is a most natural explanation, given the ubiquity of virtual Ps and the "quantum foam". The most likely host for primordial solar hydrinos in the ocean... hmm... well one candidate which should be investigated is 18O which is the surprisingly abundant isotope of oxygen. About half a percent of ocean water is this heavy so-called isotope, which seems impossible since 16O is one of the most stable of all nuclei. Some of that 16O water may serve as a host for solar hydrinos which displace the k-shell electrons, but only in pairs ?? giving the appearance of 18O. The search goes on... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 09:51:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59GpVE0020835; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:51:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59GpS4x020790; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:51:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:51:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060609125109.03fdd1b0@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060609124912.03e4ac68@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 12:51:19 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: McKubre ICCF-1 paper Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_11535109==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68869 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_11535109==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed See: McKubre, M.C.H., et al. Calorimetry and Electrochemistry in the D/Pd System. in The First Annual Conference on Cold Fusion. 1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah: National Cold Fusion Institute. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcalorimetr.pdf McKubre told me this is a "very important paper." - Jed --=====================_11535109==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" See:

McKubre, M.C.H., et al. Calorimetry and Electrochemistry in the D/Pd System. in The First Annual Conference on Cold Fusion. 1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah: National Cold Fusion Institute.

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

McKubre told me this is a "very important paper."

- Jed
--=====================_11535109==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 10:40:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59HeYcs020127; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:40:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59HeWBv020112; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:40:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:40:32 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=L6toZ9Xg0pTENUoHPePxoZsCLPaRK4Aj3/sHzlVloSsHx/IOSB+q5bqOuGRBAJIT; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006659174024702@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Tiny bubbles... Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 11:40:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fc54bbe8e8a3c54ab4b11f3dc922cf16350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.101 Resent-Message-ID: <3Zi3iC.A.M6E.QKbiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68870 X-Loop: vortex-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 other possibilities. As Fred reminds us, the lower > orbital of a hydrino may ... or perhaps MUST consist of the heavy > lepton - electronium, and not a normal electron in a tighter > orbital - as only such a heavy lepton would preserve the original > angular momentum of the lost electron and still give off anomalous > energy. This is a most natural explanation, given the ubiquity of > virtual Ps and the "quantum foam". > If you treat water and particularly the H2O molecule as a plasma in dynamic motion, it's not too difficult to see how the hydrino of whatever breed can be "brought up" to a reactive disposition by electric fields. > > The most likely host for primordial solar hydrinos in the ocean... > Agreed > > hmm... well one candidate which should be investigated is 18O > which is the surprisingly abundant isotope of oxygen. > Any atom in or on the earth is a potential host.. > > The search goes on.. > Yep Fred >. > > Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 14:10:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59L9prD007033; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:09:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59L9nL5007016; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:09:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:09:49 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=mR6rp0tQwKJxmbxTBKaJJ9sjKd/DfrL2uON6d4ZMO6HuLnfXOaRhrJq5gPientic; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665921937280@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Subject: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:09:37 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d8a82797203d13332da14ea4fa6c662ab0b5548f7b21afc86f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.244.11.248 Resent-Message-ID: <2nrthC.A.ktB.dOeiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68871 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 aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > [Original Message] > From: What's New To: Date: 6/9/2006 1:27:52 PM Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 9 Jun 06 Washington, DC 1. HEALTH: HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS VACCINE APPROVED NOT REQUIRED. Seldom in this troubled world do we get to report a story so full of promise for humankind. The FDA yesterday announced approval of a vaccine against the virus that causes cervical cancer, the result of a 15-year effort that began at the National Cancer Institute http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN06/wn010606.html . Human papillomavirus is the most common sexually transmitted disease, and the second-leading cause of death among women, killing some 233,000 women each year. Death rates are highest in countries where the Pap smear is not widely used. The vaccine should be given before girls become sexually active, however, some conservative Christian groups object, pointing out that the vaccine is no more effective than abstinence. No doubt true. 2. CRIME: THANK GOD FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION. A federal judge in Iowa ruled last Friday that a state-financed evangelical Christian program to help inmates re-enter society was "pervasively sectarian" and violated separation of church and state. Prison Fellowship Ministeries, founded by Chuck Colson, was using taxpayer dollars to proselytize inmates. Colson, of Watergate fame, has done a little hard time himself. This sets the stage for a test of a Justice Department plan to set aside cell blocks at federal prisons for a private group to "counsel" prisoners in a single faith to prepare them for release. Justice insists the program is constitutional because it's voluntary and participants will receive no special favors. But the issue is whether they think they will receive special treatment. Recent appointments to the Supreme Court take on a new significance. 3. IRAQ: HOW U.S. FORCES FOUND THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN IRAQ. This should have been the big story in today's news: To get the number-one enemy of freedom, we first had to find the crazy terrorist he was giving spiritual advice to. Crazy terrorists in Iraq are a dime-a-dozen these days, but there is only one, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who gets his spiritual advice from Sheikh Abdel Rahman. The plan was boldly simple: find al-Zarqawi and track him until he leads us to Rahman. Then, call in an F-16 strike. The problem in Iraq isn't terrorists, it's the clerics, who are constantly inflating the number of virgins per martyr. 4. LIONS: WHY CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS GAIN FEW FOLLOWERS. According to a Reuters story out of Kiev, on Sunday evening when the zoo was crowded with visitors, a man lowered himself by rope into the lion enclosure and walked up to the lions shouting,"God will save me if he exists," thus proving himself to be a man of faith. Without hesitation, a lioness severed his carotid artery. 5. BIBLES: "THE GOSPEL OF THE FLYING SPAGETTI MONSTER" IS OUT. The fastest growing carbohydrate-based religion now has its own sacred book to combat the "intelligent design" dark side. 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.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnew&A=1 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 14:22:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59LMHlj014047; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:22:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59LMGuX014022; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:22:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:22:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:22:14 -0700 From: Mark S Bilk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Message-ID: <20060609212214.GE5967@linux> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68872 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 use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons explained on my website: http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) to your .procmailrc file: :0 fhw * ^X-Mailing-List: * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes execution before proceeding. The second line tests that the message contains the header line "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the "Bcc:" line by the poster). The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail should not add a second tag to such received messages. The regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes back through the list server. There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar with them, and they're extremely useful. In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf Mark From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 16:15:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k59NF4mM012061; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 16:15:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k59NF2kW012044; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 16:15:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 16:15:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: McKubre ICCF-1 paper Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:14:59 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0rvj82pa5vnprh85ltsaej789k9bej3nep@4ax.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060609125109.03fdd1b0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060609124912.03e4ac68@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060609125109.03fdd1b0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060609124912.03e4ac68@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.50] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Fri, 9 Jun 2006 23:14:58 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k59NExtV012003 Resent-Message-ID: <2KtdnB.A.H8C.1DgiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68873 X-Loop: vortex-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, 09 Jun 2006 12:51:19 -0400: Hi, [snip] >See: > >McKubre, M.C.H., et al. Calorimetry and Electrochemistry in the D/Pd >System. in The First Annual Conference on Cold Fusion. 1990. >University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah: National Cold >Fusion Institute. > >http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcalorimetr.pdf > >McKubre told me this is a "very important paper." Bursts may well be caused by Hydrino formation going hand in hand with O++ formation. Normal electrolysis can produce a slow growth in hydrinos attached to the cathode as hydrinohydride. Background radiation can produce some O++ ions, that can then catalyze shrinkage resulting in the chain reaction I previously described when discussing the Mizuno explosion. IOW heat bursts are really just miniature explosions where there is not yet enough hydrinohydride present to destroy the reactor vessel. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 22:14:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5A5E7Cg002192; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:14:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5A5E5xx002176; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:14:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:14:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610051355661.A18701C00082@mwinf3106.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610051356.00babbd0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:13:56 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Fred's Question Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68874 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:08 am 09/06/2006 -0600, Fred wrote: > Howdy yourself, Richard. > > Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty > days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air > by vaporization of the added water or is there > something in the water mist-droplets giving > some free energy? > > Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is > when driving on snowy ones. > > Fred And Howdy again, Richard, I think Fred's question: ================================ "is there something in the water mist-droplets giving some free energy?" ================================ is a very good one, and, since you've never struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad surprised that you haven't answered it. For that matter it would be very interesting to see how many other Vortexians are prepared to stand up and be counted on this one way or the other, including of course, Fred himself. 8-) As for myself, because of the confluence of evidence I have absolutely no doubt that the mist vapour is indeed giving you some free energy and not merely improving efficiency. Cheers, Frank -------------------------------------------- nolite arbitrari quia venerim mittere pacem in terram non veni pacem mittere sed gladium -------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 9 22:33:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5A5Xd5n011949; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:33:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5A5XbKS011925; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:33:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:33:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610053330553.8712D5800082@mwinf3112.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610053331.00b6fcd4@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:33:31 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68875 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 02:09 pm 09/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: >From aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > 4. LIONS: WHY CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS GAIN FEW FOLLOWERS. > According to a Reuters story out of Kiev, on Sunday evening when > the zoo was crowded with visitors, a man lowered himself by rope > into the lion enclosure and walked up to the lions shouting,"God > will save me if he exists," thus proving himself to be a man of > faith. Without hesitation, a lioness severed his carotid artery. But had the poor demented man been a Christian, Bob, he would have been familiar with the verses, ================================================ And said to him: If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down, for it is written: That he hath given his angels charge over thee, and in their hands shall they bear thee up, lest perhaps thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said to him: It is written again: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. ================================================ he would have emulated Our Lord and not have cast himself down into the lion's den. 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 01:28:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5A8SHen026373; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:28:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5A8SF8B026349; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:28:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:28:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610082810859.D1C814800087@mwinf3107.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Joe Cell / Walter Russell Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:30:54 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68876 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vorts, Is anybody aware of an *authoritative* online discussion of Russell's concept of 'negative electricity', as propounded (I believe) in his book 'The Universal One'? Alternatively, if anyone is personally au fait with his theories, but doesn't want to get into a public discussion, please feel free to mail me off-list. Whilst I am conscious of Jones' earlier rejoinder that "Keeping an open-mind is important, but remember that a sieve doesn't hold much water", I wouldn't feel comfortable rejecting any theory, without first understanding how it came to be developed. --- For those of you interested, but not actively following the goings-on of the JC community, it looks as though it will be a turbulent few weeks... On the Y! joecellfreeenergy group, there's been a troll fest, the first bannings, proposals for alternative group formations, a big uproar about Peter Stevens' failed attempts (to date) to provide verification for the NEC, accusations of meddling from vested energy interests, and the moderator stating publicly that Stevens has lied about his part in the cell's historical gestation (by way of explanation for Stevens' failed replication). Whilst this is all fun stuff, from a sociological point of view - watching entrenched positions being formed, and the recriminations beginning - it will, no doubt, ultimately lead to membership of that group falling away, and (possibly) the cell once again being derided as a mere hoax. I personally find this a little distressing, as I agree with Jones that there is enough anecdotal evidence for many of these watercar phenomena to suggest some veracity in the reports. Patrick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 03:46:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AAkbhX029185; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:46:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AAkY0O029159; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:46:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:46:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <06e501c68c78$1c87e4f0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: Cc: References: <20060609212214.GE5967@linux> Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:24:40 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5AAkQ9p029082 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68877 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: Thanks Mark for the nice recipe, but it won't work for Windows users, and putting a tag in the subject line is a standard function in any mailing list server I would think, can't this be done on eskimo.com lists Bill? Or maybe it's time to switch to Googlegroups or Yahoogroups? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark S Bilk" To: Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:22 PM Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line >I use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of > Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons > explained on my website: > > http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ > > If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, > in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] > (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l > messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) > to your .procmailrc file: > > > :0 fhw > * ^X-Mailing-List: > * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] > | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' > > > The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe > command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, > i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then > continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered > (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the > message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. > The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes > execution before proceeding. > > The second line tests that the message contains the header line > "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l > messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This > is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. > Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header > line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the > "Bcc:" line by the poster). > > The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the > message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] > or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to > incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, > their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, > and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail > should not add a second tag to such received messages. The > regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square > brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], > [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style > regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped > (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having > their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). > > The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed > (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the > tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " > at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") > something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found > ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the > earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act > as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". > > You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], > [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square > brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it > will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes > back through the list server. > > There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google > for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly > I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on > this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular > expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar > with them, and they're extremely useful. > > In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have > someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group > will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs > Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. > > And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: > > http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf > > Mark > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 04:41:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ABZENw004658; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ABZ77h004595; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:07 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=mm54jQoITNFMZuhtQee+7JFSa1mRiFJM0CT8oOrCkTjrxh2uFA/jpTRi2YCFki2K; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610111956977@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:19:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404b76a4cfba4aca7456a4df659e2d5370350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.121 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68879 X-Loop: vortex-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 Whether opting for regular electron or Electronium (*e-) fractional orbit hydrinos the orbital velocity limit [n(c*alpha)]*2 should be such that a relativistic mass increase (gamma = [E kinetic/mc^2] + 1) is less than 1% or about 5 KeV or less. Where E kinetic = (n*13.6)^2 for the regular electron or (n*27.2)^2 for a (*e-) 2 * electron mass particle. A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle) forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus resulting in a form of energy amplification. Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke. A pint of water replacing a barrel of oil isn't too hard to take. Unless you work for Enron. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Whether opting for regular electron or Electronium (*e-)  fractional
orbit hydrinos the orbital velocity limit  [n(c*alpha)]*2 should be such
that a relativistic mass increase (gamma = [E kinetic/mc^2] + 1)
is less than 1% or about 5 KeV or less. Where E kinetic = (n*13.6)^2 for the
regular electron or (n*27.2)^2 for a  (*e-)   2 *  electron mass particle.
 
A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of
an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle)
forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to
replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus  resulting
in a form of energy amplification.
 
Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning
the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes
of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the
Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets
pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke.
 
A pint of water replacing a barrel of oil isn't too hard to take.
 
Unless you work for Enron.  :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 04:41:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ABferr009890; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:41:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ABfboV009847; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:41:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:41:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <072401c68c82$d2aba820$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <2.2.32.20060610053331.00b6fcd4@pop.freeserve.net> Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:41:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5ABfY08009819 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68880 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: Frank, I may be wrong but I doubt this is the place for proselytism. For one thing it may deeply hurt the feelings of fervent atheists amongst us :) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grimer" To: Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 7:33 AM Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 > At 02:09 pm 09/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: >>From aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > >> 4. LIONS: WHY CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS GAIN FEW FOLLOWERS. >> According to a Reuters story out of Kiev, on Sunday evening when >> the zoo was crowded with visitors, a man lowered himself by rope >> into the lion enclosure and walked up to the lions shouting,"God >> will save me if he exists," thus proving himself to be a man of >> faith. Without hesitation, a lioness severed his carotid artery. > > > But had the poor demented man been a Christian, Bob, he would have > been familiar with the verses, > > ================================================ > And said to him: If thou be the Son of God, > cast thyself down, for it is written: > That he hath given his angels charge over thee, > and in their hands shall they bear thee up, > lest perhaps thou dash thy foot against a stone. > > Jesus said to him: It is written again: > Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. > ================================================ > > he would have emulated Our Lord and not have cast himself down > into the lion's den. 8-) > > Frank > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 04:43:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ABZ8xe004614; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ABZ0eh004465; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:35:00 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=BZX7tFxWUOM8RnUiYX5K0joxrLgEsJjxf7hG2yYJpemSEBITNd2omqDGGpSf7+mU; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610112951562@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:29:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404b76a4cfba4aca74b7b66a85bdab8c90350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.121 Resent-Message-ID: <04wISC.A.mFB.i5qiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68878 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: Michel Jullian > > Thanks Mark for the nice recipe, but it won't work for Windows users, and putting a tag in the subject line is a standard function in any mailing list server I would think, can't this be done on eskimo.com lists Bill? > > Or maybe it's time to switch to Googlegroups or Yahoogroups? > Don't do that Michel. It's been refreshing to have some more folks that talk on topic and do real science on this list for a change. But, if you find an intelligent group out there, please e-mail me so I can join you. Fred > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark S Bilk" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:22 PM > Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > >I use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of > > Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons > > explained on my website: > > > > http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ > > > > If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, > > in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] > > (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l > > messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) > > to your .procmailrc file: > > > > > > :0 fhw > > * ^X-Mailing-List: > > * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] > > | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' > > > > > > The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe > > command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, > > i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then > > continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered > > (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the > > message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. > > The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes > > execution before proceeding. > > > > The second line tests that the message contains the header line > > "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l > > messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This > > is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. > > Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header > > line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the > > "Bcc:" line by the poster). > > > > The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the > > message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] > > or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to > > incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, > > their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, > > and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail > > should not add a second tag to such received messages. The > > regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square > > brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], > > [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style > > regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped > > (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having > > their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). > > > > The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed > > (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the > > tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " > > at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") > > something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found > > ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the > > earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act > > as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". > > > > You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], > > [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square > > brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it > > will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes > > back through the list server. > > > > There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google > > for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly > > I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on > > this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular > > expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar > > with them, and they're extremely useful. > > > > In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have > > someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group > > will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs > > Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. > > > > And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: > > > > http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf > > > > Mark > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 05:09:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AC94of027934; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:09:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AC93Jf027913; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:09:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:09:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <073001c68c86$a48f2a30$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066610112951562@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:08:53 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5AC8tpq027827 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68881 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: Oops sorry I was unclear Fred but I am not leaving or calling for secession, I was only wondering if we couldn't switch Vortex to possibly better mailing list servers. Thanks for your kind words all the same! Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 1:29 PM Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > Michel Jullian >> >> Thanks Mark for the nice recipe, but it won't work for Windows users, and > putting a tag in the subject line is a standard function in any mailing > list server I would think, can't this be done on eskimo.com lists Bill? >> >> Or maybe it's time to switch to Googlegroups or Yahoogroups? >> > Don't do that Michel. It's been refreshing to have some more folks that > talk on topic and do real science on this list for a change. > > But, if you find an intelligent group out there, please e-mail me so > I can join you. > > Fred >> >> Michel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark S Bilk" >> To: >> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:22 PM >> Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line >> >> >> >I use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of >> > Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons >> > explained on my website: >> > >> > http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ >> > >> > If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, >> > in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] >> > (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l >> > messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) >> > to your .procmailrc file: >> > >> > >> > :0 fhw >> > * ^X-Mailing-List: >> > * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] >> > | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' >> > >> > >> > The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe >> > command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, >> > i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then >> > continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered >> > (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the >> > message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. >> > The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes >> > execution before proceeding. >> > >> > The second line tests that the message contains the header line >> > "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l >> > messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This >> > is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. >> > Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header >> > line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the >> > "Bcc:" line by the poster). >> > >> > The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the >> > message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] >> > or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to >> > incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, >> > their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, >> > and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail >> > should not add a second tag to such received messages. The >> > regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square >> > brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], >> > [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style >> > regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped >> > (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having >> > their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). >> > >> > The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed >> > (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the >> > tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " >> > at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") >> > something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found >> > ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the >> > earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act >> > as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". >> > >> > You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], >> > [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square >> > brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it >> > will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes >> > back through the list server. >> > >> > There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google >> > for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly >> > I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on >> > this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular >> > expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar >> > with them, and they're extremely useful. >> > >> > In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have >> > someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group >> > will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs >> > Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. >> > >> > And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: >> > >> > http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf >> > >> > Mark >> > >> > >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 05:14:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ACDtu8031829; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:13:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ACDrCD031793; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:13:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:13:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610121350355.56C4F3400081@mwinf3116.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610121351.00bb504c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:13:51 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68882 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 01:41 pm 10/06/2006 +0200, you wrote: > Frank, I may be wrong but I doubt this is the > place for proselytism. I agree with you. But since Pork's paragraph was a sneer at religious belief in general, including mine, I'm sure that you, like Voltaire, will defend to the death my right of reply, even though you may not agree with me. 8-) ================================================== BASIL FAWLTY: Sorry, I got a bit confused because everyone keeps mentioning the war. So could you - what's the matter? GERMAN GUEST: It's alright. BASIL FAWLTY: Is there something wrong? GERMAN GUEST: Will you just stop talking about the war? BASIL FAWLTY: Me? You started it. GERMAN GUEST: We did not start it. BASIL FAWLTY: Yes you did, you invaded Poland. ================================================== Cheers, 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 05:21:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ACKv6s003846; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:20:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ACKtGH003813; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:20:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:20:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610122050404.62AED1C00084@mwinf3106.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610122051.00bc6b6c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:20:51 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Resent-Message-ID: <9k-Dy.A.h7.nkriEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68883 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:19 am 10/06/2006 -0600, Fred wrote: > A pint of water replacing a barrel of oil > isn't too hard to take. > > Unless you work for Enron. :-) > > Fred Who wouldn't take it lying down. 8-( Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 05:28:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ACSErH006906; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:28:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ACSChN006882; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:28:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:28:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000c01c68c89$4b2bd5d0$15027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Fred's question Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:27:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68C5F.614A7850" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68884 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68C5F.614A7850 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68C5F.614A7850" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68C5F.614A7850 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty=20 > days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air=20 > by vaporization of the added water or is there > something in the water mist-droplets giving=20 > some free energy?=20 > > Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is=20 > when driving on snowy ones. > > Fred And Howdy again, Richard, I think Fred's question: = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =20 "is there something in the water=20 mist-droplets giving some free=20 energy?" = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D is a very good one, and, since you've never struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad=20 surprised that you haven't answered it. For that matter it would be very interesting to see how many other Vortexians are prepared=20 to stand up and be counted on this one way or=20 the other, including of course, Fred himself. 8-) As for myself, because of the confluence of evidence I have absolutely no doubt that the=20 mist vapour is indeed giving you some free=20 energy and not merely improving efficiency. =20 Cheers, Frank Howdy Fred and Frank, Fence sitting can result in all sorts of stange results and has no place = in Vorts where the wild and free fear no evil. We once were testing a = "shape" for a distributor with a segment of a parabolic cut cavity. The = induction of air was so great and the velocity shear at the periphery of = the rotating member so high that we actually percipitated the mineral = from the water via oxidation. For some time I have thought we were = looking at the result from the wrong direction. Perhaps it was good we = didn't have an open flame near. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68C5F.614A7850 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty
> = days due=20 to cooling >of the compression stoke air
> by vaporization of = the=20 added water or is there
> something in the water mist-droplets = giving=20
> some free energy?
>
> Not noticeable on dry winter = days,=20 but it is
> when driving on snowy ones.
>
>=20 Fred


And Howdy again, Richard,

I think Fred's=20 question:

   =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D   
    "is=20 there something in the water
    mist-droplets giving = some=20 free
    energy?"
   =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

is a very good one, and, since you've=20 never
struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad
surprised that you = haven't=20 answered it.

For that matter it would be very interesting
to = see how=20 many other Vortexians are prepared
to stand up and be counted on = this one=20 way or
the other, including of course, Fred himself.  = 8-)

As for=20 myself, because of the confluence of
evidence I have absolutely no = doubt that=20 the
mist vapour is indeed giving you some free
energy and not = merely=20 improving efficiency.    =

Cheers,

Frank

Howdy Fred and Frank,

Fence sitting can result in all sorts of stange results and has no = place in=20 Vorts where the wild and free fear no evil. We once were testing a = "shape" for a=20 distributor with a segment of a parabolic cut cavity. The induction of = air was=20 so great and the velocity shear at the periphery of the rotating member = so high=20 that we actually percipitated the mineral from the water via oxidation. = For some=20 time I have thought we were  looking at the result from = the wrong=20 direction. Perhaps it was good we didn't have an open flame near.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68C5F.614A7850-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68C5F.614A7850 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c68c89$49fd67f0$15027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68C5F.614A7850-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 05:48:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ACmYvk016770; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:48:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ACmVTZ016737; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:48:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:48:31 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qDyGm5oejWe1kZ4ATeCFeyTKq37kbsEXOxn/xJwjgDzv0OYlHQDpRxjjK+UVSjx5; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610124820329@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:48:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940aea9c29ad6469161490748c74b71b27d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.231 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68885 X-Loop: vortex-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 My biggest question is why a topic Subject Header gets changed so you can't follow a thread in the Archives? :-) RC Macaulay To:vortex-l@eskimo.com 6/10/2006 6:28:42 AM Re: Fred's question Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty > days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air > by vaporization of the added water or is there > something in the water mist-droplets giving > some free energy? > > Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is > when driving on snowy ones. > > Fred And Howdy again, Richard, I think Fred's question: ================================ "is there something in the water mist-droplets giving some free energy?" ================================ is a very good one, and, since you've never struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad surprised that you haven't answered it. For that matter it would be very interesting to see how many other Vortexians are prepared to stand up and be counted on this one way or the other, including of course, Fred himself. 8-) As for myself, because of the confluence of evidence I have absolutely no doubt that the mist vapour is indeed giving you some free energy and not merely improving efficiency. Cheers, Frank Howdy Fred and Frank, Fence sitting can result in all sorts of stange results and has no place in Vorts where the wild and free fear no evil. We once were testing a "shape" for a distributor with a segment of a parabolic cut cavity. The induction of air was so great and the velocity shear at the periphery of the rotating member so high that we actually percipitated the mineral from the water via oxidation. For some time I have thought we were looking at the result from the wrong direction. Perhaps it was good we didn't have an open flame near. Richard ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
My biggest question is why a topic Subject Header gets changed
so you can't follow a thread in the Archives?  :-)
 
 
RC Macaulay
To:vortex-l@eskimo.com
6/10/2006 6:28:42 AM
Re: Fred's question
 
 
 Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty
> days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air
> by vaporization of the added water or is there
> something in the water mist-droplets giving
> some free energy?
>
> Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is
> when driving on snowy ones.
>
> Fred


And Howdy again, Richard,

I think Fred's question:

    ================================   
    "is there something in the water
    mist-droplets giving some free
    energy?"
    ================================

is a very good one, and, since you've never
struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad
surprised that you haven't answered it.

For that matter it would be very interesting
to see how many other Vortexians are prepared
to stand up and be counted on this one way or
the other, including of course, Fred himself.  8-)

As for myself, because of the confluence of
evidence I have absolutely no doubt that the
mist vapour is indeed giving you some free
energy and not merely improving efficiency.   

Cheers,

Frank

Howdy Fred and Frank,

Fence sitting can result in all sorts of stange results and has no place in Vorts where the wild and free fear no evil. We once were testing a "shape" for a distributor with a segment of a parabolic cut cavity. The induction of air was so great and the velocity shear at the periphery of the rotating member so high that we actually percipitated the mineral from the water via oxidation. For some time I have thought we were  looking at the result from the wrong direction. Perhaps it was good we didn't have an open flame near.

Richard

 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 06:25:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ADOqSo004521; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:24:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ADOoWf004504; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:24:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:24:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:24:48 -0700 From: Mark S Bilk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Message-ID: <20060610132448.GA20149@linux> References: <20060609212214.GE5967@linux> <06e501c68c78$1c87e4f0$3800a8c0@zothan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <06e501c68c78$1c87e4f0$3800a8c0@zothan> Organization: http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68886 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 Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 12:24:40PM +0200, Michel Jullian wrote: >Thanks Mark for the nice recipe, but it won't work for >Windows users, Maybe if you read this you won't want to use Windows any more (except for games and such that won't run under Linux and don't have an equivalent there). Microsoft is a very evil corporation: http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/ >and putting a tag in the subject line is a >standard function in any mailing list server I would think, True. >can't this be done on eskimo.com lists Bill? Apparently he's pretty busy -- 8 weeks backlog of e-mails according to his note on this page: http://amasci.com/amateur/amfrmA.html#urls >Or maybe it's time to switch to Googlegroups or Yahoogroups? I don't know about Googlegroups, but the delay through Yahoogroups is several hours, instead of the few minutes through eskimo.com. Yahoo is also very mercenary. When it started out offering mailing lists, as ISPs were dropping that service, it did not insert advertising into the lists, and also had short delays, so people moved their lists to it. Once it had the lists, Yahoo started running ads, censoring e-mail addresses in the messages, and allowing the turnaround delays to get longer and longer. And apparently Yahoo has recently begun to arbitrarily filter out a lot of legitimate messages as "spam", just as AOL has been politically censoring its incoming mail for over a year. The topics discussed in this list are potentially a threat to the profits of the tiny ultra-wealthy clique that controls most of the world's economy, government and media. These rulers have murdered a million people in the last few years alone to obtain control over oil deposits, new military bases, and restriction of ordinary people's freedom. I've noticed that the lives of a number of "free-energy" inventors seem to have ended prematurely. We all need to become much more aware of the ruthless businessmen that are destroying our planet and enslaving and murdering our people. We should disconnect ourselves from mercenary and fascist corporations like Yahoo and Microsoft, and choose pro-human alternatives. Mark >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mark S Bilk" >To: >Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:22 PM >Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > >>I use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of >> Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons >> explained on my website: >> >> http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ >> >> If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, >> in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] >> (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l >> messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) >> to your .procmailrc file: >> >> >> :0 fhw >> * ^X-Mailing-List: >> * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] >> | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' >> >> >> The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe >> command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, >> i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then >> continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered >> (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the >> message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. >> The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes >> execution before proceeding. >> >> The second line tests that the message contains the header line >> "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l >> messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This >> is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. >> Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header >> line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the >> "Bcc:" line by the poster). >> >> The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the >> message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] >> or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to >> incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, >> their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, >> and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail >> should not add a second tag to such received messages. The >> regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square >> brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], >> [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style >> regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped >> (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having >> their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). >> >> The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed >> (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the >> tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " >> at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") >> something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found >> ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the >> earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act >> as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". >> >> You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], >> [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square >> brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it >> will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes >> back through the list server. >> >> There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google >> for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly >> I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on >> this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular >> expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar >> with them, and they're extremely useful. >> >> In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have >> someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group >> will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs >> Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. >> >> And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: >> >> http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf >> >> Mark >> >> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 06:34:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ADYFfb009246; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:34:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ADYAGk009165; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:34:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:34:10 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=kB0Hjty7PEwwiuqIa6qM5oNGgnXs7suG6xzalkQja9vZ1XkkW0IAowLu6T/zl76U; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610133345407@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:33:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94060edec771a7fb7dd639f85ea3bd68748350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.146 Resent-Message-ID: <8b69VC.A._OC.QpsiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68887 X-Loop: vortex-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 Saturday, 10 June 7:00 AM - Watch England v Paraguay at Route 66 Brewery (inside Albuquerque Airport) - Live on KLUZ channel 41 Delta Flight Leaves Albuquerque 8:30 AM Arrives Atlanta 1:36 PM Delta Flight Leaves Atlanta 4:10 PM Arrives Dusseldorf 7:25 AM (Sunday morning) Oops. Some family members heading to the soccer matches, Germany. Netherlands, and Belgium this morning. :-) I think isolation/separation of hydrogen from the water molecule/molecules is unnecessary in order to get the energy release at hydrino formation. > > A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of > an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle) > forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to > replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus resulting > in a form of energy amplification." > > Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning > the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes > of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the > Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets > pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke." > It blows the H2O molecule apart when it forms inside it though. Fred Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty > days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air > by vaporization of the added water or is there > something in the water mist-droplets giving > some free energy? > > Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is > when driving on snowy ones. > > Fred And Howdy again, Richard, I think Fred's question: ================================ "is there something in the water mist-droplets giving some free energy?" ================================ is a very good one, and, since you've never struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad surprised that you haven't answered it. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Saturday, 10 June
 
7:00 AM - Watch England v Paraguay at Route 66 Brewery (inside Albuquerque Airport) - Live on KLUZ channel 41
 
Delta Flight
Leaves Albuquerque 8:30 AM
Arrives Atlanta 1:36 PM
 
Delta Flight
Leaves Atlanta 4:10 PM
Arrives Dusseldorf 7:25 AM (Sunday morning)
 
Oops. Some family members heading to the soccer matches, Germany. Netherlands,
and Belgium this morning. :-)
 
I think isolation/separation of hydrogen from the water molecule/molecules
is unnecessary in order to get the energy release at hydrino formation.
>
> A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of
> an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle)
> forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to
> replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus  resulting
> in a form of energy amplification."
>
> Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning
> the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes
> of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the
> Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets
> pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke."
>
It blows the H2O molecule apart when it forms inside it though.
 
Fred
 
 
 Is the enhanced engine performance on rainy-misty
> days due to cooling >of the compression stoke air
> by vaporization of the added water or is there
> something in the water mist-droplets giving
> some free energy?
>
> Not noticeable on dry winter days, but it is
> when driving on snowy ones.
>
> Fred


And Howdy again, Richard,

I think Fred's question:

    ================================   
    "is there something in the water
    mist-droplets giving some free
    energy?"
    ================================

is a very good one, and, since you've never
struck me as a fence sitter, I'm a tad
surprised that you haven't answered it.
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 07:40:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AEdnTA009827; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AEdXl1009696; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610143930296.486521C00089@mwinf3104.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610143931.00bfda24@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:39:31 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Fred's question Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68888 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:27 am 10/06/2006 -0500, Richard wrote: >Howdy Fred and Frank, > >Fence sitting can result in all sorts of strange results and has no place in Vorts where the wild and free fear no evil. We once were testing a "shape" for a distributor with a segment of a parabolic cut cavity. The induction of air was so great and the velocity shear at the periphery of the rotating member so high that we actually precipitated the mineral from the water via oxidation. For some time I have thought we were looking at the result from the wrong direction. Perhaps it was good we didn't have an open flame near. > >Richard Interesting. Reminds me, somewhat of the Hilsch-Ranque Vortex Tube. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 07:40:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AEdlXD009820; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AEdcBj009760; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610143932566.8A4501C00089@mwinf3104.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:39:33 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68890 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 06:24 am 10/06/2006 -0700, Mark wrote: >And apparently Yahoo has recently begun to arbitrarily filter out >a lot of legitimate messages as "spam", just as AOL has been >politically censoring its incoming mail for over a year. They have certainly buggered up the layout which has pissed me off no end. Still, I suppose one can't look a gift horse in the mouth. >I've noticed that the lives of a number of "free-energy" inventors >seem to have ended prematurely. Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 07:40:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AEdokt009846; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AEdZ5a009722; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:39:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610143931461.70AC01C00089@mwinf3104.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610143932.00c061a0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:39:32 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68889 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:33 am 10/06/2006 -0600, Fred wrote: >I think isolation/separation of hydrogen from the water molecule/molecules >is unnecessary in order to get the energy release at hydrino formation. >> >> A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of >> an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle) >> forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to >> replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus resulting >> in a form of energy amplification." >> >> Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning >> the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes >> of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the >> Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets >> pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke." >> >It blows the H2O molecule apart when it forms inside it though. > >Fred I assume that is a "yes". 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 07:55:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AEtGgU018685; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:55:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AEtFwK018671; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:55:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:55:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <076d01c68c9d$dd383400$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <20060609212214.GE5967@linux> <06e501c68c78$1c87e4f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <20060610132448.GA20149@linux> Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:55:07 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5AEt9RK018624 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68891 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: Please Mark there are more adequate places for OS wars I am sure. I understand your point of view I used to be a MacOS fan myself but I don't care much about the OS I use any more, they all look so much the same now. Thanks for the info on Bill's backlog, we may get his answer re the [Vo] tag in about 8 weeks then :) Am I the only one to pine for this feature BTW? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark S Bilk" To: Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 3:24 PM Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 12:24:40PM +0200, Michel Jullian wrote: >>Thanks Mark for the nice recipe, but it won't work for >>Windows users, > > Maybe if you read this you won't want to use Windows any more > (except for games and such that won't run under Linux and don't > have an equivalent there). Microsoft is a very evil corporation: > > http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/ > >>and putting a tag in the subject line is a >>standard function in any mailing list server I would think, > > True. > >>can't this be done on eskimo.com lists Bill? > > Apparently he's pretty busy -- 8 weeks backlog of e-mails > according to his note on this page: > > http://amasci.com/amateur/amfrmA.html#urls > >>Or maybe it's time to switch to Googlegroups or Yahoogroups? > > I don't know about Googlegroups, but the delay through > Yahoogroups is several hours, instead of the few minutes through > eskimo.com. Yahoo is also very mercenary. When it started out > offering mailing lists, as ISPs were dropping that service, it > did not insert advertising into the lists, and also had short > delays, so people moved their lists to it. Once it had the lists, > Yahoo started running ads, censoring e-mail addresses in the > messages, and allowing the turnaround delays to get longer and > longer. > > And apparently Yahoo has recently begun to arbitrarily filter out > a lot of legitimate messages as "spam", just as AOL has been > politically censoring its incoming mail for over a year. > > The topics discussed in this list are potentially a threat to > the profits of the tiny ultra-wealthy clique that controls most > of the world's economy, government and media. These rulers have > murdered a million people in the last few years alone to obtain > control over oil deposits, new military bases, and restriction > of ordinary people's freedom. > > I've noticed that the lives of a number of "free-energy" inventors > seem to have ended prematurely. > > We all need to become much more aware of the ruthless businessmen > that are destroying our planet and enslaving and murdering our > people. We should disconnect ourselves from mercenary and fascist > corporations like Yahoo and Microsoft, and choose pro-human > alternatives. > > Mark > >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Mark S Bilk" >>To: >>Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:22 PM >>Subject: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line >> >> >>>I use the Linux operating system on my PC instead of >>> Microsoft Windows, for ethical and technical reasons >>> explained on my website: >>> >>> http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/ >>> >>> If you're using procmail to process your incoming mail, >>> in, e.g., Linux, BSD, OSX, etc., you can insert a [Vo] >>> (or similar) tag into the Subject line of incoming vortex-l >>> messages by adding this "recipe" (as such entries are called) >>> to your .procmailrc file: >>> >>> >>> :0 fhw >>> * ^X-Mailing-List: >>> * !^Subject: .*\[Vo.*\] >>> | sed 's/^Subject: /&[Vo] /' >>> >>> >>> The first line begins the recipe. The "f" flag causes the pipe >>> command in the fourth line to act as a filter for the message, >>> i.e., the message is processed through it and procmail then >>> continues testing further recipes to handle the filtered >>> (modified) version of the message. The "h" flag causes the >>> message header (not the body) to be fed to the pipe command. >>> The "w" flag causes procmail to wait until the pipe finishes >>> execution before proceeding. >>> >>> The second line tests that the message contains the header line >>> "X-Mailing-List: ", which all vortex-l >>> messages do (at least the recent ones that I looked at). This >>> is the main test to detect that the message comes from the list. >>> Some messages don't contain the list name in the "To:" header >>> line, or even the "Cc:" line (if the list was named in the >>> "Bcc:" line by the poster). >>> >>> The third line of the recipe tests that the Subject line of the >>> message does not already contain a string of the form [Vo...] >>> or [vo...]. If people use this method to add a [Vo] tag to >>> incoming vortex-l messages and then they respond to the messages, >>> their outgoing responses will contain the tag in the Subject line, >>> and it will be received as such by list subscribers. So procmail >>> should not add a second tag to such received messages. The >>> regular expression \[Vo.*\] is used so that any tag with square >>> brackets beginning with Vo will be detected ( [Vo], [vortex], >>> [Vort], etc. ). Since procmail test conditions use egrep-style >>> regular expressions, the square brackets have to be escaped >>> (with "\") so they act as ordinary characters (rather than having >>> their special meaning as part of regular expression syntax). >>> >>> The fourth line pipes the message header through the sed >>> (stream-editor) program to perform the actual insertion of the >>> tag into the Subject line. When sed finds the string "Subject: " >>> at the beginning ("^") of a header line, it substitutes ("s") >>> something for that. What it substitutes is what it just found >>> ("&"), followed by the string "[Vo] ". Since sed uses the >>> earlier grep-style regular expressions, the square brackets act >>> as ordinary characters when they are _not_ escaped by "\". >>> >>> You can replace [Vo] in the fourth line with [Vortex], [Vort], >>> [vortex-l], etc., to suit your taste, as long as it has square >>> brackets and begins with "vo" (in upper or lower case), so it >>> will be detected by the third line of the recipe when it comes >>> back through the list server. >>> >>> There are plenty of procmail tutorials on the Web; just google >>> for "procmail". This is a rather esoteric usage for it. Mostly >>> I just use it to divert messages from certain idiots (none on >>> this list) into spam files, which is much simpler. Regular >>> expressions, and sed, are also pretty simple once you get familiar >>> with them, and they're extremely useful. >>> >>> In general, Linux is as easy to use as MS-Windows, if you have >>> someone install it for you (which your local Linux user group >>> will do for free -- see my website), like the PC store installs >>> Windows. And it's much more powerful and reliable, as well as free. >>> >>> And if you want respect, well, it's absolutely essential: >>> >>> http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 09:32:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AGWJ1j013249; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:32:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AGWERs013221; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:32:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:32:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <078f01c68cab$6c90e810$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006648141318351@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:32:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5AGWCbN013193 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68892 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred wrote: ... >> > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r >> > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent >> > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo ... >> > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that >> > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance >> > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). >> >> Where does this come from? >> > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. ... OK one step at a time so Bohr proposed in 1913 (cf this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model ) an ad hoc not-too-bad semi-classical model of the H atom where the electron's angular momentum can only take some discrete values: L=n*(h/2pi) Where n = 1,2,3,. is called the principal quantum number, and h is Planck's constant. Angular momentum L is r*m*v isn't it, so for ground state n=1 we have: r*m*v=1*(h/2pi) => v=1/r * 1/m * h/2pi How does one get from this to your v formula above? Wait a minute, your v formula simply results from equating centripetal coulombic force k*q^2/r^2 = V*q/r to centrifugal force m*v^2/r doesn't it? But then there is a mistake, the "2" factor in front of V*q/r shouldn't be there, which is confirmed by your second expression for v where the "2" factor cancels out. Or maybe your second expression was for your electronium (same charge as electron, twice the mass, right?) in which case it's wrong too! Please let me know if you agree with the above and we'll proceed from there. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 10:04:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AH49Zi029768; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:04:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AH473R029732; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:04:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:04:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:01:47 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 In-reply-to: <2.2.32.20060610053331.00b6fcd4@pop.freeserve.net> 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/68893 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: > At 02:09 pm 09/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: >> From aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > >> 4. LIONS: WHY CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS GAIN FEW FOLLOWERS. >> According to a Reuters story out of Kiev, on Sunday evening when >> the zoo was crowded with visitors, a man lowered himself by rope >> into the lion enclosure and walked up to the lions shouting,"God >> will save me if he exists," thus proving himself to be a man of >> faith. Without hesitation, a lioness severed his carotid artery. > > > But had the poor demented man been a Christian, Bob, he would have > been familiar with the verses, > > ================================================ > And said to him: If thou be the Son of God, > cast thyself down, for it is written: > That he hath given his angels charge over thee, > and in their hands shall they bear thee up, > lest perhaps thou dash thy foot against a stone. > > Jesus said to him: It is written again: > Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. > ================================================ > > he would have emulated Our Lord and not have cast himself down > into the lion's den. 8-) > > Frank > > Careful Frank. You sound somewhat like Bob Park, but instead of implying that the religious are demented, you appear to be implying that the non-religious are demented. ;-) Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 10:23:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AHNIsH007163; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:23:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AHNHZr007141; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:23:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:23:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005501c68cb2$9018ce90$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Subject: "Dad" & Big Oil Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:23:16 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <0uWtrB.A.fvB.FAwiEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68894 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A. C. Greene is a locally-famous historian of everything-Texan. 'Locally famous' is the next step above "a legend in his own mind," but A.C. can write. For instance, on Amazon you can find "Chance Encounters: True Stories of Unforeseen Meetings, With Unanticipated Results" ...or "Texas Sketches", in which he recounts the curious tale of "Dad" Garrett, who appears to be the first well-documented case of an inventor who was able to power his automobile on water - plus in-situ generated electricity. At the time you could buy an entire barrel of crude for $2 so it was a "yawner" of an invention but front page news in Big-D. On September 8, 1935, The Dallas Morning News first announced that the water-fuel concept worked - at least it worked for "several minutes." A few months later, "Pathe' News" - the media-outfit which many of us grew up watching on Saturday - before the matinee Western - before TV ruined that nostalgic pastime - filmed the Garrett car driving along Garland Road with the driver stopping at White Rock Lake to fill the fuel tank - with water !! before cruising off into the sunset, like in all good 'oaters'. The film was shown on Pathe's "Stranger than Fiction" feature program, and indeed it 'fit the bill'. C.H. Garrett, Dad's son, said the only items needed to convert a gasoline-engine auto to a water burner was an electrolytic carburetor and installation of a generator of double normal capacity for the breaking down of the water. He claimed instant starts in any weather, no fire hazards, cooler operation and plenty of power and speed. The car was not marketed, and no one seems to know its ultimate destiny. In Dad Garrett's estate, there was rumored to be a surprisingly large amount of the stock of a number of Oil companies, notably the Simms Oil Company. I don't know which "sister" bought Simms. Richard may know this detail. However, it may be somewhat apropos, in the QM sense, that Bonnie & Clyde robbed the Simms Oil Refinery in 1932 a few years before the Dallas Morning News announcement. It would not surprise me if, somewhere in Texas, in some corporate safe or warehouse, along with other ill-gotten and non-performing wealth, sits Dad Garrett's carburetor, gathering dust. It is no doubt the prototypical 'genesis' story of this kind of thing, which spawned dozens, if not a hundred mythological urban myths about oil companies buying up competing technologies - especially efficient carburetors. 99 of that hundred myths are mostly BS but is the 'original' true - or just one of A.C. Greene's "Chance Encounters: True Stories of Unforeseen Meetings, With Unanticipated Results" Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 10:52:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AHqXfS024004; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:52:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AHqV2T023978; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:52:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:52:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <002201c68cb6$a0f539c0$15027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: "Dad" & Big Oil Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:52:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C68C8C.B784C680" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68895 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_001E_01C68C8C.B784C680 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001F_01C68C8C.B784C680" ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C68C8C.B784C680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankJones wrote, 99 of that hundred myths are mostly BS but is the 'original'=20 true - or just one of A.C. Greene's "Chance Encounters: True=20 Stories of Unforeseen Meetings, With Unanticipated Results" Howdy Jones, You do Texas an injustice 'cause 'round here it's 100% BS. If you don't = believe it just ask one of our own sittin in the chair in D.C.=20 I''l ask one of my ole timers friends about Simms, he will know, he got = his education practicing the true art of divining rods. You may be = familar with the crooked stick type with the bow in the middle.. the = true one is shaped like a spoon to fit inside a cookie jar. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C68C8C.B784C680 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Jones wrote,

99 of that hundred myths are mostly BS but is the 'original'
true = - or=20 just one of A.C. Greene's "Chance Encounters: True
Stories of = Unforeseen=20 Meetings, With Unanticipated Results"

Howdy Jones,

You do Texas an injustice 'cause 'round here it's 100% BS. If you = don't=20 believe it just ask one of our own sittin in the chair in D.C.

I''l ask one of my ole timers friends about Simms, he will know, he = got his=20 education practicing the true art of divining rods. You may be familar = with the=20 crooked stick type with the bow in the middle.. the true one is shaped = like a=20 spoon to fit inside a cookie jar.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C68C8C.B784C680-- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C68C8C.B784C680 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001d01c68cb6$a057c140$15027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C68C8C.B784C680-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 12:06:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AJ6Vlr027432; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:06:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AJ6Qxm027392; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:06:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:06:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003f01c68cc0$f1156b00$ce9a163f@DFBGQZ91> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: References: Subject: Re: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:06:10 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68896 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I am beginning to find the tone and/or subject matters of recent postings disturbing. And not only of this particular thread. Will someone please explain what has happened to vortex in the past few years? It is not the same. If its not clear what I am saying, I will elaborate, but prepare yourself, your toes might get stamped on a bit by a (usually) quiet observer. --Kyle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 12:14:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AJE8Nu031740; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:14:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AJE6dw031702; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:14:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:14:06 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=LeghpcRqEwVhICZ+cbTn3B6YG5DbkSmuLbacS3S0jLJrWWnk7nekkAkU2/2HI6v8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610191351245@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:13:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b36429ea05e834e979c84a93457f89c6350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.145 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68897 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > > Fred wrote: > ... > >> > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r > >> > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent > >> > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo > ... > >> > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at that > >> > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance > >> > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). > >> > >> Where does this come from? > >> > > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. > ... > > OK one step at a time so Bohr proposed in 1913 (cf this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model ) an ad hoc not-too-bad semi-classical model of the H atom where the electron's angular momentum can only take some discrete values: > > L=n*(h/2pi) > Where n = 1,2,3,. is called the principal quantum number, and h is Planck's constant. > > Angular momentum L is r*m*v isn't it, so for ground state n=1 we have: > Yes. typically written mvr = h/2(pi) or as the de Broglie wavelength lambda = 2(pi)r = h/mv. > r*m*v=1*(h/2pi) > => v=1/r * 1/m * h/2pi > That is okay for algebraic acrobatics. > > How does one get from this to your v formula above? > Wait a minute, your v formula simply results from equating centripetal coulombic force k*q^2/r^2 = V*q/r to > centrifugal force m*v^2/r doesn't it? > Yes. k* q^2/r^2 is the electrostatic force between two particles each with identical unit charge +/- q For the picky it should be k* +/- q1* +/- q2/r^2 newtons Or if you are into Fusion Coulomb Barriers: Z1 * Z2 * k*q^2/r^2 which is A handy constant at r = 1 meter is 2.306E-28 newtons. I keep it and alpha (0.00729729) along with E = hc/lambda = 1.9878E-25 in my Hp 11C storage registers. > > But then there is a mistake, the "2" factor in front of V*q/r shouldn't be there, > which is confirmed by your second expression for v where the "2" factor cancels out. > > Or maybe your second expression was for your electronium (same charge as electron, twice the mass, right?) in which case it's wrong too! > > Please let me know if you agree with the above and we'll proceed from there. > Velocity v = [2*V*q/m]^1/2 derived from K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 was the intent, but correcting my errors keeps me busy. Sorry about that. Fred > > Michel > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 13:48:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AKmMIo014934; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:48:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5AKmFgh014896; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:48:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:48:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060610204813111.02AAF740008B@mwinf3208.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060610204814.0099f954@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:48:14 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Polywater & WaterFuel Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68898 X-Loop: vortex-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 Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:35:49 -0700 Jones Beene wrote: > In a curious coincidence (returning for a moment > to the even more scandalous subject of vehicles > powered by so-called WaterFuel), my source tells > me that the "fuel grade" of preconditioned water > he uses is "thick like syrup" after an overnight > conditioning. Let's hope it was no co-incidence but evidence that both are manifestations of the same phenomena. Did the "source" appreciate the significance of his phrase "thick like syrup" ======================================== The Soviet physicist Nikolai Fedyakin, working at a small government research lab in Kostroma, Russia, had performed measurements on the properties of water that had been condensed in or repeatedly forced through narrow quartz capillary tubes. Some of these experiments resulted in what was seemingly a new form of water with a higher boiling point, lower freezing point, and much higher viscosity than ordinary water, about that of a syrup. Boris Derjaguin, director of the laboratory for surface physics at the Institute for Physical Chemistry in Moscow, heard about Fedyakin's experiments. He improved on the method to produce the new water, and though he still produced very small quantities of this mysterious material, he did so substantially faster than Fedyakin did. ======================================== And when one looks up Boris Derjaguin one reads the following. ======================================== Professor Boris Vladimirovich Derjaguin (August 9, 1902 - May 16, 1994) was one of the greatest Soviet/Russian chemists on the twentieth century. As a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences he laid the foundation of the modern science of colloids and surfaces. An epoch in the development of the physical chemistry of colloids and surfaces is associated with his name. Derjaguin became famous in scientific circles for his work on the stability of colloids and thin films of liquids which is now known as the DLVO theory, after the initials of its authors: Derjaguin, Landau, Verwey, and Overbeek. It is universally included in text books on colloid chemistry and is still widely applied in modern studies of interparticle forces in colloids. ======================================== He doesn't sound like someone who would make an egregious mistake does he. But if one takes into account the cataclysmic changes that waterfuel will eventually make in the world distribution of economic power, one would have to be rather naive to think that those with this power would yield it easily or willingly. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 14:19:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ALJPSj029664; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:19:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ALJOnj029649; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:19:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:19:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=tZ4mreDYfCFHx9Lvx0cIYwQME3jDalvtU/P3DzqGMuvUmOXNSbRaL5DOOmObQk3f; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066610211910243@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:19:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404daac6fe21bab17dfa15c0511b38bf14350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.23 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68899 X-Loop: vortex-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 Posted Earlier: > > Whether opting for regular electron or Electronium (*e-) fractional > orbit hydrinos the orbital velocity limit [n(c*alpha)]*2 should be such > that a relativistic mass increase (gamma = [E kinetic/mc^2] + 1) > is less than 1% or about 5 KeV or less. Where E kinetic = (n*13.6)^2 for the > regular electron or (n*27.2)^2 for a (*e-) 2 * electron mass particle. > > A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of > an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle) > forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to > replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus resulting > in a form of energy amplification. > > Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning > the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes > of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the > Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets > pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke. > The electric field alignment of the pre-treatment (chain) should be two hydrogen atoms on one end of the H2O molecule joined by a successive H2O to make a repeating linkage: Cathode -|H2O-H2O-H2O-H2O....H2O-H2O-H2O +|Anode In pure water his should enhance the Ion Product 2 H2O <----> H3O + + OH- which would explain the high conductivity and the "greasy feel" usually associated with alkaline solutions that are attacking the skin on your fingers. Somewhere in here either the three hydrogens on the hydronium (H3O+) ion or the chain stretching is getting a proton (H+) in close to the lower level oxygen electrons to pre-activate the water for the hydrino formation when the activated water vapor gets into the ICE cylinder. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Posted Earlier:
>
> Whether opting for regular electron or Electronium (*e-)  fractional
> orbit hydrinos the orbital velocity limit  [n(c*alpha)]*2 should be such
> that a relativistic mass increase (gamma = [E kinetic/mc^2] + 1)
> is less than 1% or about 5 KeV or less. Where E kinetic = (n*13.6)^2 for the
> regular electron or (n*27.2)^2 for a  (*e-)   2 *  electron mass particle.
> 
> A proton (H+) should be able to enter into the electron cloud of
> an atom and capture a high energy inner shell electron (or *e- particle)
> forming the hydrino allowing an outer shell electron to
> replace it in a manner similar to the Auger Effect, thus  resulting
> in a form of energy amplification.
>
> Pre-treating water with an electric field is simply a way of aligning
> the highly polar H2O molecules (electric dipoles) between the electrodes
> of a capacitor which in the case of (*e-) apparently displaces it in the
> Oxygen of the H2O so it can react favorably when a proton gets
> pushed into the O atom in the ICE compression-combustion stroke.
>
The electric field alignment of the pre-treatment (chain) should be
two hydrogen atoms on one end of the H2O molecule  joined
by a successive H2O  to make a repeating linkage:
 
Cathode -|H2O-H2O-H2O-H2O....H2O-H2O-H2O +|Anode
 
In pure water his should enhance the Ion Product 2 H2O <----> H3O +  +  OH-
which would explain the high conductivity and the "greasy feel"
usually associated with alkaline solutions that are attacking the skin
on your fingers.
Somewhere in here either the three hydrogens on the hydronium (H3O+) ion
or the chain stretching is getting a proton (H+) in close to the lower level oxygen
electrons to pre-activate the water for the hydrino formation when the activated
water vapor gets into the ICE cylinder.
 
Fred
 
 
 
  
 
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 14:27:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ALR9V7001500; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:27:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ALR50t001469; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:27:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:27:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000e01c68cd4$95a1c480$7c027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Kyle R.Mcallister Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:26:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68900 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Kyle, Gosh! Golly! Gee! Kyle.. sometimes important discussion takes place when = Vorts congregate.. sometimes very serious stuff is mentioned.. a little = of Parks helps to remind us we are all human and in need. Some humor permeates the discussion.. perhaps as a way to keep from = crying when we consider the subject of energy which dominates most = topics. We need Kyle ! Speak up and be heard ! Think of the Vorts group as a pot of border chili in the making... who = knows how it's gonna wind up tasting.. but for sure if you get hungry = enough you will eventually try a spoonful if for no other reason than = why people play russian roulette. Richard,=20 ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Kyle,
 
Gosh! Golly! Gee! Kyle.. sometimes important discussion takes place = when=20 Vorts congregate.. sometimes very serious stuff is mentioned.. a little = of Parks=20 helps to remind us we are all human and in need.
Some humor permeates the discussion.. perhaps as a way to keep from = crying=20 when we consider the subject of energy which dominates most = topics.
We need Kyle ! Speak up and be heard !
 
Think of the Vorts group as a pot of border chili in the making... = who=20 knows how it's gonna wind up tasting.. but for sure if you get hungry = enough you=20 will eventually try a spoonful if for no other reason than why = people play=20 russian roulette.
 
Richard,

 

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c68cd4$950c1430$7c027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68CAA.AC3DAD50-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 16:43:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ANhdXh030525; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:43:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ANhbhY030511; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:43:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:43:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:43:32 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85AFED13C0B35-1B38-6DE2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68901 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><><> Here's a post by an astute individual on another list: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/mar/m29-005.shtml Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 16:53:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ANqmh9004993; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:52:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ANqlRt004979; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:52:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:52:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:52:40 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B001825BBC1-1B38-6E1D@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68902 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><><> Then there was Marinov: http://www.padrak.com/ine/PAPPAS_SM.html Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 16:56:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ANts6Y006481; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:55:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ANtqxH006464; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:55:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:55:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:55:45 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B00863F93ED-1B38-6E29@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68903 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><> Of course Brude DePalma did himself in also: http://www.padrak.com/ine/DEPALMA2.html Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 16:57:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ANvQWl007136; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:57:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ANvMqZ007106; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:57:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:57:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:57:14 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B00BB6D4759-1B38-6E2F@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68904 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><><> And you and I have spoken on the GEC Marconi deaths . . . what did *they* know? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marconi_Scientists Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 17:01:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B014Ev010484; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:01:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B01242010454; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:01:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:01:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:00:56 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B013FD07ACF-1B38-6E3F@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68905 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><> But it's not just FE researchers. What's with all the microbiologists? http://www.rense.com/general20/mic.htm Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 17:06:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B05nQ1012121; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:05:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B05lji012105; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:05:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:05:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:05:43 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B01EAB8AC55-1B38-6E53@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <3vLqPB.A.F9C.b51iEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68906 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><> What really got me wondering at first was the death of Pat Price, Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ's best RVer: http://www.mindspring.com/~txporter/deathpp.htm Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 17:08:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B08SQs013554; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:08:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B08RR1013533; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:08:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:08:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:08:20 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68907 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: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><> Of course all this could be coincidence, unless you're a Jungian. Or a gnostic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistis_Sophia }:-) Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 17:28:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B0SYMJ023964; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:28:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B0SV3h023936; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:28:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:28:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:28:27 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5B0SUnJ023916 Resent-Message-ID: <0IxqPB.A.41F.vO2iEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68908 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A -----Original Message----- From: hohlrauml6d   Of course all this could be coincidence, unless you're a Jungian. Or a gnostic.    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistis_Sophia    }:-)  <><><><><><> Samuel H. Clemens: "I was sorry to have my name mentioned as one of the great authors, because they have a sad habit of dying off. Chaucer is dead, Spencer is dead, so is Milton, so is Shakespeare, and I'm not feeling so well myself." Dan Rowan (or Henry Kissinger :-) "Say 'Goodnight, Dick'". ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 18:20:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B1JcB9015978; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:19:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B1JXVx015949; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:19:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:19:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: "Hoyt A. Stearns jr." To: Subject: Dead scientists Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:19:39 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-reply-to: <8C85AFED13C0B35-1B38-6DE2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68909 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: http://www.stevequayle.com/dead_scientists/UpdatedDeadScientists.html Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona US http://members.cox.net/hoyt-stearns -----Original Message----- From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net [mailto:hohlrauml6d@netscape.net] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 4:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line -----Original Message----- From: Grimer Err...I know of two - Mallove and Meyer - Can you name any others? I'm not being sarcastic. I would really like to know. There might be a chance that one day I could earn the red badge of martyrdom. 8-) <><><><><><> Here's a post by an astute individual on another list: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/mar/m29-005.shtml Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 10 21:22:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B4M4V9010772; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:22:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B4M0X4010732; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:22:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:22:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:21:54 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85B25B44A15F5-28F8-1BA82@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: Dead scientists Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68910 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: Hoyt A. Stearns jr. http://www.stevequayle.com/dead_scientists/UpdatedDeadScientists.html <><><><><><> It must simply have been "their time". Terry, gnostically speakin' ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 00:22:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5B7LoqU008005; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:21:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5B7LmNU007987; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:21:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:21:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <083401c68d27$b1b507b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066610191351245@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:21:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5B7Ljuu007960 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68911 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred wrote: >> ... >> >> > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r >> >> > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent >> >> > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo >> ... The "q" in the V formula is that of the particle with charge + q, agreed? The voltage at the particle we are concerned with (the -q one, the electron) does not depend on it's own charge, but only on external charges, and the only one around is the proton +q. The proton creates a voltage at distance r from itself equal to V = k*q/r, independently of there being a charge there, or of it's value. More below. >> >> > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at > that >> >> > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance >> >> > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the bohr radius). >> >> >> >> Where does this come from? >> >> >> > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. >> ... >> >> OK one step at a time so Bohr proposed in 1913 (cf this article > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model ) an ad hoc not-too-bad > semi-classical model of the H atom where the electron's angular momentum > can only take some discrete values: >> >> L=n*(h/2pi) >> Where n = 1,2,3,. is called the principal quantum number, and h is > Planck's constant. >> >> Angular momentum L is r*m*v isn't it, so for ground state n=1 we have: >> > Yes. typically written mvr = h/2(pi) or as the de Broglie wavelength > lambda = 2(pi)r = h/mv. > >> r*m*v=1*(h/2pi) >> => v=1/r * 1/m * h/2pi >> > That is okay for algebraic acrobatics. >> >> How does one get from this to your v formula above? >> Wait a minute, your v formula simply results from equating centripetal > coulombic force k*q^2/r^2 = V*q/r to >> centrifugal force m*v^2/r doesn't it? >> > Yes. > k* q^2/r^2 is the electrostatic force between two particles each with > identical unit charge +/- q > For the picky it should be k* +/- q1* +/- q2/r^2 newtons > Or if you are into Fusion Coulomb Barriers: Z1 * Z2 * k*q^2/r^2 which is > > A handy constant at r = 1 meter is 2.306E-28 newtons. I keep it and alpha > (0.00729729) > along with E = hc/lambda = 1.9878E-25 in my Hp 11C storage registers. >> >> But then there is a mistake, the "2" factor in front of V*q/r shouldn't > be there, >> which is confirmed by your second expression for v where the "2" factor > cancels out. >> >> Or maybe your second expression was for your electronium (same charge as > electron, twice the mass, right?) in which case it's wrong too! >> >> Please let me know if you agree with the above and we'll proceed from > there. >> > Velocity v = [2*V*q/m]^1/2 derived from K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 was the intent, This amounts to saying that K.E. 1/2 m*v^2 is equal to V*q, which can't be right either since "coulombic=centripetal" yields: m*v^2/r = k*q^2/r^2 => m*v^2 = k*q^2/r = V*q => 1/2 m*v^2 = 1/2 V*q (one half of what you wrote) Maybe you were trying to write the law of conservation of energy (Energy = Kinetic Energy + Potential Energy = constant). In this case you have to be picky about signs: K.E. = 1/2 V*q (from "coulombic=centripetal" as we just saw) P.E. = -V*q (potential energy of -q charge at potential V) => E = K.E.+ P.E. = -1/2 V*q Now if you do the computation for Bohr's ground state radius r=0.53 x 10^-10 m you find V = k*q/r = 27V, so: E= -1/2 27*q = = -1/2 27*e J = -13.5*e J = -13.5 eV K.E. = +13.5 eV P.E. = -27 eV The Wikipedia Bohr model page (link above) says En= -13.6eV/n^2 so the above must be right (n=1). Hope this helps, it helped me in any case, a good exercise before trying to understand fractional orbits and corresponding energies. Note I have assumed r was known, this is cheating, could a good soul do the derivation of r as a function of n based on the results in this page? Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 03:32:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BAWJbw014218; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:32:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BAWGwE014186; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:32:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:32:16 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=mFkmfWemLGCBID/tXeQhtkRH7KnvSgzF3LTQzgPJbzL3u6ImIZU06v911WZ/PG4G; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006601110325497@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:32:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c21bcc4d972560123778b2d6a3db1d2d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.249 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68912 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel wrote: > > Fred wrote: > >> ... > >> >> > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r > >> >> > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent > >> >> > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo > >> ... > > The "q" in the V formula is that of the particle with charge + q, agreed? > Not really, The rule is that the sign of the Potential V is given as the sign of the particle, so for an electron (- q) Potential in this case is - V (negative) . :-) > > The voltage at the particle we are concerned with (the -q one, the electron) does not depend on it's own charge, > but only on external charges, and the only one around is the proton +q. > The proton creates a voltage at distance r from itself equal to V = k*q/r, independently > of there being a charge there, or of it's value. More below. > > >> >> > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at > > that > >> >> > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance > >> >> > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the Bohr radius). > >> >> > >> >> Where does this come from? > >> >> > >> > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. > >> ... > >> > >> OK one step at a time so Bohr proposed in 1913 (cf this article > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model ) an ad hoc not-too-bad > > semi-classical model of the H atom where the electron's angular momentum > > can only take some discrete values: > >> > >> L=n*(h/2pi) > >> Where n = 1,2,3,. is called the principal quantum number, and h is > > Planck's constant. > >> > >> Angular momentum L is r*m*v isn't it, so for ground state n=1 we have: > >> > > Yes. typically written mvr = h/2(pi) or as the de Broglie wavelength > > lambda = 2(pi)r = h/mv. > > > >> r*m*v=1*(h/2pi) > >> => v=1/r * 1/m * h/2pi > >> > > That is okay for algebraic acrobatics. > >> > >> How does one get from this to your v formula above? > >> Wait a minute, your v formula simply results from equating centripetal > > coulombic force k*q^2/r^2 = V*q/r to > >> centrifugal force m*v^2/r doesn't it? > >> > > Yes. > > k* q^2/r^2 is the electrostatic force between two particles each with > > identical unit charge +/- q > > For the picky it should be k* +/- q1* +/- q2/r^2 newtons > > Or if you are into Fusion Coulomb Barriers: Z1 * Z2 * k*q^2/r^2 which is > > > > A handy constant at r = 1 meter is 2.306E-28 newtons. I keep it and alpha > > (0.00729729) > > along with E = hc/lambda = 1.9878E-25 in my Hp 11C storage registers. > >> > >> But then there is a mistake, the "2" factor in front of V*q/r shouldn't > > be there, > >> which is confirmed by your second expression for v where the "2" factor > > cancels out. > >> > >> Or maybe your second expression was for your electronium (same charge as > > electron, twice the mass, right?) in which case it's wrong too! > >> > >> Please let me know if you agree with the above and we'll proceed from > > there. > >> > > Velocity v = [2*V*q/m]^1/2 derived from K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 was the intent, > > This amounts to saying that K.E. 1/2 m*v^2 is equal to V*q, which can't be right either since "coulombic=centripetal" yields: > > m*v^2/r = k*q^2/r^2 > => m*v^2 = k*q^2/r = V*q > => 1/2 m*v^2 = 1/2 V*q (one half of what you wrote) > > Maybe you were trying to write the law of conservation of energy (Energy = Kinetic Energy + Potential Energy = constant). In this case you have to be picky about signs: > I wasn't trying, I used to applying cook book equations off the top of my head without going through their derivation. Hazardous, no? > > K.E. = 1/2 V*q (from "coulombic=centripetal" as we just saw) > P.E. = -V*q (potential energy of -q charge at potential V) > > => E = K.E.+ P.E. = -1/2 V*q > > Now if you do the computation for Bohr's ground state radius r=0.53 x 10^-10 m you find V = k*q/r = 27V, so: > > E= -1/2 27*q = = -1/2 27*e J = -13.5*e J = -13.5 eV > K.E. = +13.5 eV > P.E. = -27 eV > That's okay. Potential V = - k*q/2r = - 13.6 eV at the 5.29E-11 meter Bohr Radius > > The Wikipedia Bohr model page (link above) says En= -13.6eV/n^2 so the above must be right (n=1). > > Hope this helps, it helped me in any case, a good exercise before trying to understand fractional orbits and corresponding energies. Note I have assumed r was known, this is cheating, could a good soul do the derivation of r as a function of n based on the results in this page? > If you want to wing it, Michel. "The orbit of an electron in an atom must have a circumference equal to an integral number of wavelengths" And you will find that the orbital velocity at the Bohr radius ( n = 1) is c/137. Bon Voyage. Fred. > > Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 03:56:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BAtwQ0027206; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:55:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BAts9j027165; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:55:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 03:55:54 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=PjVUa+xeYIL87+dQ1rDBTFBiZ3LZnHLDkY743E9wJqPYjfzejUwi3BGhT/3JQU/P; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066011105545490@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Puthoff@earthtech.org Cc: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: Birthday Greetings Hal. Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:55:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e7e7da1010fe2d56e56ddc6236b2b5db350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.41 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68913 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 Belated but sincere best wishes. Wishing you many more. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Belated but sincere best wishes.
 
Wishing you many more.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 04:30:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BBURR1019521; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:30:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BBU1Se017816; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:30:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:30:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <085b01c68d47$f794db00$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006601110325497@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:12:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5BBTw3R017755 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68914 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred wrote: ... >> >> >> > The potential V of a `particle with charge - q at a distance r >> >> >> > from a particle with charge + q equals V = k*q/r independent >> >> >> > of the mass of either particle. k = 1/4(pi)eo >> >> ... >> >> The "q" in the V formula is that of the particle with charge + q, agreed? >> > Not really, The rule is that the sign of the Potential V is given as the > sign of > the particle, so for an electron (- q) Potential in this case is - V > (negative) . :-) Ah, we have another controversy Fred. V is positive and so am I ;-) Consider my previous comment right below, plus this: Electric field created by the proton is minus the derivative of the potential wrt radius right? (e field is V/m) E = -dV/dr => dV/dr = -E = -k q/r^2 => V(r) = k q/r (+ constant which me make zero so V(infinity)=0) So the sign of V is given by the sign of _the other_ particle, the one which acts on the particle under study, positive in this case :) >> The voltage at the particle we are concerned with (the -q one, the > electron) does not depend on it's own charge, >> but only on external charges, and the only one around is the proton +q. >> The proton creates a voltage at distance r from itself equal to V = > k*q/r, independently >> of there being a charge there, or of it's value. More below. >> >> >> >> > The velocity v = [2 V*q/r * (1/m)]^1/2 = [2 V*q/r (1/2m)]^1/2 at >> > that >> >> >> > point is also the same (c * alpha or c/137 at a distance >> >> >> > r = 5.29E-11 meters, the Bohr radius). >> >> >> >> >> >> Where does this come from? >> >> >> >> >> > The velocity in the classical Bohr ground state orbit. >> >> ... >> >> >> >> OK one step at a time so Bohr proposed in 1913 (cf this article >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model ) an ad hoc not-too-bad >> > semi-classical model of the H atom where the electron's angular momentum >> > can only take some discrete values: >> >> >> >> L=n*(h/2pi) >> >> Where n = 1,2,3,. is called the principal quantum number, and h is >> > Planck's constant. >> >> >> >> Angular momentum L is r*m*v isn't it, so for ground state n=1 we have: >> >> >> > Yes. typically written mvr = h/2(pi) or as the de Broglie wavelength >> > lambda = 2(pi)r = h/mv. >> > >> >> r*m*v=1*(h/2pi) >> >> => v=1/r * 1/m * h/2pi >> >> >> > That is okay for algebraic acrobatics. >> >> >> >> How does one get from this to your v formula above? >> >> Wait a minute, your v formula simply results from equating centripetal >> > coulombic force k*q^2/r^2 = V*q/r to >> >> centrifugal force m*v^2/r doesn't it? >> >> >> > Yes. >> > k* q^2/r^2 is the electrostatic force between two particles each with >> > identical unit charge +/- q >> > For the picky it should be k* +/- q1* +/- q2/r^2 newtons >> > Or if you are into Fusion Coulomb Barriers: Z1 * Z2 * k*q^2/r^2 which is >> > >> > A handy constant at r = 1 meter is 2.306E-28 newtons. I keep it and > alpha >> > (0.00729729) >> > along with E = hc/lambda = 1.9878E-25 in my Hp 11C storage registers. >> >> >> >> But then there is a mistake, the "2" factor in front of V*q/r shouldn't >> > be there, >> >> which is confirmed by your second expression for v where the "2" factor >> > cancels out. >> >> >> >> Or maybe your second expression was for your electronium (same charge > as >> > electron, twice the mass, right?) in which case it's wrong too! >> >> >> >> Please let me know if you agree with the above and we'll proceed from >> > there. >> >> >> > Velocity v = [2*V*q/m]^1/2 derived from K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 was the intent, >> >> This amounts to saying that K.E. 1/2 m*v^2 is equal to V*q, which can't > be right either since "coulombic=centripetal" yields: >> >> m*v^2/r = k*q^2/r^2 >> => m*v^2 = k*q^2/r = V*q >> => 1/2 m*v^2 = 1/2 V*q (one half of what you wrote) >> >> Maybe you were trying to write the law of conservation of energy (Energy > = Kinetic Energy + Potential Energy = constant). In this case you have to > be picky about signs: >> > I wasn't trying, I used to applying cook book equations off the top of > my head without going through their derivation. Hazardous, no? >> >> K.E. = 1/2 V*q (from "coulombic=centripetal" as we just saw) >> P.E. = -V*q (potential energy of -q charge at potential V) >> >> => E = K.E.+ P.E. = -1/2 V*q >> >> Now if you do the computation for Bohr's ground state radius r=0.53 x > 10^-10 m you find V = k*q/r = 27V, so: >> >> E= -1/2 27*q = = -1/2 27*e J = -13.5*e J = -13.5 eV >> K.E. = +13.5 eV >> P.E. = -27 eV >> > That's okay. Potential V = - k*q/2r = - 13.6 eV at the 5.29E-11 meter > Bohr Radius Could hardly be more wrong (sign, value _and_ unit!), V = + k*q/r = 27.2 volts, I guess you haven't had your coffee yet :) >> >> The Wikipedia Bohr model page (link above) says En= -13.6eV/n^2 so the > above must be right (n=1). >> >> Hope this helps, it helped me in any case, a good exercise before trying > to understand fractional orbits and corresponding energies. Note I have > assumed r was known, this is cheating, could a good soul do the derivation > of r as a function of n based on the results in this page? >> > If you want to wing it, Michel. "The orbit of an electron in an atom must > have a circumference > equal to an integral number of wavelengths" > > And you will find that the orbital velocity at the Bohr radius ( n = 1) is > c/137. OK I will, but let's solve the above discrepancies first :) Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 05:03:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BC36pb005592; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:03:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BC33HT005556; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:03:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:03:03 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=CXc4EaYTbPMK+xo9YeLHGbAOdyfmMJCH1xGRjlKQ7YfmBk9vq7uaf5ho5JqG6tyq; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006601112251392@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re; O.T. No Subject Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 06:02:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403b4f05d5dc8e32dba22462cee9182219350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.155 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68915 X-Loop: vortex-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 Cheney: “George, are you pondering what I’m pondering?” Bush: “Wuh, I think so, Brain Dick, but…” http://duryea.org/pinky/quotes.htm ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Cheney: “George, are you pondering what I’m pondering?”

Bush: “Wuh, I think so, Brain Dick, but…”

 
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 08:25:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BFPYVP026904; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:25:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BFPGk6026687; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:25:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:25:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <448C35AD.5020105@usfamily.net> Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:24:29 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 References: <2.2.32.20060610121351.00bb504c@pop.freeserve.net> In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060610121351.00bb504c@pop.freeserve.net> 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/68916 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: > >>Frank, I may be wrong but I doubt this is the >>place for proselytism. >> >> > >I agree with you. But since Pork's paragraph was a >sneer at religious belief in general, including mine, >I'm sure that you, like Voltaire, will defend to the >death my right of reply, even though you may not agree >with me. 8-) > > > If you want to see proselyzing you need look no further than Porksie's column, he brings Frank's replies on by promoting his religion, Secular Humanism, read Ann Coulter's G-dless. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 08:38:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BFcEVm002847; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:38:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BFcCcS002828; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:38:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 08:38:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060611151913262.4029AB80008A@mwinf3211.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060611151915.0099894c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:19:15 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: Dead scientists Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68917 X-Loop: vortex-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 12:21 am 11/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Hoyt A. Stearns jr. > >http://www.stevequayle.com/dead_scientists/UpdatedDeadScientists.html > ><><><><><><> > >It must simply have been "their time". > >Terry, gnostically speakin' Well since you're bringing up the possibility of action by "higher powers", I must confess I have often mused on whether or not the withholding of the knowledge needed to use water as fuel didn't have some diabolical dimension. You have to admit it's very much in the Devil's interest (and that of his acolytes the oil barons) to steer mankind towards making an infernal pact with atomic power. Maybe he knows that in our orbit around the galaxy we are shortly due to run up against a Beta-atmosphere discontinuity which will destabilise atomic reactors with Chernobyl type consequences, a possibility I pointed out in my note on Iterative Hierarchical Mechanics [N103/87] where I wrote: ======================================== Unfortunately the writer's experience of past system failures suggests that it will probably take a nation or more to be annihilated by synchronous and inexplicable nuclear accidents before the basic philosophical concepts on which the operation of fission reactors ultimately depend are given the serious attention that their importance demands. ======================================== But perhaps I had better stop there before some whiner complains I'm trying to subvert his naive atheism. ;-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 09:19:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BGJgTI029072; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:19:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BGJdbu029043; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:19:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:19:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060611161931539.838878000093@mwinf3214.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060611161933.00bb4e90@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 17:19:33 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68918 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 10:24 am 11/06/2006 -0500, Thomas wrote: > Grimer wrote: >>> Frank, I may be wrong but I doubt this is the >>> place for proselytism. >> I agree with you. But since Pork's paragraph was a >> sneer at religious belief in general, including mine, >> I'm sure that you, like Voltaire, will defend to the >> death my right of reply, even though you may not agree >> with me. 8-) > If you want to see proselytizing you need look > no further than Porksie's column, he brings Frank's > replies on by promoting his religion, Secular > Humanism, read Ann Coulter's G-dless. And you will find an interesting review of this at, http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi 8-) Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 09:37:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BGb4pd007747; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:37:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BGb3It007732; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:37:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 09:37:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <08a301c68d71$c7d95dd0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <2.2.32.20060610121351.00bb504c@pop.freeserve.net> <448C35AD.5020105@usfamily.net> Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:12:04 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5BGb05K007701 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68919 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: Like Voltaire I defend your right to reply Frank but there must be better places to do so, I doubt Parks is subscribed here. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "thomas malloy" To: Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:24 PM Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 > Grimer wrote: > >> >>>Frank, I may be wrong but I doubt this is the >>>place for proselytism. >>> >>> >> >>I agree with you. But since Pork's paragraph was a >>sneer at religious belief in general, including mine, >>I'm sure that you, like Voltaire, will defend to the >>death my right of reply, even though you may not agree >>with me. 8-) >> >> >> > If you want to see proselyzing you need look no further than Porksie's > column, he brings Frank's replies on by promoting his religion, Secular > Humanism, read Ann Coulter's G-dless. > > > --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 10:06:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BH6UQg025212; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:06:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BH6TCs025198; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:06:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:06:29 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TxXTp9RVtApDhYZbwz4EDyMsQk1oKo54jZJpyOED3pcwI2IuvYhF3NOM67lOPUms; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006601117619162@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re; "What's New" sShould Go Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 11:06:19 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408344ad14171076ce5d4d9ed0f2243708350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.225 Resent-Message-ID: <8yXuLC.A.qJG.U2EjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68920 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 Akira posted that item early on when Parks was slamming things of Vortex interest.. Giving Parks an audience on this list regardless of your leanings doesn't accomplish anything more than other Spam. I think Akira should accept our thanks and not forward Park's ravings to this list. I have enough problems keeping a sunny smiley. The Devil is in the details. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Akira posted that item early on when Parks was slamming things
of Vortex interest..
Giving Parks an audience on this list regardless of your leanings
doesn't accomplish anything more than other Spam.
 
I think Akira should accept our thanks and not forward
Park's ravings to this list.
 
I have enough problems keeping a sunny smiley.
 
The Devil is in the details.   :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 10:25:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BHOilS005310; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:24:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BHOgdk005286; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:24:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:24:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <08c501c68d7b$eb14f1b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-22006601117619162@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: "What's New" sShould Go Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:24:38 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5BHOdbP005259 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68921 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: Or maybe only post extracts of Vortex interest if any? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 7:06 PM Subject: Re; "What's New" sShould Go > Akira posted that item early on when Parks was slamming things > of Vortex interest.. > Giving Parks an audience on this list regardless of your leanings > doesn't accomplish anything more than other Spam. > > I think Akira should accept our thanks and not forward > Park's ravings to this list. > > I have enough problems keeping a sunny smiley. > > The Devil is in the details. :-) > > Fred From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 13:45:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BKjQRd026760; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:45:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BKjMWg026725; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:45:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 13:45:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060611204510287.46364740008E@mwinf3208.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060611204511.009986f8@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: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 21:45:11 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Raising Polly Water Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5BKjAgn026648 Resent-Message-ID: <0IhvG.A.dhG.iDIjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68922 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 think it's about time to set about raising Polly Water from the dead, a tad more difficult than Saving Private Ryan but one more suited to my temperament and capacities. 8-) Before someone parrots Martha and saith, "by this time she stinketh, for she is now of four decades" I would point out that it will be all the more of a challenge then to bring her back to life. If, as I suspect, polywater is an alias for waterfuel then she might even beat cold fusion to the punch as a limitless source of energy. Now that would be nice, wouldn't it. 8-) Starting with Wiki I retrieved a rather perceptive comment on the article from..... "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Polywater" .....which reads as follows. ================================================= Inconsistency ------------------------------------------------- There seems to be an inconsistency in the article. At the beginning, the properties of the hypothetical substance are said to include a "freezing point of -40 °C or lower, a boiling point of 150 °C or greater". Later, it is said that sweat was found to have the same properties, and that "when subjected to chemical analysis, samples of polywater were invariably contaminated with other substances (explaining the changes in melting and boiling points)". I don't know what sort of contaminations could cause such enormous changes in the freezing point and boiling point, but I'm pretty sure that a) sweat doesn't have these properties and that b) if some contamination were indeed able to produce such properties, it wouldn't take sophisticated chemical analysis to see that the water was contaminated. ================================================= He has quite a point, has he not. 8-) But that's enough for one post. Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 14:14:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BLEVW5010699; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:14:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BLEU2K010683; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:14:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:14:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060611211427818.C7C208000088@mwinf3214.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060611211429.00ba56b0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:14:29 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68923 X-Loop: vortex-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 06:12 pm 11/06/2006 +0200, Michel wrote: > Like Voltaire I defend your right to reply Frank > but there must be better places to do so, > I doubt Parks is subscribed here. I don't suppose he is - but whilst his diatribes are given a platform on Vortex-L I insist upon the great British tradition of the right to heckle. And incidently, you might be interested to know that the quote often attributed to Voltaire is a myth - 8-) though to be fair, he would probably endorse it. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 14:43:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BLgoY4027773; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:42:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BLgmNO027753; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:42:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:42:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000c01c68d9f$f21cd490$73037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: FW BOBPARKSIE Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:42:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68D76.08863BB0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <6c3lzD.A.gxG.Y5IjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68924 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_0008_01C68D76.08863BB0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68D76.088948F0" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68D76.088948F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank Michel wrote.. =20 > Like Voltaire I defend your right to reply Frank=20 > but there must be better places to do so,=20 > I doubt Parks is subscribed here. Grimer wrote.. And incidently, you might be interested to know that the quote often attributed to Voltaire is a myth - 8-) though to be fair, he would probably endorse it. Howdy Frank, Leave it to a Brit to know a quote . The Isles practice the art = to perfection and even invented a language ( English) for the purpose. = Say what will be said of Tony Blair.. but ..he would eat Porksie for = lunch. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68D76.088948F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 
  Michel=20 wrote..           =             &= nbsp;        =20
> Like Voltaire I defend your right to reply Frank
> but = there=20 must be better places to do so,
> I doubt Parks is subscribed=20 here.
Grimer wrote..
And incidently, you might be interested to know that
the quote = often=20 attributed to Voltaire is a myth -   8-)
though to be fair, = he=20 would probably endorse it.
Howdy Frank,
 
Leave it to a Brit to know a quote <grin> . The Isles = practice the=20 art to perfection and even invented a language ( English) for the = purpose. Say=20 what will be said of Tony Blair.. but ..he would eat Porksie for = lunch.
 
Richard
------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C68D76.088948F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68D76.08863BB0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c68d9f$f1531bf0$73037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C68D76.08863BB0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 14:57:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BLv0nu003200; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:57:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BLuvXQ003167; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:56:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:56:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001d01c68da1$eeb49160$73037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: Raising Polly Water Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:56:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C68D78.055CAF30"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68925 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_0019_01C68D78.055CAF30 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001A_01C68D78.055E35D0" ------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C68D78.055E35D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote,, I think it's about time to set about raising Polly Water=20 from the dead, a tad more difficult than Saving Private=20 Ryan but one more suited to my temperament and capacities. 8-) Before someone parrots Martha and saith,=20 "by this time she stinketh, for she is now of four decades"=20 I would point out that it will be all the more of a challenge=20 then to bring her back to life. If, as I suspect, polywater is an alias for waterfuel then=20 she might even beat cold fusion to the punch as a limitless=20 source of energy. Now that would be nice, wouldn't it. 8-) Howdy Frank.. I was totally unaware of Polly Water. It is time to raise Polly Water = from the dead. Why ? Because it "FITS" ,thats why. From what I have read = to now, it fits and it is part of the overall CF equation. This equation = may not be recognizable using present math technology.. so we may have = to hummm the words. I think about the tests we ran and hyper-oxidized = water. Later when we used the same tank water without inducting air, we = couldn't get a reading on vacuum because the darn water would not stop = surrendering air.. hmmm. Richard Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C68D78.055E35D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote,,

I think it's about time to set about raising Polly Water
from the = dead, a=20 tad more difficult than Saving Private
Ryan but one more suited to = my=20 temperament and capacities. 8-)

Before someone parrots Martha and = saith,=20
"by this time she stinketh, for she is now of four decades"
I = would=20 point out that it will be all the more of a challenge
then to bring = her back=20 to life.

If, as I suspect, polywater is an alias for waterfuel = then=20
she might even beat cold fusion to the punch as a limitless =
source of=20 energy. Now that would be nice, wouldn't it.   8-)

Howdy Frank..

I was totally unaware of Polly Water. It is time to raise Polly Water = from=20 the dead. Why ? Because it "FITS" ,thats why. From what I have read to = now, it=20 fits and it is part of the overall CF equation. This equation may not be = recognizable using present math technology.. so we may have to hummm the = words.  I think about the tests we ran and hyper-oxidized water. = Later when=20 we used the same tank water without inducting air, we couldn't get a = reading on=20 vacuum because the darn water would not stop surrendering air.. = hmmm.

Richard

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C68D78.055E35D0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C68D78.055CAF30 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001801c68da1$ee313090$73037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C68D78.055CAF30-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 15:17:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BMH0xA013833; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:17:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BMGwCH013810; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:16:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:16:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:16:54 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.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/68926 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Status: RO X-Status: A Test. Does this work? (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 15:42:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BMgMiJ028314; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:42:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BMgLCl028306; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:42:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:42:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:42:21 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.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/68927 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: When someone asked about this, I tried installing it on [FNRG] to see what havoc would happen. Things like RE:[Vo]:[Vo]:[Vo]:re:[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:[Vo]: I found a procmail script and tested it. But that was around 2002, and I never moved a copy onto vortex-L!!!! :0 * ! ^Subject: (Re:(\[[1-9]+\])? )?\[Vo\]: { :0 w CURRENT_SUBJ=| formail -zx Subject: :0 fhw | formail -I"Subject: [Vo]: $CURRENT_SUBJ" } (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 15:47:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BMke7Z030319; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:46:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BMkc3q030297; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:46:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:46:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:46:30 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85BC0041C3842-1564-E17F@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060611211429.00ba56b0@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060611211429.00ba56b0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68928 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Grimer And incidently, you might be interested to know that the quote often attributed to Voltaire is a myth - 8-) though to be fair, he would probably endorse it. <><><><><><> Quite right, it was Evelyn Beatrice Hall: http://www.classroomtools.com/voltaire.htm However, she was speaking of Voltaire. ;-) Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 16:24:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5BNOSU7021078; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:24:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5BNOR9V021060; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:24:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 16:24:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:24:20 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85BC54CCD1197-1564-E22A@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <4HXt6B.A.8IF.rYKjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68929 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Ford Hydrogen Engines Status: RO X-Status: http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=20332&make_id=trust Why are the outputs so low? 80 horses outta a 4.2 l engine? Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 18:11:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C1Aqa4024922; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:10:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C1An0k024885; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:10:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:10:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:10:46 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68931 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: 300mS Ball Lightning Status: RO X-Status: Also an MPEG of the device: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:45:17 -0600 From: Tesla list To: tesla@pupman.com Subject: Re: Holy Crap! Original poster: Jan Wagner On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, Tesla list wrote: >Original poster: mercurus2000 > >Silly subject line but worth it, slightly off topic, but I think >everyone here is gonna want to see this. >http://www.physorg.com/news68812957.html Neat! There's also a German article with a short setup diagram at http://www.ipp.mpg.de/ippcms/de/presse/pi/05_06_pi.html and a short ~2MB video of the bang at http://www.ipp.mpg.de/ippcms/de/presse/pi/05_06_kugelblitz.mpg Pity that it is not a "contained" plasma ball, more like a plasma "smoke ring". Interesting though that the plasma is greenish. Maybe due to ionized natrium / chlorine from the salt water. Wonder if other salts would result in other colours :-) The German site's diagram shows a 5 kV DC supply and 500uF capacitor bank, that's a few kJ, and more like can crusher than tesla coil. cheers, - Jan From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 18:29:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C1AkWM024831; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:11:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C19Fvc022389; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:09:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:09:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:08:47 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68930 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: 300mS ball lightning Status: RO X-Status: Forwarded from Pupman list... (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:47:56 -0600 From: Tesla list To: tesla@pupman.com Subject: Holy Crap! Original poster: mercurus2000 Silly subject line but worth it, slightly off topic, but I think everyone here is gonna want to see this. http://www.physorg.com/news68812957.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 18:49:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C1motX013903; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:48:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C1mnvb013878; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:48:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:48:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612014846511.7CC6F1C00082@mwinf3203.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612014848.00b85d90@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, 12 Jun 2006 02:48:48 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, support@freeserve.net From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: 300mS ball lightning Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68932 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 06:08 pm 11/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: > >Forwarded from Pupman list... > >(((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ >beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer >billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 >206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 08:47:56 -0600 >From: Tesla list >To: tesla@pupman.com >Subject: Holy Crap! > >Original poster: mercurus2000 > >Silly subject line but worth it, slightly off topic, but I think >everyone here is gonna want to see this. > > http://www.physorg.com/news68812957.html Fascinating - "Holy Crap!" indeed - and not at all off topic in view of the thread on Polywater and Waterfuel. Thanks Bill. Frank Grimer And by the way - no one has ever got back on how to pay the Vortex subscription via my Amazon account. It's a very convenient way to do it cos it's one-click which is great for a lazy SOB like me. 8-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 19:28:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C2SFNd007288; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:28:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C2S5RD007164; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:28:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:28:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001501c68dc7$cd388700$73037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: [VO]: 300mS ball lightning Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 21:27:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C68D9D.E37586F0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68933 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_0011_01C68D9D.E37586F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0012_01C68D9D.E3789430" ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C68D9D.E3789430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. Fascinating - "Holy Crap!" indeed - and not at all off=20 topic in view of the thread on Polywater and Waterfuel. Howdy Frank...=20 Fascinating indeed. One step closer to the ability to closer study ball = lightning phenomena. As mentioned in the past, I never met another = person that witnessed BL beside me. Plays havoc with one's credibility. = back in 1933-34, during a hurricane at LaPorte Texas we lived a few city = blocks off Galveston bay. The lightning strike witnessed was one huge = bolt. As it decayed, the bolt fragmented into segments and from several = of the segments lowest to the ground the "balls" formed and drifted to = the heavey underbrush across the road and disappeared. I recall the = balls being round the size of volley balls a strangely, the top of the = balls had a part curly trail that looked like the hair on a quepee doll. = Of course later in school ,my prof wouldn't accept my claim. Interesting the Physics web report stated they used " salt water". The = hurricane I mentioned churned up enough salt laden air to produce a = "green" haze that was visible during the steady lightning strikes that = occurred. But ,who would believe a kid? Also strange that in some of our tests we have different results when = the test tank water has a high dose of chlorine present. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C68D9D.E3789430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..

Fascinating - "Holy Crap!" indeed - and not at all off
topic in = view of=20 the thread on Polywater and Waterfuel.

Howdy Frank...

Fascinating indeed. One step closer to the ability to closer study = ball=20 lightning phenomena. As mentioned in the past, I never met another = person that=20 witnessed BL beside me. Plays havoc with one's credibility. back in = 1933-34,=20 during a hurricane at LaPorte Texas we lived a few city blocks off = Galveston=20 bay. The lightning strike witnessed was one huge bolt. As it decayed, = the bolt=20 fragmented into segments and from several of the segments lowest to the = ground=20 the "balls" formed and drifted to the heavey underbrush across the road = and=20 disappeared. I recall the balls being round the size of volley balls a=20 strangely, the top of the balls had a part curly trail that looked like = the hair=20 on a quepee doll. Of course later in school ,my prof wouldn't accept my=20 claim.

Interesting the Physics web report stated they used " salt water". = The=20 hurricane I mentioned churned up enough salt laden air to  produce = a=20 "green" haze that was visible during the steady lightning strikes that = occurred.=20 But ,who would believe a kid?

Also strange that in some of our tests we have different results when = the=20 test tank water has a high dose of chlorine present.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C68D9D.E3789430-- ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C68D9D.E37586F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001001c68dc7$cc34ab90$73037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C68D9D.E37586F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 23:11:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C6BHop020308; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:11:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C6BE4E020287; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:11:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:11:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <092c01c68de6$fd6ea840$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:10:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5C6B6xa020193 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68934 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Status: RO X-Status: Seems to work nicely, thanks! Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Beaty" To: Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:16 AM Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 11 23:41:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C6fELS010165; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:41:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C6fBKR010144; Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:41:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:41:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <093401c68deb$3015e4d0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <2.2.32.20060611211429.00ba56b0@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85BC0041C3842-1564-E17F@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:40:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5C6f933010116 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68935 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 9, 2006 Status: RO X-Status: Quite right Terry, the "I disapprove..." quote is by Hall speaking of Voltaire, and the "Monsieur l'abbé..." quote supposed to have inspired Hall seems to have been made up: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Voltaire "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Though these words are regularly attributed to Voltaire, they were first used by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing under the pseudonym of Stephen G Tallentyre in The Friends of Voltaire (1906), as a summation of Voltaire's beliefs on freedom of thought and expression. Another possible source for the quote was proposed by Norbert Guterman, editor of "A Book of French Quotations," who noted a letter to M. le Riche (February 6, 1770) in which Voltaire is quoted as saying: "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write." This remark, however, does not appear in the letter. Michel Terry: > Quite right, it was Evelyn Beatrice Hall: > > http://www.classroomtools.com/voltaire.htm > > However, she was speaking of Voltaire. ;-) Frank: > And incidently, you might be interested to know that > the quote often attributed to Voltaire is a myth - 8-) > though to be fair, he would probably endorse it. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 00:13:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5C7CxE8031902; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:12:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5C7CuZa031869; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:12:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:12:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000601c68def$9e9f54a0$0b628451@NH2> From: To: References: <2.2.32.20060610143933.00c0a108@pop.freeserve.net> <8C85B024807D4A3-1B38-6E6E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <8C85B0517E578A9-1B38-6EC2@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:12:39 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <98-sx.A.yxH.3PRjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68936 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Status: RO X-Status: Yes, if you want to know that the message was received. I have had no trouble before !!! Norman ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Beaty" To: Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 11:16 PM Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 03:48:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CAmEqe010277; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 03:48:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CAm9Pc010225; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 03:48:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 03:48:07 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=dGwoxl2V6NIt89cKmGa7JgNw5dFov/rcpzSiKt4pnHR2zKJuMxDlvKMpt6QcPGrh; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066112104757176@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 04:47:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409b828e707d1fe0286535e4218a3f15f1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.161 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68937 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re; Mileage on the Cheap Revised Status: RO X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A single electron orbiting"Hydrogenic" atom has a Potential V = 13.6 * Z^2 volts Thus for hydrogen Z = 1, V = 13.6 and for oxygen Z = 8, 13.6 * 64 = 870 volts Argon 13.6 Z^2 = 13.6 * 18^2 = 4,406 volts, Potassium 4910 volts etc. Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts and the Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with a commensurate energy release? Prompt answer not required. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A single electron orbiting"Hydrogenic" atom has a Potential V = 13.6 * Z^2 volts
 
Thus for  hydrogen Z = 1, V = 13.6 and for oxygen Z = 8,  13.6 * 64 = 870 volts
Argon 13.6 Z^2 = 13.6 * 18^2 =  4,406 volts, Potassium 4910 volts etc.
 
Since the potential  V at a distance r  from a charge = k * q/2r volts and the
Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k  * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how
close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom?
 
Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom
need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the
oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy
it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons
of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with
a commensurate energy release?
 
Prompt answer not required.  :-)
 
Fred
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 04:53:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CBrLR4023480; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 04:53:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CBrJCo023448; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 04:53:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 04:53:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <098b01c68e16$c9619c80$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066112104757176@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:52:50 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5CBrDaU023376 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68938 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Status: RO X-Status: Fred wrote: >A single electron orbiting"Hydrogenic" atom has a Potential V = 13.6 * Z^2 volts Wrong for H in any case, it's 27.2V Fred (did you get my 2nd post of yesterday in thread "Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits"?). > > Thus for hydrogen Z = 1, V = 13.6 and for oxygen Z = 8, 13.6 * 64 = 870 volts > Argon 13.6 Z^2 = 13.6 * 18^2 = 4,406 volts, Potassium 4910 volts etc. > > Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts V=k * q/r (cf same post, come on you had it right two days ago) > and the > Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how > close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? > > Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom > need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the > oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy > it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons > of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with > a commensurate energy release? well it's exactly... > Prompt answer not required. :-) ... oh I won't tell you then ;) Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 06:21:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CDLETO027569; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:21:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CDF0B3021848; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:15:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:15:00 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=iAiZTqjXeX0R0RfrAMn4ddBHDwLrrDA0njajZe+JWpB0Ppibfmhd6S2m/IgjWtvU; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066112131436296@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:14:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408d31fa7b58f06531c7a3ecaf7f43079d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.225 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68939 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: Michel Jullian (The new broom of Vo) wrote: :-) > > > Fred wrote: > > >A single electron orbiting"Hydrogenic" atom has a Potential V = 13.6 * Z^2 volts > > Wrong for H in any case, it's 27.2V Fred (did you get my 2nd post of yesterday in thread "Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron Orbits"?). > The last I heard the proton H+ has 13.6 eV "potential energy" at the ground state Bohr Radius 5.29E-11 meters. V = k*q/2r = 1.44E-9/(2*5.29E-11) = 13.6 eV For Oxygen 8+, (hydrogenic) 870 eV, Scandium 21+, 5998 eV etc, with a bunch of shell groups of lower energy electrons betwixt and between. > > > > > Thus for hydrogen Z = 1, V = 13.6 and for oxygen Z = 8, 13.6 * 64 = 870 volts > > Argon 13.6 Z^2 = 13.6 * 18^2 = 4,406 volts, Potassium 4910 volts etc. > > > > Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts > > V=k * q/r (cf same post, come on you had it right two days ago) > That is total energy, Potential plus Kinetic.A 0.5 kilogram raindrop (hailstones like those that trashed my roof in October 2004) formed at 1 Km or more has a potential energy of mgh, but while it is falling it's gaining kinetic energy too. No? > > > and the > > Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how > > close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? > > > > Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom > > need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the > > oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy > > it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons > > of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with > > a commensurate energy release? > > well it's exactly... > > > Prompt answer not required. :-) > > ... oh I won't tell you then ;) > Please do. I want to see if high energy "fractional orbit" hydrinos are formed in the water molecules in an ICE after "Preconditioning" in the Joe Cell. Do they evaporate out of the "highly conductive-syrupy liquid polywater" of the Cell as Dimers (H2OH2O) ? Fred > > Michel > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 07:03:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CE2ikT028520; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:02:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CDrT0m020840; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:53:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:53:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <000d01c68e27$93aa0620$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066112131436296@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:52:58 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5CDrPLV020802 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68940 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Status: O X-Status: Fred wrote: > Michel Jullian (The new broom of Vo) wrote: :-) >> >> >> Fred wrote: >> >> >A single electron orbiting"Hydrogenic" atom has a Potential V = 13.6 * > Z^2 volts >> >> Wrong for H in any case, it's 27.2V Fred (did you get my 2nd post of > yesterday in thread "Electronium (Bound Ps-) Orbits vs Fractional Electron > Orbits"?). >> > The last I heard the proton H+ has 13.6 eV "potential energy" at the ground > state Bohr Radius > 5.29E-11 meters. V = k*q/2r = 1.44E-9/(2*5.29E-11) = 13.6 eV Dear Fred, you should be ashamed of tweaking formulae to get good-looking results, you're not a schoolboy anymore ;) Potential energy (J or eV) is not the same as potential (V), furthermore P.E. in this case is equal to -27.2 eV (twice what you said, and opposite sign), it's the total energy (K.E. + P.E.) which is equal to -13.6 eV (again sign matters). In order not to duplicate my brooming efforts could you please review my 2nd post of yesterday in which those things are derived? (beware there is stuff towards the bottom of that post too) > For Oxygen 8+, (hydrogenic) 870 eV, Scandium 21+, 5998 eV etc, > with a bunch of shell groups of lower energy electrons betwixt and between. >> >> > >> > Thus for hydrogen Z = 1, V = 13.6 and for oxygen Z = 8, 13.6 * 64 = > 870 volts >> > Argon 13.6 Z^2 = 13.6 * 18^2 = 4,406 volts, Potassium 4910 volts etc. >> > >> > Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts >> >> V=k * q/r (cf same post, come on you had it right two days ago) >> > That is total energy, Potential plus Kinetic.A 0.5 kilogram raindrop > (hailstones like those > that trashed my roof in October 2004) formed at 1 Km or more has a > potential energy of mgh, > but while it is falling it's gaining kinetic energy too. No? >> >> > and the >> > Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k * Z1 * Z2 * > q^2/r^2, how >> > close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? >> > >> > Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom >> > need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell > electrons of the >> > oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the > same energy >> > it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low > energy) electrons >> > of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron > with >> > a commensurate energy release? >> >> well it's exactly... >> >> > Prompt answer not required. :-) >> >> ... oh I won't tell you then ;) >> > Please do. I want to see if high energy "fractional orbit" hydrinos are > formed in the > water molecules in an ICE after "Preconditioning" in the Joe Cell. > Do they evaporate out of the "highly conductive-syrupy liquid polywater" of > the Cell > as Dimers (H2OH2O) ? Later, we must sort out the basics first. Michel_the_broom ;-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 08:13:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CFDNxK026055; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:13:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CFDL5S026028; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:13:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:13:20 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=fc+UcGUOAVJr4LuDPq+75MwdkONLa+l6QJMCH4FXsFXQ37X6IKMb4xlxzwcUCTeWS8VQ55sIrur2h9b/TuJwCyJ9rp6k5nizP6AdN8OkgX+lj363BTHmVK/owBiEJy85m5i106WyVFGabq5PvSeL1/1TrmGo6XZqAwFfDnXTVIE= ; Message-ID: <20060612151316.82659.qmail@web82704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:13:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68941 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Status: RO X-Status: --- Thanks to Colin Quinney for forwarding Technology Review Daily Update From: MIT Technology Review (6/12/2006) http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16974 "Cheap Drinking Water from the Ocean" by Aditi Risbud As Colin must have keenly observed - this story may have two messages. First, the obvious advancement to water purification, such that Carbon nanotube-based membranes will dramatically cut the cost of desalination. That is very good for the Third World. A second message is more subtle, requires thinking 'outside the box' and would mean little to other observers, outside the current threads on vortex related to polywater and WaterFuel. Indeed, that message may be a 'missing link' in some of what has only been suspected: re polywater --> waterfuel. The LLNL team measured water flow rates up to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by classical equations -i.e. through the pores or a membrane, which as mainstream science suggest: flow rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the diameter drops. That slowing is not progressively linear - it has now been discovered and at a certain level actually reverses itself and becomes faster than expected - by a factor of 10,000. And in typical Vortex fashion, anytime an anomaly of this magnitude is seen, the obvious next step is: can we find the underlying cause and then incorporate that into an OU energy device? In this case that would involve much complexity than, but the possibility is now open for further investigation. "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate." Hmm. Some of that enhancement - the 10,000-1 anomaly is no doubt due to mineralization. A type of both chemical and structural change given to H2O - which is the colloidal incorporation of surface atoms from the carbon pore into the water, but is there more? BTW the colloid is likely very diluted. If so, as in the substance known as polywater, the rest of what is going on to account for the changes in properties is probably due to electrochemical changes in water structure, and the "possible" incorporation of Helmholtz-layer induced capacitance, which has been internalized into that structure. In fact, perhaps "some" of the surprising efficiency seen in the present day diesel engine is due to structural changes in the fuel itself, related to forcing that fuel at 20,000 psi minimum - through a "pore" of sorts. It is kown that higher pressurre is beneficial and Mercedes now uses a 40,000 psi diesel injector as standard. That would be an unappreciated benefit, AFAIK, even if other explanations have been given for it - but it does not mean or imply that one can necessarily convert a 'non-fuel' especially into a fuel. But it is intriguing. One would need to get incredible capacitance in thewater structure to get to "fuel" and we are talking kilo-farads equivalent per liter, followed by an 'exploding capacitor' effect... Next step in water fuel conditioning ? Perhaps it will relate to the incorporation of an external electrical charge into a microporous filtration membrane, giving a higher level of charge to water fuel - made 'on the fly'. In a perfect world, one would at least experiment with converting a diesel engine directly to waterfuel by adding an electrically charged micropore nozzle - in place of the normal nozzle. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 08:50:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CFnwSD019350; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:49:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CFntEW019292; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:49:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:49:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002001c68e30$2eb07b10$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <410-220066112131436296@earthlink.net> Subject: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:54:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5CFnnvE019232 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68942 X-Loop: vortex-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 Fred I had missed this bit:) >> > Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts >> >> V=k * q/r (cf same post, come on you had it right two days ago) >> > That is total energy, No, that is voltage! Easy to check by yourself: take the derivative of this formula wrt r to get the electric field (reminder: derivative of 1/x is -1/x^2), which if you multiply it by your electron charge -q yields the coulombic force. If force formula works out as k*(-q)*(+q)/r^2 as you expect (negative i.e. towards the proton) then V formula is right, agreed? > Potential plus Kinetic.A 0.5 kilogram raindrop > (hailstones like those > that trashed my roof in October 2004) formed at 1 Km or more has a > potential energy of mgh, > but while it is falling it's gaining kinetic energy too. No? Yes, precisely: E = P.E. + K.E. is constant so while one decreases the other increases. In the case of the H electron at 0.53 10^-10m of the proton: P.E. = -27.2 eV K.E. = +13.6 eV => E = -27.2 + 13.6 = -13.6 If you could let the electron (hailstone) fall towards the proton (the earth) it's P.E. would indeed decrease, say by 10 eV to -37.2 eV, so it's K.E. would increase to 13.6+10 = 23.6 eV. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 09:14:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CGEUfL009126; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:14:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CGEPf3009037; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:14:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:14:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612161418727.B1A761C00089@mwinf3103.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612161420.00bd4c7c@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, 12 Jun 2006 17:14:20 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68943 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:13 am 12/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: > >--- Thanks to Colin Quinney for forwarding Technology >Review Daily Update From: MIT Technology Review >(6/12/2006) > >http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16974 > >"Cheap Drinking Water from the Ocean" by Aditi Risbud The article is now at.... http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16977&ch=nanotech .....but in case they move it again, if you put - cheap water - in the Technology Review search box at the top of the page, you will find where it's gone. Frank I've more comments but I thought I'd send this update first. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 09:54:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CGsXvZ004075; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:54:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CGsVof004054; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:54:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:54:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612165428309.4B91D1C00082@mwinf3106.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612165430.00bdee08@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, 12 Jun 2006 17:54:30 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Resent-Message-ID: <9vN07D.A.L_.HxZjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68944 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:13 am 12/06/2006 -0700, Jones wrote: > >A second message is more subtle, requires thinking >'outside the box' and would mean little to other >observers, outside the current threads on vortex >related to polywater and WaterFuel. > >Indeed, that message may be a 'missing link' in some >of what has only been suspected: re polywater --> >waterfuel. The LLNL team measured water flow rates up >to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by >classical equations -i.e. through the pores or a >membrane, which as mainstream science suggest: flow >rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the >diameter drops. That slowing is not progressively >linear - it has now been discovered and at a certain >level actually reverses itself and becomes faster than >expected - by a factor of 10,000. ... >"It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says >LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings >appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. "As you >shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in >flow rate." ... >Jones Hi Jones, I think you will agree the key paragraph is, ================================================= Indeed, the LLNL team measures water flow rates up to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by classical equations, which suggest that flow rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the diameter drops. "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate." ================================================= That's not just huge, that's BLOODY ENORMOUS! and it shows existing theory is 4 orders of magnitude up the creek without a paddle. A nanotube is a 2-dimensional Casimir plate. I reckon that they have got down to the dimensions at which huge Beta-atmosphere negative pressures (Beta-atm. vacua) are showing up - in other words the 8th power law is kicking in. If you reduce Beta-atmosphere pressure to that extent you might expect the viscosity to drop and the material to completely restructure itself. Reimpose the pressure and we are left with something far more viscous than the original which contains enormous built in strain energy. We have here a phenomena well known to material scientists and concrete heads. It's called HYSTERESIS. Frank Grimer And thanks again to Colin for sending us that article. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 09:59:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CGxPHQ006740; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:59:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CGxNj5006710; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:59:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:59:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: "vortex-l" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:59:13 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0033_01C68E17.9F98A190" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <410-22006601112251392@earthlink.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <4q_EUD.A.YoB.p1ZjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68945 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: RE: Re; O.T. No Subject Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01C68E17.9F98A190 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I knew I liked you for some reason.... 8^) Vorts are a weird eclectic bunch, eh? The Brain rides shotgun with me to work every morning. -j -----Original Message----- From: Frederick Sparber [mailto:fjsparber@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 7:03 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re; O.T. No Subject Cheney: George, are you pondering what Im pondering? Bush: Wuh, I think so, Brain Dick, but http://duryea.org/pinky/quotes.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01C68E17.9F98A190 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I knew=20 I liked you for some reason.... 8^)   Vorts are a weird = eclectic=20 bunch, eh?  The Brain rides shotgun with me to work every=20 morning.
 
-j
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Frederick Sparber=20 [mailto:fjsparber@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 = 7:03=20 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re; O.T. No=20 Subject

Cheney: =13George, are you pondering what I=12m pondering?=14

Bush: =13Wuh, I think so, Brain Dick, = but=05=14

 
http://duryea.org/pinky/quote= s.htm
 ------=_NextPart_000_0033_01C68E17.9F98A190-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 10:10:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CHAcH3012866; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:10:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CHAanf012836; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:10:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:10:36 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZtQqeQb5XkHdEeQaVwekCnCJy2CWbJONCF5LB9EyZl+PE5fFDRKJzOCyFsfHbI2kLEjsAs4pNposBsjFi3FoQ/guiM13jjgIE3JRsITZ4Jpxe5aJzp0mOkHsu3yswodhaOsjqWzgS+9KdmcjiCGB31rQAIDyyra24EkkPIE8paM= ; Message-ID: <20060612171035.30247.qmail@web82707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:10:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060612165430.00bdee08@pop.freeserve.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68947 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --- Grimer wrote: > We have here a phenomena well known to material scientists and concrete heads. It's called HYSTERESIS. Frank, I am only familiar with the term in regard to magnetics - is there a big difference in meaning in materials science (over the basic notion of 'temporal continuity' ). It should be noted, for those who do not remember all of Feynman's pronouncements (and I have forgotten the correct terminology but it is not 'hysteresis') but relates to structural 'coherence' such as crystal structure - in itself is a physical 'ordering' property which can be used for possible power production, when disrupted (into disorder)... and with an energy-content in the range of a fractional eV per atom - perhaps double what you get from buring gasoline in air yet with no 'obvious' chemical redox reaction... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 10:12:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CHCmmf014401; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:12:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CH5gsW010073; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:05:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:05:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Cc: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:05:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68946 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: Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! Just my 2 cents. 8^( -----Original Message----- From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Test. Does this work? (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 10:22:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CHLu1t020130; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:21:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CHLscB020090; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:21:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:21:54 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Q1xwliBLDhnGC3KWi/9OOaNMlVnntj38j6pNruMG98e8F7HNpTa7OJNinyUvhrXR; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066112172138847@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:21:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9409ce7e7f17f0780692291538fb244661c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.200 Resent-Message-ID: <8DAEeC.A.05E.uKajEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68948 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > > > Potential energy (J or eV) is not the same as potential (V), furthermore P.E. in this case is equal to -27.2 eV (twice what you said, and opposite sign), it's the total energy (K.E. + P.E.) which is equal to -13.6 eV (again sign matters). > I'll take your word for it,Michel. The 1929-30 Davis and Barnes experiment used alpha particles (stripped Helium ++ atoms) in an experiment that putatively allowed them to determine that when their velocity was slowed to 54.4 eV they picked up the 1st K shell Electron.They made their determination by detecting the 2+ beams on a scintillating phosphor detector plates. This type of experiment might have missed fractional orbit Helium. OTOH, if my memory Electron Scattering experiments on protons found "inelastic anomalies" at about 3,900 eV electron energy. > > > I want to see if high energy "fractional orbit" hydrinos are formed in the > > water molecules in an ICE after "Preconditioning" in the Joe Cell. > > Do they evaporate out of the "highly conductive-syrupy liquid polywater" of > > the Cell as Dimers (H2OH2O) ? > > Fred From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 10:40:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CHdYKx029850; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:39:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CHdTMw029806; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:39:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:39:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007301c68e47$23f7c360$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:21 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5CHdOSq029770 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68949 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 said why a filter, which I am not too lazy to setup (I have about 20 of those), wasn't nearly as good as a prefix for a mailing list. This is standard mailing list practice which I am not going to further waste my time to explain to you. REs and FWs getting put in front of the prefix are standard too. Note Bill had been planning to do this for quite some time as he told us. Is this OK with you or do you really want to start a war on the topic? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Steck" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 7:05 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just > because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As > soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! > > Just my 2 cents. 8^( > > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 11:07:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CI6vIq010966; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:06:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CI6q9F010931; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:06:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:06:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AQAAACJKjUSJZgcOKg X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,229,1146456000"; d="scan'208"; a="33946183:sNHT20069468" Message-ID: <448DAD3A.7040100@teksavvy.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:06:50 -0400 From: peatbog User-Agent: Mail/News 1.5 (X11/20060309) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line 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/68950 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 Steck wrote: > Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just > because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As > soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! > > Just my 2 cents. 8^( When I first started reading vortex, I put a filter on the To: header to whitelist anything addressed to vortex-l, and added one to move the message into the Vortex folder. I'm using mozilla thunderbird, but thought even the simplest mail readers could do that. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 11:12:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CIC2SH014811; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:12:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CIC02b014781; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:12:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:12:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <002c01c68e4b$ab6b5fb0$b4037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: [VO]: When push comes to shove Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:11:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01C68E21.C1FC9A20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68951 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68E21.C1FC9A20 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0029_01C68E21.C1FE20C0" ------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C68E21.C1FE20C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. Indeed, the LLNL team measures water flow=20 rates up to 10,000 times faster than would=20 be predicted by classical equations, which=20 suggest that flow rates through a pore will=20 slow to a crawl as the diameter drops.=20 "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive,"=20 says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose=20 findings appeared in the 19 May issue of=20 Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there=20 is a huge enhancement in flow rate."=20 = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D That's not just huge, that's BLOODY ENORMOUS! and it=20 shows existing theory is 4 orders of magnitude up the=20 creek without a paddle. A nanotube is a 2-dimensional Casimir plate. I reckon that they have got down to the dimensions at which huge=20 Beta-atmosphere negative pressures (Beta-atm. vacua) are=20 showing up - in other words the 8th power law is kicking in. If you reduce Beta-atmosphere pressure to that extent you might expect the viscosity to drop and the material to=20 completely restructure itself. Reimpose the pressure and we are left with something far more viscous than the=20 original which contains enormous built in strain energy. We have here a phenomena well known to material scientists and concrete heads. It's called HYSTERESIS. Howdy Frank, Classic vortex phenonema. Notice the mention of a reduction of throat = size. Vortex in action.. Schauberger identified the action taking = place.. it accelerates. Thats the good news. The bad is carbon nano technology is in danger of = being " oversold". The risk in using the screens for desal is " = clogging" and resistance to backwashing. DuPont worked out the problem = years ago with their membrane with an easy way to backwash. Not so with = nanotech. They have a hundred miles left to go before they have a = useable, workable, cost effective nano screen. Once that point is = reached.. the next impossible problem arises.. how to disinfect a = nanotube.. the buildup of bacteria and viruses play hide and seek in = nanotubes. Along with the bacteria lurks an entirely new nightmare.. = steroids, birthcontrol pills, antibiotics, drugs combinants and a few = even stranger derivatives that love to lurk in impossible places. We have stuff entering our raw water sources that defy disinfection = except a partial solution using a wide range of "mixed oxidants". Pour a = bucket of raw water into a bottle of bleach and later watch the culture = grow.. wow! We are in the business and yes, it keeps water treatment = plant specialists awake at night. Our small firm works tirelessly and we = keep falling further behind. We believe we have less than 5 years for = the industry to get a handle on the situation before it's gets totally = outa hand..We had our warning some 5-7 years ago with the "virus from = hell" situation in the North Carolina estuaries caused by hog farm = wastewater runoff ( since remedied hopefully).. Asian flu and it's bird = flu cousin all stem from swine diseases that crossover via fowl. Ya = can't get a certain people to farm or eat a hog.. ever wonder why? Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C68E21.C1FE20C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..

    Indeed, the LLNL team measures water flow=20
    rates up to 10,000 times faster than would=20
    be predicted by classical equations, which=20
    suggest that flow rates through a pore will=20
    slow to a crawl as the diameter drops.=20
    "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," =
    says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose=20
    findings appeared in the 19 May issue of=20
    Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there=20
    is a huge enhancement in flow rate."=20
   =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D<= BR>
That's not just huge,=20 that's BLOODY ENORMOUS! and it
shows existing theory is 4 orders of=20 magnitude up the
creek without a paddle.

A nanotube is a=20 2-dimensional Casimir plate. I reckon that
they have got down to the=20 dimensions at which huge
Beta-atmosphere negative pressures = (Beta-atm.=20 vacua) are
showing up - in other words the 8th power law is kicking=20 in.

If you reduce Beta-atmosphere pressure to that extent = you
might=20 expect the viscosity to drop and the material to
completely = restructure=20 itself. Reimpose the pressure and
we are left with something far more = viscous=20 than the
original which contains enormous built in strain = energy.

We=20 have here a phenomena well known to material scientists
and concrete = heads.=20 It's called HYSTERESIS.

Howdy Frank,

Classic vortex phenonema. Notice the mention of a reduction of throat = size.=20 Vortex in action.. Schauberger identified the action taking place.. it=20 accelerates.

Thats the good news. The bad is carbon nano technology is in danger = of being=20 " oversold". The risk in using the screens for desal is " clogging" and=20 resistance to backwashing. DuPont worked out the problem years ago with = their=20 membrane with an easy way to backwash. Not so with nanotech. They have a = hundred=20 miles left to go before they have a useable, workable, cost effective = nano=20 screen. Once that point is reached.. the next impossible problem = arises.. how to=20 disinfect a nanotube.. the buildup of bacteria and viruses play hide and = seek in=20 nanotubes. Along with the bacteria lurks an entirely new nightmare.. = steroids,=20 birthcontrol pills, antibiotics, drugs combinants and a few even = stranger=20 derivatives that love to lurk in impossible places.

We have stuff entering our raw water sources that defy disinfection = except a=20 partial solution using a wide range of "mixed oxidants". Pour a bucket = of raw=20 water into a bottle of bleach and later watch the culture grow.. wow! We = are in=20 the business and yes, it keeps water treatment plant specialists awake = at night.=20 Our small firm works tirelessly and we keep falling further behind. We = believe=20 we have less than 5 years for the industry to get a handle on the = situation=20 before it's gets totally outa hand..We had our warning some 5-7 years = ago with=20 the "virus from hell" situation in the North Carolina estuaries caused = by hog=20 farm wastewater runoff ( since remedied hopefully).. Asian flu and it's = bird flu=20 cousin all stem from swine diseases that crossover via fowl. Ya can't = get a=20 certain people to farm or eat a hog.. ever wonder why?

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0029_01C68E21.C1FE20C0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C68E21.C1FC9A20 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002701c68e4b$aac4e680$b4037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C68E21.C1FC9A20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 11:44:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CIhf33031720; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:43:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CIheeM031704; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:43:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:43:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612184338262.4006F6400085@mwinf3109.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612184339.00bc0408@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, 12 Jun 2006 19:43:39 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68953 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:10 am 12/06/2006 -0700, Jones wrote: >--- Grimer wrote: > >> We have here a phenomena well known to material >> scientists and concrete heads. It's called HYSTERESIS. > > Frank, > > I am only familiar with the term in regard to > magnetics - is there a big difference in meaning in > materials science Err.... I doubt it. In General Systems Theory terms they are the same, albeit using a different language. 8-) But you've got me googling so I'll get back to you when I've thought about the implications a bit more. One memorable factoid I came across - ======================================== Many hysteretic systems make screeching noises as they respond to their external load (hence, the natural connection with hysteria). ======================================== It also answers the thermodynamic objection as to where the energy in WaterFuel [you ought to trademark that word ;-) ] is coming from. Go round the hysteresis loop one way and you put energy in. Go round the other and you take energy out. The energy is coming from the Beta-atmosphere which is the d2L/dL and d3L/dL2 Compreture (i.e. gas "heat" - see #504 post of Beta-atmosphere Group) equivalent as far as the water is concerned. On the subject of the 8th power Casimir Law. For the benefit of Vorts who don't read the Beta-atm. Group posts, I wrote in #507 ======================================= The 4th power Casimir Law is confirmed experimentally with flat plates. Presumably one would have to confirm the 8th power Casimir with a cylinder which could have a variable diameter. I was pondering how one could do this and thought perhaps that one could have three long elliptical cams which rotated to confine a different sized space. ======================================= It would seem that with their nano-cylinders the LLNL team have done that for us, albeit unknowingly. 8-) Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 12:09:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CJ98lI012937; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:09:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CJ97C5012917; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:09:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:09:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612190905335.51D5C2400085@mwinf3102.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612190906.00be2f74@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, 12 Jun 2006 20:09:06 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68954 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 12:35 pm 12/06/2006 -0600, DonW wrote: >> I'm using mozilla thunderbird, but thought even the simplest mail readers >> could do that. I use Eudora Pro Version 2.2 - No problems. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 12:11:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CJAlDt013966; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:10:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CJAiY4013922; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:10:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:10:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612191026270.4218F1C000E4@mwinf3001.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:13:12 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 In-Reply-To: <007301c68e47$23f7c360$3800a8c0@zothan> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68955 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 standard mailing list practice Yep, and I'm more than happy to keep the [Vo] prefix, to help me pick out the more interesting stuff from a groaning daily inbox. However, as a pedant, can I suggest dropping the ':' after the '[Vo]' - it's an unnecessary delimiter, and distracting to the eye. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:03:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CK0SVs011835; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:03:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CJwYo5010805; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:58:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:58:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=T+DJYu97lP0BzSRxjgrUIysKxMNab2RglnZFrxcZaIgIwjF8kaYvrCFbvwwe2+fL; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066112195820474@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:58:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940efe8e1cf31f961d86d078ec08abd71f1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.174 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68956 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Langmuir, Davis & Barnes Status: RO X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII :Famous or Infamous? http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~ken/Langmuir/langA.htm Fig. 1 Diagram of first experimental tube. S, radio-active source; W, thin glass window; F, filament; G, grid; R, lead to silvered surface; A, second anode; M, magnetic field; C, copper seals; Y, and Z, zinc sulfide screens. "He produced a beam of alpha rays from polonium in a vacuum tube. He had a parabolic hot cathode electron emitter with a hole in the middle, and the alpha rays came through it and could be counted by scintillations on a zinc sulfide screen with a microscope over here (Y and Z). The electrons were focused on this plate, so that for a distance there was (p.1) a stream of electrons moving along with the alpha particles. Now you could accelerate the electrons and get them up to the velocity of the alpha particles. To get an electron to move with that velocity takes about 590 volts; so if you put 590 volts here, accelerating the electrons, the electrons would travel along with the alpha particles and the idea of the experiment was that if they moved along together at the same velocity they might recombine so that the alpha particle would lose one of its charges, would pick up an electron, so that instead of being a helium atom with two positive charges it would only have one charge. Well, if an alpha particle with a double charge had one electron, it’s like the Bohr theory of the hydrogen atom, and you know its energy levels. It's just like a hydrogen atom, with a Balmer series, and you can calculate the energy necessary to knock off this electron and so on. " ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
:Famous or Infamous?
 

 

Fig. 1 Diagram of first experimental tube. S, radio-active source; W, thin glass window; F, filament; G, grid; R, lead to silvered surface; A, second anode; M, magnetic field; C, copper seals; Y, and Z, zinc sulfide screens.

"He produced a beam of alpha rays from polonium in a vacuum tube. He had a parabolic hot cathode electron emitter with a hole in the middle, and the alpha rays came through it and could be counted by scintillations on a zinc sulfide screen with a microscope over here (Y and Z). The electrons were focused on this plate, so that for a distance there was (p.1) a stream of electrons moving along with the alpha particles. Now you could accelerate the electrons and get them up to the velocity of the alpha particles. To get an electron to move with that velocity takes about 590 volts; so if you put 590 volts here, accelerating the electrons, the electrons would travel along with the alpha particles and the idea of the experiment was that if they moved along together at the same velocity they might recombine so that the alpha particle would lose one of its charges, would pick up an electron, so that instead of being a helium atom with two positive charges it would only have one charge. Well, if an alpha particle with a double charge had one electron, it’s like the Bohr theory of the hydrogen atom, and you know its energy levels. It's just like a hydrogen atom, with a Balmer series, and you can calculate the energy necessary to knock off this electron and so on. "

 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:13:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CKCmT4017648; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:12:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CKCkLP017621; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:12:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:12:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <448DCAB4.50808@pobox.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:12:36 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com References: <2.2.32.20060611204511.009986f8@pop.freeserve.net> In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060611204511.009986f8@pop.freeserve.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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/68957 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Raising Polly Water Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: > I think it's about time to set about raising Polly Water > from the dead, a tad more difficult than Saving Private > Ryan but one more suited to my temperament and capacities. 8-) > > Before someone parrots Martha and saith, > "by this time she stinketh, for she is now of four decades" > I would point out that it will be all the more of a challenge > then to bring her back to life. > > If, as I suspect, polywater is an alias for waterfuel then > she might even beat cold fusion to the punch as a limitless > source of energy. Now that would be nice, wouldn't it. 8-) > > Starting with Wiki I retrieved a rather perceptive comment on > the article from..... > "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Polywater" > .....which reads as follows. > > ================================================= > Inconsistency > ------------------------------------------------- > There seems to be an inconsistency in the article. > At the beginning, the properties of the > hypothetical substance are said to include a > "freezing point of -40 °C or lower, a boiling > point of 150 °C or greater". Later, it is said > that sweat was found to have the same properties, > and that "when subjected to chemical analysis, > samples of polywater were invariably contaminated > with other substances (explaining the changes in > melting and boiling points)". I don't know what > sort of contaminations could cause such enormous > changes in the freezing point and boiling point, I believe ethylene glycol could do that ... but it takes about a 50% mix by volume which is a pretty serious level of contamination. And I'm not sure it would actually push the boiling point that high, in any case. > > but I'm pretty sure that a) sweat doesn't have > these properties If your sweat contains that much ethylene glycol you have a problem. > and that b) if some contamination > were indeed able to produce such properties, it > wouldn't take sophisticated chemical analysis to > see that the water was contaminated. > Right, the stuff with 50% glycol tastes sweet, the "uncontaminated" water doesn't. > ================================================= > > He has quite a point, has he not. 8-) > > But that's enough for one post. > > Cheers, > > Frank > > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:19:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CKJAmx021407; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:19:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CKJ7OD021365; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:19:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:19:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:18:49 -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 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <007301c68e47$23f7c360$3800a8c0@zothan> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68958 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: Sorry Michel. I'm a bit of a traditionalist. Vortex has been without prefix since I signed on around '96 with no issues, complaints, or problems. Everyone here is reasonably savvy to handle separating the wheat from the chaff so you are correct that a lecture on standard mailing list practices would be a waste of time... and probably regarded as condescending to most. I don't mind change if there is really some value added, but respectfully I just don't see it with this one. Sorry about that. My opinion nothing more. War? over this? that would only continue this silliness even longer and I haven't the time or interest for that kind of nonsense anymore. Bill is welcome to do with his list whatever he likes. We are all here at his whim. -j -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian [mailto:mj@exbang.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:39 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line I said why a filter, which I am not too lazy to setup (I have about 20 of those), wasn't nearly as good as a prefix for a mailing list. This is standard mailing list practice which I am not going to further waste my time to explain to you. REs and FWs getting put in front of the prefix are standard too. Note Bill had been planning to do this for quite some time as he told us. Is this OK with you or do you really want to start a war on the topic? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Steck" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 7:05 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just > because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As > soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! > > Just my 2 cents. 8^( > > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:22:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CKMBZD023902; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:22:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CKM8JX023860; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:22:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:22:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060612202200797.C2BC62C0008E@mwinf3101.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060612202202.00bf6158@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, 12 Jun 2006 21:22:02 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68959 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:13 am 12/06/2006 -0700, Jones wrote: > A second message is more subtle, requires thinking > 'outside the box' and would mean little to other > observers, outside the current threads on vortex > related to polywater and WaterFuel. > > Indeed, that message may be a 'missing link' in some > of what has only been suspected: re polywater --> > waterfuel. The LLNL team measured water flow rates up > to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by > classical equations -i.e. through the pores or a > membrane, which as mainstream science suggest: flow > rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the > diameter drops. That slowing is not progressively > linear - it has now been discovered and at a certain > level actually reverses itself and becomes faster than > expected - by a factor of 10,000. Once one grasps the reality of the reduction in Beta-atmosphere pressure within the nano-cylinders then the explanation for the increase in flow rate and implied reduction is viscosity is straightforward. It must be recognised that long cylinders shield the contents from the external Beta-atmosphere pressure far more effectively than a membrane. Viscosity is dependent on temperature since temperature is a measure of the rate the one shearing layer interferes with its neighbour, But from Robin's clue we know that as far as the Beta-atm. is concerned, water is nothing more than a highly compressed gas. This means it obeys the gas laws and the relevant one in this case is Gay-Lussac's 2nd law which states that the pressure of a fixed amount of gas at fixed volume is directly proportional to its temperature in kelvins. It is expressed mathematically as: P/T = k - Where: P is the pressure of the gas. T is the temperature of the gas (measured in kelvins). k is a constant. If the Beta-atmosphere pressure is reduced, its temperature will be reduced, ergo, its viscosity will be reduced. To put numbers to all this one would have to take 1-dimensional Casimir (4th power law) down to some plausible boundary and then work one's way back up with the 2-dimensional 8th power Casimir Law. Cheers, Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:23:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CKNcDG025052; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:23:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CKNZcV025026; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:23:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:23:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: "List - Vortex" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:23:24 -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 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68960 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hell, why not change it to [This is a Vortex-L Message] to make sure no one could possibly miss it? A nod is as good as a wink to a blind man. gaaa! disappointed in myself for even still answering this tripe! -j -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Vessey [mailto:patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 2:13 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > This is standard mailing list practice Yep, and I'm more than happy to keep the [Vo] prefix, to help me pick out the more interesting stuff from a groaning daily inbox. However, as a pedant, can I suggest dropping the ':' after the '[Vo]' - it's an unnecessary delimiter, and distracting to the eye. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 13:31:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5CKV5UO030624; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:31:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5CKV253030560; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:31:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:30:59 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=gvbqQzRjv12b9CJ7JO2lqWq7d/klW27D2UT9OztT3nVLPW5HuT8IfT7wX9xJxxlOvM6I++/Bvkc1P/Aw/uvoesdxaJqrfO5eL4zf55SCJDT9yHc1PelFQlau0qgkQ8k7sJsyXRxyalj0PrLF/yRBQ9dRIqjHt3ExHc6HMY9rF3s= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:30:05 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, billb@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10006_20801909.1150144205359" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68961 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: I am a VO! Subject line Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_10006_20801909.1150144205359 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Bill and Vo, I am glad vortex works and exists. I am glad, after a few years of hiatus...that Vo is still here. As a dedicated Vo... I am a little disturbed the text and letters offer less science and experimental reports... and more NON science and experimentalism. Q: Is it true there is a ""parallel" to vortex that non science can communicate with-to? Q: As a computer dummy.... how would I ask to have only the digest and not the each and every letter? Q: If i read a lot of ...not quite vortex.... what would I suggest the poster persons write to??? ? Is this called Vortex [someting??} --> What is are the correct venue...if there still is one.... that one may suggest the ''not quite vo" to post on and-or within? Thanks, Hermajohn On 6/11/06, William Beaty wrote: > > > Test. Does this work? > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 > > ------=_Part_10006_20801909.1150144205359 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
 
 
  Dear Bill and Vo,
 
   I am glad vortex works and exists.   I am glad, after a few years of hiatus...that Vo is still here.
 
       As a dedicated Vo... I am a little disturbed
the text and letters offer less science and experimental reports... and more NON science and experimentalism.
 
  Q:  Is it true there is a ""parallel" to vortex that non science can communicate with-to?
 
  Q:  As a computer dummy.... how would I ask to have only the digest and not the each and every letter?
 
  Q:  If i read a lot of ...not quite vortex....  what would I suggest the poster persons write to???
 
        ? Is this called Vortex [someting??} -->
     What is are the correct venue...if there still is one.... that one may suggest the ''not quite vo" to post on and-or within?
 
    Thanks,
                Hermajohn 
 
On 6/11/06, William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com> wrote:

Test.   Does this work?


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty@chem.washington.edu       Research Engineer
billb@amasci.com                UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
206-543-6195                    Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700


------=_Part_10006_20801909.1150144205359-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 17:11:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D0Bc2b005092; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:11:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D0BamN005064; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:11:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:11:35 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=hrs+LOFxQP/Bxn/Z4WDNz/t+FPNPvzldVbNRWeEosF0QVoNi0xbkJJPEEuz0LCa/; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006621301118700@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:11:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94003468bddeaf5182b672a51f53eed7def350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.95 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68962 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: RO X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Posted earlier: > > Since the potential V at a distance r from a charge = k * q/2r volts and the > Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how > close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? > > Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom > need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the > oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy > it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons > of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with >a commensurate energy release? > I'm trying to convince myself that "fractional orbit hydrinos" below the Bohr ground state require energy input to form. IOW, a high energy inner shell electron captured by a proton in the electron cloud can be made to orbit in quantized states and be stimulated to release this "stored" (ZPE replenished?) energy. I need to track down that item on Electron-Proton scattering experiments that mentioned "anomalous inelastic collisions at about 3.9 KeV". In some respects I think Langmuir was blowing blue smoke: http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~ken/Langmuir/langA.htm "Well, what they found, Davis and Barnes, was that if this velocity was made to be the same as that of the alpha particle there was a loss in the number of deflected particles. If there were no electrons, for example, and no magnetic field, all the alpha particles would be collected over here (Y) and they had something of the order of 50 per minute which they counted over here. Now if you put on a magnetic field you could deflect the alpha particles so they go down here (Z). But if they picked up an electron then they would only have half the charge and therefore they would only be deflected half as much and they would not strike the screen. Now the results that they got, or said they got at that time, were very extraordinary. They found that not only did these electrons combine with the alpha particles when the electron velocity was 590 volts, but also at a series of discrete differences of voltage. When the velocity of the electrons was less or more than that velocity by perfectly discrete amounts, then they could also combine. All the results seemed to show that about 80' of them combined. In other words, there was about an 80' change in the current when the conditions were right. Then they found that the velocity differences had to be exactly the velocities that you can calculate from the Bohr theory. In other words, if the electron coming along here happened to be going with a velocity equal to the velocity that it would have if it was in a Bohr orbit, then it will be captured. Of course, that makes a difficulty right away be-cause in the Bohr theory when there is an electron coming in from infinity it has to give up half its energy to settle into the Bohr orbit. Since it must conserve energy, it has to radiate out, and it radiates out an amount equal to the energy that it has left in the orbit So, if the electron comes in with an amount of energy equal to the amount you are going to end up with, then you have to radiate an amount of energy equal to twice that, which nobody had any evidence for. So there was a little difficulty which never was quite resolved although there were two or three people including some in Germany who worked up theories to account for how that might be. Sommerfeld, for example, in Germany. He worked up a theory to account for how the electron could be captured if it had a velocity equal to what it was going to have after it settled down into the orbit." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Posted earlier:
>
> Since the potential  V at a distance r  from a charge = k * q/2r volts and the
> Electrostatic attractive or repulsive force Fes = k  * Z1 * Z2 * q^2/r^2, how
> close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom?
>
> Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom
> need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the
> oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy
> it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons
> of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with
>a commensurate energy release?
> 
I'm trying to convince myself that "fractional orbit hydrinos" below the Bohr ground state
require energy input to form.
IOW, a high energy inner shell electron captured by a proton in the electron
cloud can be made to orbit in quantized states and be stimulated to release this "stored"
(ZPE replenished?) energy.
 
I need to track down that item on Electron-Proton scattering experiments
that mentioned "anomalous inelastic collisions at about 3.9 KeV".
 
In some respects I think Langmuir was blowing blue smoke:
 
 

"Well, what they found, Davis and Barnes, was that if this velocity was made to be the same as that of the alpha particle there was a loss in the number of deflected particles. If there were no electrons, for example, and no magnetic field, all the alpha particles would be collected over here (Y) and they had something of the order of 50 per minute which they counted over here. Now if you put on a magnetic field you could deflect the alpha particles so they go down here (Z). But if they picked up an electron then they would only have half the charge and therefore they would only be deflected half as much and they would not strike the screen.

Now the results that they got, or said they got at that time, were very extraordinary. They found that not only did these electrons combine with the alpha particles when the electron velocity was 590 volts, but also at a series of discrete differences of voltage. When the velocity of the electrons was less or more than that velocity by perfectly discrete amounts, then they could also combine. All the results seemed to show that about 80' of them combined. In other words, there was about an 80' change in the current when the conditions were right. Then they found that the velocity differences had to be exactly the velocities that you can calculate from the Bohr theory. In other words, if the electron coming along here happened to be going with a velocity equal to the velocity that it would have if it was in a Bohr orbit, then it will be captured.

Of course, that makes a difficulty right away be-cause in the Bohr theory when there is an electron coming in from infinity it has to give up half its energy to settle into the Bohr orbit. Since it must conserve energy, it has to radiate out, and it radiates out an amount equal to the energy that it has left in the orbit So, if the electron comes in with an amount of energy equal to the amount you are going to end up with, then you have to radiate an amount of energy equal to twice that, which nobody had any evidence for. So there was a little difficulty which never was quite resolved although there were two or three people including some in Germany who worked up theories to account for how that might be. Sommerfeld, for example, in Germany. He worked up a theory to account for how the electron could be captured if it had a velocity equal to what it was going to have after it settled down into the orbit."

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 20:20:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D3K3LP032496; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:20:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D3JtNE032362; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:19:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:19:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060613031952142.22AB08000084@mwinf3214.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060613031953.00b89b38@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, 13 Jun 2006 04:19:53 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: When push comes to shove Resent-Message-ID: <2FIn-D.A.m5H.b7ijEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68963 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:13 am 12/06/2006 -0700, Jones wrote: > A second message is more subtle, requires thinking > 'outside the box' and would mean little to other > observers, outside the current threads on vortex > related to polywater and WaterFuel. If you think of the nano tubes as a rather exotic clay mineral then what is going on becomes awfully obvious - and I use the words awfully in the sense of filling one with awe. In soil mechanics terms..... ========================================== (see Soil Mechanics for Road Engineers, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Road Research Laboratory. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 195, Chapter 16, Soil Moisture and the Factors Governing its Movement, pp.293-325) The following article is also relevant, http://physorg.com/news4113.html ========================================== .....the water in the nanotubes is in a high state of tension, at a high pF to use the scientific term. Therefore in putting water into the tubes the viscosity will seem to be negative since the water will be falling down a pressure gradient and be "sucked in" to the material. There is a nice hysteresis curve on page 301 of SMFRE which I will scan in later. This apparent negative viscosity probably partly explains Jason Holt's statement, "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate." "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. The trouble with science is that it is partitioned into ever smaller pieces and people working in one discipline have very little idea of what has already been discovered yonks ago in another. One of the advantages of multi-disciplinary discussion groups like this one is that it enables one to bridge those gaps - albeit with not a little suffering. Now the beauty of nano-tubes viewed as clay minerals is that there ain't nothing like them in nature - but if there are # Then the news ain't come to Ha'vard There may be many others, But they haven't been discavard. # [with apologies to Tom Lehrer 8-) ] So here we are dealing, not with the one-dimensional Casimir pressure on the flat plate mineral grains, but with the 2-dimensional Casimir pressure on the nano-cylinders and the consequent 8th power pressure reduction within them. Now I wrote "I use the words awfully in the sense of filling one with awe." because all this has very spooky connotations. But because I don't want to "deeply hurt the feelings of fervent atheists" like Michel and other little darlings by disturbing their naive faith I will put these connotations safely out of reach on the Yahoo Beta-atmosphere Group site. I'm sure, Michel, you don't object to any proselytizing on my own site, eh! ;-) Which calls for one of the poems I frequently read to my grandson, Edwin, whose angelic visage you can behold in my Yahoo profile. =========================================================== The Spider and the Fly - by Mary Howitt 1821. ----------------------------------------------------------- Will you walk into my parlour?" said the Spider to the Fly, 'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did espy; The way into my parlour is up a winding stair, And I've a many curious things to show when you are there." Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "to ask me is in vain, For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again." "I'm sure you must be weary, dear, with soaring up so high; Will you rest upon my little bed?" said the Spider to the Fly. "There are pretty curtains drawn around; the sheets are fine and thin, And if you like to rest awhile, I'll snugly tuck you in!" Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "for I've often heard it said, They never, never wake again, who sleep upon your bed!" Said the cunning Spider to the Fly, " Dear friend what can I do, To prove the warm affection I 've always felt for you? I have within my pantry, good store of all that's nice; I'm sure you're very welcome -- will you please to take a slice?" "Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "kind Sir, that cannot be, I've heard what's in your pantry, and I do not wish to see!" "Sweet creature!" said the Spider, "you're witty and you're wise, How handsome are your gauzy wings, how brilliant are your eyes! I've a little looking-glass upon my parlour shelf, If you'll step in one moment, dear, you shall behold yourself." "I thank you, gentle sir," she said, "for what you 're pleased to say, And bidding you good morning now, I'll call another day." The Spider turned him round about, and went into his den, For well he knew the silly Fly would soon come back again: So he wove a subtle web, in a little corner sly, And set his table ready, to dine upon the Fly. Then he came out to his door again, and merrily did sing, "Come hither, hither, pretty Fly, with the pearl and silver wing; Your robes are green and purple -- there's a crest upon your head; Your eyes are like the diamond bright, but mine are dull as lead!" Alas, alas! how very soon this silly little Fly, Hearing his wily, flattering words, came slowly flitting by; With buzzing wings she hung aloft, then near and nearer drew, Thinking only of her brilliant eyes, and green and purple hue -- Thinking only of her crested head -- poor foolish thing! At last, Up jumped the cunning Spider, and fiercely held her fast. He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den, Within his little parlour -- but she ne'er came out again! And now dear little children, who may this story read, To idle, silly flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed: Unto an evil counsellor, close heart and ear and eye, And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly. =========================================================== Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 20:52:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D3pZP9014720; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:51:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D3pVpv014692; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:51:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:51:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001301c68e9c$a307af30$ef027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:51:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01C68E72.B9AE1F50"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68964 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Whne push comes to shove Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C68E72.B9AE1F50 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0010_01C68E72.B9B12C90" ------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C68E72.B9B12C90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. .....the water in the nanotubes=20 is in a high state of tension, at a high pF to use the=20 scientific term. Therefore in putting water into the=20 tubes the viscosity will seem to be negative since the=20 water will be falling down a pressure gradient and be=20 "sucked in" to the material. There is a nice hysteresis=20 curve on page 301 of SMFRE which I will scan in later. This apparent negative viscosity probably partly=20 explains Jason Holt's statement, "As you shrink the pore=20 size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate." "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says=20 LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings=20 appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. The trouble with science is that it is partitioned=20 into ever smaller pieces and people working in one=20 discipline have very little idea of what has already=20 been discovered yonks ago in another. One of the=20 advantages of multi-disciplinary discussion groups how = about much suffering Frank ? like this one is that it enables one to bridge those=20 gaps - albeit with not a little suffering. Now the beauty of nano-tubes viewed as clay minerals=20 is that there ain't nothing like them in nature - but=20 if there are=20 Howdu Frank.. Cone shape converging nozzles can form vortexes that can = explain the acceleration in flowrate together with what you describe. = Takes " two to tango". Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C68E72.B9B12C90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..

.....the water in the nanotubes
is in a high state of tension, at = a high=20 pF to use the
scientific term. Therefore in putting water into the =
tubes=20 the viscosity will seem to be negative since the
water will be = falling down=20 a pressure gradient and be
"sucked in" to the material. There is a = nice=20 hysteresis
curve on page 301 of SMFRE which I will scan in=20 later.

This apparent negative viscosity probably partly =
explains=20 Jason Holt's statement, "As you shrink the pore
size, there is a = huge=20 enhancement in flow rate."

"It's something that is quite=20 counter-intuitive," says
LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose = findings=20
appeared in the 19 May issue of Science.

The trouble with = science is=20 that it is partitioned
into ever smaller pieces and people working = in one=20
discipline have very little idea of what has already
been = discovered=20 yonks ago in another. One of the
advantages of multi-disciplinary = discussion=20 groups      <grin>  how about much = suffering=20 Frank ?
like this one is that it enables one to bridge those
gaps = -=20 albeit with not a little suffering.  <g>

Now the = beauty of=20 nano-tubes viewed as clay minerals
is that there ain't nothing like = them in=20 nature - but
if there are

Howdu Frank.. Cone shape converging nozzles can form vortexes = that can=20 explain the acceleration in flowrate together with what you describe. = Takes "=20 two to tango".

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0010_01C68E72.B9B12C90-- ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C68E72.B9AE1F50 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000e01c68e9c$a274e510$ef027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C68E72.B9AE1F50-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 12 22:13:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D5Cn0I017669; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:12:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D5Cg77017610; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:12:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:12:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: When push comes to shove Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:12:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68E7E.13AC72D0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001301c68e9c$a307af30$ef027841@xptower> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68965 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C68E7E.13AC72D0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68E7E.13AC72D0" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68E7E.13AC72D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit BlankIsn't this just capillary action? http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/surten2.html#c4 Performance increase with decrease in ID... http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/surten2.html#c5 Perhaps on the nanoscale the effect is amplified by the extreme expression of the mechanics involved? -john -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay [mailto:walhalla@cvtv.net] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:51 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Whne push comes to shove Grimer wrote.. .....the water in the nanotubes is in a high state of tension, at a high pF to use the scientific term. Therefore in putting water into the tubes the viscosity will seem to be negative since the water will be falling down a pressure gradient and be "sucked in" to the material. There is a nice hysteresis curve on page 301 of SMFRE which I will scan in later. This apparent negative viscosity probably partly explains Jason Holt's statement, "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate." "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. The trouble with science is that it is partitioned into ever smaller pieces and people working in one discipline have very little idea of what has already been discovered yonks ago in another. One of the advantages of multi-disciplinary discussion groups how about much suffering Frank ? like this one is that it enables one to bridge those gaps - albeit with not a little suffering. Now the beauty of nano-tubes viewed as clay minerals is that there ain't nothing like them in nature - but if there are Howdu Frank.. Cone shape converging nozzles can form vortexes that can explain the acceleration in flowrate together with what you describe. Takes " two to tango". Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68E7E.13AC72D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Isn't this just capillary=20 action?
http:= //hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/surten2.html#c4
 
Performance increase with decrease = in=20 ID...
http:= //hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/surten2.html#c5
 
Perhaps on the = nanoscale the effect=20 is amplified by the extreme expression of the mechanics=20 involved?
 
-john
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: RC Macaulay=20 [mailto:walhalla@cvtv.net]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:51=20 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: = Whne push=20 comes to shove

Grimer wrote..

.....the water in the nanotubes
is in a high state of tension, at = a high=20 pF to use the
scientific term. Therefore in putting water into the =
tubes=20 the viscosity will seem to be negative since the
water will be = falling down=20 a pressure gradient and be
"sucked in" to the material. There is a = nice=20 hysteresis
curve on page 301 of SMFRE which I will scan in=20 later.

This apparent negative viscosity probably partly =
explains=20 Jason Holt's statement, "As you shrink the pore
size, there is a = huge=20 enhancement in flow rate."

"It's something that is quite=20 counter-intuitive," says
LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose = findings=20
appeared in the 19 May issue of Science.

The trouble with = science is=20 that it is partitioned
into ever smaller pieces and people working = in one=20
discipline have very little idea of what has already
been = discovered=20 yonks ago in another. One of the
advantages of multi-disciplinary = discussion=20 groups      <grin>  how about much = suffering=20 Frank ?
like this one is that it enables one to bridge those
gaps = -=20 albeit with not a little suffering.  <g>

Now the = beauty of=20 nano-tubes viewed as clay minerals
is that there ain't nothing like = them in=20 nature - but
if there are

Howdu Frank.. Cone shape converging nozzles can form vortexes = that can=20 explain the acceleration in flowrate together with what you describe. = Takes "=20 two to tango".

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C68E7E.13AC72D0-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68E7E.13AC72D0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <842150205@13062006-11fb> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C68E7E.13AC72D0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 00:54:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D7sV9W029797; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:54:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D7sTTw029779; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:54:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:54:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060613075425935.E46831C002EB@mwinf3003.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060613075427.00bb10b0@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, 13 Jun 2006 08:54:27 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Resent-Message-ID: <4x2z2C.A.LRH.08mjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68966 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Status: RO X-Status: I recently contacted someone who had gone to the trouble of obtaining Stan Meyer's autopsy report. The following was his interesting reply. =================================================== The autopsy report makes no mention of the often rumored "food poisoning" and the death is ruled as being natural, caused by a cerebral aneurysm (this would account for the violent vomiting in the parking lot). However, if Stan did indeed have a water fuel cell which functioned as he claimed, I am much more inclined to think Stan was poisoned and the coroner was paid off to make it look like a natural death. Since the coroner (William R. Adrion) had exclusive access to the body, no one else verified his findings, and he could have said virtually anything about the manner in which Stan died. However, the coroner’s report is required to have information regarding the circumstances surrounding the death... and there were many witnesses. In other words, while the manner in which Stan died could not be corroborated by anyone else, and thus could be faked, the circumstances surrounding his death had witnesses, and thus, could not be faked. In this section, it reads: "Decedent supposedly at lunch with N.A.T.O. officials at a Cracker Barrel diner. The group made an opening toast with cranberry juice, immediately after which, decedent ran outside followed by his brother, then vomited violently and told his brother that he had been poisoned." I find it interesting that the coroner writes, "supposedly." I wonder how many other reports he puts "supposedly" on. It is an unprofessional and unusual statement of disbelief. To me this is the coroner's way of saying to the public, "it is doubtful," which is completely unnecessary and makes me feel like he is trying to lead you away from believing that material in this section which he was forced to write truthfully. I would love to know more of the story behind what happened that night. Steve Meyer watched as his brother vomited and lay dying before his eyes. What does he believe? Is Steve carrying on Stan's work, but in a different format...one that could possibly get its foot in the door of big oil? Oliver Stone needs to make a movie out of this. Now is the perfect time. ==================================================== Any lawyers wish to comment? 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 00:55:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D7tGWe030211; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:55:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D7tDxs030174; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:55:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:55:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line From: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk Reply-to: patrick@vbpl.fsnet.co.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Sender-IP-Address: 194.105.164.99 X-Mailer: Nameko 0.10.0 Message-Id: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:55:06 +0100 Resent-Message-ID: <5axk4B.A.aXH.g9mjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68967 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, > Hell, why not change it to [This is a Vortex-L Message] to > make sure no one > could possibly miss it? A nod is as good as a wink to a > blind man. I suspect that I'm not alone in only having sporadic access to a fat mail client. For a large portion of my working week, I'm reduced to web only access to my POP3 maildrop - no folders, rules or filters possible. For those of us similarly 'challenged', I'd suggest that this small change to the list is helpful. Patrick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 01:15:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D8FK7p008218; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:15:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D8FIDe008186; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:15:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:15:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Ford Hydrogen Engines Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:14:59 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <8C85BC54CCD1197-1564-E22A@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C85BC54CCD1197-1564-E22A@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.52.6] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:15:00 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5D8F6KY007966 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68968 X-Loop: vortex-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 hohlrauml6d@netscape.net's message of Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:24:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] >http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=20332&make_id=trust > >Why are the outputs so low? 80 horses outta a 4.2 l engine? [snip] I think Jones answered that the other day. Hydrogen has a low density, so it takes up a lot of room in the cylinder. Much more than a liquid fuel would. Consequently, the energy liberated in each power stroke is less. There is simply both less fuel and less oxygen in the cylinder. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 01:23:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5D8NLg4012631; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:23:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5D8NJHZ012609; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:23:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 01:23:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:23:15 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-220066112131436296@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220066112131436296@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.52.6] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:23:15 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5D8NHVc012589 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68969 X-Loop: vortex-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 Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:14:36 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Please do. I want to see if high energy "fractional orbit" hydrinos are >formed in the >water molecules in an ICE after "Preconditioning" in the Joe Cell. >Do they evaporate out of the "highly conductive-syrupy liquid polywater" of >the Cell >as Dimers (H2OH2O) ? [snip] Hydrinos can't form by getting rid of their formation energy by means of radiation. That means they need to dump it into an energy hole. So unless the oxygen in water happens to have such an energy hole, then the hydrino can't form there. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 05:22:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DCMUcS000517; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:22:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DCMRtR000488; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:22:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:22:27 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Fzr11GPlUVDfeBIfQWS5qC0B6zZJFPORR42n9ogYNRdse27J3BgWRt5wkDLVOI0Y; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006621312221779@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 06:22:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9406641d356a53d2edb5a75119a5a2838e2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.125 Resent-Message-ID: <8IqbpB.A.eH.D4qjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68970 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Scattering and Electron & Nuclear Sizes Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Using a disk or hoop to measure the width of a string? Particle Radius, R = kq^2/E Electron energy E = mc^2 = 8.19E-14 Joule R = 3.72E-15 meters or Fermi Disk or Hoop (string circles ?) Proton energy E = mc^2 = 1.49E-10 Joule R = 2.0E-18 meters Or with 3 stacked "quark circles" making a proton E = 1.49E-19/3 Joule E = 4.98E-11 Joule Stack Radius R = 6.0E-18 meters http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/elescat.html "The scattering of electrons from nuclei has given us the most precise information about nuclear size and charge distribution. The electron is a better nuclear probe than the alpha particles of Rutherford scattering because it is a point particle and can penetrate the nucleus. For low energies and under conditions where the electron does not penetrate the nucleus, the electron scattering can be described by the Rutherford formula." "As the energy of the electrons is raised enough to make them an effective nuclear probe, a number of other effects become significant, and the scattering behavior diverges from the Rutherford formula. The probing electrons are relativistic, they produce significant nuclear recoil, and they interact via their magnetic moment as well as by their charge." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Using a disk or hoop to measure the width of a string?
 
Particle Radius, R = kq^2/E
 
Electron energy E = mc^2 = 8.19E-14 Joule
R = 3.72E-15 meters or Fermi
Disk or Hoop (string circles ?)
 
Proton energy E = mc^2 = 1.49E-10 Joule
R = 2.0E-18 meters
Or with 3 stacked "quark circles"  making a proton
E = 1.49E-19/3 Joule
E = 4.98E-11 Joule
Stack Radius R = 6.0E-18 meters
 
 
"The scattering of electrons from nuclei has given us the most precise information about nuclear size and charge distribution. The electron is a better nuclear probe than the alpha particles of Rutherford scattering because it is a point particle and can penetrate the nucleus.

For low energies and under conditions where the electron does not penetrate the nucleus, the electron scattering can be described by the Rutherford formula."

"As the energy of the electrons is raised enough to make them an effective nuclear probe, a number of other effects become significant, and the scattering behavior diverges from the Rutherford formula. The probing electrons are relativistic, they produce significant nuclear recoil, and they interact via their magnetic moment as well as by their charge."

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 05:35:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DCZ9VJ006953; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:35:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DCZ5hp006881; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:35:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:35:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <002601c68ee5$c135eeb0$26027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: [VO]: Stan Meyer- Autopsy Report Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:34:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01C68EBB.D77622F0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68971 X-Loop: vortex-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_0022_01C68EBB.D77622F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0023_01C68EBB.D777A990" ------=_NextPart_001_0023_01C68EBB.D777A990 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. recently contacted someone who had gone to the trouble of obtaining Stan Meyer's autopsy report. The following was his interesting reply. = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D The autopsy report makes no mention of the often=20 rumored "food poisoning" and the death is ruled=20 as being natural, caused by a cerebral aneurysm=20 (this would account for the violent vomiting in=20 the parking lot).=20 However, if Stan did indeed have a water fuel cell=20 which functioned as he claimed, I am much more =20 inclined to think Stan was poisoned and the coroner=20 was paid off to make it look like a natural death.=20 Since the coroner (William R. Adrion) had exclusive=20 access to the body, no one else verified his=20 findings, and he could have said virtually anything=20 about the manner in which Stan died. However, the=20 coroner's report is required to have information=20 regarding the circumstances surrounding the death... and there were many witnesses. In other words,=20 while the manner in which Stan died could not be=20 corroborated by anyone else, and thus could be faked,=20 the circumstances surrounding his death had witnesses,=20 and thus, could not be faked.=20 In this section, it reads: "Decedent supposedly at=20 lunch with N.A.T.O. officials at a Cracker Barrel=20 diner. The group made an opening toast with cranberry=20 juice, immediately after which, decedent ran outside=20 followed by his brother, then vomited violently and=20 told his brother that he had been poisoned."=20 Howdy Frank.. A Coroner, holding a neo-political office, would not, as a general rule = , never comment on " circumstance surrounding" a case. They use the word = " undetermined" and let it go at that. To make any comment is beyond the = scope of their medical training and casts suspicion They are not in the = speculation business,=20 A writer , Wm.D.Pease's novel.. " The Monkey's Fist", weaves an = insightful story of wheels within wheels, the goings on of people in = levels of black ops that get carried away with their importance. The = results are not too unlike the account of the 3 armies as recorded in = 2Chronicles chptr 20. We are witnessing a similar event on the world = stage at present... not over yet.. but beginning. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0023_01C68EBB.D777A990 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..
 
 recently contacted someone who had gone to the
trouble of=20 obtaining Stan Meyer's autopsy report.

The following was his = interesting=20 reply.

    =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D
    =20 The autopsy report makes no mention of the often =
    =20 rumored "food poisoning" and the death is ruled =
     as=20 being natural, caused by a cerebral aneurysm =
     (this=20 would account for the violent vomiting in
     = the=20 parking lot).

     However, if Stan did = indeed have=20 a water fuel cell
     which functioned as he = claimed, I=20 am much more           =
     inclined to think Stan was poisoned and the = coroner=20
     was paid off to make it look like a natural = death.=20

     Since the coroner (William R. Adrion) = had=20 exclusive
     access to the body, no one else = verified=20 his
     findings, and he could have said = virtually=20 anything
     about the manner in which Stan = died.=20 However, the
     coroner's report is required = to have=20 information
     regarding the circumstances = surrounding=20 the death...
     and there were many witnesses. = In other=20 words,
     while the manner in which Stan died = could=20 not be
     corroborated by anyone else, and = thus could=20 be faked,
     the circumstances surrounding his = death=20 had witnesses,
     and thus, could not be = faked.=20

     In this section, it reads: "Decedent = supposedly=20 at
     lunch with N.A.T.O. officials at a = Cracker=20 Barrel
     diner. The group made an opening = toast with=20 cranberry
     juice, immediately after which, = decedent=20 ran outside
     followed by his brother, then = vomited=20 violently and
     told his brother that he had = been=20 poisoned."
 
Howdy Frank..
 
A Coroner, holding a neo-political office, would not, as a general = rule ,=20 never comment on " circumstance surrounding" a case. They use the word " = undetermined" and let it go at that. To make any comment is beyond the = scope of=20 their medical training and casts suspicion  They are not in the = speculation=20 business,
 
A writer , Wm.D.Pease's novel.. " The Monkey's Fist", weaves = an=20 insightful story of wheels within wheels, the goings on of  people = in=20 levels of black ops that get carried away with their importance. The = results are=20 not too unlike the account of the 3 armies as recorded in 2Chronicles = chptr 20.=20 We are witnessing a similar event on the world stage at present... not = over=20 yet.. but beginning.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0023_01C68EBB.D777A990-- ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C68EBB.D77622F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <002101c68ee5$c033c0f0$26027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C68EBB.D77622F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 09:47:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DGlgnQ022996; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:47:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DGlNOS022872; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:47:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:47:23 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=nquAadqskt6xpdyTuV4C+AHKK/OEAU0/0wrJI5zdYNEvCYfNAzn7KyRXCDfGrm0F; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066213164712760@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:47:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94036a6ed7a029431adaf7dd4cebb3d7fd6350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.221 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68972 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Hydrogen-Proton Diffusion, Hydrinos & WaterFuel Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Posted earlier: > > Particle Radius, R = kq^2/E > > Electron energy E = mc^2 = 8.19E-14 Joule > R = 3.72E-15 meters or 3.72 Fermi > Disk or Hoop (string circles ?) > > Proton energy E = mc^2 = 1.49E-10 Joule > R = 2.0E-18 meters or 0.002 Fermi > Or with 3 stacked "quark circles" making a proton > E = 1.49E-19/3 Joule > E = 4.98E-11 Joule > Stack Radius R = 6.0E-18 meters or 0.006 Fermi > > > > How close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom? > > Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom > need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the > oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy > it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons > of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with >a commensurate energy release? > Based on the small size of a proton, and the propensity for hydrogen to diffuse into Palladium and other metals, why not visualize the protons formed in water near the right type of stainless steel electrodes diffusing into and through them concurrently picking up electrons in the high energy shells and forming hydrinos that dump energy in the compression-combustion cycle of the ICE? Check out the 700 eV to 7 Kev electron levels for Iron, Nickel, Chromium, Manganese, and others in the X-ray wavelength tables. Palladium goes much higher. Lots of "holes in there, Robin. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
Posted earlier:
>
> Particle Radius, R = kq^2/E
>
> Electron energy E = mc^2 = 8.19E-14 Joule
> R = 3.72E-15 meters or  3.72 Fermi
> Disk or Hoop (string circles ?)
>
> Proton energy E = mc^2 = 1.49E-10 Joule
> R = 2.0E-18 meters or 0.002 Fermi
> Or with 3 stacked "quark circles"  making a proton
> E = 1.49E-19/3 Joule
> E = 4.98E-11 Joule
> Stack Radius R = 6.0E-18 meters or 0.006 Fermi
>
>
>
> How close can a bare proton (H+) approach a hydrogenic (one electron) atom?
>
> Or, how far into an oxygen atom of an H2O molecule does a hydrogen atom
> need to go in order to capture one of the high energy inner shell electrons of the
> oxygen atom which can then be taken up to orbit the proton with the same energy
> it had in it's oxygen orbit, allowing that one of the outer (low energy) electrons
> of the H2O molecule will replace the proton-captured oxygen electron with
>a commensurate energy release?
>
Based on the small size of a proton, and the propensity for hydrogen to
diffuse into Palladium and other metals, why not visualize the protons
formed in water near the right type of stainless steel electrodes diffusing
into and through them concurrently picking up electrons in the high energy
shells and forming hydrinos that dump energy in the compression-combustion
cycle of the ICE?
Check out the 700 eV to 7 Kev electron levels for Iron, Nickel, Chromium,
Manganese, and others in the X-ray wavelength tables.
Palladium goes much higher. Lots of "holes in there, Robin. :-)
 
Fred
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 11:43:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DIhXot006617; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:43:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DIhTo4006551; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:43:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:43:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:43:12 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85D305BD1644F-1144-1AE00@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060613075427.00bb10b0@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060613075427.00bb10b0@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.67 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68973 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer Any lawyers wish to comment? 8-) <><><><><><> IANAL, however, do you know if the coroner was a pathologist? In many places the coroner doesn't have to be even a medical doctor. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 12:25:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DJPixV028060; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:25:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DJPgps028037; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:25:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:25:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:25:35 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85D3647A4EC9B-17B4-FD@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C85D2EF808B9EB-1144-1ADD6@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C85D2EF808B9EB-1144-1ADD6@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5DJPf1f028018 Resent-Message-ID: <5mqTBB.A.B2G.2ExjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68974 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 suspect that I'm not alone in only having sporadic access to a fat mail  client. For a large portion of my working week, I'm reduced to web only access  to my POP3 maildrop - no folders, rules or filters possible.    For those of us similarly 'challenged', I'd suggest that this small change to  the list is helpful.    Patrick    <><><><><><>    Try netscape, hotmail, yahoo, or I'll invite you into gmail. Get you a free mail address to use only with Vortex. Works for me.    Terry  ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 12:51:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DJolRo007884; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:50:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DJoa0Q007799; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:50:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:50:35 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=OMg+bWsjrr4rS4k1S/ngHSeljPxPydTcUtd1XiOlFp7ndXAbUNP8JKxb+ejRpqb1+hYVUQXg8y5ieLDv/2HW4r+mKvVv8vj06oGyMnfUkbFwWIPqCHbZY2HEk0cBTgViiHA029Z3DoVIdUmxkYIToKj99Vu9vle9IhJNPCHb8EQ= ; Message-ID: <20060613194737.91389.qmail@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:47:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <8C85D305BD1644F-1144-1AE00@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68975 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Status: RO X-Status: This Meyer conspiracy nonsense is kind of a silly waste of time IMHO - even if there were some proof ... (not that there aren't real conspiracies in the world today) Stan Meyer was not murdered, most likely. Nor was Gene Mallove. Meyer had many risk factors for Aneurysm, which is probably what happened. A feeling of "being poisoned" is common among many sudden pathologies which are totally unrelated to food - such as a heart attack. The larger problem with all of this talk is that it probably does the whole field of alternative-energy a huge *disservice* to suggest things like this on little or no evidence. It is the underlying " flawed belief process" more so than the conclusion, which is worrisome. It reinforces the notion among the majority of open-minded readers of these posts - or of LENR-CANR and so forth - that the only people who could possibly believe that low level nut-cases like Meyer would attract the attention of the putative PetroMafia are those who will "believe in anything" especially of a "high level conspiracy" nature. Even if one accepts that there are rogue elements in government (there are), and in a handful of corporations, such as Halliburton - that is far from the pervasive kind of evil it would take to murder someone whose greatest value, under any circumstances, might be as "martyr value" or as "mobilization value". IOW Meyer was nothing more than a marginal inventor, not a scientist in any way, even if he had stumbled on something of value - he could not advance it. He probably did stumble on something, but it will take millions to figure out what. Papp was the same. Joe Newman was a prototype. There are dozens of these fringe characters, not just "cranks" but even further out there - who may deserve some kind of poetic justice for all the false-alarms and scams they have promoted, but do not even remotely concern big corporations, or Sam. IOW - let's say for the sake of argument that there is an active and well-funded PetroMafia operating in the USA, and that it does manage to pull-off a lot of underhanded things - such as to secure drilling rights, intimidate land-owners, keep out labor unions, pay-off or black-mail politicians, discredit ecologists and concerned scientists and so forth - why would they waste time on a nut like Meyer? ... who let's remind ourselves, actually accomplished ZERO of a repeatable nature, and whose death might possibly trigger 'reactionary' funding to scientists operating in that field, who could do something that the paranoid inventor himself could only stumble-on, if he even got that far. The suggestion of a conspiracy to murder Meyer is ludicrous IMHO. Now if someone took out a real genius of the level of Puthoff, R. Mills, George Miley, Bockris, Mizuno etc - then yes - that would be a huge concern. IOW these men are accomplished, influential, "in the know", and capable of sounding a preliminary threat for fossil fuel with a single experiment. Meyer may have gotten lucky, but he was no such threat. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 13:32:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DKWBne027841; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:32:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DKWAL0027805; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:32:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:32:09 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=3+SHJVog1e9B22eWqVRGNXwJuygA1ecfn2ymvsMatz0VwykC81Dm0fucKlNP4LwAO+lQrOuOR5WfENG21GC1jr7DTzJaxxuq3xTrpAUa0Zz6CmodSf02Mx4t7ulRUrKbhWiBI9TMFQwlItoTf5zisYBUOUhyMY/sM9wBc/ChdIo= ; Message-ID: <20060613201121.41023.qmail@web82712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:11:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <20060613194737.91389.qmail@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68976 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Status: RO X-Status: Oops, meant to say- ...nor was Gene Mallove murdered as part of a conspiracy. Of course he was murdered. Meyer was not even murdered. There was no big conspiracy to silence the enemies of 'Big Oil' in either case - at least there is no evidence of such. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 13:39:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DKd7OU031030; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:39:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DKd6Kv031010; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:39:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:39:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:39:03 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85D408AAB1C25-2410-476B@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <20060613201121.41023.qmail@web82712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <7l6gfB.A.dkH.qJyjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68977 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: Jones Beene There was no big conspiracy to silence the enemies of 'Big Oil' in either case - at least there is no evidence of such. <><><><><> A shiek would not be worth his linen if he did not do all he could to protect his country's interests. You probably doubt the Mossad offed Gerald Bull, too. You're no fun. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 13:46:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DKjlZF001681; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:45:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DKjia1001656; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:45:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:45:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060613160332.03e900d8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:44:37 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report In-Reply-To: <20060613194737.91389.qmail@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <8C85D305BD1644F-1144-1AE00@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> <20060613194737.91389.qmail@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_27287984==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68978 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: --=====================_27287984==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Jones Beene wrote: >Stan Meyer was not murdered, most likely. Nor was Gene >Mallove. As noted this meant Gene was not murdered by an establishment conspirator, but rather by an ordinary crazed drug addict. >The larger problem with all of this talk is that it probably does >the whole field of alternative-energy a huge *disservice* to suggest >things like this on little or no evidence. I agree. Even if it is true, it does not do us any good talking about it without evidence. >It reinforces the notion among the majority of open-minded readers >of these posts - or of LENR-CANR and so forth - that the only people >who could possibly believe that low level nut-cases like Meyer would >attract the attention of the putative PetroMafia are those who will >"believe in anything" especially of a "high level conspiracy" nature. True again. BUT, however, the PetroMafia is real and they have suppressed technology. The upcoming movie discussed here, "Who Killed the Electric Car?" is a good example. So was the destruction of the public transportation system in Los Angeles in the 1940s, and the bankruptcy of the LUZ Corp. solar thermal generating systems. I would not call these actions "conspiracies" because the corporations that suppressed this technology acted shamelessly and overtly. You might as well say the tobacco companies have been conducting a "conspiracy" to spread cancer, or coal-fired plants conspire to secretly kill 20,000 people per year. It is no conspiracy when you boldly commit crimes in public. Along the same lines, I do not think Park and Zimmerman are "conspiring" to suppress cold fusion and fire anyone in the federal government who supports cold fusion. How can you call the conspiracy when they announced their plans in front of a crowd of a thousand cheering supporters at the APS?!? You might call it a witch hunt, or an academic pogrom. The DoE's de facto policy of attacking cold fusion is also overt. They make no bones about it, and although they do sometimes lie to the public -- claiming they may fund experiments -- it is a gratuitous lie. It is a mere formality. They do not expect anyone to believe it. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LENRCANRthedoelies.pdf >Even if one accepts that there are rogue elements in government >(there are), and in a handful of corporations, such as Halliburton - >that is far from the pervasive kind of evil it would take to murder >someone whose greatest value, under any circumstances, might be as >"martyr value" or as "mobilization value". More to the point, Meyer was suppressing himself more effectively than any conspirators could have hoped to accomplish. Meyer was, as I often say, his own worst enemy. This is true of many cold fusion researchers as well. Why molest an enemy who is as assiduously destroying himself? >The suggestion of a conspiracy to murder Meyer is ludicrous IMHO. >Now if someone took out a real genius of the level of Puthoff, R. >Mills, George Miley, >Bockris, Mizuno etc - then yes - that would be a huge concern. If these people ever begin to make serious technical progress, and the oil companies become aware of their activity, then I think they may soon be in grave danger. I doubt they will be murdered, but I expect they will be fired on trumped up charges, and their funding cut off. They will be given the kind of treatment being meted out to Taleyarkhan by Nature and the rest of the physics establishment. As things now stand the oil companies are not the least bit concerned about CF as far as I know. As Beene indicated, they are busy fighting global warming researchers, and spreading false rumors about wind energy, such as the notion that it kills significant numbers of birds. Now that we have said all these rotten things about Meyer, I think we should recall that he did impress some smart people, such as Adm. Griffin. I am haunted by the possibility that he may have actually been on to something real. - Jed --=====================_27287984==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Jones Beene wrote:

Stan Meyer was not murdered, most likely. Nor was Gene
Mallove.

As noted this meant Gene was not murdered by an establishment conspirator, but rather by an ordinary crazed drug addict.


The larger problem with all of this talk is that it probably does the whole field of alternative-energy a huge *disservice* to suggest things like this on little or no evidence.

I agree. Even if it is true, it does not do us any good talking about it without evidence.


It reinforces the notion among the majority of open-minded readers of these posts - or of LENR-CANR and so forth - that the only people who could possibly believe that low level nut-cases like Meyer would attract the attention of the putative PetroMafia are those who will "believe in anything" especially of a "high level conspiracy" nature.

True again. BUT, however, the PetroMafia is real and they have suppressed technology. The upcoming movie discussed here, "Who Killed the Electric Car?" is a good example. So was the destruction of the public transportation system in Los Angeles in the 1940s, and the bankruptcy of the LUZ Corp. solar thermal generating systems. I would not call these actions "conspiracies" because the corporations that suppressed this technology acted shamelessly and overtly. You might as well say the tobacco companies have been conducting a "conspiracy" to spread cancer, or coal-fired plants conspire to secretly kill 20,000 people per year. It is no conspiracy when you boldly commit crimes in public.

Along the same lines, I do not think Park and Zimmerman are "conspiring" to suppress cold fusion and fire anyone in the federal government who supports cold fusion. How can you call the conspiracy when they announced their plans in front of a crowd of a thousand cheering supporters at the APS?!? You might call it a witch hunt, or an academic pogrom. The DoE's de facto policy of attacking cold fusion is also overt. They make no bones about it, and although they do sometimes lie to the public -- claiming they may fund experiments -- it is a gratuitous lie. It is a mere formality. They do not expect anyone to believe it. See:

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


Even if one accepts that there are rogue elements in government (there are), and in a handful of corporations, such as Halliburton - that is far from the pervasive kind of evil it would take to murder someone whose greatest value, under any circumstances, might be as "martyr value" or as "mobilization value".

More to the point, Meyer was suppressing himself more effectively than any conspirators could have hoped to accomplish. Meyer was, as I often say, his own worst enemy. This is true of many cold fusion researchers as well. Why molest an enemy who is as assiduously destroying himself?


The suggestion of a conspiracy to murder Meyer is ludicrous IMHO. Now if someone took out a real genius of the level of Puthoff, R. Mills, George Miley,
Bockris, Mizuno etc - then yes - that would be a huge concern.

If these people ever begin to make serious technical progress, and the oil companies become aware of their activity, then I think they may soon be in grave danger. I doubt they will be murdered, but I expect they will be fired on trumped up charges, and their funding cut off. They will be given the kind of treatment being meted out to Taleyarkhan by Nature and the rest of the physics establishment.

As things now stand the oil companies are not the least bit concerned about CF as far as I know. As Beene indicated, they are busy fighting global warming researchers, and spreading false rumors about wind energy, such as the notion that it kills significant numbers of birds.

Now that we have said all these rotten things about Meyer, I think we should recall that he did impress some smart people, such as Adm. Griffin. I am haunted by the possibility that he may have actually been on to something real.

- Jed
--=====================_27287984==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 13:54:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DKsODs006538; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:54:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DKsMRv006513; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:54:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:54:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:54:00 -0500 Message-ID: <29E5343E7F6959449B97C93EB07190C50C21F8DE@CCUMAIL24.usa.ccu.clearchannel.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Thread-Index: AcaPKJls2nA4ZrshS/+560lzeP6+TgAAEdgg From: "Zell, Chris" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jun 2006 20:54:02.0655 (UTC) FILETIME=[805C82F0:01C68F2B] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5DKsKhU006494 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68979 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 wonder about Paul Brown. He warned everyone he was being threatened, discontinued his work - then re-started it later and died in an "accident" soon after. If tens of thousands die for oil in war, should inventors be off limits? Most of us have enough sense to avoid walking thru crime ridden neighborhoods or carefully walk across busy streets. Do we act the same way about "disruptive technology"? If the NSA monitors "disruptive technology", are we to trust them as regards the definition of what disruptive means? Does it concern terrorism - or things that wreck financial markets by replacing oil? Do we get to openly debate the issue? Does Congress? Do various researchers remain alive as long as they fail to enter the popular realm of credibility? Can they be neutralized by ridicule and rank disbelief? -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9@pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 4:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Oops, meant to say- ...nor was Gene Mallove murdered as part of a conspiracy. Of course he was murdered. Meyer was not even murdered. There was no big conspiracy to silence the enemies of 'Big Oil' in either case - at least there is no evidence of such. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 14:40:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DLdiU5026746; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:39:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DLdghS026736; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:39:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:39:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060613173038.03e742d8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 17:39:39 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report In-Reply-To: <29E5343E7F6959449B97C93EB07190C50C21F8DE@CCUMAIL24.usa.ccu .clearchannel.com> References: <29E5343E7F6959449B97C93EB07190C50C21F8DE@CCUMAIL24.usa.ccu.clearchannel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <_ni5ZD.A.shG.eCzjEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68980 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: Zell, Chris wrote: >I wonder about Paul Brown. He warned everyone he was being threatened, >discontinued his work - then re-started it later and died in an >"accident" soon after. Indeed, the Brown case seems a lot more serious to me. On the other hand, as I recall Brown was known for driving cars recklessly at high speed. Who knows what to make of it? I think the lesson for the guy who comes up with a practical cold fusion reactor is: keep no secrets. Publish everything. If thousands of experts worldwide know what you have done and how to replicate, because you distributed papers worldwide via the Internet, there is no point to killing you or trying to suppress your work. This strategy is described in the thriller movie "Three days of the Condor." This movie centers around a high-level U.S. government conspiracy to invade an oil-rich country in the Middle East on false pretenses. Needless to say, this is a ridiculous & contrived fantasy -- such things could not happen in real life! -- but we can still learn from it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 14:44:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DLiSqU029478; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:44:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DLiQw7029462; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:44:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:44:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 17:44:22 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85D49AAE049B7-2410-4B61@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C85D305BD1644F-1144-1AE00@mblkn-m03.sysops.aol.com> <20060613194737.91389.qmail@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060613160332.03e900d8@mindspring.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060613160332.03e900d8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68981 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: Jed Rothwell Along the same lines, I do not think Park and Zimmerman are "conspiring" to suppress cold fusion . . . <><><><><><> Just what *is* PZ's motivation on the Hydrino list? He has spent countless hours debunking hydrinos & CQM in particular and FE in general. I honestly do not believe he is merely a defender of the faith. He is up to something more sinister, IMO. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 16:59:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5DNxFku021957; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:59:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5DNxDWq021932; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:59:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:59:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002101c68f45$575c73f0$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> From: "Nick Palmer" To: References: <29E5343E7F6959449B97C93EB07190C50C21F8DE@CCUMAIL24.usa.ccu.clearchannel.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:58:50 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68982 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chris mentions Paul Brown - by coincidence there was this about him on CBSmarketwatch.com today SPECIAL REPORT Short sellers: The good, the bad and the ugly Some have exposed fraud; others become the scandal themselves SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- In the escalating debate over whether short sellers do more harm than good, the case of Anthony Elgindy neatly gives detractors a bogeyman they can use to drum up support for their cause. On Dec. 19, 2001, an FBI agent ran a search on the agency's confidential National Crime Information Center database and came across criminal history information about Paul Brown, chief executive of a company called Nuclear Solutions. Less than three hours later, Elgindy emailed a message to subscribers of his investment Web sites: "NSOL -- CEO, Dr. Paul Maurice Brown, is a convicted felon ..." In the following days, Elgindy and others put out still more information on the Internet about Brown's alleged criminal record. Over the next month, he shorted shares of the nuclear-waste technology company several times and recommended that his subscribers do the same. From early December 2001 to the end of January 2002, shares of the Nuclear Solutions lost almost half their value. Elgindy's lawyer, borrowing from a common short-sellers refrain, sought to portray his client as a hero for trying to expose "phony companies." To U.S. Attorney Alan Vinegrad, the scheme was "a shocking partnership between an experienced stock manipulator and law-enforcement agents, undertaken for their illicit personal gain." Last year, a jury in Brooklyn agreed and convicted Elgindy of conspiracy, securities fraud and extortion surrounding Nuclear Solutions (NSOL : nuclear solutions inc com NSOL1.21, -0.06, -4.7%) , wasn't a convicted felon after all. An illegal drug possession charge against him was dismissed in 1991, the Wall Street Journal reported. He died in a car crash in April 2002. The Elgindy case does little to help defenders of short sellers, who frequently claim they help keep markets ticking and contribute to accurate share prices by making sure the prices of stocks reflect negative as well as positive information about companies. Elgindy's scheme, and several similar ones described in the grand jury indictments that followed, is at one extreme end of the debate about whether short sellers are good or bad for the markets. On the other end of the spectrum, short-seller advocates like David Rocker want investors and regulators to focus on the supposed benefits that shorts have. "Although there have been occasional instances in which short sellers have been accused of circulating misleading stories, these instances are dwarfed both in number and magnitude by the misleading stories circulated by long holders and the issuers themselves," David Rocker, a leading short seller, told a Congressional hearing in 2003. Rocker cites a long list of frauds and accounting abuses at companies including Enron, Tyco International Ltd. (TYC : Tyco International Ltd CNO23.61, -0.19, -0.8%) , Boston Chicken and Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products that he says were uncovered by short sellers. 'Out of thin air' From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 19:17:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5E2GjhR016123; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:16:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5E2GcjL016063; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:16:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:16:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:11:24 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85D6EF876E8D3-1820-14F0F@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68983 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: US Windpower Status: O X-Status: http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for Cape Wind T here is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 13 20:40:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5E3e5DU020871; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:40:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5E3e2B0020828; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:40:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:40:02 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=gthY2w6j1t0qjyCMf7dgrmt8dkSCAL60Y1rk4KhHMtSQzXeLTXYNh13SLr3bCpGs; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <20843176.1150256398667.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:39:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191cd325be5a901577037ddf071f06505e2788598faf7aa7eaca350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.28 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68984 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: >Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America > >Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power >plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for >Cape Wind That is astounding. There is also enough wind power in North and South Dakota to power the entire U.S., but they are farther from population centers than offshore locations. Europe has roughly 4 times as much offshore wind power capacity as their present consumption. Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and HTSC power lines. Wind power projections keep rising as the size of wind turbines increases, because they sweep a larger cross-section of the atmosphere. It would be interesting if carbon fiber towers and turbine blades 1 km long could be developed. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 05:32:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ECVh7F015877; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 05:31:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ECVe2v015851; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 05:31:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 05:31:40 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=jIWtmp8iuGkuitF7MKf4JWdCBhcaww0w8Delsmq9by2fKiIOZiuhXRuEQZNdCQVR; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066314123136191@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 06:31:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ad29110fd3150d1c875c3bdf099af3c5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.113 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68985 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Mileage on the Cheap Revised Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII According to this treatment of water-metal surface interaction by P. Thiel at Ames, and Madey at NIST, the water molecule tends to dissociate into bound OH and H on the Nickel portion of the stainless steel. According to other Cr-Ni catalyst sources the presence of Chromium Oxide present on the surface keeps the exposed Ni area active. http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf The bound H atoms on the Ni should allow the hydrino "metastable pre-activation" by interaction of the adsorbed H proton with the outer M or N shell Ni electrons, entrainment in the water and subsequent ignition of the H or H2 "pilot fuel" generated by the electrolysis along with compression-combustion in the ICE cylinder should form KeV energy fractional orbit hydrinos, thus effecting several orders of magnitude energy multiplication of the invested electrolysis energy. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
According to this treatment of water-metal surface interaction by P. Thiel at Ames, and Madey at NIST,
the water molecule tends to dissociate into bound OH and H on the Nickel portion of
the stainless steel.
According to other Cr-Ni catalyst sources the presence of Chromium  Oxide present on
the surface keeps the exposed Ni area active.
 
 
The bound H atoms on the Ni should allow the hydrino "metastable pre-activation"
by interaction of the adsorbed H proton with the outer M or N shell Ni electrons, entrainment
in the water and subsequent ignition of the H or H2 "pilot fuel" generated by the electrolysis
along with compression-combustion in the ICE cylinder should form KeV energy fractional
orbit hydrinos, thus effecting several orders of magnitude energy multiplication of the
invested electrolysis energy.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 07:30:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EEU0oN021335; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:30:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EETvFE021306; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:29:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:29:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:29:50 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <8C85D6EF876E8D3-1820-14F0F@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68986 X-Loop: vortex-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 wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Wind farms of that magnitude surely would have some net-effect on the low altitude weather patterns of the region they are located and the regions down wind of them.... the closest analogy I can think of is hydroelectric damming. -j -----Original Message----- From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net [mailto:hohlrauml6d@netscape.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: US Windpower http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for Cape Wind T here is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 08:06:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EF68jI008911; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:06:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EF67sU008892; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:06:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:06:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614110149.03e82c68@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:05:57 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: [Vo]: US Windpower In-Reply-To: References: <8C85D6EF876E8D3-1820-14F0F@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.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/68987 X-Loop: vortex-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 Steck wrote: >I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Interesting point. I doubt it would be significant. Total wind power equals the total solar energy that intercepts earth, and that is immense compared to human energy consumption. >Wind farms of that magnitude surely would have some net-effect on >the low altitude weather patterns of the region they are >located and the regions down wind of them.... the closest analogy >I can think of is hydroelectric damming. Probably the closest similar physical effect would be the "heat islands" caused by urban areas, and their effect on the weather. Whatever the effect, I am sure it would not be as bad as the effect of coal-fired power generation and a billion automobiles burning gasoline. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 08:47:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EFlH8F031271; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:47:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EFlEqB031235; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:47:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:47:13 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=xifKSInT4tZU3IA6wg41sZAojYiUE7vWuh6073HcKq7fOlvBI3XEciUkNtg4X2/OvnwbSvS99V1ohMa/BCqeKI38GAidssqpxZTT8aanzotrL13TG2e6a8TFdcE+Ly94KEFY83uoGerRfk/YfNTc8pF39mHVdFhiiifz728B3Ks= ; Message-ID: <20060614154712.21816.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:47:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614110149.03e82c68@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68989 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower Status: O X-Status: Let me belabor a couple of points, raised several times previously, relative to supplying about 175 million Americans with windpower (those within 100 miles of ocean or Great Lakes). 1) *Offshore* windfarms are highly preferable -stronger and more reliable wind with less impact on wildlife and aethetics 2) Floating windfarms make more sense than permanent mooring. a) Catamaran Hulls made of ferrocement are cheap & reliable b) Hulls can provide storage for several days production of liquid air c) Can be moved to safe harbor in storms d) Easier to accomodated vertical axis or 'Ladder Mill' type rotors 3) Liquid air (O2 or N2O enriched) is the best way to store wind energy a) Linde Method is very efficient with ocean heat sink b) Product can be transported cheaply 4) Using liquid air (intitally) in gas/coal plants provides double synergy a) Free waste heat for expansion of liquid at high efficiency b) Increases combustion efficiency after or during expansion c) N2O has 'fuel' content in itself 5) Can eventually eliminate carbon altogether in a stepwise process as fossil fuel prices rise. 6) Apadaptable to nuclear plants (using waste heat) There is no better win-win (win-wind-win) scenario in all of alternative energy - even the coal miners are happy as it gives them a way to produce much more, and cleaner energy from the same amount of coal. It is not perfect of course, but neither is anything else which can be implemented today without a technological breakthrough. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 08:58:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EFvdWU005988; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:57:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EFvbmP005970; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:57:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:57:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:57:30 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85DE2607B1761-2EB0-2983@mblkn-m15.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <20060614154712.21816.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Subject: Re: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.133 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <2-QqMD.A.OdB.xHDkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68990 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene c) N2O has 'fuel' content in itself <><><><><><> As these tricked-out turf surfers can testify: http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/nitrous-oxide/ Alas, gone are the days when we would puchase a bag of ammonium nitrate, melt it on a stirring hotplate and collect the resulting gas over a water bath (to leech out the ammonia) into large garbage bags. Terry ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 09:04:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EG0Qqt007802; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:04:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EFg0Fa028748; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:42:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:42:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060614154142611.954565C00087@mwinf3113.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060614154144.00b72b68@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:41:44 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: [Vo]: US Windpower Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68988 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:05 am 14/06/2006 -0400, Jed wrote: > John Steck wrote: > >> I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. > > Interesting point. I doubt it would be significant. Total wind power > equals the total solar energy that intercepts earth, and that is > immense compared to human energy consumption. Interesting - I hadn't thought of that. I was thinking the same effect as a small range of mountains - or even hills. 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 10:07:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EGaqJS031616; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:36:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EGacnj031501; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:36:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:36:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:36:07 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower In-Reply-To: <20060614154712.21816.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614110149.03e82c68@mindspring.com> <20060614154712.21816.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.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/68991 X-Loop: vortex-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: >1) *Offshore* windfarms are highly preferable -stronger and more >reliable wind . . . Yes. That is why the human race used to move megatons of goods and people across the oceans on sailing ships, up until 1900 or so. People who think that wind power is negligible should look at photo of the warfs of New York or London in the mid-19th century. From 1846 to 1854, wind power carried 2 million people from Ireland to the US -- about a quarter of the Irish population. This is probably in the same range as jet aircraft carry from Ireland to the U.S. today. >2) Floating windfarms make more sense than permanent >mooring. I never thought of that. But how would you anchor them? It would take immensely strong anchors to prevent something like this from sailing off. Full rigged clipper ships at sea were by far the most powerful machines prior to 1860, with megawatts of motive power. A floating wind power vessel would be the equivalent of a container ship, which has an ~85 MW engine. How could you anchor such a thing? Perhaps you could sink it the way the WWII "mulberries" were sunk during the invasion of Normandy By the way, there are serious proposals for wind power augmentation for container ships. It is an ideal application. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 10:10:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EHA369012271; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:10:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EH9xgB012211; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:09:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:09:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 13:09:50 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C85DEC7B08A992-2E1C-24B8@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 17673 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5EH9upq012151 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68992 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil Status: O X-Status: The father of the periodic table was also a proponent of the beta-atmosphere: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Mendeleev "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. Of these two proposed elements, he thought the lighter to be an all-penetrating, all-pervasive gas, and the slightly heavier one to be a proposed element, coronium." And Mendeleev had good reason to believe in coronium: http://sunearthday.nasa.gov/2006/locations/coronium.php Dmitri was also the first to propose an abiotic origin of petroleum in 1877; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin although, better understanding of the process has prevailed. ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 10:23:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EHK6gM019855; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:23:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EHBCMB013309; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:11:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:11:12 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=RFY607DSV+YN93O1Rudc4eOtqH4ndf7h2D6IAJ4ZBjIjy30iaCY7exKUUJbx+7Nw; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066314171057899@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:10:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9404e29fa8f386dc0ee94c96199745cf06c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.59 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68993 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > Let me belabor a couple of points, raised several > times previously, relative to supplying about 175 > million Americans with windpower (those within 100 > miles of ocean or Great Lakes). > > 3) Liquid air (O2 or N2O enriched) is the best way > to store wind energy > N2O (that makes you laugh) is made by "Careful Decomposition of Ammonium Nitrate" NH4NO3. NH3 that has to be used in making NH4NO3 requires Ammonia Synthesis (N2 + 3 H2 + High Pressure + energy) where the 3 H2 comes from Electrolysis of Water at 25 Kw-Hr/LB. The Nitric-Nitrous Acid HNO3-HNO2 comes fro reacting H2O with NO2 which comes from Oxidizing Ammonia NH3 with O2: 4 NH3 + O2 ----> 4 NO + 6 H2O + ~ 1. Megajoule (lost), then more O2: 2 NO + O2 ----> 2 NO2 + 120 kJ (lost), then 3 NO2 + H2O ---> 2 HNO3 + NO, Which is a NO NO for making low cost N2O (LOL Gas). > > There is no better win-win (win-wind-win) scenario in > all of alternative energy - even the coal miners are > happy as it gives them a way to produce much more, and > cleaner energy from the same amount of coal. It is not > perfect of course, but neither is anything else which > can be implemented today without a technological > breakthrough. > Reacting CO2 from the atmosphere (or existing power plants) with Electrolysis H2 to make Methanol would be more practical for storage and transport. 3 H2 + CO2 <---> H2O + CH3OH (Methanol) Agriculture needs Ammonia NH3, Ammonium Nitrate, NH4NO3, and Urea made from: 2 NH3 + CO2 ----> NH2-CO-NH2 + H2O. Fred > > > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 10:24:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EHK6gO019855; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:23:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EHDJF0014754; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:13:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:13:18 -0700 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=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=LruqvR1S5abk8JQtr+Whp4TL1bFQoXLEcQMnweOiBoBuDo09LjnYVlOzu0Jq7vGE5f9TnkTuHPSgbGfgkxMbSYeIwLVdO4ikxLJH077KQn6bp7ppIw+J8c5JBEKkyKdn9L5R8vwoEkYqxW48ejI4492+VPO6Ok9e+PD96co5uYs= ; Message-ID: <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:13:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <53Hy_C.A.2lD.sOEkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68994 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower Status: O X-Status: --- Jed Rothwell wrote: > I never thought of that. But how would you anchor them? It would take immensely strong anchors to prevent something like this from sailing off. No anchor. The West coast, and Northeast has little or no "shelf" and the ocean is too deep for anchorage anyway. You would use converted drogues. A drouge is a sea-anchor which merely slows movement, like a parachute- and does not attempt to create a permanent anchorage. It can slow a ship in a 30 knot wind to 1-2 knots - or perhaps a 20 mile controlled-drift per day. They are steerable. Imagine a giant *funnel* which at the small outlet-end there is a propeller attached to a generator. When drug behind a ship it creates a huge drag, almost stopping the wind aligned vector. Using this you could recoup some of the energy it takes to return to your starting position when the winds subside - usually late at night. IOW the catamaran flotilla would be in constant controlled-drift mode- starting at point-x in the morning, and capturing wind energy for 20 hours, using it to compress air and produce some electricity for onboard use, and using the ocean heat sink would allow easy conversion of air (enriched) to a liquid for storage. Around midnight, or as winds subside the flotilla uses power to return the 20-30 miles which they have drifted during the work-day, returning to the same point-x by morning for the next days repeat of the same routine. The wind farm flotilla is never "really" anchored but see-saws back and forth in a general area. They can be pretty far out to sea this way - where winds are strongest and the operators can even choose the best locations seasonally, if there is a predictable pattern. The constant shuttle movement of the flotilla creates only a small inefficiecy compared to the amount of wind which is harnessed, a few percent, and has many advantages - particularly in a storm. A cryo-tanker comes by every day or two and collects the liquid from each catamaran, returns it to port or direct to a nearby (converted) natural gas plant which can thereby produce 30-50 percent more energy using the same amount of methane as before - and the best part is that all the electrical distribution infrastructure is already in place from that plant - so we are only adding a bulk transportation infrastructure - relatively cheap and with no bureaucracy to deal with. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 11:02:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5EI1dmB015749; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:01:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5EI1cXe015734; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:01:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:01:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060614180135398.614C31C0008E@mwinf3009.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060614180137.00b847f4@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:01:37 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68995 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: RE: Raising Polly Water Status: O X-Status: Re-reading, http://oemagazine.com/fromTheMagazine/oct02/eyeontech.html I came across this useful factoid, ======================================= Scientists have characterized nanotubes as the Superman of the molecular world. Composite materials made with nanotubes can be 100 times stronger than steel at one-sixth the weight. ======================================= and thought I'd calculate the Beta-atmosphere shielding in "English" taking the nanotube as an impenetrable cylinder. Say steel is 50,000 psi. So the shielding is 100 x 50,000 = 5 million psi. Now the Beta-atmosphere pressure which holds liquid water together is. 3750 atmospheres x 6 (the Spaandonk Power) x 14.7 = 330,750 psi which means that the pressure drop is 15 time greater that the point at which the water structures falls apart and the individual water molecules are like a lot of loose ball bearings. Admittedly, the assumption of a solid surface to the nanotube is a boundary condition since it is more like a net. However, the factor of 15 suggests that if they aren't loose molecules they're pretty damn close. Also the exclusion of a lot of the Beta-atm. transverse jiggling explains why...... ===================================================== http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id =16977&ch=nanotech ----------------------------------------------------- The carbon nanotubes used by the researchers are sheets of carbon atoms rolled so tightly that only seven water molecules can fit across their diameter. Their small size makes them good candidates for separating molecules. And, despite their diminutive dimensions, these nanopores allow water to flow at the same rate as pores considerably larger, reducing the amount of pressure needed to force water through, and potentially saving energy and costs compared to reverse osmosis using conventional membranes. Indeed, the LLNL team measures water flow rates up to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by classical equations, which suggest that flow rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the diameter drops. "It's something that is quite counter- intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate. ===================================================== I reckon nanotube technology is a far better bet for Gold Fusion (sic) than palladium. But I suppose, once an electro-chemist, always an electro-chemist. They really need some of those "Get out of cell, FREE" cards. Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 16:26:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ENQJuk005273; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:26:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ENQBd0005189; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:26:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:26:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:26:41 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: * 0.9 PLING_QUERY Subject has exclamation mark and question mark X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.9 required=6.0 tests=PLING_QUERY autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:26:51 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:26:53 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68996 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Status: O X-Status: The 12 June 2006 issue of "New York" magazine has a feature on Bob Guccione Jr. (http://www.nymetro.com/news/media/17209/). His father, Bob Guccione Sr., famed for starting both the skin mag "Penthouse" and the science mag "Omni" also, according to the article, "nearly bankrupted himself by single-handedly funding a cold-fusion project that would employ 82 scientists and cost $17 million before being shut down." Does anyone know anything about this project? -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 17:53:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F0rYRS022154; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:53:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F0rWfk022144; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:53:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:53:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060614175439.03327bf8@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:59:52 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_371894890==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68997 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_371894890==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Walter, From what I've been able to track on that so far is a possible reference to a 1990 book called Fusion. I've ordered the book, it's on the way. Once I get it I plan to pursue the basic details until I have the facts. My first guess is that the there is something very factually incorrect about this story. You know, 82 cold fusion scientists? And none of us have heard about it? And it's not referenced in any of the cold fusion books, AFAIK. But hey, facts aside, isn't it nice to see cold fusion gettin' some ink? Heh heh. I knew there had to be someway to connect CF to sex! s At 04:26 PM 6/14/2006, you wrote: >The 12 June 2006 issue of "New York" magazine has a feature on Bob >Guccione Jr. (http://www.nymetro.com/news/media/17209/). His father, Bob >Guccione Sr., famed for starting both the skin mag "Penthouse" and the >science mag "Omni" also, according to the article, "nearly bankrupted >himself by single-handedly funding a cold-fusion project that would employ >82 scientists and cost $17 million before being shut down." > >Does anyone know anything about this project? > >-Walter --=====================_371894890==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Walter,

From what I've been able to track on that so far is a possible reference to a 1990 book called Fusion. I've ordered the book, it's on the way. Once I get it I plan to pursue the basic details until I have the facts.

My first guess is that the there is something very factually incorrect about this story.  You know, 82 cold fusion scientists?  And none of us have heard about it?

And it's not referenced in any of the cold fusion books, AFAIK.

But hey, facts aside, isn't it nice to see cold fusion gettin' some ink? Heh heh.
 
I knew there had to be someway to connect CF to sex!

s


At 04:26 PM 6/14/2006, you wrote:
The 12 June 2006 issue of "New York" magazine has a feature on Bob
Guccione Jr. ( http://www.nymetro.com/news/media/17209/). His father, Bob
Guccione Sr., famed for starting both the skin mag "Penthouse" and the
science mag "Omni" also, according to the article, "nearly bankrupted
himself by single-handedly funding a cold-fusion project that would employ
82 scientists and cost $17 million before being shut down."

Does anyone know anything about this project?

-Walter
--=====================_371894890==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 18:14:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F1Emdd002546; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:14:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F1ElmN002526; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:14:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:14:47 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=XNOuYWYCgreAZhPD0jKMzSmNOl2613n939m4qZEgi3Ioy3P49Zs7d84xjSzdL5fr; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <28854242.1150334086364.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 21:14:46 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191c2912db71ef4cf2e87953462aa9aa22731e3821db987f1b31350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.29 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68998 X-Loop: vortex-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 was a miniature plasma reactor. I thought I recalled it was a Farnsworth Fusor, but these sources says it was a "rigatron" based on an MIT design, designed by Bussard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Bussard http://fusor.net/old-boards/songs.com/msgs/msg-1087.html Nothing to do with cold fusion. Not even cold, just small. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 18:38:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F1c0Be020421; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:38:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F1bwn0020400; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:37:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:37:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Rv9DTWX7O8jQRn0dA3H4cQK4BorHP1KDKkPKnYn3MYhHQ5jL7OJzfbC+ZI6GGJzW; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <11669843.1150335478060.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:37:58 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: Randy Souther Reply-To: Randy Souther To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 811455d6894cae21cbae38b235b0bda9239a348a220c26097d9a8f2a68ea7dbc04c32d5498d07c5793caf27dac41a8fd350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.31 Resent-Message-ID: <4vBkd.A.r-E.2nLkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/68999 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: While Bob Guccione's publishing business is not in danger of closing its doors, it is being drained financially by his expensive ventures outside publishing. For example, D. H. Blair & Co. Inc. has had trouble interesting the investment community in purchasing one million units of International Fusion Energy Systems Co. Inc. (INESCO), Guccione's costly, visionary fusion energy company. According to Guccione, he is laying out $12 million-$13 million annually for nonproductive investments. This cash drain has stalled a variety of other projects, including: 1. motion pictures, 2. a direct-broadcast adult television channel, and 3. a research effort in genetic engineering. An increase in the cover price allows Penthouse magazine to continue generating a profit of about $20 million annually. Circulation, however, was down to 3.2 million in June 1984 from its 4.7 million peak in the 1970s. Guccione's Other Plans Shepherd, William G., Jr.. Venture. New York: Nov 1984. Vol. 6, Iss. 11; pg. 86, 5 pgs Randy From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 19:50:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F2oZ27032139; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:50:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F2oXSu032109; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:50:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:50:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4490CAEF.2040808@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 22:50:23 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? References: <28854242.1150334086364.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <28854242.1150334086364.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> 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/69000 X-Loop: vortex-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: > This was a miniature plasma reactor. I thought I recalled it was a Farnsworth Fusor, but these sources says it was a "rigatron" based on an MIT design, designed by Bussard: > That's incredible! Did you see this? http://www.fusor.net/board/view.php?site=fusor&bn=fusor_announce&key=1143684406 Could this be for real? The final breakthrough came some time in the last six months, and one week later their funding was cut. Bussard says the next step is to build a full-scale generator, because they've learned how to do it and there's nothing more to be learned with pilot reactors. Frankly, it's not cold, but so what? If this is real -- and if he gets the $200M needed to build the full-scale model -- it could be really significant. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Bussard > > http://fusor.net/old-boards/songs.com/msgs/msg-1087.html > > Nothing to do with cold fusion. Not even cold, just small. > > - Jed > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 19:52:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F2psaH000413; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:51:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F2pqU5000394; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:51:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:51:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00e201c69026$a6f85f50$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <11669843.1150335478060.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:51:49 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69001 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Status: O X-Status: I only read it for the... err ...articles ... err ... the ones on compact fusion... > While Bob Guccione's publishing business is not in danger of > closing its doors ... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 20:44:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3inoC028985; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:44:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3ihlv028911; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:44:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:44:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <010e01c6902e$0510f2d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <28854242.1150334086364.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <4490CAEF.2040808@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:44:34 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69004 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" > Could this be for real? Maybe.. but not because Bussard says so. Like Randy Mills, he has been saying the same things for many years in "Fusion Technology" and elsewhere, and spending the big-bucks - but with even less to show for the millions spent than BLP. Sounded good then, like now - and Bussard is very much the competent self-promoter; but as everyone hopes and wonders, is he equally competent in the lab? Quien sabe? Jed is correct in that it started out as a kind of Fusor, now called IEC - not 'hot' in the ITER, sense but pretty damn "warm"... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 20:47:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3lGAj030644; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:47:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3lDKU030584; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:47:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:47:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:47:05 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <20843176.1150256398667.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <20843176.1150256398667.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.194] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:47:05 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5F3l649030505 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69005 X-Loop: vortex-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 Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:39:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00): Hi, [snip] >Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and HTSC power lines. An alternative would be to use Tesla's method of pumping energy into the Earth, and extracting it with tuned receivers. *No transmission lines required*. Of course all power transmitters would need to be owned by one entity, as there would otherwise be no way of determining who should get paid. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 20:53:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3rUsx003392; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:53:30 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3rSlZ003371; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:53:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:53:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:53:26 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <8C85D6EF876E8D3-1820-14F0F@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.194] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:53:25 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5F3rPbI003333 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69006 X-Loop: vortex-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 John Steck's message of Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:29:50 -0500: Hi, [snip] >I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Wind farms of >that magnitude surely would have some net-effect on the low altitude weather >patterns of the region they are located and the regions down wind of >them.... the closest analogy I can think of is hydroelectric damming. [snip] Since the Globe is warming anyway, there is more energy being added to the wind system. This means that as global warming progresses, average wind speed (and resultant damage in storms) is going to increase. It also means that windmills are going to return the investment made in them sooner. Furthermore windmills extract energy from the global weather system, thus they are a two edged sword (or three if you have one with three blades ;). First they reduce the energy in the system, and second they displace fossil fuel use cutting down on greenhouse gasses. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 20:55:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3oN80000804; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:54:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3S3tw020075; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:28:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:28:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615032756572.8BA24B800085@mwinf3211.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615032758.00bb27a0@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, 15 Jun 2006 04:27:58 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69003 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:50 pm 14/06/2006 -0400, Stephen wrote: > > >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> This was a miniature plasma reactor. I thought I recalled it was a Farnsworth Fusor, but these sources says it was a "rigatron" based on an MIT design, designed by Bussard: >> >That's incredible! Did you see this? > >http://www.fusor.net/board/view.php?site=fusor&bn=fusor_announce&key=1143684406 > >Could this be for real? Interesting that they talk about 7th and 5th power scaling laws. They could be working between the 1-D and 2-D Casimir Law boundaries, i.e. the 4th and 8th powers. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 21:10:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3oN82000804; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:54:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3JpnS015751; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:19:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:19:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615031456546.856F11C00082@mwinf3203.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615031458.00bcad08@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 04:14:58 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5F3JgIL015615 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69002 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:59 pm 14/06/2006 -0700, Steven wrote: >I knew there had to be someway to connect CF to sex! > >s Of course there is. 8-) In Britain there is a apparel retailer called French Connection UK (FCUK) and if you render this is the language of love it becomes: Connexion Français UK (CFUK) What better connection could one ask. Cheers, François From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 14 21:14:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5F3xJiM008629; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:59:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5F3xFdh008565; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:59:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:59:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <010b01c6902b$8c096fe0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <8C85DEC7B08A992-2E1C-24B8@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:26:52 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69007 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: > "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, > he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two > inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part... there is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for mainstream guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines is laughable, right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim either. It is an open issue. If Don Hotson is partially correct in his interpretation of Dirac (but not completely) then the epo-BEC, which is the "aether" may have a number of temporal or spatial realties that are "not-quite" fully condensed - for varying lengths of time, or in certain environments ...? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 05:02:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FC2l6o028585; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:02:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FC2gYI028551; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:02:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:02:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001201c69073$9540d290$9f037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: [VO]:Re:Cold Fusion and "Penthouse"!? Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:02:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69049.AB43FDD0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <3f-Wf.A.-9G.hxUkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69008 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C69049.AB43FDD0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69049.AB458470" ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69049.AB458470 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank At 05:59 pm 14/06/2006 -0700, Steven wrote: >I knew there had to be someway to connect CF to sex! > >s Of course there is. 8-) In Britain there is a apparel retailer called French Connection UK (FCUK) and if you render this is the language of love it becomes: Connexion Fran=E7ais UK (CFUK) =20 What better connection could one ask. Cheers, Fran=E7ois Howdy Frank.. Speaking of various languages.. like Texian.. any sentence withe the = word "cold" may produce a " spontaneous reaction" as several unknowns = exists when words like ... cold feet.. cold hands.. cold shoulder... are = introduced into the chemistry. Perhaps Penthouse has invented a viagra fuel for autos. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69049.AB458470 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 

At 05:59 pm 14/06/2006 -0700, Steven wrote:


>I knew = there had=20 to be someway to connect CF to sex!
>
>s


Of = course there=20 is.   8-)

In Britain there is a apparel retailer=20 called

     French Connection UK  =20 (FCUK)

and if you render this is the language of love it=20 becomes:

     Connexion Fran=E7ais UK =20 (CFUK)  

What better connection could one ask.=20 <g>

Cheers,

Fran=E7ois

Howdy Frank..

Speaking of various languages.. like Texian.. any sentence withe the = word=20 "cold" may produce a " spontaneous reaction"  as several unknowns = exists=20 when words like ... cold feet.. cold hands.. cold shoulder... are = introduced=20 into the chemistry.

Perhaps Penthouse has invented a viagra fuel for autos.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69049.AB458470-- ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69049.AB43FDD0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000d01c69073$940608a0$9f037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69049.AB43FDD0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 05:09:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FC9Zpl032389; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:09:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FC9Wjh032355; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:09:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:09:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002701c69074$8b86ef40$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <20843176.1150256398667.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:04:27 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69009 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Robin van Spaandonk" Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower > In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:39:58 > -0400 (GMT-04:00): > Hi, > [snip] >>Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I >>expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all >>of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and >>HTSC power lines. > > An alternative would be to use Tesla's method of pumping energy > into the Earth, and extracting it with tuned receivers. *No > transmission lines required*. Of course all power transmitters > would need to be owned by one entity, as there would otherwise be > no way of determining who should get paid. Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. "Lamp" in this context does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous borad spectrum radio noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF energy desnity would currently be regarded as a health hazard. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 05:35:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FCYw27013718; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:34:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FCYuKm013688; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:34:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:34:55 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TJ7I1sf1BomJEETW3v9vw+ZhZ9QnLiG8mXm4FuQfwa2DoRzXtLifntQeIzqRm9f4; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066415123442985@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 06:34:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402b608d0a0f285801250b25fbfa01217f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.138 Resent-Message-ID: <1gh7qC.A.oVD.vPVkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69010 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Free Radicals and Waterfuel Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII "About 50 years ago it was discovered that, under certain circumstances, the water molecule can split up in another, quite different, way. If, for instance, water is exposed to radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays, the two-electron bonds between the oxygen and the hydrogen atoms can briefly split, leaving one unpaired electron on the hydrogen and one on the oxygen, thus creating two radicals, both electrically neutral but both having only one spare electron. Thus, momentarily,there are two atoms each with only one electron in an outer orbital. These radicals are known, respectively, as the hydrogen radical and the hydroxyl radical, and both of them are highly reactive. The hydroxyl radical is the most reactive free radical known to chemistry and will attack almost every molecule in the area. It is the unpaired electron that makes these radicals so chemically active. A group with an unpaired electron is highly unstable and is desperate either to pick up another electron from somewhere, or to give up its solitary electron. Hydrogen atoms, which have only one electron, never exist individually for more than a fraction of a second, but immediately join up in pairs to produce a hydrogen molecule of two atoms with a stable pair of electrons (H2). The same applies to a hydrogen radical—which is, of course, simply an isolated hydrogen atom. It is this stable state that free radicals are always aiming for, and if a free radical is formed, it will at once attack the nearest molecule in order to steal or hand over an electron and achieve stability. So now we have a definition of a free radical. A free radical is any atom or group of atoms that can exist independently and that contains at least one unpaired electron. Some free radicals exist for appreciable lengths of time. But the great majority have only a very brief independent existence before either grabbing an extra electron or giving one up." > > According to this treatment of water-metal surface interaction by P. Thiel at Ames, and Madey at NIST, > the adsorbed water molecule tends to dissociate into bound OH and H on the Nickel portion of > the stainless steel. > According to other Cr-Ni catalyst sources the presence of Chromium Oxide present on > the surface keeps the exposed Ni area active. > > http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf > Add the complexities in a electrolysis cell to this and....get back more than three orders of magnitude energy multiplication without the hydrino formation? Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
"About 50 years ago it was discovered that, under certain circumstances, the water molecule can split up in another, quite different, way.  If, for instance, water is exposed  to radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays, the two-electron bonds between the oxygen and the hydrogen atoms can briefly split, leaving one unpaired electron on the hydrogen and one on the oxygen, thus creating two radicals, both electrically neutral but both having only one spare electron. Thus, momentarily,there are two atoms each with only one electron in an outer orbital. These radicals are known, respectively, as the hydrogen radical and the hydroxyl radical, and both of them are highly reactive. The hydroxyl radical is the most reactive free radical known to chemistry and will attack almost every molecule in the area.
 
It is the unpaired electron that makes these radicals so chemically active. A group with an unpaired electron is highly unstable and is desperate either to pick up another electron from somewhere, or to give up its solitary electron.
 
Hydrogen atoms, which have only one electron, never exist individually for more than a fraction of a second, but immediately join up in pairs to produce a hydrogen molecule of two atoms with a stable pair of electrons (H2). The same applies to a hydrogen radical—which is, of course, simply an isolated hydrogen atom. It is this stable state that free radicals are always aiming for, and if a free radical is formed, it will at once attack the nearest molecule in order to steal or hand over an electron and achieve stability.
 
So now we have a definition of a free radical. A free radical is any atom or group of atoms that can exist independently and that contains at least one unpaired electron. Some free radicals exist for appreciable lengths of time. But the great majority have only a very brief independent existence before either grabbing an extra electron or giving one up."
>
> According to this treatment of water-metal surface interaction by P. Thiel at Ames, and Madey at NIST,
> the adsorbed water molecule tends to dissociate into bound OH and H on the Nickel portion of
> the stainless steel.
> According to other Cr-Ni catalyst sources the presence of Chromium  Oxide present on
> the surface keeps the exposed Ni area active.
>
>
Add the complexities in a electrolysis cell to this and....get back more than three orders of magnitude
energy multiplication without the hydrino formation?
 
Fred
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 05:56:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FCuGsg027149; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:56:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FCuDTF027119; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:56:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 05:56:13 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Q/gIsh7eunCFU7pj3ZfdCVMzFQPIu0S2kSUcrIljn3akorFHtG063J3T+Q9y+WAK; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006641512566711@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 06:56:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e88adb815c33f91c73205670e66a7c42350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.195 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69011 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > > Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his > Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed > by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light > a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. "Lamp" in this context > does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, > but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla > demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when > they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power > drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous broad spectrum radio > noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF > energy density would currently be regarded as a health hazard. > Judging by the Tesla Cults that pervade the Internet, I think Tesla himself was/is a health hazard. OTOH, CQ up in Canada seems to be in good health. :-) A recent survey stated that "Canadians are in better health than Americans". Could this be because Canadians that get sick, just die quick? Fred > > Mike Carrell > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 07:05:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FE56If009838; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FE554g009751; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:05 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=pdus6htF1R7CwP+XnYlO+srw7BaO9zM+FqNFNRHUHOtzxyWqEf57DQNVPNDoF7bmL6FAEDVoWf01Y18pbWnFNUON7Hp1/gMsyp1QuAcHRj9pxgk6zfcjo2zucBJEK1Vni1EOVTGWrD4UvsF+WdpONcUj34M59ay1VTkWSeHOUI4= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:05:02 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_17344_27300981.1150380302411" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69012 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Hydrox cooks Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_17344_27300981.1150380302411 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline General comment regarding aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments: NB: With aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments electric circuit causes power to be applied to electrodes in a reaction cell. Questions and Comments = QC QC: Can someone let us know, in general, the values of votage and current or ranges for these measures? QC: In how many cases do we find H and O produced? QC: Can anyone let us know the MEASURED amounts of H and O? QC: How are the measures arrived at....? Or are the amounts of H and O "calculated?" and not measured? QC: If measured are there real world empirical values for the energy conveyed by the H and O ? QC: Have the volumes of H and O been conveyed to fuel cells and-or have the volumes of H and O been combusted to yield real world thermal information....? As opposed to the CALCULATED energy that MIGHT be available if one was to exploit H and O ?? -------- QC: Can anyone post any of this information? NB: Without this information investigators can only present part of the "picture" regarding Input ------> VS ----> Output ---> of and for CF. Please let all of know of the holes in the Question..... QC: Can this question be asked in some form that is more accurate or effective or both? Thank to you, JH nn On 6/14/06, Jones Beene wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > > > > "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, > > he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two > > inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. > > > Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part... > there is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for > mainstream guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines > is laughable, right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim either. It is > an open issue. > > If Don Hotson is partially correct in his interpretation of Dirac > (but not completely) then the epo-BEC, which is the "aether" may > have a number of temporal or spatial realties that are "not-quite" > fully condensed - for varying lengths of time, or in certain > environments ...? > > Jones > > ------=_Part_17344_27300981.1150380302411 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
 
   General comment regarding aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments:
 
     NB:   With aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments electric circuit causes power to be applied to electrodes in a reaction cell.
 
      
Questions and Comments = QC
 
QC:   Can someone let us know, in general, the values of votage and current or ranges for these measures?
QC:   In how many cases do we find H and O produced?
QC:  Can anyone let us know the MEASURED amounts of H and O?
QC:  How are the measures arrived at....?  Or are the amounts of H and O "calculated?" and not measured?
QC:  If measured are there real world empirical values for the energy conveyed by the H and O ?
QC:  Have the volumes of H and O been conveyed to fuel cells and-or have the volumes of H and O been combusted to yield real world thermal information....?
       As opposed to the CALCULATED energy that MIGHT be available if one was to exploit H and O  ??
 
--------
 
QC:          Can anyone post any of this information?
 
 
   NB:  Without this information investigators can only present part of the "picture" regarding
Input  ------>  VS ---->  Output ---> of and for CF.
 
     Please let all of know of the holes in the Question.....
 
 QC:   Can this question be asked in some form that is more accurate or effective or both? 
 
 
     Thank to you,
 
                  JH
 
 
 
 
nn
 

 
On 6/14/06, Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: <hohlrauml6d@netscape.net >


> "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether,
> he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two
> inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen.


Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part...
there is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for
mainstream guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines
is laughable, right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim either. It is
an open issue.

If Don Hotson is partially correct in his interpretation of Dirac
(but not completely) then the epo-BEC, which is the "aether" may
have a number of temporal or spatial realties that are "not-quite"
fully condensed - for varying lengths of time, or in certain
environments ...?

Jones


------=_Part_17344_27300981.1150380302411-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 07:05:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FE5PLE010079; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FE5FmT009946; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:05:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44916907.6030209@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:04:55 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower References: <410-22006641512566711@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-22006641512566711@earthlink.net> 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/69013 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > Mike Carrell wrote: > > > > Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna > > atop his Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into > > the cavity formed by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. > > Reportedly he was able to light a lamp at some distance without a > > wired connection. "Lamp" in this context does not necessarily mean > > an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, but could be any of > > several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla demonstrated > > at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when they > > realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the > > power drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous broad > > spectrum radio noise which would have prevented the growth of AM > > radio broadcasting. The RF energy density would currently be > > regarded as a health hazard. > > > Judging by the Tesla Cults that pervade the Internet, I think Tesla > himself was/is a health hazard. > > OTOH, CQ up in Canada seems to be in good health. :-) > > A recent survey stated that "Canadians are in better health than > Americans". > > Could this be because Canadians that get sick, just die quick? Nah, they just eat "healthier" than folks in the States. We bust the budget on health care and then eat a diet that negates it all. The Canadian diet is not so great either for that matter, but it's not as bad as the U.S. diet. By rights, heart disease should be a rare illness, affecting only those with congenital heart defects and those with a congenital problem regulating their cholesterol level. Instead it's the most common cause of death among middle aged and older people here. Sorry, this is 'way, 'way off topic. > > Fred > > Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 07:36:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FEZww6002332; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:35:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FEZv6d002317; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:35:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:35:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615103138.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:35:44 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell In-Reply-To: <009001c69033$69b8fa20$3f672c42@iri> References: <8931ae0c3f33cd9d3c50aa1f0074e78a@mail.montclair.edu> <000e01c68d95$af759500$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <096301c68e00$ad236500$3800a8c0@zothan> <000b01c68e2c$782c1d20$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <002801c68e38$2b981de0$3800a8c0@zothan> <001f01c68e70$2860ed40$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> <009001c69033$69b8fa20$3f672c42@iri> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_4789437==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69014 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: CMNS: Re: Wayne Green Status: O X-Status: --=====================_4789437==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Thomas Valone wrote: >This cryptic message below was just received on June 12 from the >disenfranchised Wayne Green, who has been so discouraged about cold >fusion . . . He is one strange dude. >with, "Let me know when there is a breakthrough. I'll let everyone know." He >had indicated that would include investors with deep pockets too. I doubt he knows any investors. There have been dozens of breakthroughs, but I not think any of them will lead to near-term investment opportunities of the sort he has in mind. Anyway, I suggest you tell him to read the following: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEcoldfusione.pdf http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEastudentsg.pdf http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf Beaudette, C.G., Excess Heat. Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed - Jed --=====================_4789437==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Thomas Valone wrote:

This cryptic message below was just received on June 12 from the
disenfranchised Wayne Green, who has been so discouraged about cold fusion . . .

He is one strange dude.


with, "Let me know when there is a breakthrough. I'll let everyone know." He
had indicated that would include investors with deep pockets too.

I doubt he knows any investors. There have been dozens of breakthroughs, but I not think any of them will lead to near-term investment opportunities of the sort he has in mind. Anyway, I suggest you tell him to read the following:

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

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

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

Beaudette, C.G., Excess Heat. Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed

- Jed
--=====================_4789437==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 07:43:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FEe33D005706; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:42:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FEakJ5002780; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:36:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:36:46 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=eqsG7UicnPqKTlNB0vYNSZ4Pg+HehDecXI80J0VlRmEYgeOJd7XxDooj7eeEN2T8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066415143633356@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:36:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fe82db37820c8db0c85dccec67f33f0b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.144 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69015 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Minos and diet Coke Gusher craze Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Germane to Waterfuel? Yesterday ABc TV showed moms dads kids and physicists dropping Mintos (sp) into Diet Coke and a jet of bubbly froth shooting up several feet. A Physicist said something about "surface area" of the Mentos pellets. What gives? ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Germane to Waterfuel?
 
Yesterday ABc TV showed moms dads kids and physicists
dropping Mintos (sp) into Diet Coke and a jet of bubbly froth
shooting up several feet.
 
A Physicist said something about "surface area" of the Mentos pellets.
What gives?
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 08:53:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FFqicV028621; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FFqcnZ028574; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:38 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=KT4zSNw/buPnE1ui0GkIG1dAt/LhcjuNp84VcANLeBDql41Z9xrGWfG0gw9tt4RE; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066415155231738@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:52:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402d2a1e2ff48efa99f009f88855d33302350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.34 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69016 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Mentos and Diet Coke Gusher Craze Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/00000109 " For example, adding salt to soda causes it to foam up because thousands of little bubbles form on the surface of each grain of salt. Many scientists, including Lee Marek, claim that the Mentos phenomenon is a physical reaction, not a chemical one. Water molecules strongly attract each other, linking together to form a tight mesh around each bubble of carbon dioxide gas in the soda. In order to form a new bubble, or even to expand a bubble that has already formed, water molecules must push away from each other. It takes extra energy to break this "surface tension." In other words, water "resists" the expansion of bubbles in the soda. When you drop the Mentos into the soda, the gelatin and gum arabic from the dissolving candy break the surface tension. This disrupts the water mesh, so that it takes less work to expand and form new bubbles. Each Mentos candy has thousands of tiny pits all over the surface. These tiny pits are called nucleation sites - perfect places for carbon dioxide bubbles to form. As soon as the Mentos hit the soda, bubbles form all over the surface of the candy. Couple this with the fact that the Mentos candies are heavy and sink to the bottom of the bottle and you've got a double-whammy. When all this gas is released, it literally pushes all of the liquid up and out of the bottle in an incredible soda blast. You can see a similar effect when cooking potatoes or pasta are lowered into a pot of boiling water. The water will sometimes boil over because organic materials that leach out of the cooking potatoes or pasta disrupt the tight mesh of water molecules at the surface of the water, making it easier for bubbles and foam to form. " ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
" For example, adding salt to soda causes it to foam up because thousands of little bubbles form on the surface of each grain of salt.

Many scientists, including Lee Marek, claim that the Mentos phenomenon is a physical reaction, not a chemical one. Water molecules strongly attract each other, linking together to form a tight mesh around each bubble of carbon dioxide gas in the soda. In order to form a new bubble, or even to expand a bubble that has already formed, water molecules must push away from each other. It takes extra energy to break this "surface tension." In other words, water "resists" the expansion of bubbles in the soda.

When you drop the Mentos into the soda, the gelatin and gum arabic from the dissolving candy break the surface tension. This disrupts the water mesh, so that it takes less work to expand and form new bubbles. Each Mentos candy has thousands of tiny pits all over the surface. These tiny pits are called nucleation sites - perfect places for carbon dioxide bubbles to form. As soon as the Mentos hit the soda, bubbles form all over the surface of the candy. Couple this with the fact that the Mentos candies are heavy and sink to the bottom of the bottle and you've got a double-whammy. When all this gas is released, it literally pushes all of the liquid up and out of the bottle in an incredible soda blast. You can see a similar effect when cooking potatoes or pasta are lowered into a pot of boiling water. The water will sometimes boil over because organic materials that leach out of the cooking potatoes or pasta disrupt the tight mesh of water molecules at the surface of the water, making it easier for bubbles and foam to form. "
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 08:53:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FFqq6G028694; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FFqlpE028653; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003701c69093$bdaaafb0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <410-220066314123136191@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:52:43 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69017 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Nickel, Iron and Photolithography Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber "According to this treatment of water-metal surface interaction by P. Thiel at Ames, and Madey at NIST, the water molecule tends to dissociate into bound OH and H on the Nickel portion of the stainless steel. According to other Cr-Ni catalyst sources the presence of Chromium Oxide present on the surface keeps the exposed Ni area active. http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~wchen/Madey_page/Full_Publications/PDF/madey_SSR_1987_T.pdf The bound H atoms on the Ni should allow the hydrino "metastable pre-activation" by interaction of the adsorbed H proton with the outer M or N shell Ni electrons..." OK. Even if the hydrino (in the first few levels of shrinkage at least) is a metastable charge-retaining species which "reinflates" quickly (reading between the lines) the hypothetical process using Stainless gets even better, but with a different culprit: While Ni and Mn are both in stainless and listed by Mills as catalysts, they require extraodinary ionization levels (4 or greater ) to get into that state- seldom found in an electrolyte - whereas the critical role of Fe may have been overlooked, especially as a component of a Stainless Steel surface in an *acid* situation. The temporary removal (shift) of 3 electrons from iron results in an energy "hole" of 54.7 eV which is a bit larger than the ideal 54.4 eV, but should accomplish the double-level shrinkage with the hydronium ion being the donor, in an ion exchange. When the hydronium ion is present, as it was catalyszed on an adjoining Ni atom in the alloy electrode - and that close proximity of the two alloy components in stainless may be critically important, we are set for manufactured metastability. Probably the whole process could be more robust if somehow we started with first stage n=1/2 hydrinohydrides instead of protons - and having to go all the way to n=1/3 at once. But since the hydrinohydride most likely comes away with 2 electrons instead of one, ab initio, then we have our needed metastable-charge anomaly - even if it is transitory (so long as the lifetime is 100 milliseconds or longer) for use in an ICE. Looking at my Oxford (Elmsley) reference - surprise, surpise --- it turns out that the 3+ ion of Fe is highly favored in acid soultions of carbon and nitrogen - to the extent the only a third of a volt is required. to bump it from the natrual 2+ state. But all of this only explains what is going on - hit-or-miss in the present BG or JC, both of which are using stainless electrodes with an effective charge potential in that fractional volt range. The required acidity, BTW may be inherent in using fresh water on stainless when CO2 and dissolved nitrogen are there - as the Ni gives us that instant hydronium. IOW the original Mills wet-cell appears to be a mish-mash where the K, which is a base, was working *against* the favored acid process on the electrodes but is catalytic in its own right. Maybe that redox inefficiency is why the origianl process was not commercial. As for "how to" make the process more robust, we need an 'in situ' source for the first step of shrinkage and preferably located within the same few nanometers of the electrode surface where the hydronium ion is formed... Impossible, you say? Maybe not... but if we need an acid solution (or at least neutral) for the nickel-iron tag team - then the setup is a bit more demanding. Now comes the "photolithography" mentioned in the subject heading ... here is something of an unplanned three-way "connection" for James Burke, when you combine the story below with the findings about nanopore filtration, mentioned recently - and the "stainless" electrode process above. http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=189400846 In the hydrino theory, the first-step of shrinkage at 27.2 eV has the associated wavelength of 45.66 nm. In the story above - that is near the exact limits of where photolithography is headed in 2006. Intel is already there no doubt. Once more of the non-proprietary 45 nm foundries, such as the one mentioned in the news yesterday, are in service, then a single centimeter square of stainless steel can be punched with about 10 billion geometric holes of 45 nm, allowing a filter membrane to be made through which water can be forced - perhaps by a fuel injector- direct into a cylinder vacuum. The $64 question is: will filtered-water (electrolyzed 'on-the-fly' through stainless nanopores) which comes out of the "fuel" injector, be loaded with enough hydrinos (and metastable charge) in the process - especially by adding the extra fractional volt, to explode in an ICE? How does the UV energy get transfered into the cylinder - or would you only end up with only a bright UV source? Hopefully more than that - you could end up with a very high level of capacitive charge being added and aided by the hydrino formation itself - and then the UV splits some of the remaining water giving a double boost - such that the same "exploding capacitor" effect, hypothesized earlier, is in still in play (as the hypothetical modality) to push the cylinder and create torque. Worth a try, in that "perfect world," one suspects... And if you cannot wait around for the 45 nm foundry there is another possible soultion - Zinc - which has a 27.4 eV hole. An alloy of Fe-Zn-Ni would be interesting, AND there is a commercial galvanized stainless available. Unfortunately the Ni content is low but it is worth a try in a JC or BG cell powering an ICE. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 08:57:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FFuwwp032011; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:56:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FFusMn031968; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:56:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:56:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:56:41 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_9646531==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69018 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Yet another free energy claim Status: O X-Status: --=====================_9646531==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed See: www.potomacenergyprojects.com - Jed --=====================_9646531==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" See:

www.potomacenergyprojects.com

- Jed
--=====================_9646531==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 09:01:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FG1Ibq003120; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FG1GL5003096; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003f01c69094$ebf02020$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-220066415143633356@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:10 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69019 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Minos and diet Coke Gusher craze Status: O X-Status: http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.htmlin_article_id=15432&in_page_id=2 http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0612coke-mentos12-ON.html The question on everyone's lips (in suburbia) : why doesn't it work with Diet Pepsi? The question on everyone's lips (on vortex) : is there stainless steel in the Coke pull tab but not in the Pepsi ? What's the "apparent" chemistry behind the geyser? San Diego chemist Neal Langerman suggests the answer lies in the higher level of carbon dioxide in diet sodas than other sodas and the porous surface area of a Mentos. Langerman, the past chairman of the division of chemical health and safety at the American Chemical Society, said similar results wouldn't be achieved with an M&M, for instance, "which is really solid." Diet Coke has more carbon dioxide than Diet Pepsi, he says. Coke wouldn't comment on the comparison. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber Germane to Waterfuel? Yesterday ABc TV showed moms dads kids and physicists dropping Mintos (sp) into Diet Coke and a jet of bubbly froth shooting up several feet. A Physicist said something about "surface area" of the Mentos pellets. What gives? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 09:01:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FG1cG3003326; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FG1Zak003283; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:01:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:01:25 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85EAC16B0B14C-10A0-13E7@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <410-220066415143633356@earthlink.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <410-220066415143633356@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Minos and diet Coke Gusher craze Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5FG1VTq003212 Resent-Message-ID: <6GbrMB.A.Gz.dRYkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69020 X-Loop: vortex-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: Frederick Sparber   A Physicist said something about "surface area" of the Mentos pellets. What gives? <><><><><> You can see it again at: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/ Scroll down to "recent GMA stories". As Michio Kaku explains, the rough surface area of the candy allows a lot more bubble generation than a smooth surface. And it *is* germaine to wasserwagen. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 09:27:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FGQvMs021464; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:26:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FGQpS5021404; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:26:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:26:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:26:31 -0600 From: Ron Wormus To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Yet another free energy claim Message-ID: <13219125.1150367191@localhost> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.co m> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="==========13224768==========" Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69021 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --==========13224768========== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --On Thursday, June 15, 2006 11:56 AM -0400 Jed Rothwell wrote: > www.potomacenergyprojects.com I don't know about his deivce but he needs to hire a webpage designer! --==========13224768========== Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Arial --On Thursday, June 15, 2006 11:56 AM -0400 Jed Rothwell = < wrote: > www.potomacenergyprojects.com I don't know about his deivce but he needs to hire a = webpage designer! --==========13224768==========-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 11:33:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FIUHxO015778; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:33:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FIAUPs000777; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:10:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:10:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449194E9.9000502@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:12:09 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mentos and Diet Coke Gusher Craze References: <410-220066415155231738@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220066415155231738@earthlink.net> 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/69022 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/00000109 > > " For example, adding salt to soda causes it to foam up because > thousands of little bubbles form on the surface of each grain of > salt. > > Many scientists, including Lee Marek, claim that the Mentos > phenomenon is a physical reaction, not a chemical one. Water > molecules strongly attract each other, linking together to form a > tight mesh around each bubble of carbon dioxide gas in the soda. What's more, the ions in the water form complex ions with the carbonate ions, consisting of many small units loosely bonded together. Physical agitation, among other things, can break up the complexes, allowing the soda to suddenly gallop in the direction of equilibrium, which is why soda foams when you shake it. Or, at any rate, that's what my high school chemistry teacher said when I asked him why it does that, many many years ago. I've never read anything since about that particular phenomenon, but I've also never run across another explanation that seemed so plausible for why carbonated beverages behave the way they do. If the Mentos tabs also disrupt the complex ions, then the effect might still be "physical" but at a lower level than anything involving actual gas bubbles. > In > order to form a new bubble, or even to expand a bubble that has > already formed, water molecules must push away from each other. It > takes extra energy to break this "surface tension." In other words, > water "resists" the expansion of bubbles in the soda. > > When you drop the Mentos into the soda, the gelatin and gum arabic > from the dissolving candy break the surface tension. This disrupts > the water mesh, so that it takes less work to expand and form new > bubbles. Each Mentos candy has thousands of tiny pits all over the > surface. These tiny pits are called nucleation sites - ! perfect > places for carbon dioxide bubbles to form. As soon as the Mentos hit > the soda, bubbles form all over the surface of the candy. Couple this > with the fact that the Mentos candies are heavy and sink to the > bottom of the bottle and you've got a double-whammy. When all this > gas is released, it literally pushes all of the liquid up and out of > the bottle in an incredible soda blast. You can see a similar effect > when cooking potatoes or pasta are lowered into a pot of boiling > water. The water will sometimes boil over because organic materials > that leach out of the cooking potatoes or pasta disrupt the tight > mesh of water molecules at the surface of the water, making it easier > for bubbles and foam to form. " From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 12:25:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FIr9HG032361; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:53:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FIqvEx032260; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:52:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:52:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=mS6bO91yNlNdHd+bryZfzxVfh6ShrfPLhlFMsOPU50HI4qUsR+2r/G3Ael3qQYVM; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006641517451184@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Nickel, Iron and Photolithography Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:45:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9405988e2b2131f4448f873739f0dad4b33350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.5 Resent-Message-ID: <8c1ZIC.A.33H.HyakEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69023 X-Loop: vortex-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 temporary removal (shift) of 3 electrons from iron results in > an energy "hole" of 54.7 eV which is a bit larger than the ideal > 54.4 eV, but should accomplish the double-level shrinkage with the > hydronium ion being the donor, in an ion exchange. > CRC "bible" gives Mn +++ Z = 25 51.2 eV, Fe +++ Z = 26 54.8 eV, Co +++ Z = 27 51.3 eV, Ni +++ Z = 28 54.9 eV. All allow the proton (H+) to be well shielded from the repulsive field of their nuclei by 21 to 24 electrons as it picks up the IV "resonant" ionization level electron regardless of whether or not they need be ionized first if the proton is diffusing into the cloud with a coulomb repulsive force limit Fes = k*q * Zq/r^2, where separation distance (r) is quite close for the group. Same game for higher Z atoms like Palladium (Z = 46), but not favorable for Titanium (Z = 22) other lower Z atoms (K, Ar, O, or He) etc. > > > Looking at my Oxford (Elmsley) reference - surprise, surpise --- > it turns out that the 3+ ion of Fe is highly favored in acid > soultions of carbon and nitrogen - to the extent the only a third > of a volt is required. to bump it from the natrual 2+ state. But > all of this only explains what is going on - hit-or-miss in the > present BG or JC, both of which are using stainless electrodes > with an effective charge potential in that fractional volt range. > The required acidity, BTW may be inherent in using fresh water on > stainless when CO2 and dissolved nitrogen are there - as the Ni > gives us that instant hydronium. > > IOW the original Mills wet-cell appears to be a mish-mash where > the K, which is a base, was working *against* the favored acid > process on the electrodes but is catalytic in its own right. Maybe > that redox inefficiency is why the origianl process was not > commercial. > It might be "catalytic" if it pushes the H+ around. OTOH, the electron clouds around molecules containing low Z atoms could change the rules a many-body problem Like the water in the liquid state. > > As for "how to" make the process more robust, we need an 'in situ' > source for the first step of shrinkage and preferably located > within the same few nanometers of the electrode surface where the > hydronium ion is formed... > Inherent in the J Cell? > > Now comes the "photolithography" mentioned in the subject heading > ... here is something of an unplanned three-way "connection" for > James Burke, when you combine the story below with the findings > about nanopore filtration, mentioned recently - and the > "stainless" electrode process above. > http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=189400846 > Sharpen Ock's razor, Jones. :-) > > The $64 question is: will filtered-water (electrolyzed > 'on-the-fly' through stainless nanopores) which comes out of the > "fuel" injector, be loaded with enough hydrinos (and metastable > charge) in the process - especially by adding the extra fractional > volt, to explode in an ICE? > Many cars putatively running on the cell are fuel injected. Fred > > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 12:38:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FJcAbT029153; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:38:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FJc8Pf029119; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:38:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:38:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:48:49 -0400 To: "Todd Hathaway" , protech@frii.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell In-Reply-To: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.co m> References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.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/69024 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Status: O X-Status: Todd Hathaway wrote: >You're right about the web page design...not pretty but it's >practical. Now, why don't you actually review the information on >the web site to understand that it's not a free energy device...geniuses. Of course it is free energy machine! It says: "Using magnetic flux generated from permanent magnets, the only renewable requirement is liquid nitrogen, and in an environment such as space, liquid nitrogen could be recycled without an energy input." . . . though the next generation systems will provide the energy required to generate liquid nitrogen directly from the unit." There is no energy input as far as I can tell from the descriptions. You cannot continuously extract energy from permanent magnets any more than you can from a spring. It appears to be a violation of the conservation of energy. A perpetual motion machine, in other words. I very much doubt it works, but if it can be demonstrated, I will believe it. Anyway, that a catch-all phrase. I even refer to cold fusion as "free energy" occasionally, and of course that would only be true in the dollars-and-cents sense, since the energy comes from a nuclear reaction in that case. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 13:11:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FKAmSg018306; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:10:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FKAjCZ018260; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:10:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:10:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615155437.0400de18@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:10:27 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower In-Reply-To: <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <0Xb6y.A.HdE.E7bkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69025 X-Loop: vortex-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: >No anchor. The West coast, and Northeast has little or no "shelf" >and the ocean is too deep for anchorage anyway. You would use >converted drogues. A drouge is a >sea-anchor which merely slows movement, like a parachute- and does >not attempt to create a permanent anchorage. It can slow a ship in a >30 knot wind to 1-2 knots - or perhaps a 20 mile controlled-drift >per day. They are steerable. > >Imagine a giant *funnel* which at the small outlet-end there is a >propeller attached to a generator. In this design, do you envision some sort of wind turbine mounted above the deck, or only sails, to move the ship along? In other words, would all of the energy come from the propeller at the end of the drouge, or would some of it be generated directly by wind turbines? A design with only sails might be simpler. The ship would always go before the wind, which simplifies sailing. (And takes the fun out of it, too.) These would not be cloth sails, but rather large, rigid structures which could be retracted or feathered when the motor is used. There are schemes to augment container ship power with wind power, as I mentioned. These are turbines that can face any direction, so they can be used no matter which way the wind is blowing, except when the ship goes directly into the wind of course, in which case they would be retracted. Here is someone trying to make a 50,000 dwt automated square-rigged sailing ship with five masts and no mizzen: http://www.rina.org.uk/rfiles/navalarchitect/editorialnov04.pdf Shiver me timbers! Avast, me hearties! - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 13:28:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FKSeKi030040; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:28:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FKScDr030001; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:28:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:28:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:28:29 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69026 X-Loop: vortex-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: Jed Rothwell There is no energy input as far as I can tell from the descriptions. You cannot continuously extract energy from permanent magnets any more than you can from a spring. It appears to be a violation of the conservation of energy. <><><><><> Do you have a citation for that? I find no reference which says that permanent magnets are conservative. After all, PMs get their force from a quantum function, the spin of the electron. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetism "The physical cause of the magnetism of objects, as distinct from electrical currents, is the atomic magnetic dipole. Magnetic dipoles, or magnetic moments, result on the atomic scale from the two kinds of movement of electrons. The first is the orbital motion of the electron around the nucleus; this motion can be considered as a current loop, resulting in an orbital dipole magnetic moment along the axis of the nucleus. The second, much stronger, source of electronic magnetic moment is due to a quantum mechanical property called the spin dipole magnetic moment (although current quantum mechanical theory states that electrons neither physically spin, nor orbit the nucleus)." Electron spin is a quantum effect and likely related to ZPE, IMO. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 13:42:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FKgGfm007484; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:42:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FKgF2X007467; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:42:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:42:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615163549.0400de18@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:42:05 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell 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/69027 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Hathaway versus 19th century me Status: O X-Status: this fellow Hathaway tried to explain his discovery to me. Alas, his words fell on deaf ears. I have no clue what he is talking about, since my knowledge of physics ends somewhere around 1895 just about the time they discovered x-rays. For the benefit of readers here who may have some clue what he is talking about, here is an exchange of messages between us. You can see what he is up against, dealing with an unimaginative person who insists that all energy must have a nuclear, chemical or mechanical primary source. It must be frustrating! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From Todd Hathaway, umd2009@gmail.com: OK. Let's start over with Cooper pair breaking. Magnetic flux flows through a transformer via path A and B. Let's assign path B as the long path where magnetic flux travels through YBCO-coated cylinders at liquid nitrogen temperatures. When 930 nm photons are shot at the YBCO using a small laser (kind folks have on their keychains), it disrupts the flow of Cooper pairs and produces an avalanche effect that disrupts the entire material, similar to how lightning cuts through the air if you were to draw it on a sheet of paper. This avalanche effect blocks the magnetic flux from travelling down path B, so it takes the shorter path A. Cooper pair breaking is a relatively short-term disruption (picoseconds), and the YBCO (and any other type II superconductor for that matter) 'resets' its original superconductor structure AUTOMATICALLY. This pheonmena is proven, so there should be no issue with that claim. Now, by winding copper wire around Path A and B, this superconductive-nonsuperconductive oscillation process resulting from switching the laser on and off at a high frequency produces a change in flux through each channel where the magnetic flux is directed at the same frequency. A change in magnetic flux produces through copper windings produces electricity...that's it. Nothing magical beyond whatever is going on in superconductors. That's the bigger mystery, not the magnetic component. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MY RESPONSE: Whoa! Hold it. I read the web site. Back up. Just answer this: What is the primary source of energy? Chemical, nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal or hydro? According to conventional physics, you cannot generate energy out of nowhere, as I am sure you realize. You must have a primary source. On earth, those six are the only known sources. (No doubt you also know hydro is solar once removed and geothermal is nuclear -- but let us not get lost in the details.) Which of these six primary sources do you tap? Or have you discovered a new source? Or do you create the energy out of nowhere, with no primary source? That would be 'free energy,' which does not exist as far as I know. I think the details you describe on the web site and in this message are irrelevant. In my opinion, if you want credibility you must address the issues listed above. All of your readers will assume, as I do, that energy must have a primary source and these are the only primary sources on earth. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:04:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FKpR6s014118; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:51:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FKpMxp014033; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:51:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:51:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615164245.03faadc0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:50:55 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again In-Reply-To: <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.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/69028 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >You cannot continuously extract energy from permanent magnets any >more than you can from a spring. It appears to be a violation of the >conservation of energy. > ><><><><><> > >Do you have a citation for that? No, this is a common observation. Magnets act like springs. You push them together N to N, and they spring apart, yielding no more energy than it took you to push them together. Actually, there is some loss and over time they are de-magnetized, just as springs gradually wear out. > I find no reference which says that permanent magnets are conservative. And I know of no way to extract energy from them. Countless people have claimed there are ways, but no one has ever demonstrated one, to my knowledge. In any case, it turns out Hathaway is claiming the energy comes from high temperature superconducting, not the magnet. That also makes zero sense to me. You might as well say: "we extract continuous energy from the capacity of the capacitor." - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:11:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLB86q025604; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:11:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLB6hJ025574; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:11:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:11:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:10:56 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.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/69029 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell > > There is no energy input as far as I can tell from the descriptions. > You cannot continuously extract energy from permanent magnets any more > than you can from a spring. It appears to be a violation of the > conservation of energy. > > <><><><><> > > Do you have a citation for that? Of course permanent magnets are conservative! In the macroscopic world in which we live and in which perpetual motion machines are built, they follow Maxwell's equations; the A field, which describes the combined E and B fields, is conservative. What's more, a magnetic field _does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_. It's typically hard to see exactly what's really happening with a permanent magnet, but this law is always followed: the force exerted by a magnetic field on a charged particle is always perpendicular to its motion, and hence cannot impart energy to it. As to a citation, check any E&M text. The "standard" reference on this is probably Jackson, titled something like "Electrodynamics". Griffiths' text on the same subject, "Intro to Electrodynamics", is generally considered more accessible, however. > I find no reference which says that permanent magnets are > conservative. After all, PMs get their force from a quantum function, > the spin of the electron. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetism > > "The physical cause of the magnetism of objects, as distinct from > electrical currents, is the atomic magnetic dipole. Magnetic dipoles, > or magnetic moments, result on the atomic scale from the two kinds of > movement of electrons. The first is the orbital motion of the electron > around the nucleus; this motion can be considered as a current loop, > resulting in an orbital dipole magnetic moment along the axis of the > nucleus. The second, much stronger, source of electronic magnetic > moment is due to a quantum mechanical property called the spin dipole > magnetic moment (although current quantum mechanical theory states > that electrons neither physically spin, nor orbit the nucleus)." > > Electron spin is a quantum effect and likely related to ZPE, IMO. > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:12:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLCJCs026382; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:12:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLCIQK026362; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:12:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:12:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615211215510.7C94E1C002E2@mwinf3003.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615211218.00c11848@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, 15 Jun 2006 22:12:18 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69030 X-Loop: vortex-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 02:48 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, Jed wrote: ... > There is no energy input as far as I can tell from the descriptions. > You cannot continuously extract energy from permanent magnets any > more than you can from a spring. A classic spring is assumed to be perfectly elastic so cycling it encloses no energy area. However, perfect elasticity is a theoretical ideal not found in the real world. All really cycling encloses some energy and depending on which way round you travel (cf Carnot) you can loose energy to the environment or gain energy from the environment (heat pump). There's plenty of energy out there for the asking if you're clever enough to tap it. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:16:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLGHZH028865; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:16:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLGFRq028847; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:16:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:16:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4491CE0E.90604@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:15:58 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615155437.0400de18@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615155437.0400de18@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/69031 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Jones Beene wrote: > >> No anchor. The West coast, and Northeast has little or no "shelf" and >> the ocean is too deep for anchorage anyway. You would use converted >> drogues. A drouge is a >> sea-anchor which merely slows movement, like a parachute- and does >> not attempt to create a permanent anchorage. It can slow a ship in a >> 30 knot wind to 1-2 knots - or perhaps a 20 mile controlled-drift per >> day. They are steerable. >> >> Imagine a giant *funnel* which at the small outlet-end there is a >> propeller attached to a generator. > > In this design, do you envision some sort of wind turbine mounted > above the deck, or only sails, to move the ship along? In other words, > would all of the energy come from the propeller at the end of the > drouge, or would some of it be generated directly by wind turbines? > > A design with only sails might be simpler. The ship would always go > before the wind, which simplifies sailing. (And takes the fun out of > it, too.) These would not be cloth sails, but rather large, rigid > structures which could be retracted or feathered when the motor is used. > > There are schemes to augment container ship power with wind power, as > I mentioned. These are turbines that can face any direction, so they > can be used no matter which way the wind is blowing, except when the > ship goes directly into the wind of course, A ship-mounted wind turbine _can_ be used to drive the ship even when heading straight into the wind. With a wind turbine up top and a conventional prop underneath a "sailing ship" is completely independent of the direction the wind is blowing ... at least, as long as the wind speed is substantially faster than the speed of any current in the water through which the ship is sailing, and as long as you don't require that the ship sail at a speed approaching that of the wind itself. If you want to sail as fast or faster than the speed of the wind, on the other hand, the wind direction starts to matter quite a bit. > in which case they would be retracted. > > Here is someone trying to make a 50,000 dwt automated square-rigged > sailing ship with five masts and no mizzen: > > http://www.rina.org.uk/rfiles/navalarchitect/editorialnov04.pdf > > Shiver me timbers! Avast, me hearties! > > - Jed > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:20:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLJs62031786; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:19:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLJqSV031752; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:19:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:19:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615171656.03d9e3f8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:19:40 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Hathaway versus 19th century me In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615163549.0400de18@mindspring.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615163549.0400de18@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/69032 X-Loop: vortex-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 message to Hathaway] To summarize, your readers will probably all assume that every machine on earth must have a primary source of energy: nuclear, chemical or mechanical. If your claim is that this machine does not tap any primary source, and it just sits there generating energy apparently from nowhere, then I think you must boldly state this is what you mean. Perhaps you should call it "an apparent violation" of the conservation of energy. You seem to be ignoring this issue. This will give your readers the impression that you do not understand elementary physics and the conservation of energy. You have to show that: You DO understand conservation of energy, BUT You think it does not apply (for thus-and-such technical reasons which are over my head). Do not evade the issue. Confront it directly. Many people, including me, will assume you are wrong and your claim is impossible. But at least we will see that you are familiar with the textbooks, and you realize this claim is impossible by the standards of conventional physics. It is better to be thought wrong than both wrong and ignorant. - Jed [That last point about politics and perception is something that free energy claimants often overlook. Some of them, of course, are unaware of the conservation of energy. They do not even realize their claims violate conventional physics.] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:26:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLPgkS003305; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:25:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLPaDa003205; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:25:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:25:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615212531566.8A2E31C00084@mwinf3011.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615212534.00c27404@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, 15 Jun 2006 22:25:34 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69033 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:10 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Of course permanent magnets are conservative! In the macroscopic world >in which we live and in which perpetual motion machines are built, they >follow Maxwell's equations; the A field, which describes the combined E >and B fields, is conservative. > >What's more, a magnetic field _does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_. It's >typically hard to see exactly what's really happening with a permanent >magnet, but this law is always followed: the force exerted by a >magnetic field on a charged particle is always perpendicular to its >motion, and hence cannot impart energy to it. > >As to a citation, check any E&M text. The "standard" reference on this >is probably Jackson, titled something like "Electrodynamics". >Griffiths' text on the same subject, "Intro to Electrodynamics", is >generally considered more accessible, however. Dearie me. You disappoint me Dr.Lawrence. 8-( Vortex is no place for people who believe without doubting what they've been taught. The theological virtue of Faith (belief without doubting) may be appropriate for religion, but it has no place in science. And the way you defend it so vehemently "_does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_" makes me wonder just how secure you really feel in your religion. Frank Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:40:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLe57A011565; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:40:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLPpv5003412; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:25:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:25:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615172208.03f3dcf0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:24:26 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060615211218.00c11848@pop.freeserve.net> References: <2.2.32.20060615211218.00c11848@pop.freeserve.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69034 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: >A classic spring is assumed to be perfectly elastic so cycling it >encloses no energy area. However, perfect elasticity is a >theoretical ideal not found in the real world. I mentioned this in my second message. Also, as far as I know all permanent magnets eventually become de-magnetized with repeated cycles of pressing them together and releasing. They get warm, I believe. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:43:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLhIBX013594; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLhG2J013575; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615172810.03eeed40@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:42:38 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower In-Reply-To: <4491CE0E.90604@pobox.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615155437.0400de18@mindspring.com> <4491CE0E.90604@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <330JJB.A.CUD.0RdkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69035 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >>matter which way the wind is blowing, except when the ship goes >>directly into the wind of course, >A ship-mounted wind turbine _can_ be used to drive the ship even >when heading straight into the wind. Of course, but it is inefficient. For that matter, even a square rigged ship can sail into the wind to within 20 degrees or so, but it is very slow. I think mainly they used the mizzen and jib sails (the fore-and-aft sails), and they got frustrated endlessly tacking back and forth. The schemes that I have seen for shipboard wind turbines would only be used to augment electricity. This would be very helpful for things like refrigerated ships. A wind turbine being used for this purpose would be stowed when traveling into the wind, otherwise you are mainly scavenging engine power and converting it into electricity in an inefficient manner. This source says a square rigged ship could only go to within about 70 degrees of the wind, but that's not what daddy told me: http://sailing-ships.oktett.net/square-rigging.html (Believe it or not, my dad sailed on Titanic-era steam piston ships, with riveted hulls, and he saw the last of the wooden square rigged ship. It is astounding that in his lifetime we progressed from windjammers to fission powered aircraft carriers. Unless cold fusion is perfected, I doubt that any generation will see such profound and rapid progress again.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:43:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLhajV013801; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLhXkd013770; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:43:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615214325393.5FF816400087@mwinf3109.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615214327.009cc070@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, 15 Jun 2006 22:43:27 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Hathaway versus 19th century me Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69036 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:19 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >[Another message to Hathaway] > >To summarize, your readers will probably all assume that every >machine on earth must have a primary source of energy: nuclear, >chemical or mechanical. > >If your claim is that this machine does not tap any primary source, >and it just sits there generating energy apparently from nowhere, >then I think you must boldly state this is what you mean. Perhaps you >should call it "an apparent violation" of the conservation of energy. >You seem to be ignoring this issue. This will give your readers the >impression that you do not understand elementary physics and the >conservation of energy. You have to show that: > >You DO understand conservation of energy, > >BUT > >You think it does not apply (for thus-and-such technical reasons >which are over my head). > >Do not evade the issue. Confront it directly. Many people, including >me, will assume you are wrong and your claim is impossible. But at >least we will see that you are familiar with the textbooks, and you >realize this claim is impossible by the standards of conventional >physics. It is better to be thought wrong than both wrong and ignorant. > >- Jed > >[That last point about politics and perception is something that free >energy claimants often overlook. Some of them, of course, are unaware >of the conservation of energy. They do not even realize their claims >violate conventional physics.] True, but sometimes, where ignorance is bliss it is folly to be wise. Theory is unavoidably an inadequate idealization of the real world and can act as a terrible brake on innovation - as you know perfectly well from CF. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:54:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLresw021010; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:53:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLrcZW020970; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:53:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:53:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615215334992.F23CD5800090@mwinf3108.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615215337.00bc5bc8@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, 15 Jun 2006 22:53:37 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69037 X-Loop: vortex-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 05:24 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Grimer wrote: > >>A classic spring is assumed to be perfectly elastic so cycling it >>encloses no energy area. However, perfect elasticity is a >>theoretical ideal not found in the real world. > >I mentioned this in my second message. Also, as far as I know all >permanent magnets eventually become de-magnetized with repeated >cycles of pressing them together and releasing. They get warm, I believe. > >- Jed Absolutely - And if one really understood what was going on, and could go round the hysteresis curve in the opposite direction then one would have a magnetic energy pump. We can do it at the thermal level. Why should we not be able to do it at the magnetic level. Couldn't it be that no one has yet worked out exactly how to bell the cat - or has the Great Maxwell promulgated a Law of the Medes and Persians? Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 14:59:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FLwtiI024869; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:58:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FLwrbk024852; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:58:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 14:58:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009001c690c6$ddfeb760$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> From: "Nick Palmer" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:58:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008D_01C690CF.3BEC9BF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69038 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Yet another free energy claim Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C690CF.3BEC9BF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >From their FAQ... <> and=20 <> So, it's probably not a scam - it's vapourware... ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C690CF.3BEC9BF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From their FAQ...
 

<<What sort of funding are you = looking for to=20 continue R&D efforts?

None=85Yes folks, this really is free = energy for the=20 taking.>>

and

<<How long has it run = altogether?=20

N/A - Device once completed will operate = indefinitely=20 as long as liquid nitrogen is available.>>

 

So, it's probably not a scam = -=20 it's vapourware...

------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C690CF.3BEC9BF0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 15:08:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FM80be030577; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:08:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FM7wEW030554; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:07:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:07:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615180252.03ee7d80@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615174435.03eeee88@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:07:43 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_16669281==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69039 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Hathaway et al. versus c. of e. Status: O X-Status: --=====================_16669281==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed I begin to suspect these people do not grasp the fundamentals. Also, I get the uneasy feeling this is based on theory alone, without experimental proof. edsines@aol.com wrote to me: >Once the LN2 burns off the device STOPS! No perpetual motion machine here. MY RESPONSE: That is not what your FAQ states. It says: ". . . though the next generation systems will provide the energy required to generate liquid nitrogen directly from the unit." That would make it a perpetual motion machine. The machine produces liquid nitrogen (LN), and the LN keeps the machine going, in a closed loop. I do not understand advanced physics, but to be frank with you, I begin to wonder whether you understand basic physics, since you appear to have overlooked the fact that this describes a closed loop perpetual motion machine. Perhaps you are implying that the machine is a heat engine that taps temperature difference between liquid nitrogen and the surrounding air, by "burning it off." If so, it is nothing more than a battery and because there is no economical way to make LN, this is not a useful or efficient battery. Obviously a heat engine of this nature cannot produce more LN than it takes to run the machine in the first place! [And I hope that is obvious to these people . . .] - Jed --=====================_16669281==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" I begin to suspect these people do not grasp the fundamentals. Also, I get the uneasy feeling this is based on theory alone, without experimental proof.

edsines@aol.com wrote to me:

Once the LN2 burns off the device STOPS! No perpetual motion machine here.

MY RESPONSE:

That is not what your FAQ states. It says:

". . . though the next generation systems will provide the energy required to generate liquid nitrogen directly from the unit."

That would make it a perpetual motion machine. The machine produces liquid nitrogen (LN), and the LN keeps the machine going, in a closed loop.

I do not understand advanced physics, but to be frank with you, I begin to wonder whether you understand basic physics, since you appear to have overlooked the fact that this describes a closed loop perpetual motion machine.

Perhaps you are implying that the machine is a heat engine that taps temperature difference between liquid nitrogen and the surrounding air, by "burning it off." If so, it is nothing more than a battery and because there is no economical way to make LN, this is not a useful or efficient battery. Obviously a heat engine of this nature cannot produce more LN than it takes to run the machine in the first place!

[And I hope that is obvious to these people . . .]

- Jed
--=====================_16669281==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 15:08:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FM8QM5030899; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:08:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FM8MR8030843; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:08:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:08:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:08:18 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <20843176.1150256398667.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <002701c69074$8b86ef40$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> In-Reply-To: <002701c69074$8b86ef40$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.102] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:08:17 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5FM8I4B030754 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69040 X-Loop: vortex-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, 15 Jun 2006 08:04:27 -0400: Hi Mike, [snip] >> An alternative would be to use Tesla's method of pumping energy >> into the Earth, and extracting it with tuned receivers. *No >> transmission lines required*. Of course all power transmitters >> would need to be owned by one entity, as there would otherwise be >> no way of determining who should get paid. > >Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his >Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed >by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light >a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. "Lamp" in this context >does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, >but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla >demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when >they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power >drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous borad spectrum radio >noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF >energy desnity would currently be regarded as a health hazard. > >Mike Carrell Tesla himself said that he did his utmost to *suppress* normal radio transmission, as he considered this to be wasted energy. The Colorado transmitter was in fact nothing more than a huge spherical capacitor with a coil attached. It sat on a tower to prevent arcing with the ground. The other end of the coil was grounded. This "unit" formed one end of a tuned resonant connection that ran through the ground (not the air), and was connected to any other similarly tuned resonance at any distance. The ground (not the Earth's ionosphere - Earth cavity) was the energy transmission medium. It was a one "wire" transmission system, with tuned circuits at both ends. Because it relied on conduction through a real solid conductor it was nearly loss free over large distances (just as the wires we currently use). BTW I am probably the only person on the planet who believes this. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 15:18:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FMHsc6005190; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:17:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FMHrj7005171; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:17:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:17:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615180803.03f03f00@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:17:44 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060615212534.00c27404@pop.freeserve.net> References: <2.2.32.20060615212534.00c27404@pop.freeserve.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <9Y3DgC.A.vQB.QydkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69041 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: >The theological virtue of Faith (belief without doubting) may be >appropriate for religion, but it has no place in science. Here is what has no place in science: Claims unsupported by experimental proof. These include the often repeated claims that you can extract energy from magnets, or HTSC, or Orgones, without a primary source of nuclear, chemical or mechanical energy. Unless someone can offer serious experimental proof of such claims, I do not think we should take them seriously. Putting aside all discusssion of dipole magnetic moment and quantum mechanical theory, I think we should all agree that on the macroscopic level magnets act just the way springs do, and there is no known method of extracting energy from them. Of course there have been many claims of magnetic motors and Greg Watson devices, etc., ad nauseam, but none has ever panned out. As far as I know, they are all gross violations of elementary physics (c. of e.) Can we agree on that? If anyone here is aware of any such claim that has actually been experimentally proved -- or even tested in a credible way -- please tell us about it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 15:36:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FMa37f017581; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:36:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FMZx5N017525; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:35:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:35:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615183424.03f03ae8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:35:47 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Yet another free energy claim In-Reply-To: <009001c690c6$ddfeb760$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> <009001c690c6$ddfeb760$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> 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/69042 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nick Palmer wrote: >So, it's probably not a scam - it's vapourware... Yes, literally. If it works at all, I'll bet it is a heat engine that converts LN to N vapor. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 16:00:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FMxpMX032006; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:59:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FMxnPT031980; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:59:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:59:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615180803.03f03f00@mindspring.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:59:40 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jun 2006 22:59:44.0524 (UTC) FILETIME=[647DE4C0:01C690CF] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69043 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Slightly updated from the MPI website re magnetic energy extraction. Status: O X-Status: The Importance of Reproducing the Hans Coler 6 kW Generator Magnetic Power Inc., (MPI), is developing technology that extracts energy from the active quantum vacuum. This subject is generally regarded as akin to perpetual motion and is usually ignored by the scientific community. This is a brief explanation of why it should be taken seriously. Firstly, many eminent scientists since the time of Dirac have proffered the view that the vacuum is an enormous source of energy, not only in the form of classical photons but also and more importantly as virtual photons. Thus extracting some of this energy (and seemingly gaining energy from "nowhere") does not violate thermodynamic principles. Secondly, advances in materials science and in the relatively new field of spintronics have produced insights into doing things at the quantum level previously deemed impossible, like pumping heat "uphill" (i.e. against the thermal gradient). Thirdly, there is a large body of evidence that many devices have been built which do extract quantum energy. There are sufficient reputable claims to make widespread investigation worthwhile. Perhaps a clear path to validation is most readily available by reproducing the 6 kW, solid-state, generator demonstrated, in 1937, by German inventor Hans Coler. A British Intelligence report dates from shortly after WWII, refers to Coler’s developments in Germany going back to 1926 (B.I.O.S. Final Report No. 1043, "The invention of Hans Coler relating to an alleged new source of power" A copy is linked to the Chronology on the MPI website. There was independent examination of the Coler device by two academic teams of Professors. They verified the excess energy and could find no evidence that the work was fraudulent. At that time no explanation could be given for the excess energy and the academics, fearing for their reputation, did not wish to be associated in public with it. Certainly the inventor himself had views that are scientifically untenable. Today however, some 80 years later, our knowledge allows us to understand why the device worked, and why the inventor held those views, which is a good starting point for creating a replication. MPI has been contacted by a scientist at one of the National Laboratories who has unofficially undertaken to reproduce the 6 kW Coler generator. We have encouraged other labs to do the same. Should a replication prove successful, the door is open for a quantum shift in mainstream scientific dogma, which today does not recognize that such a device is possible. An engineer/scientist member of the MPI team, who has been active in this field for the last 10 years, and has decades of experience in magnetics, has explored the Coler work. His analysis suggests how, and why, the Coler device demonstrated that energy can be extracted from magnetically active electrons in ferromagnetic material. National Labs and universities have facilities infinitely greater than we can muster as a small company. A successful reproduction of the Coler 6 kW generator seems worthy of widespread efforts. Therefore, MPI has released copies of our own analysis of the Coler work, to scientists and engineers who supply sufficient evidence that they are employed by National Laboratories or universities. A Ph.D. physicist who was a member of the faculty at a campus of the University of California and a scientist at a University in the UK are among the recipients. The physicist intends to build the device. >From: Jed Rothwell >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again >Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:17:44 -0400 > >Grimer wrote: > >>The theological virtue of Faith (belief without doubting) may be >>appropriate for religion, but it has no place in science. > >Here is what has no place in science: > >Claims unsupported by experimental proof. > >These include the often repeated claims that you can extract energy from >magnets, or HTSC, or Orgones, without a primary source of nuclear, chemical >or mechanical energy. Unless someone can offer serious experimental proof >of such claims, I do not think we should take them seriously. > >Putting aside all discusssion of dipole magnetic moment and quantum >mechanical theory, I think we should all agree that on the macroscopic >level magnets act just the way springs do, and there is no known method of >extracting energy from them. > >Of course there have been many claims of magnetic motors and Greg Watson >devices, etc., ad nauseam, but none has ever panned out. As far as I know, >they are all gross violations of elementary physics (c. of e.) Can we agree >on that? > >If anyone here is aware of any such claim that has actually been >experimentally proved -- or even tested in a credible way -- please tell us >about it. > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 16:03:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FN36CG002105; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:03:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FN3257002069; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:03:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:03:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00cc01c690cf$d61aabe0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060614122135.03ef0728@mindspring.com> <20060614171310.55443.qmail@web82711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615155437.0400de18@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:02:53 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69044 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: RE: US Windpower Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" > In this design, do you envision some sort of wind turbine > mounted above the deck, or only sails, to move the ship along? No sails - and the drogue turbine plays only a small role. Mounted on deck is an improved "ladder-mill" (either fixed or rotary) which has the same capability as about 200 acres of land-stationed wind turbines. Here is the original Delft concept for a stationary laddermill: http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=8d16d19a-e942-45aa-9b52-48deb9312e92&lang=en Delft has worked out all the numbers. It has almost unbelievable capacity compared to turbines. This thing promises to be an order of magnitude more cost effective than present turbines, and cheaper than every other alternative - but it is more complicated, perhaps fragile, and needs active computer control. No technological breakthrough is required. The Dutch are very practical folks. The video is worth the time but only shows the stationary version. Turbines would be mounted on the wings of the stationary version. The rotary ladder-mill turns an axle for the prime output, but wings may be fitted with turbines as well. I wish I had the finalized and improved ocean-going rotary version of that Delft concept firmed-up enough for a nice web-page presentation, with some drawings and animation - because any picture, in this case, is probably worth more than a thousand words. It is not an easy concept to put to words. The big (former) drawback, which I am trying to make into a "feature" is the storable-energy-output in the form of liquid air. Obviously there is no other way to use the idea than with storable energy output and making liquid hydrogen is too wasteful. Here is a crude sketch of an airfoil wing attached to a flexible carbon fiber cable. In a rotating ladder-mill there would be dozens of these wings pulling 3-4 cables up which then turn axle-mounted machinery on the ground. The (computer controlled) wing would tilt into a "dive" for the backside descent. The path is not circular but an elongated oval flattened on one side. Too fragile. http://www.ockels.nl/Images/Concepts/ladder_one_wing_advanced.JPG Here are kite type airfoils - again not suitable for the ocean version. http://www.ockels.nl/Images/Concepts/two%20halves.JPG These older ladder-mill concepts are usually envisioned for land, using miles of cable. I envision a less flexible but tiltable version of about 300-400 meters in height, with a open-strutted mandrel, built like a radio-transmission tower - attached to the deck at one end (hinged) - the effect being not unlike the "blade" of a gigantic chainsaw - only open, and with steerable airfoils mounted on the chain so that torque is applied on both the lift side AND on the return side (forced dive). The torque for the rotary version is easy to calculate and is enormous, as each wing can lift about 200,000 pounds against gravity at only 30 knots. There would be 12-18 wings per ladder-mill. In the stationary version, 2-4 turbines are mounted on the back of each wing, but it is less cost effective than the rotary version. The catamaran hulls would be 100-120 meters in length with 40-60 meters between hulls; and with the ladder-mill hinge mounted fore deck - which hinged mandrel and wings can fold nearly flat, for allowing the return to the starting point with little drag when the drogue is raised. The wingspan of the dozen or so airfoils can be 60 meters, and the construction similar to but simpler, and with no sweep, compared to a 747 which has that wingspan ! Probably they can be of Rutan-type fiberglass construction. The slight drift movement of the catamaran with the wind can be analogized to the flotilla being stationary with a slightly slower wind. IOW if the wind-speed is 30 knots and the drift speed is 2 knots then only 28 knots can be used from the wind. Constant daytime winds of this speed are the norm in the better locations on the West coast. The water turbine in the drogue-cone provides additional energy, but most is provided by the lift of the airfoils. Much more torque is available using "lift" than from sails plus a water mounted turbine. And a traditional bladed turbine is only as efficient as its diameter, and that is limited by structural constraints, more so than are true wings. By far the best way to harness heavy wind is with the pure lift from a number of large-chorded airfoils, which are nearly identical to an airplane wing. > A design with only sails might be simpler. The ship would always > go before the wind, which simplifies sailing. (And takes the fun > out of it, too.) These would not be cloth sails, but rather > large, rigid structures which could be retracted or feathered > when the motor is used. Yes there are a number of simpler options, including privately owned, robotically controlled ships which make a storable fuel (H2 or liquid air) for companies, or even individuals. If too many were allowed, ocean shipping would be impacted. Like many, the search is for lowest net cost for unsubsidized grid electricity. The Europeans are ahead of us in the USA on advanced wind energy concepts, and although I "borrowed" from their work extensively in the present version, I believe this ocean-going ladder-mill concept is an improvement over anything out-there presently - but only IF a power-utility company can be convinced or enticed to add a liquid air expander to a present power plant, using waste heat for expansion ... and so forth. It is altogether a very complicated situation, even politically, in application - and that may be its ultimate downfall - but hey... it is offered free to all - a re-Dutch treat, so to speak. It would even be ideal for a country like France - where instead of adding more nuclear capacity - they could use the existing waste heat from nuclear to expand liquid air - which has been manufactured offshore. Having been in Provence during the 'Mistral' that would be an enticing way to benefit from nature's wrath. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 16:18:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FNIQFK010101; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:18:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FNIJLj010017; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:18:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:18:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060615231811428.687AD3C00084@mwinf3212.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060615231813.00ced2ac@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, 16 Jun 2006 00:18:13 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69045 X-Loop: vortex-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 06:17 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Grimer wrote: > >>The theological virtue of Faith (belief without doubting) may be >>appropriate for religion, but it has no place in science. > >Here is what has no place in science: > >Claims unsupported by experimental proof. > >These include the often repeated claims that you can extract energy >from magnets, or HTSC, or Orgones, without a primary source of >nuclear, chemical or mechanical energy. Unless someone can offer >serious experimental proof of such claims, I do not think we should >take them seriously. > >Putting aside all discusssion of dipole magnetic moment and quantum >mechanical theory, I think we should all agree that on the >macroscopic level magnets act just the way springs do, In so far as neither are perfectly elastic, I agree. > and there is no known method of extracting energy from them. True, but I believe there are unknown methods and people searching for them should be encouraged and their claims approached with an open mind; not the closed mind of the Porksies of this world. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 16:22:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5FNMKuM013108; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:22:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5FNMDYB012991; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:22:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:22:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060615162758.0362a060@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:28:34 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold fusion and "Penthouse"!? In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060615031458.00bcad08@pop.freeserve.net> References: <2.2.32.20060615031458.00bcad08@pop.freeserve.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5FNM6j4012908 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69046 X-Loop: vortex-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 better connection could one ask. >Cheers, > >François From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 17:45:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G0iohn027020; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:44:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G0imK0026987; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:44:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 17:44:47 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=FzFHR2n1LtkxShfbcFcmovLMO/xIsptmSYeVpyfUh1xKD+SX46+2g+YxximFuR6w; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006651604442589@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:44:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940f45e86e847ea0a411b16e713aa99d2dd350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.161 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69047 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Potassium, Argon, Calcium, Oxygen, (*e-) and Fractional Orbits Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Potassium along with the K-40 radioisotope decay daughters Ar-40 and Ca-40, is the most likely source of a possible stable bound Ps- or ~ 2 electron mass "Electronium" (*e-) followed by Oxygen-Oxides, Sulfur-Sulfides, and Chlorine etc. A composite particle with a mass ~ 2 to 2.7 times that of the electron, with the same charge, isn't likely to play by the Classical Bohr Atom rules for the electron. Aside from the mass difference, there is radius and magnetic moment to consider in how this (putative) particle interacts with a Proton or Deuteron. As I recall Potassium was used in the early Cold Fusion experiments and Potassium Nitrate KNO3 was used in Mills' early "Hydrino" work.Since Argon-40 makes up about 1% of the air breathed on over-unity experiments and H2O is abundant about everywhere except in Albuquerque.... Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Potassium along with the K-40 radioisotope decay daughters Ar-40 and Ca-40, is the
most likely source of a possible stable bound Ps-  or ~ 2 electron mass "Electronium"
(*e-) followed by Oxygen-Oxides, Sulfur-Sulfides, and Chlorine etc.
 
A composite particle with a mass ~ 2 to 2.7 times that of the electron, with the
same charge, isn't likely to play by the Classical Bohr Atom rules for the electron.
 
Aside from the mass difference, there is radius and magnetic moment
to consider in how this (putative) particle interacts with a Proton or Deuteron.
 
As I recall Potassium was used in the early Cold Fusion experiments and
Potassium Nitrate KNO3 was used in Mills' early "Hydrino" work.Since
Argon-40 makes up about 1% of  the air breathed on over-unity experiments
and H2O is abundant about everywhere except in Albuquerque....
 
Fred
 
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 18:45:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G1j0Uv031361; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:45:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G1ivu5031323; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:44:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:44:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:44:45 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85EFD947B3121-163C-3650@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615164245.03faadc0@mindspring.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615164245.03faadc0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5G1iplA031260 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69048 X-Loop: vortex-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: Jed Rothwell >Do you have a citation for that?    No, this is a common observation. <><><><><> A hypocritical statement from one such as you, IMO. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 20:01:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G30uFB010103; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:00:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G30rOm010061; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:00:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:00:53 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=kw+9vIN88TkF1ihz+CTVXrhV6uh3JMqBYu3QNwryKIvXZABCJ+dAQlCJKWaIYlkw; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:00:48 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191cb21be9c0a5659be8136eb154d8ff488d633a2d08139eb819350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.50 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5G30mFD009992 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69049 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >>Do you have a citation for that?ďż˝ >ďż˝ >No, this is a common observation. > ><><><><><> > >A hypocritical statement from one such as you, IMO. What could be hypocritical about it? I value observations above all -- above theory, textbook and speculation. Many people, including me, have observed that magnets act like springs, and there is no known way to extract energy out of either of them. They are like falling weights: you only get as much energy out as you put in. I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates excess energy from magnets or springs. That's my point. If you know of such an experiment, tell us about it. Until we hear of one, I think we should conclude that it is impossible. That's what all the textbooks say, as far as I know. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 20:51:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G3oNGn002372; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:51:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G3nBOP001687; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:49:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:49:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44922A2C.30904@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:49:00 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <2.2.32.20060615212534.00c27404@pop.freeserve.net> In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060615212534.00c27404@pop.freeserve.net> 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/69050 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: > At 05:10 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: > > > >> Of course permanent magnets are conservative! In the macroscopic world >> in which we live and in which perpetual motion machines are built, they >> follow Maxwell's equations; the A field, which describes the combined E >> and B fields, is conservative. >> >> What's more, a magnetic field _does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_. It's >> typically hard to see exactly what's really happening with a permanent >> magnet, but this law is always followed: the force exerted by a >> magnetic field on a charged particle is always perpendicular to its >> motion, and hence cannot impart energy to it. >> >> As to a citation, check any E&M text. The "standard" reference on this >> is probably Jackson, titled something like "Electrodynamics". >> Griffiths' text on the same subject, "Intro to Electrodynamics", is >> generally considered more accessible, however. >> > > > Dearie me. You disappoint me Dr.Lawrence. I have never claimed to have a PhD. > 8-( > Vortex is no place for people who believe > without doubting what they've been taught. > And you are making the common mistake of assuming I was told it, so I blindly believe it. I've spent years digging through the math. I have a reasonably firm grasp of the basic theory, and I can see how it applies to predict the results we get with magnets. I have a pretty clear mental model of macroscopic magnets, and enough hands-on EE experience and general knowledge of the state of the art to take with a very very large grain of salt any claim that all mainstream scientists have just _overlooked_ some grossly obvious property of permanent magnets, or that there's some conspiracy to hide some property of magnets. And need I point out that the request was made for a citation? In referring to two common textbooks I was answering the question which was asked. > The theological virtue of Faith (belief > without doubting) may be appropriate for > religion, but it has no place in science. > So? That has nothing to do with the current discussion. > And the way you defend it so vehemently > "_does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_" makes me > wonder just how secure you really feel > in your religion. > My religion is Lutheran and Luther said nothing about magnets. The statement that magnetic fields do no work follows directly from the Lorentz force law F = q(E + v x B) and if you know of an exception to that law, by all means please post it. Like all physical laws it's only "valid" until a counter example is found. AFAIK no such counterexample is yet known (a magnetic monopole would, of course, provide such a counterexample). I emphasized the statement not in order to "defend it vehemently" but because it is, on the face of it, such a bizarre statement; it flies in the face of our everyday intuition, and is hence worth calling out as a remarkable and unexpected assertion which none the less appears to be correct. More generally, in the absence of magnetic monopoles the B field can be modeled as nothing more than the Lorentz transform of the E fields of all involved particles; the E fields are, of course, conservative. This is, of course, a _macroscopic_ view of the fields; at the quantum level things may be different. But the question at issue involved macroscopic behavior of large aggregates of particles so the model applies. > Frank > > > Frank > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 20:56:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G3ufL2007605; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:56:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G3ubtY007547; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:56:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:56:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44922BEB.7030603@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:56:27 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Slightly updated from the MPI website re magnetic energy extraction. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69053 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark Goldes wrote: > The Importance of Reproducing the Hans Coler 6 kW Generator > > Magnetic Power Inc., (MPI), is developing technology that extracts > energy from the active quantum vacuum. I think it's worth pointing out that extracting energy from the quantum vacuum wouldn't violate the laws of thermodynamics, nor Maxwell's equations, nor any of the other long-established pillars of scientific thought (though it might do a number on some aspects of quantum mechanics as currently understood). It's more akin to punching a hole in the bucket to let in more energy from outside, than it is to breaking the rules as to how things are supposed to behave inside the bucket. > This subject is generally regarded as akin to perpetual motion and is > usually ignored by the scientific community. This is a brief > explanation of why it should be taken seriously. > > Firstly, many eminent scientists since the time of Dirac have > proffered the view that the vacuum is an enormous source of energy, > not only in the form of classical photons but also and more > importantly as virtual photons. Thus extracting some of this energy > (and seemingly gaining energy from "nowhere") does not violate > thermodynamic principles. > > Secondly, advances in materials science and in the relatively new > field of spintronics have produced insights into doing things at the > quantum level previously deemed impossible, like pumping heat "uphill" > (i.e. against the thermal gradient). > > Thirdly, there is a large body of evidence that many devices have been > built which do extract quantum energy. There are sufficient reputable > claims to make widespread investigation worthwhile. > > Perhaps a clear path to validation is most readily available by > reproducing the 6 kW, solid-state, generator demonstrated, in 1937, by > German inventor Hans Coler. A British Intelligence report dates from > shortly after WWII, refers to Coler’s developments in Germany going > back to 1926 (B.I.O.S. Final Report No. 1043, "The invention of Hans > Coler relating to an alleged new source of power" A copy is linked to > the Chronology on the MPI website. > > There was independent examination of the Coler device by two academic > teams of Professors. They verified the excess energy and could find no > evidence that the work was fraudulent. At that time no explanation > could be given for the excess energy and the academics, fearing for > their reputation, did not wish to be associated in public with it. > Certainly the inventor himself had views that are scientifically > untenable. Today however, some 80 years later, our knowledge allows us > to understand why the device worked, and why the inventor held those > views, which is a good starting point for creating a replication. > > MPI has been contacted by a scientist at one of the National > Laboratories who has unofficially undertaken to reproduce the 6 kW > Coler generator. We have encouraged other labs to do the same. Should > a replication prove successful, the door is open for a quantum shift > in mainstream scientific dogma, which today does not recognize that > such a device is possible. > An engineer/scientist member of the MPI team, who has been active in > this field for the last 10 years, and has decades of experience in > magnetics, has explored the Coler work. His analysis suggests how, and > why, the Coler device demonstrated that energy can be extracted from > magnetically active electrons in ferromagnetic material. > > National Labs and universities have facilities infinitely greater than > we can muster as a small company. A successful reproduction of the > Coler 6 kW generator seems worthy of widespread efforts. Therefore, > MPI has released copies of our own analysis of the Coler work, to > scientists and engineers who supply sufficient evidence that they are > employed by National Laboratories or universities. A Ph.D. physicist > who was a member of the faculty at a campus of the University of > California and a scientist at a University in the UK are among the > recipients. The physicist intends to build the device. > > > > >> From: Jed Rothwell >> Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again >> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:17:44 -0400 >> >> Grimer wrote: >> >>> The theological virtue of Faith (belief without doubting) may be >>> appropriate for religion, but it has no place in science. >> >> Here is what has no place in science: >> >> Claims unsupported by experimental proof. >> >> These include the often repeated claims that you can extract energy >> from magnets, or HTSC, or Orgones, without a primary source of >> nuclear, chemical or mechanical energy. Unless someone can offer >> serious experimental proof of such claims, I do not think we should >> take them seriously. >> >> Putting aside all discusssion of dipole magnetic moment and quantum >> mechanical theory, I think we should all agree that on the >> macroscopic level magnets act just the way springs do, and there is >> no known method of extracting energy from them. >> >> Of course there have been many claims of magnetic motors and Greg >> Watson devices, etc., ad nauseam, but none has ever panned out. As >> far as I know, they are all gross violations of elementary physics >> (c. of e.) Can we agree on that? >> >> If anyone here is aware of any such claim that has actually been >> experimentally proved -- or even tested in a credible way -- please >> tell us about it. >> >> - Jed >> >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 21:11:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G4AJmr018053; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:11:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G3pcQt003098; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:51:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:51:36 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=JhYCvQiTTAW/ediRGvv2yp3kC8Z0JTJO2OvPJAEgVsmLYsgBIkJU4p8FRP9T1FXA; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <13195814.1150427619971.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:13:39 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: Todd Hathaway , vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191cb21be9c0a5659be8d8e06ddbb2f44d7f68fdb9e9071e9a9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.50 Resent-Message-ID: <9B5SFC.A.Aw.HrikEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69052 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: post this on your little blog Status: O X-Status: Todd Hathaway wrote: >Subject: post this on your little blog I do not have a blog. I have posted some of our discussion on the Vortex discussion group. >If you don't ask the right questions, how can you expect to come up with the >right answers? There is only question: Do you or do you not believe in the conservation of mass-energy? >None of you asked the following questions, let alone answer any of them >adequately: >Where does magnetic flux come from? >Why are permanent magnets "permanent"? I have no idea, but I am quite sure no one has extracted energy from one. >How can magnetic flux be used to generate electricity? Only by converting mechanical energy into electromechanical energy. There is never any gain. >OK, enough of the easy stuff. How about these: >Why does changing the path of magnetic flux through two separate paths in a >transformer generate a current? >Why is the frequency of a flux gate proportional to the amount of >electricity generated? >Where does the energy to reset Cooper pairs in a Type II superconductor come >from? None of this matters. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It comes from nuclear, chemical or mechanical sources only, and in every case, it annihilates mass at the same fixed rate (e=mc^2). If you disagree, then you do not believe in the conservation of energy or the laws of thermodynamics. I still do, and I will continue to believe them until you actually demonstrate a machine that creates energy out of nowhere. I do not think it can be done. This is a fundamental law of physics, like Newton's laws, and it does not make the slightest difference how much esoteric physics you pile on it, you will never extract a single joule of energy from a permanent magnet or superconductor. You will only convince me and most other people by experiment, not by theory. The same goes for cold fusion, by the way. Ten million theories would not convince me it is true. Only experiments. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 21:31:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G4AJmt018053; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:11:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G3pZWX003066; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:51:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:51:35 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=jZaRo+0wfXZi9Y8MhQN4GO57WUspyLu9IzpKZ9phzvcjxCIdVQd4zydclEx7YTqA; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <16713261.1150428673366.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:31:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191cb21be9c0a5659be82e38a83a398b8265d6c243459f46c23b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.50 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69051 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Grimer wrote: >> and there is no known method of extracting energy from them. > >True, but I believe there are unknown methods . . . Perhaps you have some reason for thinking so, but I have never heard of one. It is like extracting chemical energy from water, or over-unity electrolysis. Water is inert. Aside from the inexplicable Meyer's stuff, there is no evidence you can create energy from electrolysis. > and people >searching for them should be encouraged and their claims >approached with an open mind . . . I would not encourage or discourage such people. I think it is a waste of time trying to do things which are manifestly impossible. But I also think it is a free country, and there is no harm to wasting a little time. I will only believe it when they demonstrate it by experiment. Before anyone gets a chance to say "what about CF?!" let me say: 1. There has been tons of evidence CF might exist, going back decades. Only Fleischmann and Pons were smart enough to see it. 2. I would not believe it if they had not demonstrated it by experiment. > . . . not the closed mind of the Porksies of this world. There is a WORLD of difference between my attitude and Park's. I am not the least bit hostile toward people who make impossible claims -- I simply do not believe them. I am perfectly wlling to change my mind when experiments prove I am wrong, whereas Park has ignored thousands of experiments proving that he is wrong about CF. I am a genuine skeptic in the original sense of the word, and he is a fanatical true believer. It is not even a tiny bit "closed minded" to believe in the conservation of energy, as long as we are willing to put aside that belief in the face of experimental evidence proving it is wrong. We must believe in something. We must have some structure and a set of physical laws to make sense of things. We can only hope that these laws are correct, or at least, close approximations. A person who simply turns his back on c. of e. without a reason or a subsitute theory has turned his back on rationality. You cannot simply make up the laws of physics as you go along, and assume out of the blue that it is possible to extract energy from a superconductor, or a magnet, or an Orgone box. Yes that MIGHT be true despite theory and experience, but until you see proof of it, you should assume it is not true. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 22:56:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G5uFM1002279; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:56:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G5tx9H002188; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:55:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:55:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449247BD.4090503@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:55:09 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil References: <8C85DEC7B08A992-2E1C-24B8@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <010b01c6902b$8c096fe0$6401a8c0@NuDell> In-Reply-To: <010b01c6902b$8c096fe0$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69054 X-Loop: vortex-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: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > > >> "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, he >> put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two inert >> chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. > > > > Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part... there > is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for mainstream > guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines is laughable, > right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim Russell postulated several lighter "atoms" than hydrogen. Someone has posted his spiral periodic table on line. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 23:17:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G6HYRr013190; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:17:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G6HWAY013172; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:17:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:17:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44924CF4.4040307@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:17:24 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.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/69055 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: A little brain teaser Status: O X-Status: Frank's apparent objection to my observation that classical magnetic fields do no work got me thinking ... and the consequence is a cute little puzzle which some in the group might find amusing. Let's imagine a small experiment with a couple of _ideal_ objects. I am telling you up front these objects obey Maxwell's equations, and Newton's laws of mechanics (or Einstein's laws if you want to be picky); there's no wiggle room for any uncertain "reality" to sneak in! First object: A black box which produces a perfect, unvarying magnetic dipole field. The box is anchored to the table and the table is anchored to the earth. You don't need to know what's inside it; only its field is interesting. Second object: A rigid ring of uniform charge density. The ring has mass M, radius R, total charge Q; the charge is evenly distributed around the ring. The charge in the ring obeys the Lorentz force law: the force on each infinitesimal portion of the ring will be q(E+VxB) where E and B are the electric and magnetic fields in space at that point on the ring, q is the (infinitesimal) charge contained in that infinitesimal portion of the ring, and V is the velocity of that particular point on the ring. Set the ring to spinning, at angular velocity W. (Now the ring is behaving just like a current loop, of course.) Place it near the box, oriented so that the magnetic dipole field the spinning ring creates is oriented opposite to the dipole generated by the box. (Like two bar magnets, with N poles lined up with S poles.) A moment's fiddling with the right-hand rule should be enough to convince you that the ring is _attracted_ to the box (keep in mind that the field from the black box falls off with distance). Now, let the ring go. ZZZIIIP! it heads for the box ... BAM! it hits the side of the box. Oh, looky there -- the collision dented the box! Hey, wait a minute -- denting the box took _energy_. But ... magnetic fields _do_ _no_ _work_. That's obvious from the Lorentz force law, and in this idealized case there is no wiggle room: we have specified that the law Must Be Followed. So, where'd the energy to dent the box come from? ;-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 23:34:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G6Y3Gx024479; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:34:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G6Y10s024457; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:34:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:34:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449250B5.2090003@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 01:33:25 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Yet another free energy claim References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615115621.03fd0cb8@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/69056 X-Loop: vortex-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: Thanks for the URL Jed, He has quite a list of referenced patents http://www.potomacenergyprojects.com/patents.htm --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 15 23:39:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G6dEjv027075; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:39:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G6dCjq027046; Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:39:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:39:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616063905739.B48A52000084@mwinf3111.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616063908.00bec950@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, 16 Jun 2006 07:39:08 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69057 X-Loop: vortex-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 11:49 pm 15/06/2006 -0400, Lawrence wrote: ... > I have never claimed to have a PhD. You seemed so knowledgeable I just assumed you must have. 8-) ... > My religion is Lutheran ... Ah well, that explains a lot. ;-) F. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 00:09:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G79AFf006884; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:09:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G7989U006868; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:09:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:09:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616070906178.045135800087@mwinf3112.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616070908.00bd5e44@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, 16 Jun 2006 08:09:08 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69058 X-Loop: vortex-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 am 16/06/2006 -0500, Thomas wrote: >Jones Beene wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: >> >> >>> "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, he >>> put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two inert >>> chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. >> >> >> >> Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part... there >> is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for mainstream >> guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines is laughable, >> right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim > >Russell postulated several lighter "atoms" than hydrogen. Someone has >posted his spiral periodic table on line. Having devised a minimalist sub-atomic periodic table myself, I am quite interested in this subject. I found images of a lot of periodic tables including Stowe, Benfey, Zmaczynski, Giguere, Tarantola, Filling, Mendeleev and Modern - but I couldn't find an image of Russell's. Do you have a URL for this? Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 00:51:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G7ofGd026951; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:50:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G7odEe026933; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:50:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 00:50:39 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=TqkKnpx+zTc2MGeR8VKtqtUdI1Tl/Badq2lEH7Vw8GKsdoQOZ4yQCzvvRUm9TxpYFUmjTUZgff+eXAAEc2PjxrwRkqAkD9ZOPK7rw2R9g2x5d92VU2zOHyAUjXVJkdmwbjsSS7Ea83h7g+QLD1inv+e4tbLii4FV2qd7VfB9jag= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:50:38 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_9096_14843635.1150444238689" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69059 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: direct energy conversion Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_9096_14843635.1150444238689 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline There are MANY types of direct energy conversion ... SE: Stan Angrist DEC volumes III and beyond..... WHERE IS THE BEEF??? www.potomacenergyprojects.com ------=_Part_9096_14843635.1150444238689 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
There are MANY types of direct energy conversion ...
 
    SE:  Stan Angrist DEC  volumes III and beyond.....
 
          WHERE IS THE BEEF???
 
 

 
------=_Part_9096_14843635.1150444238689-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 02:04:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G94ULV029023; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:04:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G94ShV029005; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:04:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:04:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005201c69123$da97c460$0300a8c0@user> From: "Noel D. Whitney" To: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:04:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004F_01C6912C.3B774AA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69060 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: re [VO]:Nickle,Iron and Photo etc Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C6912C.3B774AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Maybe i am off the wavelength but Meyer,s injectors featured a ramping = voltage over the final length of the unit caused by diamensional changes = inside the injector - the Volts per unit area of cross section varied = from some 20Kv to 100Kv.as the water mist/hydrogenOxy mix came to the = injectors very fine apature Similar - Maybe ?? Rgds Noel in Ireland ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C6912C.3B774AA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Maybe i am off the wavelength but = Meyer,s injectors=20 featured a ramping voltage over the final length of the unit caused by=20 diamensional changes inside the injector - the Volts per unit area of = cross=20 section varied from some 20Kv to 100Kv.as the water mist/hydrogenOxy mix = came to=20 the injectors very fine apature
Similar - Maybe ??
Rgds
Noel in = Ireland
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C6912C.3B774AA0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 02:17:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G9HOHD003061; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:17:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G9HMfv003038; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:17:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:17:21 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=T85Vt6/P5H/5IqKQIOcixxv7c/4km0vuyV6fEQPRAjZruKf1KKPg43Eg/N5qZ5J6; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006651691716702@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:17:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940352d917027e599fbd1acfdd1044fda68350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.92 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69061 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Augering Electronium (*e-) out of Atoms Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII If (*e-) exists (most likely in Potassium, Argon, or Oxygen atoms) attempting to detect it other than by it's capture by Hydrogen or Deuterium poses a challenge. Attempting to eject it by electron stripping of an atom will probably cause it to go into a lower energy level or shell releasing detectable anomalous spectra. The Auger Effect might shake it out of an atom where it can be detected by using a mass spectrometer of sorts to compare it's mass with that of an electron. Electronium might be ubiquitous but not very ostentatious. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
If (*e-) exists (most likely in Potassium, Argon, or Oxygen atoms) attempting to
detect it other than by it's capture by Hydrogen or Deuterium poses a
challenge.
Attempting to eject it by electron stripping of  an atom will probably
cause it to go into a lower energy level or shell releasing detectable
anomalous spectra.
The Auger Effect might shake it out of an atom where
it can be detected by using a mass spectrometer of sorts to
compare it's mass with that of an electron.
 
Electronium might be ubiquitous but not very ostentatious.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 02:41:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5G9f8uH013577; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:41:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5G9f7d1013559; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:41:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:41:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616094103998.F3A731C00091@mwinf3008.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:43:54 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060616070908.00bd5e44@pop.freeserve.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69062 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > Having devised a minimalist sub-atomic periodic table myself, > I am quite interested in this subject. I found images of a > lot of periodic tables including Stowe, Benfey, Zmaczynski, > Giguere, Tarantola, Filling, Mendeleev and Modern - but I > couldn't find an image of Russell's. > > Do you have a URL for this? http://www.philosophy.org/science-photos.html or http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8989/russtbl.gif Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.4/364 - Release Date: 14/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 03:21:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GALVfY031059; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:21:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GALRbT031035; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:21:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:21:27 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=IWcU286x6nGUewKNVtAfDn5NBhtmGfw2/WJby8+KSYjlP+lI6k/ueyWGBlFM7EWw; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066516102120752@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 04:21:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9406b3a222d48854ff4260598203f2cb292350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.151 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69063 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re; Three Photon Positron-Electron Annihilation & Electronium Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Normally the photons given off during Positron-Electron Annihilation are two 510 KeV photons, but three photon Annihilation radiation also occurs. If the known Positron Anion (Ps-) collapses to a stable ~ 2 to 2.7 electron mass bound particle Electronium (*e-) or (e- e+ e-) the most likely energy given off as the binding energy (mass defect) are three photons of ~ 170 KeV each or the equivalent of 1/3 of an electron mass. Coincidentally the anomalous "2 Billion Deg" x-ray temperature achieved by Sandia's Z Pinch of steel wires corresponds to the estimated 170 KeV 3-photon radiation for (*e-) formation, or possible disruption. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Normally the photons given off during Positron-Electron  Annihilation
are two 510 KeV photons, but three photon Annihilation radiation
also occurs.
If the known Positron Anion (Ps-) collapses to a stable ~ 2 to 2.7 electron
mass bound particle Electronium (*e-) or (e- e+ e-) the most likely energy given off
as the binding energy (mass defect) are three photons of ~ 170 KeV  each or
the equivalent of 1/3 of an electron mass.
Coincidentally the anomalous "2 Billion Deg" x-ray temperature achieved by
Sandia's Z Pinch of steel wires corresponds to the estimated 170 KeV
3-photon radiation for (*e-) formation, or possible disruption.
 
Fred
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 03:55:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GAtgsm015435; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:55:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GAtfNR015418; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:55:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 03:55:41 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=LCgqbEN5dfJZkGuo4u5DcxFuglmyvJJ2FtfaCIZTONg/2XMUWQOtt27PhBxTKT+8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066516105534315@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 04:55:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d5e4f8c2e22b2c32b1477e7fdbb4e0d0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.12 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69064 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/16/2006 4:22:04 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re; Three Photon Positron-Electron Annihilation & Electronium Normally the photons given off during Positron-Electron Annihilation are two 510 KeV photons, but three photon Annihilation radiation also occurs. If the known Positron Anion (Ps-) collapses to a stable ~ 2 to 2.7 electron mass bound particle Electronium (*e-) or (e- e+ e-) the most likely energy given off as the binding energy (mass defect) are three photons of ~ 170 KeV each or the equivalent of 1/3 of an electron mass. Coincidentally the anomalous "2 Billion Deg" x-ray temperature achieved by Sandia's Z Pinch of steel wires corresponds to the estimated 170 KeV 3-photon radiation for (*e-) formation, or possible disruption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Vo]: Re: Augering Electronium (*e-) out of Atoms If (*e-) exists (most likely in Potassium, Argon, or Oxygen atoms) attempting to detect it other than by it's capture by Hydrogen or Deuterium poses a challenge. Attempting to eject it by electron stripping of an atom will probably cause it to go into a lower energy level or shell releasing detectable anomalous spectra. The Auger Effect might shake it out of an atom where it can be detected by using a mass spectrometer of sorts to compare it's mass with that of an electron. Electronium might be ubiquitous but not very ostentatious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Vo]: Re: Potassium, Argon, Calcium, Oxygen, (*e-) and Fractional Orbits Potassium along with the K-40 radioisotope decay daughters Ar-40 and Ca-40, is the most likely source of a possible stable bound Ps- or ~ 2 electron mass "Electronium" (*e-) followed by Oxygen-Oxides, Sulfur-Sulfides, and Chlorine etc. A composite particle with a mass ~ 2 to 2.7 times that of the electron, with the same charge, isn't likely to play by the Classical Bohr Atom rules for the electron. Aside from the mass difference, there is radius and magnetic moment to consider in how this (putative) particle interacts with a Proton or Deuteron. As I recall Potassium was used in the early Cold Fusion experiments and Potassium Nitrate KNO3 was used in Mills' early "Hydrino" work.Since Argon-40 makes up about 1% of the air breathed on over-unity experiments and H2O is abundant about everywhere except in Albuquerque.... < 30 > ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
----- Original Message -----
From: Frederick Sparber
To: vortex-l
Sent: 6/16/2006 4:22:04 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re; Three Photon Positron-Electron Annihilation & Electronium
 
 
Normally the photons given off during Positron-Electron Annihilation
are two 510 KeV photons, but three photon Annihilation radiation
also occurs.
If the known Positron Anion (Ps-) collapses to a stable ~ 2 to 2.7 electron
mass bound particle Electronium (*e-) or (e- e+ e-) the most likely energy given off
as the binding energy (mass defect) are three photons of ~ 170 KeV each or
the equivalent of 1/3 of an electron mass.
Coincidentally the anomalous "2 Billion Deg" x-ray temperature achieved by
Sandia's Z Pinch of steel wires corresponds to the estimated 170 KeV
3-photon radiation for (*e-) formation, or possible disruption.
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
[Vo]: Re: Augering Electronium (*e-) out of Atoms
 
If (*e-) exists (most likely in Potassium, Argon, or Oxygen atoms) attempting to
detect it other than by it's capture by Hydrogen or Deuterium poses a
challenge.
Attempting to eject it by electron stripping of an atom will probably
cause it to go into a lower energy level or shell releasing detectable
anomalous spectra.
The Auger Effect might shake it out of an atom where
it can be detected by using a mass spectrometer of sorts to
compare it's mass with that of an electron.
 
Electronium might be ubiquitous but not very ostentatious.
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
[Vo]: Re: Potassium, Argon, Calcium, Oxygen, (*e-) and Fractional Orbits
 
Potassium along with the K-40 radioisotope decay daughters Ar-40 and Ca-40, is the
most likely source of a possible stable bound Ps- or ~ 2 electron mass "Electronium"
(*e-) followed by Oxygen-Oxides, Sulfur-Sulfides, and Chlorine etc.
 
A composite particle with a mass ~ 2 to 2.7 times that of the electron, with the
same charge, isn't likely to play by the Classical Bohr Atom rules for the electron.
 
Aside from the mass difference, there is radius and magnetic moment
to consider in how this (putative) particle interacts with a Proton or Deuteron.
 
As I recall Potassium was used in the early Cold Fusion experiments and
Potassium Nitrate KNO3 was used in Mills' early "Hydrino" work.Since
Argon-40 makes up about 1% of the air breathed on over-unity experiments
and H2O is abundant about everywhere except in Albuquerque....
 
                                                                    <   30 >
 
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 05:35:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GCYkuf003861; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 05:34:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GCYfkE003825; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 05:34:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 05:34:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001301c69141$3961cb90$71027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: References: <2.2.32.20060616070908.00bd5e44@pop.freeserve.net> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Mendeleev, Aether & Oil Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:34:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C69117.4FB8E330" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69065 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C69117.4FB8E330 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> > > >>Russell postulated several lighter "atoms" than hydrogen. Someone has >>posted his spiral periodic table on line. > > > Having devised a minimalist sub-atomic periodic table myself, > I am quite interested in this subject. I found images of a > lot of periodic tables including Stowe, Benfey, Zmaczynski, > Giguere, Tarantola, Filling, Mendeleev and Modern - but I > couldn't find an image of Russell's. > > Do you have a URL for this? Howdy Frank, Here is a link that may. http://www.vortexpluswater.com/vortex_basics.htm Richard ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C69117.4FB8E330 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="vortex_basics.htm.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vortex_basics.htm.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.vortexpluswater.com/vortex_basics.htm Modified=60376CFD4091C60198 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C69117.4FB8E330-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 06:20:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GDKWll029114; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:20:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GDKUqi029083; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:20:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:20:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003c01c69147$a2a73350$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005201c69123$da97c460$0300a8c0@user> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:20:27 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69066 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nickel, Iron and Photo etc Status: O X-Status: Noel, Which injector was this? Among the amazing number (thirty-something) of patents and applications, Meyer had a number of different variations for hydrogen/water injectors - one of them seems to be a direct copy of Puharich. I wonder how many were actually constructed and tested, or if even Meyer knew which one worked best ? 4,389,981 Hydrogen gas injector system for internal combustion engine (U.S.A.) 1,231,872 Hydrogen injector system (CDA) 1,233,379 Hydrogen gas injector for internal combustion engine( CDA) 1,234,774 Hydrogen generator system (USA) 3,970,070 Solar heating system (USA) 1,234,773 Resonant cavity hydrogen generator (CDA) 0086439 Hydrogen gas injector system for internal combustion engine (WPO) 1,584,224 Hydrogen Injection System (JPO) 4,936,961 Method For the production of a Fuel Gas "Electrical polarization Process" (U.S.A.) 1,694,782 Resonant Cavity For Hydrogen Generator (JPO) ----- Original Message ----- From: Noel D. Whitney Maybe i am off the wavelength but Meyer,s injectors featured a ramping voltage over the final length of the unit caused by diamensional changes inside the injector - the Volts per unit area of cross section varied from some 20Kv to 100Kv.as the water mist/hydrogenOxy mix came to the injectors very fine apature Similar - Maybe ?? Rgds Noel in Ireland From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 06:53:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GDrQWb019366; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:53:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GDrM2M019334; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:53:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 06:53:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:53:18 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5GDrKs5019315 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69067 X-Loop: vortex-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: Jed Rothwell    I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates  excess energy from magnets or springs.    <><><><><><>    Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most certainly perform work. I will try, one more time, to explain the most simple one:    http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm    In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a curved glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This is done with the fingers of the experimenter who eats food for an energy source. The second drop causes the ball to roll further up the inclined plane with an increased energy of 0.424 mJ. The earth provides the kinetic energy.    Now the experimenter replaces his fingers with a permanent magnetic field and gets the same result. He places the ball at the 31 mm level of the field gradient and the gradient lifts the ball to 35 mm. What does the magnet eat???    This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates with a COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I will be happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in the metropolitan area.    Terry  From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 07:24:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GENhaY004553; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:23:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GENgng004533; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:23:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:23:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:23:35 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Slightly updated from the MPI website re magnetic energy extraction. In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615180803.03f03f00@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <9Jj0C.A.tGB.u7rkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69068 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark Goldes wrote: >Firstly, many eminent scientists since the time of Dirac have >proffered the view that the vacuum is an enormous source of energy . . . If 5 million eminent scientists tied together made this assertion, it would make no difference to me. It must be demonstrated by experiment, or it cannot be believed. There is only one source of knowledge, and one standard of truth: the experiment. The replicated, high-sigma experiment, to be exact. >, not only in the form of classical photons but also and more >importantly as virtual photons. Thus extracting some of this energy >(and seemingly gaining energy from "nowhere") does not violate >thermodynamic principles. It sure does violate those principles. No fuel is consumed, no matter annihilated. Obviously it violates those principles, and when you deny that fact, you do nothing to enhance your credibility. You resemble a hypothetical CF scientist who says: "Yeah, we get heat from fusion with no neutrons. So what?" You must at least acknowledge that the lack of neutrons is surprising and inexplicable based on what we know about plasma fusion. >There was independent examination of the Coler device by two >academic teams of Professors. They verified the excess energy and >could find no evidence that the work was fraudulent. Did anyone replicate? Without that, it does not count. >MPI has been contacted by a scientist at one of the National >Laboratories who has unofficially undertaken to reproduce the 6 kW >Coler generator. Is there any reason it has to be so large? If it would be cheaper and easier to make a 1-watt version, I suggest you do that instead. 6 kW would not prove the point any more than 1-watt would. Many people working on off-beat free energy have the strange notion that they must build on a large scale, in the kilowatt range, or they will not be believed. Actually, the opposite is true. It is far easier to confirm 1 watt than a 1 kW. One of the biggest disadvantages of the Griggs Gadget is that it is far too big and powerful to be tested accurately. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 07:37:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GEbYF3011509; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:37:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GEbUxs011473; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:37:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:37:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616102629.03ef3e68@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:24 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again In-Reply-To: <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.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/69069 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most >certainly perform work. I will try, one more time, to explain the >most simple one: > >http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm > >In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a >curved glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This page (smotidx.htm) is not available. That is the Greg Watson SMOT device. It never worked as far as I know. Perhaps Naudin thought he had it working for a while -- I do not recall. It would be interesting to hear what he has to say now. Tinsley briefly thought it was working but more careful evaluation proved otherwise. If the SMOT is ever replicated by two or three people, I will start to take it seriously. If 10 or 20 demonstrate it works to a significant (high-sigma) extent, then I will believe it. Not before. >This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested >another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates >with a COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I >will be happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in >the metropolitan area. Why not start by publishing a paper, photos, and one of these short silent movies electronic cameras take? (My daughter is crazy about them.) After we have all had a chance to think about it, then perhaps I would like to see it. I do not want to look at an experiment I have not carefully studied beforehand. I would probably fail to see the point. That wastes everyone's time and it is not fair to the experimenter. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 07:49:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GEn5qf020624; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:49:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GEn24a020600; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:49:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:49:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:48:59 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69070 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: More on Wind... Status: O X-Status: Thinking (outside the box) about the subject of capturing wind energy, cost-effectively - and "in the abstract" so to speak... It is logical that - first and foremost - a derivative aim of building the most cost effective wind-energy device would focus on the design of an apparatus which presents the largest possible (steerable) surface area to react against the wind vector, while at the same time using the least amount of structural material. Duh. The standard solution of course is the wind turbine where the frontal area available is pi*r^2 but where, unfortunately, only the outer third of the blade is actively capturing energy - and the centrifugal stresses can be severe. The largest turbine ever built lasted only weeks. In fact the bulk of material used is in the tower, which is inactive. Thus the high cost per unit output. The vertical axis mill is a potential improvement over the turbine in that more of the structural material is utilized, and at lower stress levels. But is there more? This was the situation that the ladder-mill attempted to improve on with wings. Of course it is as yet unproven as a unit, even though the component parts have been well-studied. If there was a better or more practical solution than ++wings++ for capturing and using wind energy, we would probably see evidence of that in nature. There isn't ... but using wings presents its own unique set of problems - like ... converting lift into usable energy, but keeping everything relatively stationary. However, this morning it "dawned on me" coincident with the rising sun, of course, that since a large wing can be tilted so that it captures wind energy as both "lift" which is the normal method, but also in compression (dive-mode) when the wing is tilted in a slightly different angle, and since the angular difference between the two is small - less than 30 degrees ... [all of which is inherent in the modus operandi of the rotating ladder-mill] ...that there may be an improvement over that scheme. And it is one which can be used on land - so that electricity can be produced directly. Since computers can control the angle of wing-against-wind (known as the 'angle of attack') and do it very rapidly and precisely with stepper motors, then wow! ... an unexplored option is still out-there (dare I say, "waiting in the wings"?) and that is to maximize the frequency of 'angle of attack' changes, and thereby convert the horizontal free energy vector into a very short vertical vector. It is only possible with rapid and accurate computer control and perhaps that is why it has never been imagined before. That option can be called a 'reciprocating ladder mill' which is somewhere in between the stationary and the rotating version. From a distance, one would imagine that the wings will appear to "flap" since the changes are rapid, perhaps a frequency of every few seconds -but it is not true avian flaps. Imagine the strongest possible lightweight tower structure. Here are some fitted with turbines: http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind_towers.html ... but you want to avoid the need for guy-wires. Carbon fiber masts on sail-boats are strong enough on their own, for use without guy-wires up to about 20 meters, but a stronger solution for this idea is the triangular cross-section open skeleton tower, itself made of carbon spars. A single wing can be mounted permanently of a number of wings-units can be engineered to elevate up the tower, on command when the wind picks up and to be lowered for maintenance. Once in place they "lock" and begin the coordinated 'attack-changes' which will cause the tower to reciprocate. The tower need not be 'literally' vertical to earth and can slope at perhaps 20-30 degrees away from the wind. The idea is to outfit a tower with ladder-mill wings but arrange the whole device so that the power is extracted from reciprocating motion of the tower going up-an-down, or nearly so. The tower is steerable at its base to rapidly face into the wind. IOW there will be an excursion length of perhaps a few meters and the wings will appear to be "flapping" as they change the angle of attack at the bottom and top of each excursion. Springs can be used to achieve a damping resonance. You do not need an actual "crank" (other than 'present company' that is) as a single hydraulic piston attached to the tower at the base will convert the linear motion into high pressure fluid for use with a small rotary hydraulic take-off pump and electrical generator - standard hydraulics. Well... if this concept does prove-out to "hold water", or air, then it is the dawning-result of a long fascination with the Hillerman mystique and glorification of the Navajo - as it was forthcoming from the sunrise blessing ceremony, replete with corn pollen ... or at least a gringo substitute... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 07:51:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GEoX6F021467; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:50:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GEoSVZ021394; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:50:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:50:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [192.82.6.9] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 07:50:10 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jun 2006 14:50:14.0168 (UTC) FILETIME=[2CCEF980:01C69154] Resent-Message-ID: <7PJ5jC.A.COF.yUskEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69071 X-Loop: vortex-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, We agree that 1 watt is all that is needed. Our own proprietary Demonstration Device designs are all low power devices, simply intended to allow interested parties to puzzle over this embryonic science. One or more are likely to rapidly be knocked off as toys by companies well known for that behavior. Youngsters will not be concerned that this technology was considered impossible by the scientific establishment. The Coler reproductions reveal no proprietary information. We have no control or concern about the power levels. The lab at the university in the UK that is in touch with us has now confirmed that they also intend to attempt a replication. The Coler sheet on our website has had a goodly number of hits from labs all over the world, exactly as we intended. Others are probably engaged in attempts at reproduction without asking for our analysis. All to the good. Mark >From: Jed Rothwell >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: [Vo]: Slightly updated from the MPI website re magnetic >energy extraction. >Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:23:35 -0400 > >Mark Goldes wrote: > >>Firstly, many eminent scientists since the time of Dirac have proffered >>the view that the vacuum is an enormous source of energy . . . > >If 5 million eminent scientists tied together made this assertion, it would >make no difference to me. It must be demonstrated by experiment, or it >cannot be believed. There is only one source of knowledge, and one standard >of truth: the experiment. The replicated, high-sigma experiment, to be >exact. > > >>, not only in the form of classical photons but also and more importantly >>as virtual photons. Thus extracting some of this energy (and seemingly >>gaining energy from "nowhere") does not violate thermodynamic principles. > >It sure does violate those principles. No fuel is consumed, no matter >annihilated. Obviously it violates those principles, and when you deny that >fact, you do nothing to enhance your credibility. You resemble a >hypothetical CF scientist who says: "Yeah, we get heat from fusion with no >neutrons. So what?" You must at least acknowledge that the lack of neutrons >is surprising and inexplicable based on what we know about plasma fusion. > > >>There was independent examination of the Coler device by two academic >>teams of Professors. They verified the excess energy and could find no >>evidence that the work was fraudulent. > >Did anyone replicate? Without that, it does not count. > > >>MPI has been contacted by a scientist at one of the National Laboratories >>who has unofficially undertaken to reproduce the 6 kW Coler generator. > >Is there any reason it has to be so large? If it would be cheaper and >easier to make a 1-watt version, I suggest you do that instead. 6 kW would >not prove the point any more than 1-watt would. > >Many people working on off-beat free energy have the strange notion that >they must build on a large scale, in the kilowatt range, or they will not >be believed. Actually, the opposite is true. It is far easier to confirm 1 >watt than a 1 kW. One of the biggest disadvantages of the Griggs Gadget is >that it is far too big and powerful to be tested accurately. > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 08:24:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GFOdDO012381; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:24:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GFOch9012363; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:24:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:24:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:24:32 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: More on Wind... In-Reply-To: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69073 X-Loop: vortex-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 largest turbine ever built lasted only weeks. Where was that? As far as I know, the largest turbines ever built are in service today. They 2.5 MW units, and I think 5 MW ones are in the works. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 08:30:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GFU4pA016817; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:30:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GFMxUp010842; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:22:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:22:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:22:42 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@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/69072 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark Goldes wrote: >One or more are likely to rapidly be knocked off as toys by >companies well known for that behavior. That would be wonderful. That is the best possible outcome. If a toy company sells a million of these gadgets, every scientist on earth will have one, and your troubles will be over. >The Coler reproductions reveal no proprietary information. We have >no control or concern about the power levels. But why make it so large? Is it easier to construct a large one? I suppose a larger machine would be more expensive, more difficult to construct, and more difficult to evaluate -- unless it self sustains. Some gadgets only work on a large-scale, such as the tokamak. (One might argue that it does not even work on a large-scale.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 08:47:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GFl7ko029415; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:47:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GFl5Du029378; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:47:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:47:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: More on Wind... Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:46:41 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69074 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Jed Rothwell" >>The largest turbine ever built lasted only weeks. > Where was that? As far as I know, the largest turbines ever > built are in service today. They 2.5 MW units, and I think 5 MW > ones are in the works. Today's quiz; what 70s era boondoggle generated 2 MW (total! almost ) created devotees called 'wooshies', was the largest windmill in the world by a long shot (at the time) didn't work - and set-back wind-energy in the USA by at least a decade (along with burial help from Ron Ray-gun) ? Answer; the DoE windmill on Howard's Knob, near Boone N.C. .... DOA ... October, 1978. http://www.mountaintimes.com/history/1970s/windmill.php3 Standing 131 feet high, sporting two 97 foot blades that rotated counterclockwise at 35 miles an hour, the windmill generated much fanfare when it was announced that the knob had been chosen for the largest working model designed to convert wind power to electricity. Managed by NASA and operated by BREMCO, the windmill was hoped to be part of a renewal energy movement begun under President Jimmy Carter. The Federal Energy Research and Development Administration had begun their research into wind-powered energy in 1973, with Howard's Knob selected as one of 17 sites, and 1n 1977 announced that Boone would be the location of the granddaddy of them all; a $6.2 million, ten-story, 350-ton, 2000 kW (two million watts) monster built by General Electric. It was hoped that the windmill would generate enough electricity for 300 to 500 average size homes at winds of 25 mph. Even without the subsequent election of Ronald Reagan, who pulled the federal funding for alternative energy source research and development, the indications soon showed Howard's Knob generation less of electricity than of eccentricity. The woosh of the steel blades - actually through the blades as they stood stock-still - was producing less power than pranksters, as a local group of college students started a group called the Wooshies. The Charlotte Observer took full journalistic advantage with a story on a "full-blown mythical cult," and a lead that if you placed a giant windmill in front of ten thousand college students "someone had to tilt." Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:01:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GG1Ruh007421; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:01:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GG1Q7m007396; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:01:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:01:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:01:18 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: More on Wind... In-Reply-To: <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69075 X-Loop: vortex-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: >Today's quiz; what 70s era boondoggle generated 2 MW (total! almost >) created devotees called 'wooshies', was the largest windmill in >the world by a long shot (at the time) didn't work - and set-back >wind-energy in the USA by at least a decade (along with burial help >from Ron Ray-gun) ? Goodness. That's a classic case of scaling up before you are ready. Nowadays, of course, hundreds of wind turbines with much larger capacity are in service all around the world. Here is a 5 MW, 120 meter tall unit that looks larger than the NASA unit: http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=21962 - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:11:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGAjue013742; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:10:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGAh1L013715; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:10:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:10:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4492CEB6.4000600@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:31:02 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.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/69076 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell > > I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates > excess energy from magnets or springs. > > <><><><><><> > > Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most > certainly perform work. Is Horace still active on Vortex? We could use a few words from him here, I think. I can't comment on any alleged closed-loop OU magnetic device using ordinary magnets, beyond saying I don't buy the claims (which assertion is not evidence, of course, and is probably contrary to the rules on Vortex!). However, I certainly can attempt a more lengthy comment on the magnets which lift steel balls and thus "certainly perform work". This is area is extremely confusing and the claim, which I have made in this forum, that magnetic fields do no work is utterly counter-intuitive. As previously mentioned, that was my reason for _emphasizing_ that claim in an earlier note. See also, for example, the "little brain teaser" I posted last night, in which I describe a gedanken experiment with a couple of stripped-down idealized objects in a model system in which the B field both "obviously does work" and in which the model system is so constrained that the magnetic field obviously _cannot_ do work -- it appears to be a contradiction, until you work out where the energy is actually coming from. If you model a piece of ferrous material as a collection of tiny superconducting rings, then you find that the apparent energy exchange between a magnetic field and a piece of iron can be explained as changes in the currents in the rings. The "work" apparently done by the field on a piece of iron consists of extracting internal energy from the iron itself; when "work" is apparently done on the field, by pulling a piece of iron out of the field against the force of the field, energy is being pumped back into the iron itself. There's no other source of energy in the problem. (I'm talking about macroscopic effects here, not microscopic permanent changes in the iron which may result after many cycles.) Again, this follows from the fundamental behavior of a magnetic field: The field _ONLY_ affects charged particles which are in motion, and the effect of a magnetic field on a charged particle takes the form of a force which is _perpendicular_ to the motion of the particle. Since "work" is the dot product of distance moved with force, when the force is perpendicular to the line of motion, no work is done. Once again, iron can be modeled as a collection of superconducting rings. The electrons moving in the internal "rings" are in motion, and are hence affected by the magnetic field; in fact they're the only thing which is affected by it in a piece of iron. Stationary charges, and uncharged particles, are not affected. And at this point I need to cut this off, as I'm at the edge of my ability to deal with macroscopic iron! I'm more at home dealing with individual particles; a full picture of the constraints on the electrons in a block of iron requires a lot more QM than I can bring to bear, unfortunately. :-( > I will try, one more time, to explain the most simple one: > > http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm > > In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a > curved glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This is done > with the fingers of the experimenter who eats food for an energy > source. The second drop causes the ball to roll further up the > inclined plane with an increased energy of 0.424 mJ. The earth > provides the kinetic energy. > > Now the experimenter replaces his fingers with a permanent magnetic > field and gets the same result. He places the ball at the 31 mm level > of the field gradient and the gradient lifts the ball to 35 mm. What > does the magnet eat??? > > This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested > another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates with a > COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I will be > happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in the > metropolitan area. > > Terry > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:11:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGBEe7013982; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:11:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGBC4p013954; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:11:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:11:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616161059541.842912C00091@mwinf3101.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616161102.00b9f59c@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, 16 Jun 2006 17:11:02 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69077 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Status: O X-Status: I came across this animation... http://www.ilight.com/ ...and was struck by the resemblance to the photo on Mizuno's book cover. http://www.amazon.com/gp/sitbv3/reader/ref=sib_dp_pt/ 102-7351500-5733754?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=1892925001 http://tinyurl.com/rd4c9 I now understand just what that photo is telling us though I don't expect many people to take me seriously since the congnitive dissonance of the explanation is too great. The photo is showing the splashes of material thrown up by the collapse of the roof of a nuclear explosion cavity which is at Beta- atmosphere pressures vastly below ambient. The different cones are caused by different pieces hitting the floor of the cavity at enormous speed. This enormous speed arises from the huge pressure differential between the outside and the inside. The way they radiate out shows that the different parts of the collapse dome are projected along their respective diameters in accordance with the force vectors operating, Ah well, it shows that nucular (pace Dubya) reactions are definitely taking place. It would take those kind of pressures to open up such a huge Beta-atmosphere cavity in a metal. The structures are not unlike that famous photo of a drop impacting on the surface of milk. Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:18:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGHopj018791; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:17:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGHmnE018763; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:17:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:17:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@mindspring.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:17:39 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jun 2006 16:17:45.0925 (UTC) FILETIME=[67197F50:01C69160] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69078 X-Loop: vortex-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, We agree. The main advantage of a 6 kW reproduction of Coler's generator at that power level would be as an answer to those who claim that if magnetic energy can in fact be extracted, the quantities can only be trivial. The fact that Hitler's Navy supported Coler after the 6 kW demonstration seems likely to have resulted from the potential application of this work for the recharge of batteries in submarines. Incidently, his first type of generator, demonstrated in 1925, was a 10 watt unit. Fortunately for the Allies, production of the 6 kW units never took place as they proved difficult to reproduce and had other problems characteristic of prototypes involving new science. He once admitted he did not really understand how or why his generators functioned. Mark >From: Jed Rothwell >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. >Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:22:42 -0400 > >Mark Goldes wrote: > >>One or more are likely to rapidly be knocked off as toys by companies well >>known for that behavior. > >That would be wonderful. That is the best possible outcome. If a toy >company sells a million of these gadgets, every scientist on earth will >have one, and your troubles will be over. > > >>The Coler reproductions reveal no proprietary information. We have no >>control or concern about the power levels. > >But why make it so large? Is it easier to construct a large one? I suppose >a larger machine would be more expensive, more difficult to construct, and >more difficult to evaluate -- unless it self sustains. > >Some gadgets only work on a large-scale, such as the tokamak. (One might >argue that it does not even work on a large-scale.) > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:47:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGlLTT002000; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:47:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGlJwS001980; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:47:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:47:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:47:10 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: More on Wind... In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@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/69080 X-Loop: vortex-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: >Here is a 5 MW, 120 meter tall unit that looks larger than the NASA unit: > >http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=21962 It probably weighs less than the NASA monster. Note that it has a "helicopter platform" on the nacelle. (Not a landing pad, exactly.) The AWEA reports that in the US the industry will probably install 3000 MW (nameplate) of new wind turbine capacity in 2006. Adjusting for actual output, this is roughly equivalent to one average US nuclear power plant. The cost will be $3 billion, which is a lot less than an average new nuclear plant. See: http://www.awea.org/news/First_Quarter_Market_Report_Energy_On_Track_050306.html The US has about 100 nuclear plants. So, assuming we maintain and rebuild the nukes, and we keep adding wind capacity at this rate, in about 100 years we will derive 20% of our electricity from nuclear power and 20% from wind. I think we should do it a lot sooner than 100 years! I would increase production by a factor of 5, and reach this goal in 20 years. After you reach ~20% capacity from wind, you start to encounter problems with load balancing and energy storage. The cost of modifying the grid and buying additional equipment shoots up. Perhaps in 20 years advanced batteries and other solutions will be available, but for now I think we should plan for 20% wind capacity and leave it at that. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:49:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGUwKD026011; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:30:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGUuMO025960; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:30:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:30:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:30:44 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85F79599EA429-1308-15EF@mblkn-m15.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060616161102.00b9f59c@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060616161102.00b9f59c@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.133 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69079 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer It would take those kind of pressures to open up such a huge Beta-atmosphere cavity in a metal. <><><><><><> Is it really happening *in* the metal or just at the metal surface? Like a Beta-atm black hole impacting the surface? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 09:52:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GGpp9d005157; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:51:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GGpprt005134; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:51:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:51:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616124720.03f1ec48@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:51:38 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@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/69081 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark Goldes wrote: >The main advantage of a 6 kW reproduction of Coler's generator at >that power level would be as an answer to those who claim that if >magnetic energy can in fact be extracted, the quantities can only be trivial. I am sure there are people who would say that. A top official in the British government once told Chris Tinsley the same thing about cold fusion. However, people who say such things are fools, and they will not be convinced no matter what you do, so I think you should ignore them. If you can make a smaller device more easily at less expense in a shorter time, I recommend you do that instead. In other words, this advantage is real but it is not worth the trade off. (Assuming a 6 kW machine is substantially more difficult than a 1 watt version.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:02:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GH23TJ011377; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:02:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GH21IH011317; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:02:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:02:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616170157596.918E25800082@mwinf3112.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616170200.00bb0404@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, 16 Jun 2006 18:02:00 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69082 X-Loop: vortex-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 16/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Grimer > >It >would take those kind of pressures to open >up such a huge Beta-atmosphere cavity in >a metal. > ><><><><><><> > >Is it really happening *in* the metal or just at the metal surface? >Like a Beta-atm black hole impacting the surface? > >Terry A fair question, Terry. Mmm.... You would need a number of black holes of different sizes all impacting at the same instant to produce that pattern. If the domed roof of a cavity is imploded then one would expect different sized chunks and they would all impact at virtually the same instant. Also you will notice that the central splashes are small. This corresponds to the apex of the dome which is the thinnest part. Howzatt - as they say in the that bat and ball game that Yanks don't play cos they might get hurt by a bouncer. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:34:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GHXo0g026222; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:33:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GHXnIW026205; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:33:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:33:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <003f01c6916b$01f35410$71027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: References: <2.2.32.20060616161102.00b9f59c@pop.freeserve.net> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:33:39 -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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69083 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Mizunos Book Cover Status: O X-Status: Howdy Frank, Thanks for the posts. You saw Beta at its finest, I saw vortex at its basic. Spirals , cones, both looking at the same thing. Hmmm! Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grimer" To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 11:11 AM Subject: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover >I came across this animation... > > http://www.ilight.com/ > > ...and was struck by the resemblance to the > photo on Mizuno's book cover. > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/sitbv3/reader/ref=sib_dp_pt/ > 102-7351500-5733754?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=1892925001 > > http://tinyurl.com/rd4c9 > > I now understand just what that photo is > telling us though I don't expect many people > to take me seriously since the congnitive > dissonance of the explanation is too great. > > The photo is showing the splashes of material > thrown up by the collapse of the roof of a > nuclear explosion cavity which is at Beta- > atmosphere pressures vastly below ambient. > > The different cones are caused by different > pieces hitting the floor of the cavity at > enormous speed. This enormous speed arises > from the huge pressure differential between > the outside and the inside. The way they > radiate out shows that the different parts > of the collapse dome are projected along > their respective diameters in accordance > with the force vectors operating, > > Ah well, it shows that nucular (pace Dubya) > reactions are definitely taking place. It > would take those kind of pressures to open > up such a huge Beta-atmosphere cavity in > a metal. > > The structures are not unlike that famous > photo of a drop impacting on the surface of > milk. > > Frank Grimer > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:37:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GHbL7s028452; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GHbKsQ028434; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616124720.03f1ec48@mindspring.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:16 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jun 2006 17:37:18.0853 (UTC) FILETIME=[83FC8350:01C6916B] Resent-Message-ID: <65D-qD.A.I8G.QxukEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69084 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: We are not reproducing the Coler device ourselves, but encouraging universities and national labs everywhere in the world to do so. Three attempts are in process where we have been happy to provide our analysis of how and why his generator functioned. Our own work is initially aimed at low power for Demo Devices. At least one modular unit appears capable of being scaled to a bit more power. These units can be combined to produce any power level desired in the same manner as photovoltaic cells. Demo Device prototypes could be at a pre-production prototype stage later this year. This device is covered by a pending patent application that will be published 18 months after filing toward the end of next month. Another prototype is on an automated development bench that is aimed at providing the necessary information to convert 3 phase utility type transformrs into generators. See the page on our website entitled: Fast Track to Market. 3 KVA transformers of this type are about the size of a large home microwave oven. We hope to eventually reach an output of 1,500 watts without any apparent input. Once these units produce power they can be licensed for production. Optimized genrators of this design might be smaller, lighter, and more rapidly in the market. If funding becomes adequate, some variety of this generator might be in the hands of a licensee during Q1 of next year. They could become a production item before 2007 ends. Mark >From: Jed Rothwell >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. >Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:51:38 -0400 > >Mark Goldes wrote: > >>The main advantage of a 6 kW reproduction of Coler's generator at that >>power level would be as an answer to those who claim that if magnetic >>energy can in fact be extracted, the quantities can only be trivial. > >I am sure there are people who would say that. A top official in the >British government once told Chris Tinsley the same thing about cold >fusion. However, people who say such things are fools, and they will not be >convinced no matter what you do, so I think you should ignore them. If you >can make a smaller device more easily at less expense in a shorter time, I >recommend you do that instead. > >In other words, this advantage is real but it is not worth the trade off. >(Assuming a 6 kW machine is substantially more difficult than a 1 watt >version.) > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:38:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GHbsPQ028754; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GHbqdn028731; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:37:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:37:47 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85F82B74AF532-EC4-54C6@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060616170200.00bb0404@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060616170200.00bb0404@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69085 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer You would need a number of black holes of different sizes all impacting at the same instant to produce that pattern. <><><><><> Agreed. However, I once saw a viddy of a tornado that split into three separate ones then later recombined into the one. It looks like little vortices would just fit into those holes. Hey, lookie . . . they seem to be in groups of threes! Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:40:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GHeJFH030773; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:40:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GHeHBT030745; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:40:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:40:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:40:09 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85F830BE49FD2-EC4-5503@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060616170200.00bb0404@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060616170200.00bb0404@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <1Y_OpD.A.SgH.B0ukEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69086 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer Also you will notice that the central splashes are small. This corresponds to the apex of the dome which is the thinnest part. <><><><><> You are probably right; however, it's your fault that I look at things in a different way. We expect those void are due to eruptive blowouts. But, just suppose the material was SUCKED out by B-a hole. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 10:57:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GHvJKA007927; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:57:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GHvG64007891; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:57:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:57:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00b801c6916e$4a3c3e50$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:57:08 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <-qOQYB.A.66B.6DvkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69087 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: More on Wind... Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" > The AWEA reports that in the US the industry will probably > install 3000 MW (nameplate) of new wind turbine capacity in > 2006. Adjusting for actual output, this is roughly equivalent to > one average US nuclear power plant. The cost will be $3 billion, My worry is that, even with wind and certainly with nuclear, we have not done our 'homework' and may still be at a premature stage in the developmental process, and that the turbine is perhaps not the optimum way to proceed, long term. For instance, if a laddermill promises to produce the same energy output for a $2 billion investment - that for the turbine requires 50% more, isn't it worth at least a prototype costing 1% of the potential wastage? One does not have to delay what is already in progress, of course, but are we really putting enough $$ into R&D, relative to potential savings? In other fields where significant improvements are possible - in the corporate world particularly, R&D is at least 5% of the total budget. Why can't we run DoE more like a company, with incentives for real progress instead of the pork-barrel bureaucracy it is? Look at the tiny budget of NREL, meager as it is - Ha! Bush was going to slash that even more, before getting caught recently in another energy-embarrassment, and with the emphasis on "bare ass". But at some point - out of desperation, lack of available options due to lethargy, and with continually rising gas prices, we will throw in the towel, the one marked ' optimal' - and spend 'way too much' for 'way too little' from the 'usual suspects' - companies staffed with former DoE 'experts' . IOW it is the 'same-old, same-old' bureaucratic process in action. AFAIK most of the R&D for wind-energy is going into slight improvements in the turbine design, and almost zero into any other competing promising concepts. Even the promising vertical-axis mill is getting almost nothing from DoE (some privately) and yet the Feds will end-up committing billions in either grants or tax-incentives to a "possibly" inferior design, since they have failed to do their homework in the lab. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 11:11:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GIAtcT017849; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:10:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GIAtxn017828; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:10:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:10:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616181048550.865BA200008C@mwinf3111.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616181051.00bb82d0@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, 16 Jun 2006 19:10:51 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Mizunos Book Cover Resent-Message-ID: <0pVrOB.A.bWE.uQvkEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69088 X-Loop: vortex-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 01:40 pm 16/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Grimer > >Also you will notice that the >central splashes are small. This corresponds to the apex of >the dome which is the thinnest part. > ><><><><><> > >You are probably right; however, it's your fault that I look at things >in a different way. We expect those void are due to eruptive blowouts. > But, just suppose the material was SUCKED out by B-a hole. > >Terry Well, I did originally suggest they were B-atm. tornadoes resulting from the puncturing of a Beta-atmosphere cavity and I must admit they do look more like tornados than splashes. Maybe its a tornado-like splash, i.e. a splash with a lot of rotation if you can imagine such a thing. Or better still, B-atm. vacuum induced tornados which whip up the molten material from the dome shrapnel impacts. One thing for sure, it's dramatic enough to be nuclear. The solids are behaving like liquids which implies a high speed event. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 11:46:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GIkNvS005259; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:46:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GIkHfg005198; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:46:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:46:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4492FC70.1010805@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:46:08 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@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/69089 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Mark Goldes wrote: > >> One or more are likely to rapidly be knocked off as toys by companies >> well known for that behavior. > > That would be wonderful. That is the best possible outcome. If a toy > company sells a million of these gadgets, every scientist on earth > will have one, and your troubles will be over. > > >> The Coler reproductions reveal no proprietary information. We have >> no control or concern about the power levels. > > But why make it so large? Is it easier to construct a large one? The answer's simple; did Mark ever mention what it is? The original device (long gone, of course) was a 6 kW device. So, to attempt to recreate the original device and see if it really worked, one must build a 6 kW device. See, for instance: http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb~1.htm Anything else wouldn't be an attempted replication. It would be a new experiment. In any case, I find it very hard to understand why this wasn't pursued at the time. Of course, the Germans were busy losing the war at the time of the original experiments, and afterwards the British were trying to put their country back together, but it's still peculiar that nobody thought it important enough to attempt to go farther with it. > I suppose a larger machine would be more expensive, more difficult to > construct, and more difficult to evaluate -- unless it self sustains. > > Some gadgets only work on a large-scale, such as the tokamak. (One > might argue that it does not even work on a large-scale.) > > - Jed > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 12:39:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GJda92003990; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:39:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GJdZoQ003973; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:39:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:39:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616153826.03fa7330@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:39:29 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. In-Reply-To: <4492FC70.1010805@pobox.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616111731.03ea4008@mindspring.com> <4492FC70.1010805@pobox.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/69090 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Anything else wouldn't be an attempted replication. It would be a >new experiment. I see. >In any case, I find it very hard to understand why this wasn't >pursued at the time. Surely this is because everyone assumes the device cannot exist. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 12:53:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GJr5hY010210; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:53:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GJr3fm010186; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:53:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:53:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616154013.03eb1d98@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:52:55 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: More on Wind... In-Reply-To: <00b801c6916e$4a3c3e50$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <00b801c6916e$4a3c3e50$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69091 X-Loop: vortex-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: >My worry is that, even with wind and certainly with nuclear, we have >not done our 'homework' and may still be at a premature stage in the >developmental process, and that the turbine is perhaps not the >optimum way to proceed, long term. This is a serious concern with nearly every technology and commercial venture. Corporations must decide when it is time to freeze the design and proceed to production. The decision is seldom easy. If you commit to one designed too quickly, the product is soon obsolete. If you wait, the competition may begin production, grab market share, lower its costs, and beat you even though they have an inferior, older technology. Many inferior and obsolete designs remain dominant long after they would be retired if optimum engineering excellence were the only criterion. The IBM PC computer architecture is a prime example. Mass production of the obsolescent DC3 aircraft design during WWII is another. See also Arthur C. Clarke's short story, "Superiority" (1951). - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:04:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GK4AKp015332; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:04:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GK49oe015313; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:04:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:04:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616155914.03f18d28@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616155413.03fa91f0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:03:53 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: More on Wind... 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/69092 X-Loop: vortex-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 balance between waiting for an optimum design and going ahead now, see Freeman Dyson's two essays: "Quick is beautiful" -- he recommends you go ahead and sell what to have now. "Little red schoolhouse" -- he recommends you wait until the design is improved. Of course it depends upon the product and the situation. The latter essay describes the development of commercial nuclear fission reactors, including conventional US ones, the CANDU design, and so on. Dyson participated in some of this design work himself. He feels that if the scientists had been given a few more years to play around before committing to the conventional US fission reactor design, fusion power would be cheaper, safer and more reliable. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:06:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GK6Wi1016631; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:06:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GK6U2X016606; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:06:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:06:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:55:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5GK6S7t016576 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69093 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Status: O X-Status: Trying again, 1st attempt didn't get through (not on archive either) While I am at it, does anyone have any idea of which energy is lost by the system in the paper clip experiment below to compensate for gravitational potential energy increase? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Jullian" To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 5:31 PM Subject: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Hi Terry, it seems to me this experiment can be further simplified: hold a paper clip underneath a magnet, and then open your fingers. The paper clip will rise to the magnet, therefore increasing it's gravitational potential energy between it's initial and final positions, thanks to the magnet. Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total energy of the system hasn't been conserved? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 3:53 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell > > I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates > excess energy from magnets or springs. > > <><><><><><> > > Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most > certainly perform work. I will try, one more time, to explain the most > simple one: > > http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm > > In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a curved > glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This is done with the > fingers of the experimenter who eats food for an energy source. The > second drop causes the ball to roll further up the inclined plane with > an increased energy of 0.424 mJ. The earth provides the kinetic energy. > > Now the experimenter replaces his fingers with a permanent magnetic > field and gets the same result. He places the ball at the 31 mm level > of the field gradient and the gradient lifts the ball to 35 mm. What > does the magnet eat??? > > This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested > another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates with a > COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I will be > happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in the > metropolitan area. > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:12:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GKBvdT019798; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:11:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GKBtlY019769; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:11:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:11:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616160515.03eae8b8@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616155914.03f18d28@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:11:37 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: More on Wind... 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/69094 X-Loop: vortex-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: "[Dyson] feels that if the scientists had been given a few more years to play around before committing to the conventional US fission reactor design, fusion power would be cheaper, safer and more reliable." I mean "fission power" would be more reliable! That was not even a voice input error. More like a Freudian slip. The development of plasma fusion is yet another extreme: not too soon or too late, but too hard, too botched, or too never. It may be the most extreme case in history. I doubt any other R&D project has gone on for so long and racked up such expenses with nothing to show for it. It is like the Hundred Years' War. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:39:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GKcxmu001025; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:39:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GKcwRv000997; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:38:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:38:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:38:49 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69095 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total energy of the system hasn't been conserved? <><><><><> You must pull the clip from the magnet to repeat. All that is required in the JLN experiment is to lift the magnet back to 31 mm. Big difference, mon ami. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:43:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GKgsVW003053; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:42:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GKgqUX003035; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:42:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:42:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449317C0.6060501@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:42:40 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69096 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > Trying again, 1st attempt didn't get through (not on archive either) > > While I am at it, does anyone have any idea of which energy is lost by the system in the paper clip experiment below to compensate for gravitational potential energy increase? > I believe the energy comes from the internal energy of the paperclip itself. Within the clip, there are permanent current loops playing the roles of the magnetic "domains", and the currents change as the external magnetic field changes (in the paper clip's frame of reference). Unfortunately iron is pretty complicated stuff, and I'm no expert on this subject. I can hack the field equations in free space but to really understand a piece of iron you probably need to understand the quantum mechanical effects which make the iron ferromagnetic rather than diamagnetic, and I don't. If you want to look at a far, far simpler case which can be understood without knowing how magnetic domains work, take a look at my "A little brain teaser" post from last night. It's a tightly constrained gedanken experiment in which the rules of the game guarantee that the B field does no work, yet it shows the same "Darn the magnet obviously just performed work!!" effect. In that case, it's obvious where the energy comes from, though. I posted it as a "puzzle", and I didn't originally intend to post the solution for a day or two, but that plan no longer looks so hot, so I'll just say that in the gedanken experiment the spinning ring slows down. Total energy of the system -- rotational energy + linear kinetic energy -- must be conserved, and the right-hand rule quickly leads to the conclusion that as the ring moves through the field toward the box it experiences a torque opposite its direction of spin. > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michel Jullian" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 5:31 PM > Subject: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > > Hi Terry, it seems to me this experiment can be further simplified: hold a paper clip underneath a magnet, and then open your fingers. The paper clip will rise to the magnet, therefore increasing it's gravitational potential energy between it's initial and final positions, thanks to the magnet. > > Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total energy of the system hasn't been conserved? > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 3:53 PM > Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jed Rothwell >> >> I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates >> excess energy from magnets or springs. >> >> <><><><><><> >> >> Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most >> certainly perform work. I will try, one more time, to explain the most >> simple one: >> >> http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm >> >> In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a curved >> glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This is done with the >> fingers of the experimenter who eats food for an energy source. The >> second drop causes the ball to roll further up the inclined plane with >> an increased energy of 0.424 mJ. The earth provides the kinetic energy. >> >> Now the experimenter replaces his fingers with a permanent magnetic >> field and gets the same result. He places the ball at the 31 mm level >> of the field gradient and the gradient lifts the ball to 35 mm. What >> does the magnet eat??? >> >> This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested >> another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates with a >> COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I will be >> happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in the >> metropolitan area. >> >> Terry >> >> >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 13:55:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GKsrqw008287; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:54:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GKsldT008239; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:54:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 13:54:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060616205436486.76B9D3C00082@mwinf3212.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060616205439.009a2814@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, 16 Jun 2006 21:54:39 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: How to demonstrate magnetic energy extraction. Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69097 X-Loop: vortex-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 02:46 pm 16/06/2006 -0400, Stephen wrote: > http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb~1.htm > In any case, I find it very hard to understand why this wasn't pursued > at the time. Of course, the Germans were busy losing the war at the > time of the original experiments, and afterwards the British were trying > to put their country back together, but it's still peculiar that nobody > thought it important enough to attempt to go farther with it. I think that's a pretty good summary of why nothing was done. Plus the fact that, as I remember it (being in my teens then) everyone's mind was concentrated on the prospect of unlimited cheap atomic power and still unaware of its downside. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 14:50:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GLngVF001142; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:49:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GLnfEE001129; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:49:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:49:41 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=jUs/zc5h5PfJK3h2oZomjvdAGgVag/RmEM1ZiMamk4mVBzPWhhDp1e1Hkqihjb6G; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006651621493690@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:49:36 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d82bb288e96cd99035272897c29fc0781f548b785378294e88350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.83.133 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69098 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: FW: [vo] [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 16, 2006 Status: O X-Status: forward from aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > [Original Message] > From: What's New To: Date: 6/16/2006 2:29:07 PM Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 16, 2006 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 16 Jun 06 Washington, DC 1. SANCTUARY: PRESIDENT CREATES VAST OCEAN CONSERVATION PROJECT. Even as Earth faces new threats, President Bush made wonderful use of his authority under the 1906 National Antiquities Act to establish a new national monument. A vast marine sanctuary stretching across the Northwestern Hawaiian archipelago. The area, which contains 70% of the shallow water coral reefs in the United States, will be the largest marine conservation area in the world, and fortunately has absolutely no oil reserves. 2. DOOMSDAY: STEPHEN HAWKING EXPLAINS WHY WE MUST COLONIZE SPACE. Hawking told a news conference in Hong Kong on Tuesday, that the survival of the human race depends on having someplace else to go when disaster strikes. He said we could have a base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in 40. According to an AP story, Hawking cited global warming, nuclear war, and genetically modified viruses as examples of world disasters. These are human engineered disasters, of course, and it might make more sense to solve human problems. Ironically, even as Hawking's computer was speaking in Hong Kong, the Sci Fi Channel was on Capitol Hill promoting "Countdown to Doomsday," a Wednesday TV special that included natural disasters such as gamma ray bursts and giant solar flares. For these disasters, neither moon nor Mars offer refuge and no time to get to the lifeboat, even if you could get a seat; the Population Clock this morning read 6,522,550,980. Maybe we should focus on taking care of the home we have. 3. ARMS RACE: JUST WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS, MORE RELIABLE NUKES. The excitement is palpable at Los Alamos and Livermore. "This is a chance to exercise skills that we have not had a chance to use for 20 years," the head of the Los Alamos design team gushed. The two labs are locked in the playoffs to win the coveted honor of designing the new "reliable replacement warhead." To get congressional approval, it was claimed the new weapon would not need testing. Sid Drell, former director of SLAC, and longtime advisor on nuclear weapons to DOE, scoffs at the notion that it would be relied on without testing. Linton Brooks, chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration, dreamed up the gimmick; he knows that before any new warheads go into the stockpile, pressure to test will be irresistible. All at a time when we are seeking to restrain Iran's nuclear program. 4. DANGEROUS STORY: THE JOKE'S NOT FUNNY IF YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN. If you thought I had the story about the terrorist going to meet his virgins backwards, you were not alone. Judged by the e-mail, about half the readers thought I was even more confused than usual. "The plan was boldly simple, find al-Zarqawi and track him until he leads us to Rahman." The problem with satire is that it's not funny unless it's subtle, but if it's too subtle people won't know it's satire. 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.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnew&A=1 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 15:20:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GMJp7i016241; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:19:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GMJokB016220; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:19:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:19:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:51:05 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5GMJleA016176 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69099 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mmmm Terry I am not sure it is that different, doesn't it require work to bring the ball back to starting position, as it does for the paper clip? Also it's not clear to me what is being done to the magnets, can't they be left stationary? If you have to move them the energy analysis becomes complicated I am afraid. Stephen thanks for the brain teaser explanation, it sounds right. I'll read you tomorrow. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total > energy of > the system hasn't been conserved? > > <><><><><> > > You must pull the clip from the magnet to repeat. All that is required > in the JLN experiment is to lift the magnet back to 31 mm. Big > difference, mon ami. > > Terry > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 16:23:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5GNNTPf011117; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:23:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5GNNRr0011095; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:23:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:23:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: A little brain teaser Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:23:19 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0af692lsjv07q2hsd4kb1r3nsqpb4uo7ep@4ax.com> References: <44924CF4.4040307@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: <44924CF4.4040307@pobox.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.61] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:23:18 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5GNNKrd011044 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69100 X-Loop: vortex-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 Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 16 Jun 2006 02:17:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] >So, where'd the energy to dent the box come from? [snip] You'll find out when you try to remove it. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 17:20:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H0KQe1007291; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:20:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H0KJID007228; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:20:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:20:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: More on Wind... Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:20:17 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.61] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 17 Jun 2006 00:20:17 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5H0KHmO007207 Resent-Message-ID: <6c_Rc.A.4wB.Dr0kEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69101 X-Loop: vortex-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, 16 Jun 2006 12:47:10 -0400: Hi, [snip] >http://www.awea.org/news/First_Quarter_Market_Report_Energy_On_Track_050306.html [snip] Note the appropriate name:) "AWEA executive director Randall Swisher" Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 17:35:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H0Z6k7013682; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:35:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H0Z3s9013655; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:35:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:35:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:34:57 -0400 Message-Id: <8C85FBCFE812A3C-10A0-6927@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69102 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian Mmmm Terry I am not sure it is that different, doesn't it require work to bring the ball back to starting position, as it does for the paper clip? <><><><><> I think, if you do the math, it takes far more energy to remove the clip from the mag than it does to lift the ball against gravity. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 17:42:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H0ftEQ016765; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:41:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H0fsdl016748; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:41:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:41:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:42:01 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69103 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > What's more, a magnetic field _does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_. It's > typically hard to see exactly what's really happening with a permanent > magnet, but this law is always followed: the force exerted by a > magnetic field on a charged particle is always perpendicular to its > motion, and hence cannot impart energy to it. > > As to a citation, check any E&M text. The "standard" reference on this > is probably Jackson, titled something like "Electrodynamics". > Griffiths' text on the same subject, "Intro to Electrodynamics", is > generally considered more accessible, however. Yes , I have both of these books and have noticed the " magnetic field does no work" line in Griffiths and other texts. This is the interpretation in all texts that I have seen. I find that this statement is somewhat misleading and most students probably find it confusing as the interaction of two magnets can obviously do work. Force * distance is work. What is being done here is a somewhat arbitrary classification of electromagnetic forces into electric and magnetic forces. The Lorentz force law F=q(E+VxB) actually hides what I think of as a longitudinal magnetic force included in the original Ampere law inside the qE term. The earlier Ampere law included this interaction between the magnetic fields of moving charges as an explicit term. A straight forward application of the Lorentz law gives the same total force of a magnetic field on current flow around a complete circuit as the Ampere law but not the correct distribution of forces along the wire. This has been shown in many experiments including my own but is largely ignored in texts. Tom Phipps has written about the problems with the Lorentz force law in Infinite Energy and in his book "Heretical Verities". He and others have suggested adding a longitudinal term which provides invariance and matches experiment. >If you want to look at a far, far simpler case which can be understood >without knowing how magnetic domains work, take a look at my "A little >brain teaser" post from last night. It's a tightly constrained gedanken >experiment in which the rules of the game guarantee that the B field >does no work, yet it shows the same "Darn the magnet obviously just >performed work!!" effect. In that case, it's obvious where the energy >comes from, though. I posted it as a "puzzle", and I didn't originally >intend to post the solution for a day or two, but that plan no longer >looks so hot, so I'll just say that in the gedanken experiment the >spinning ring slows down. Total energy of the system -- rotational >energy + linear kinetic energy -- must be conserved, and the right-hand >rule quickly leads to the conclusion that as the ring moves through the >field toward the box it experiences a torque opposite its direction of spin. Yes the ring slows down, but the dipole field also provides energy. How does the spin of the ring slow down? The only force that will slow the ring must be longitudinal to the electron motion. If you want to save the Lorentz force law you will have to include dynamic electric fields along the ring caused by movement through the changing magnetic fields. Think of it as being caused by voltage induced by magnetic induction. In general when magnets are attracted to each other and move closer, total field energy increases and the energy comes from the individual dipoles. That would be the electron spin and orbital motion dipoles. George Holz Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 18:03:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H13ht7025651; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:03:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H13g4x025631; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:03:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:03:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: More on Wind... Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:03:36 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0ck69216pdpjsl6ullic6v3q6lf6mpui4o@4ax.com> References: <005001c69154$0134b670$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616112305.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <006401c6915c$10837ff0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616115633.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616123346.03f09ab0@mindspring.com> <00b801c6916e$4a3c3e50$6401a8c0@NuDell> In-Reply-To: <00b801c6916e$4a3c3e50$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.61] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:03:35 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5H13dbV025607 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69104 X-Loop: vortex-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 Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:57:08 -0700: Hi, [snip] >AFAIK most of the R&D for wind-energy is going into slight >improvements in the turbine design, and almost zero into any other >competing promising concepts. Even the promising vertical-axis >mill is getting almost nothing from DoE (some privately) and yet >the Feds will end-up committing billions in either grants or >tax-incentives to a "possibly" inferior design, since they have >failed to do their homework in the lab. > >Jones This is a good summary of affairs, not just in the wind industry, but the entire energy sector in general. *All* the "long shots" should be investigated by competent labs, on the off chance that there is something to them. This includes magic magnet motors etc. Many experiments could be done for no more than a few grand each. While the chances of any one paying off may be small, the chance that at least one would be worth while are reasonable. IOW the down side is relatively small, while the upside potential is mind boggling. This is precisely the sort of research that government should support, iso putting all it's eggs in one basket with ITER. After an initial first elimination round a reduced number of potentially promising technologies might remain, which could then receive further funding to determine definitively whether or not they might be interesting. BTW I consider CF to have already achieved this second tier status. This approach allows nature to determine the path to be followed, rather than human prejudice. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 18:41:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H1fjda008928; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:41:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H1fhX8008912; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:41:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:41:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:41:30 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> In-Reply-To: <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> 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/69105 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >> What's more, a magnetic field _does_ _no_ _work_, _ever_. It's >> typically hard to see exactly what's really happening with a permanent >> magnet, but this law is always followed: the force exerted by a >> magnetic field on a charged particle is always perpendicular to its >> motion, and hence cannot impart energy to it. >> >> As to a citation, check any E&M text. The "standard" reference on this >> is probably Jackson, titled something like "Electrodynamics". >> Griffiths' text on the same subject, "Intro to Electrodynamics", is >> generally considered more accessible, however. >> > > Yes , I have both of these books and have noticed the " magnetic field > does no work" line in Griffiths and other texts. This is the interpretation > in all texts that I have seen. I find that this statement is somewhat > misleading and most students probably find it confusing as the > interaction of two magnets can obviously do work. Force * distance is > work. > What is being done here is a somewhat arbitrary classification of > electromagnetic forces into electric and magnetic forces. The Lorentz > force law F=q(E+VxB) actually hides what I think of as a > longitudinal magnetic force included in the original Ampere law > inside the qE term. The earlier Ampere law included this interaction > between the magnetic fields of moving charges as an explicit term. > A straight forward application of the Lorentz law gives the same total > force of a magnetic field on current flow around a complete circuit as the > Ampere law but not the correct distribution of forces along the wire. > This has been shown in many experiments including my own but is > largely ignored in texts. Tom Phipps has written about the problems > with the Lorentz force law in Infinite Energy and in his book > "Heretical Verities". He and others have suggested adding a longitudinal > term which provides invariance and matches experiment. > > >> If you want to look at a far, far simpler case which can be understood >> without knowing how magnetic domains work, take a look at my "A little >> brain teaser" post from last night. It's a tightly constrained gedanken >> experiment in which the rules of the game guarantee that the B field >> does no work, yet it shows the same "Darn the magnet obviously just >> performed work!!" effect. In that case, it's obvious where the energy >> comes from, though. I posted it as a "puzzle", and I didn't originally >> intend to post the solution for a day or two, but that plan no longer >> looks so hot, so I'll just say that in the gedanken experiment the >> spinning ring slows down. Total energy of the system -- rotational >> energy + linear kinetic energy -- must be conserved, and the right-hand >> rule quickly leads to the conclusion that as the ring moves through the >> field toward the box it experiences a torque opposite its direction of spin. >> >> Yes the ring slows down, but the dipole field also provides energy. >> How does the spin of the ring slow down? The only force that will slow the ring must be longitudinal to the electron motion. No, it's not -- not in the "stationary" frame! The ring moves _sideways_ through the field as it spins. While it's sliding sideways the direction of motion of the charges on the ring is no longer purely tangential to the ring, and the Lorentz force -- which is perpendicular to the line of motion -- is consequently not purely radial. It has a tangential component. The thing you need to keep firmly in mind is that all motions considered here are as seen by an observer stationary in the "laboratory frame" and in that frame the motion of the charges is not simple rotation about the ring's axis; it's got a translation added to it. The charges are following something more akin to a cycloidal path than a circular path. Here's a picture which may help; the red line, motion of the charges, is supposed to be the sum of the green line (translation) and the black curve (rotational velocity) (ok ok the lines are not drawn not to scale, sorry): http://www.physicsinsights.net/images/moving-ring.png The B field is assumed to point UP through the page, so the Lorentz force lies in the page and is perpendicular to the net motion of the charges. If, instead, you want to view it from the POV of an observer riding on the ring, or from the POV of an observer fixed at the center of the ring, then your POV is no longer stationary with respect to the laboratory. In that case, when you transform the B field to your new frame of reference you find that there's an E field present as well, and that's the culprit "doing the work". > If you want to save the Lorentz force law you will have to include dynamic electric fields along the ring caused by movement through the changing magnetic fields. Again, I only need to do that _if_ I want to view the problem from a frame moving with the ring, and in that case the Lorentz transform of the B field provides me with the needed E field. If I stick with the frame of reference which is stationary with respect to the table (and the black box) then the only forces come from the VxB component, and that's all that is needed ... but again, in that case the ring is translating and V isn't purely tangential, and there is a component of VxB which _is_ tangential. > Think of it as > being caused by voltage induced by magnetic induction. > In general when magnets are attracted to each other and move closer, > total field energy increases and the energy comes from the individual > dipoles. That would be the electron spin and orbital motion dipoles. > > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 20:10:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H39vQO014690; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:09:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H39trs014669; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:09:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 20:09:55 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=eCdgD7IdcCBHtJFhKVNAK0UaVpieRcTKn+yxQSGXMtuwtw5c41UMWPT7vrI4Oi3D; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200666173953939@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:09:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940678e0c194e6eba67402a76818204d2ab350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.153 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69106 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Pressure Cooker Fractional Orbits Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A backup address to get around a computer problem. That 1975 arc to water in a pressure cooker experiment looking for Proton Lithium Fusion is coming back to haunt me again, this time with fractional orbit over-unity energy in mind. The electrode was a 5/8 inch diameter by ~ 8 inch long ceramic ignitor electrode used on boilers, fed through the lid of the Stainless Steel pressure cooker so that there was about 4 inches sticking above and below the lid with about 1/2 inch above the pool of water laced with Lithium Hydroxide LiOH. The 7500- 0-7500 volt center-tapped neon sign transformer rated at 0.060 amps at a low voltage short was hooked so that 15,000 volts was across the gap with the pressure cooker floated from ground using a 1/2 inch acrylic insulator. When the voltage was applied the pressure shot up enough to extinguish the discharge in a matter of seconds even so fast that the water pool never got hot. When the pressure dropped enough for the discharge to re- ignite, the cycle repeated. Later "control" tests were ran using salt water. boric acid water, well water and so on, with about the same mysterious results. Very disappointing to a Hot Fusion mind- set. The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps so the wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise. OTOH, recent waterfuel activity puts a new slant on things. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A  backup address to get around a computer problem.
 
That  1975 arc to water in a pressure cooker experiment looking
for Proton Lithium Fusion is coming back to
haunt me again, this time with fractional orbit over-unity energy
in mind.
The electrode was a 5/8 inch diameter by ~ 8 inch  long ceramic
ignitor electrode used on boilers, fed through the lid of the Stainless
Steel pressure cooker so that there was about  4 inches sticking above
and below the lid with about 1/2 inch above the pool of water laced with
Lithium Hydroxide LiOH.
The 7500- 0-7500 volt center-tapped neon sign transformer rated at 0.060 amps
at a low voltage short was hooked so that 15,000 volts was across the gap
with the pressure cooker floated from ground using a 1/2 inch acrylic
insulator. When the voltage was applied the pressure shot up enough to
extinguish the discharge in a matter of seconds even so fast that the
water pool never got hot. When the pressure dropped enough for
the discharge to re- ignite, the cycle repeated.
Later "control" tests were ran using salt water. boric acid water, well water
and so on, with about the same mysterious results.
Very disappointing to a Hot Fusion mind- set.
The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps
so the wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise.
 
OTOH, recent waterfuel activity puts a new slant on things.
 
Fred
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 21:36:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H4aNt7015644; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:36:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H4aMtH015629; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:36:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:36:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 00:36:37 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69107 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > The thing you need to keep firmly in mind is that all motions considered > here are as seen by an observer stationary in the "laboratory frame" and > in that frame the motion of the charges is not simple rotation about the > ring's axis; it's got a translation added to it. The charges are > following something more akin to a cycloidal path than a circular path. > > Here's a picture which may help; the red line, motion of the charges, is > supposed to be the sum of the green line (translation) and the black > curve (rotational velocity) (ok ok the lines are not drawn not to scale, > sorry): > > http://www.physicsinsights.net/images/moving-ring.png > > The B field is assumed to point UP through the page, so the Lorentz > force lies in the page and is perpendicular to the net motion of the > charges. So with your model the ring would not slow down if the box with the dipole field moved instead of the ring? George Holz Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 16 23:06:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H66ILt023349; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:06:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H66Fg5023327; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:06:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:06:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Slightly updated from the MPI website re magnetic energy extraction. Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 16:06:02 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060615180803.03f03f00@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060616100946.03e93908@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.54.61] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:06:01 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5H665M2023231 Resent-Message-ID: <7Qs_FD.A.SsF.Vv5kEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69108 X-Loop: vortex-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, 16 Jun 2006 10:23:35 -0400: Hi, [snip] >>, not only in the form of classical photons but also and more >>importantly as virtual photons. Thus extracting some of this energy >>(and seemingly gaining energy from "nowhere") does not violate >>thermodynamic principles. > >It sure does violate those principles. No fuel is consumed, no matter >annihilated. This isn't necessarily so. It's possible that all matter derives it's mass from the interaction of charge with the ZPE field. If so, then devices such as these may actually function by converting a tiny fraction of the mass of each individual constituent particle to energy, and said mass would then be restored from the ZPE. Of course this results in a minuscule reduction in the energy of the ZPE throughout the Universe, but I think we can miss that little bit, especially when you consider that it hasn't really been lost anyway, just converted from one form to another. In this way one might see such a device as a negative entropy generator, where the random energy of the ZPE is converted into a more coherent and useful form. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 01:36:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5H8ajHO023635; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:36:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5H8aixR023620; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:36:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:36:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005101c691e1$7b8a2d00$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85FBCFE812A3C-10A0-6927@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:41:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5H8afIE023600 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69109 X-Loop: vortex-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, the question is whether any free energy is gained at each iteration, whether ball process or paper clip process. I found the following at http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=68526 , let me know if it makes any sense to you: -------- Magnets, gravity, electric fields, stretched springs or rubber bands... any two masses that are separated but affected by some force pulling them together has potential energy. Release the two objects so they come together and that potential energy converts to kinetic energy. When the two objects slam into one another (assuming they don't bounce off) the kinetic energy is converted to thermal energy in the form of noise and heat. Energy is always conserved. Note also that the objects could also do an amount of work equal to the potential energy that exists when they are separated. But once they do that work, that's all the work they can do without being separated again, or 'reset'. -------- The key is that what is supposed to be conserved is total energy (_all_ potential energies plus kinetic energy). What would be a breakthrough would be to violate this, but it would require to take into account not only the potential energy wrt the gravitational force of the earth, but also the potential energy of the magnet's force, and I see no trace of the latter in your (JLN's) calculation. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > Mmmm Terry I am not sure it is that different, doesn't it require work > to bring > the ball back to starting position, as it does for the paper clip? > > <><><><><> > > I think, if you do the math, it takes far more energy to remove the > clip from the mag than it does to lift the ball against gravity. > > Terry > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 04:23:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HBNP3l023625; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 04:23:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HBNDOa023473; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 04:23:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 04:23:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009401c691f9$3c7172f0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85FBCFE812A3C-10A0-6927@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <005101c691e1$7b8a2d00$3800a8c0@zothan> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 12:31:47 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5HBN6KO023413 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69110 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Actually I think the best approach would be to be open minded and forget about theory for now, and try and detect excess energy in a purely experimental way: if the ball is brought to a higher (even very slightly higher) elevation than starting elevation (is it BTW?), you should be able to loop the system: let the ball go back to starting point on it's own by rolling down a curved track with a very small slope, and see the ball pick up more speed at every turn round the loop. Even if you detect no speed increase, the mere fact of going round for ever in spite of parasitic energy losses (due to air drag etc..) would mean you're on to something. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Jullian" To: Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 9:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > Hi Terry, the question is whether any free energy is gained at each iteration, whether ball process or paper clip process. I found the following at http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=68526 , let me know if it makes any sense to you: > -------- > Magnets, gravity, electric fields, stretched springs or rubber bands... any two masses that are separated but affected by some force pulling them together has potential energy. Release the two objects so they come together and that potential energy converts to kinetic energy. When the two objects slam into one another (assuming they don't bounce off) the kinetic energy is converted to thermal energy in the form of noise and heat. Energy is always conserved. > > Note also that the objects could also do an amount of work equal to the potential energy that exists when they are separated. But once they do that work, that's all the work they can do without being separated again, or 'reset'. > -------- > The key is that what is supposed to be conserved is total energy (_all_ potential energies plus kinetic energy). What would be a breakthrough would be to violate this, but it would require to take into account not only the potential energy wrt the gravitational force of the earth, but also the potential energy of the magnet's force, and I see no trace of the latter in your (JLN's) calculation. > > Michel > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 2:34 AM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michel Jullian >> >> Mmmm Terry I am not sure it is that different, doesn't it require work >> to bring >> the ball back to starting position, as it does for the paper clip? >> >> <><><><><> >> >> I think, if you do the math, it takes far more energy to remove the >> clip from the mag than it does to lift the ball against gravity. >> >> Terry >> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 05:26:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HCQQYk021639; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:26:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HCQPcZ021629; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:26:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:26:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:26:14 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> In-Reply-To: <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <0BzCkC.A.5RF.wT_kEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69111 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >> The thing you need to keep firmly in mind is that all motions considered >> here are as seen by an observer stationary in the "laboratory frame" and >> in that frame the motion of the charges is not simple rotation about the >> ring's axis; it's got a translation added to it. The charges are >> following something more akin to a cycloidal path than a circular path. >> >> Here's a picture which may help; the red line, motion of the charges, is >> supposed to be the sum of the green line (translation) and the black >> curve (rotational velocity) (ok ok the lines are not drawn not to scale, >> sorry): >> >> http://www.physicsinsights.net/images/moving-ring.png >> >> The B field is assumed to point UP through the page, so the Lorentz >> force lies in the page and is perpendicular to the net motion of the >> charges. >> > > So with your model the ring would not slow down if the box with the dipole > field moved instead of the ring? > Certainly it would. All you've done is change your frame of reference, which doesn't affect the outcome, and doesn't affect the 4-force which causes that outcome. If the box is in motion, then to find the field which will be observed in the "laboratory" frame we need to transform the B field which is observed in the box's frame into the lab frame. When we do that we find there's now an E field in the lab frame. In this case the ring is slowed down by the E field, which (in the ring's frame of reference) _does_ do work. By the way, whether work is done is frame-dependent, which should come as no surprise, since kinetic energy is a frame-dependent quantity. The E and B fields together form a rank 2 tensor (the "Faraday" tensor). The application of that tensor to a charged particle's 4-velocity yields the 4-force on that particle due to the EM field. Changing FoR changes the components of the Faraday tensor but doesn't change the effect it has on a particular object. > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 05:33:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HCXawa026298; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:33:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HCXYLJ026277; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:33:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 05:33:34 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=cRzYGUp4fXQFDKCjKwIermgP+u2HpeoF33fiQYqT+CVQ+HzkJxKgakF1sLMY7MzO; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066617123317933@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:33:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403019404bb3d4e2409963b7aa82c489fc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.100 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69112 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Pressure Cooker Fractional Orbits Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Posted earlier: > > The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps > so there wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise. > Mizuno's experiments come to mind here, except the discharge is to the water pool surface is though the air (N2, O2, Ar, CO2, ) and H2O vapor rather than in the water. Mizuno's early tungsten in water arc experiments (1998) by comparison: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/Wreport.html The ion energy bombarding the pool surface is set by the cathode fall potential which is probably not more than 150 volts or less. This means that a proton (or some deuterons in the water)can penetrate into an oxygen, nitrogen, or argon electron cloud setting up Auger Effect "cascades" by proton/deuteron capture of inner shell electrons with an energy release that can substantially multiply the energy input. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Posted earlier:
>
> The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps
> so there wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise.
>
Mizuno's experiments come to mind here, except the discharge is to the water
pool surface is though the air (N2, O2, Ar, CO2, ) and H2O vapor rather than in
the water.
 
Mizuno's early tungsten in water arc experiments (1998) by comparison:
 
 
 
The ion energy bombarding the pool surface is set by the cathode
fall potential which is probably not more than 150 volts or less.
 
This means that a proton (or some deuterons in the water)can penetrate into
an oxygen, nitrogen, or argon electron cloud setting up Auger Effect "cascades"
by proton/deuteron capture of inner shell electrons with an energy release
that can substantially multiply the energy input.
 
Fred
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 06:29:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HDTZfI018455; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:29:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HDTODI018382; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:29:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:29:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Yqa4VOaRqwI1YbSWeI4YqCO3k/AAlC76g0+WcKfTa+7kGZd2PtJB6OdLJynjyAPi; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066617132914967@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:29:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94084f2a87a0f5778f153f123a1f80051cc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.146 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69113 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII The discharge was an atmospheric pressure Glow Discharge not an Arc. http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/dischg.htm#Glow " Most of the voltage between anode and cathode is represented by the cathode fall Vc near the cathode. Aston found experimentally that the electric field is greatest at the cathode, and falls linearly to zero at the end of the cathode fall in the negative glow. This linear decrease means that the potential rises parabolically: V(x) = (2Vc/d2)x(x - 2d). This means that there is a constant positive space charge in the region of amount Vc/2pd2, and the field at the cathode is Eo = 2Vc/d. If K is the mobility of the positive ions, then the positive ion current can be found. The electron current is ? times this, so the total current density at the cathode is jo = Vc2K(1 + ?)/pd3" "Fast ion bombardment causes sputtering of the cathode material. The rate of sputtering is proportional to (Vc - V), where V is the normal cathode fall, and Vc the established cathode fall. 850V would not be an unusual figure, where V = 200V, say. The exact mechanism of sputtering is in doubt, but it seems that cathode material is ejected to the cathode surface, and then evaporated by the local heating. The rate of deposition obeys the inverse-square law. The films produced are quite coherent and uniform. Silver sputters relatively easily, aluminum with difficulty. Where cathode surfaces are specially prepared, perhaps with low-work function substances as in thermionic cathodes, sputtering can destroy them quickly, even at relatively low overvoltages. There seems to be little sputtering at the normal cathode fall. The electrodes of glow lamps are treated with low-work-function materials, so they are injured by overcurrent, and their striking voltages may rise." ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/17/2006 6:34:12 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Pressure Cooker Fractional Orbits Posted earlier: > > The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps > so there wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise. > Mizuno's experiments come to mind here, except the discharge is to the water pool surface is though the air (N2, O2, Ar, CO2, ) and H2O vapor rather than in the water. Mizuno's early tungsten in water arc experiments (1998) by comparison: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/Wreport.html The ion energy bombarding the pool surface is set by the cathode fall potential which is probably not more than 150 volts or less. This means that a proton (or some deuterons in the water)can penetrate into an oxygen, nitrogen, or argon electron cloud setting up Auger Effect "cascades" by proton/deuteron capture of inner shell electrons with an energy release that can substantially multiply the energy input. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
The discharge was an atmospheric pressure Glow Discharge not an Arc.
 
 
" Most of the voltage between anode and cathode is represented by the cathode fall Vc near the cathode. Aston found experimentally that the electric field is greatest at the cathode, and falls linearly to zero at the end of the cathode fall in the negative glow. This linear decrease means that the potential rises parabolically: V(x) = (2Vc/d2)x(x - 2d). This means that there is a constant positive space charge in the region of amount Vc/2pd2, and the field at the cathode is Eo = 2Vc/d. If K is the mobility of the positive ions, then the positive ion current can be found. The electron current is ? times this, so the total current density at the cathode is jo = Vc2K(1 + ?)/pd3"
 
"Fast ion bombardment causes sputtering of the cathode material. The rate of sputtering is proportional to (Vc - V), where V is the normal cathode fall, and Vc the established cathode fall. 850V would not be an unusual figure, where V = 200V, say. The exact mechanism of sputtering is in doubt, but it seems that cathode material is ejected to the cathode surface, and then evaporated by the local heating. The rate of deposition obeys the inverse-square law. The films produced are quite coherent and uniform. Silver sputters relatively easily, aluminum with difficulty. Where cathode surfaces are specially prepared, perhaps with low-work function substances as in thermionic cathodes, sputtering can destroy them quickly, even at relatively low overvoltages. There seems to be little sputtering at the normal cathode fall. The electrodes of glow lamps are treated with low-work-function materials, so they are injured by overcurrent, and their striking voltages may rise."
 
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/17/2006 6:34:12 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Pressure Cooker Fractional Orbits

Posted earlier:
>
> The arc drops the transformer output to 1,000 volts or less at 0.06 amps
> so there wasn't enough input energy to account for the pressure rise.
>
Mizuno's experiments come to mind here, except the discharge is to the water
pool surface is though the air (N2, O2, Ar, CO2, ) and H2O vapor rather than in
the water.
 
Mizuno's early tungsten in water arc experiments (1998) by comparison:
 
 
 
The ion energy bombarding the pool surface is set by the cathode
fall potential which is probably not more than 150 volts or less.
 
This means that a proton (or some deuterons in the water)can penetrate into
an oxygen, nitrogen, or argon electron cloud setting up Auger Effect "cascades"
by proton/deuteron capture of inner shell electrons with an energy release
that can substantially multiply the energy input.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 06:42:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HDgW5Y024292; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:42:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HDgVjo024261; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:42:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 06:42:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:42:23 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8602AFF6642CB-7A4-1CB@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <024e01c69176$68d5d350$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85F9C0210106B-7CC-6252@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <026a01c6918e$f8ee05d0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C85FBCFE812A3C-10A0-6927@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <005101c691e1$7b8a2d00$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <005101c691e1$7b8a2d00$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.136 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69114 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian What would be a breakthrough would be to violate this, but it would require to take into account not only the potential energy wrt the gravitational force of the earth, but also the potential energy of the magnet's force, <><><><><> Take a look at this device: http://geocities.com/terry1094/magnet_motor01.avi It generates about 4 Nm of torque in one cycle. It uses a very efficient electromagnet to move the rotor beyond the peak gradient point. The electromagnet uses about 1 Ws per pulse. This has been discussed here before; so, if you'd like to learn more we should take it off list. Do you have a broadband connection? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 07:41:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HEexSD018206; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:40:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HEevm5018189; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:40:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:40:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007101c69218$3f1096c0$0300a8c0@user> From: "Noel D. Whitney" To: References: <005201c69123$da97c460$0300a8c0@user> <003c01c69147$a2a73350$6401a8c0@NuDell> Subject: [VO]:Re: Re: Nickel, Iron and Photo etc Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 15:13:44 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69115 X-Loop: vortex-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 - Hi there, I only saw and studied one type , It was about 150mm long and quite narrow - possibly about 20mm dia,Extreamly well constructed in S/s with alot of ground finishes - not turned, It was this type he had fitted on the beach Buggy in his garage beside the office and freaked out at some Swiss visitors who tried to dismantle one of the injectors. Regretably they were "Dead" items and did nothing at any time I was there. best wishes Noel in Ireland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 2:20 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nickel, Iron and Photo etc > Noel, > > Which injector was this? > > Among the amazing number (thirty-something) of patents and applications, > Meyer had a number of different variations for hydrogen/water injectors - > one of them seems to be a direct copy of Puharich. I wonder how many were > actually constructed and tested, or if even Meyer knew which one worked > best ? > > 4,389,981 Hydrogen gas injector system for internal combustion engine > (U.S.A.) > 1,231,872 Hydrogen injector system (CDA) > 1,233,379 Hydrogen gas injector for internal combustion engine( CDA) > 1,234,774 Hydrogen generator system (USA) > 3,970,070 Solar heating system (USA) > 1,234,773 Resonant cavity hydrogen generator (CDA) > 0086439 Hydrogen gas injector system for internal combustion engine (WPO) > 1,584,224 Hydrogen Injection System (JPO) > 4,936,961 Method For the production of a Fuel Gas "Electrical polarization > Process" (U.S.A.) > 1,694,782 Resonant Cavity For Hydrogen Generator (JPO) > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Noel D. Whitney > > Maybe i am off the wavelength but Meyer,s injectors featured a ramping > voltage over the final length of the unit caused by diamensional changes > inside the injector - the Volts per unit area of cross section varied from > some 20Kv to 100Kv.as the water mist/hydrogenOxy mix came to the injectors > very fine apature > Similar - Maybe ?? > Rgds > Noel in Ireland > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:00:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HExqbW027240; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:59:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HExpqx027224; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:59:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 07:59:51 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=AYcYhVJHXqXeffpSNmxj0PcA84B42UHq/k/hHsbYTqFOc71pn30+XMDjmZYp92vN; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006661714169795@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:16:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a9f43bc31c9b910c95844dfcd1ac809e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.231 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69116 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I think that one can get a stable arc by using a circulating pump to power a water jet immersed below the water pool surface squirting water from a nozzle onto the anode. The dish sprayer at the kitchen sink held beneath the surface of water in a pan shows that the jets emerge intact when pointed upward. Borax and/or Baking Soda should get the conductivity up enough to run off 24 volts or so DC, if the area of the jet is sufficient. http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/dischg.htm#Glow ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
I think that one can get a stable arc by using a
circulating pump to power a water jet  immersed below
the water pool surface squirting water from a nozzle onto the anode.
 
The dish sprayer at the kitchen sink held beneath the surface
of water in a pan shows that the jets emerge intact when
pointed upward.
 
Borax and/or Baking Soda should get the conductivity
up enough to run off 24 volts or so DC, if the area of the jet
is sufficient.
 
 
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:06:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HF6Sv4031120; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:06:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HF6QeF031095; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:06:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:06:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:06:22 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86036BAAB2611-C24-55C6@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <005201c69123$da97c460$0300a8c0@user> <003c01c69147$a2a73350$6401a8c0@NuDell> <007101c69218$3f1096c0$0300a8c0@user> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <007101c69218$3f1096c0$0300a8c0@user> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [VO]:Re: Re: Nickel, Iron and Photo etc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5HF6PP7031081 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69117 X-Loop: vortex-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: Noel D. Whitney Regretably they were "Dead" items and did nothing at any time I was there.  best wishes  <><><><><><> Another list says that Stan make Orthohydrogen instead of Parahydrogen. What was the energy difference, Jones (since you did research on this before.) Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:08:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HF8KHH032016; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:08:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HF8Cua031954; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:08:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:08:12 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=HWU+RBr754kddD1XqfQF41DWG2q+jWhLtcPVssxzoi7hPpbFS2scE4orZTN2EePl; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <33116670.1150556887831.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:08:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191c1fdd922144c033d045626631d1cf51718adfe556ef2d9778350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.50 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69118 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Take a look at this device: > >http://geocities.com/terry1094/magnet_motor01.avi > >It generates about 4 Nm of torque in one cycle. It uses a very >efficient electromagnet to move the rotor beyond the peak gradient >point. The electromagnet uses about 1 Ws per pulse. I have to say, that is an impressive looking device, and the research seems serious. I do not know what to make of it, but I guess I should revise my previous statement that I know of no serious claims of over-unity magnet motors. As I understand it, this motor still requires electric power input, but the input seems to be smaller than the output. Terry told me they hope to make it self-sustain. That would certainly be indisputable proof. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:10:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HFAOI6001390; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:10:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HFAMEw001372; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:10:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:10:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:10:15 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C860374584BF46-C24-55E1@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69119 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Every magnetics researcher should have one . . . Status: O X-Status: http://www.magnetostatics.com/ pricey, tho. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:23:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HFNEPs009140; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:23:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HFNDmX009118; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:23:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:23:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004901c69221$f2150e00$6400a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:23:10 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69120 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Off Topic: El Filibusteros de OU Status: O X-Status: ... your alternative "Word-of-the-Day" ; and fitting tribute to this forum, perhaps. El Filibustero = "free-booter". If you saw the fine little film, "Walker" you were one of the few witnesses of such a jewel, and were treated to some fine 'strummer' music (another of those 'names that work'). Walker, sans fiction, was the prototypical Filibustero - which is a revived but antiquated concept in either old-Espanol or neo-Anglais. The Spanish "filibustero" once meant a common pirate - ultimately coming from the Dutch word "vrijbuiter" (free booter) and was first applied (in a highly derogatory sense) to persons raiding Spanish ships in the West Indies, the most famous of which was Sir Francis Drake (a fondly remembered murderer, thief, and scum-bag)... but nevertheless 'fondly remembered' because he was "our scum-bag" ...not unlike some of the modern-day crude-oil-filibusteros, operating out of 5-sided castles. Drake is now even regarded, in 'Merry Olde' at least, as a "sir". History is written by the winners. Nowadays, in the case of many vortex filibusterous-ramblings, booty=free-energy. But historically in the hot and sultry, soon-to-be 'banana republics', the word came to mean an "irregular military adventurer" especially from el norte: the displaced 'Yanqui' Johnny-Reb vet, looking for a fight under false-pretenses, and hopefully a fiefdom to run, and engaged in insurrection in Latin America in the mid-19th century ... of which there were many. Surprise, surprise. Our lauded agents of "manifest destiny" were also scum-bag pirates in the eyes of many, little different from Hitler's putschers ... but hey, history is written by the winners, no? Yep, many former noose-dodgers are now Alamo-heroes, thanks to filibusterous-martyrdom. The so-called "filibuster" in USA politics, in a strange turn of verbal nuance, refers to the use of extreme dilatory tactics to prevent action, especially in a legislative assembly... such as where an ornery senator (usually from the South for some reason) speaks incessantly about nada, or even reads from arcane books - arguing to empty chairs; and does not yield the floor for hours, even days, paralyzing the business of legislation, until he gets what he wants - or has to go to the bathroom. Sometimes he is standing in a pool instead. I guess political filibusteros have both water and outrageous conduct in common with the earlier models of same. El Filibusteros de OU ...has a nice ring, wouldn't you say? Especially for those of us free-booters who write outrageous pieces on the possibility-of-the-impossible - and even if they are not personally convinced - those who might advocate a renewed and well-financed look into the possibility of using water-as-fuel... free booters indeed, but are they proto-martyrs ? Depends on who will be writing the history of free-booting, oops I mean the history of free-energy for the next generation. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:46:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HFjlf3021157; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:45:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HFjbwq021095; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:45:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:45:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:42:27 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Fw: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <33116670.1150556887831.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> 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/69121 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Terry wrote: > >> Take a look at this device: >> >> http://geocities.com/terry1094/magnet_motor01.avi >> >> It generates about 4 Nm of torque in one cycle. It uses a very >> efficient electromagnet to move the rotor beyond the peak gradient >> point. The electromagnet uses about 1 Ws per pulse. > > I have to say, that is an impressive looking device, and the research seems > serious. I do not know what to make of it, but I guess I should revise my > previous statement that I know of no serious claims of over-unity magnet > motors. > > As I understand it, this motor still requires electric power input, but the > input seems to be smaller than the output. Terry told me they hope to make it > self-sustain. That would certainly be indisputable proof. > > - Jed > Maybe this magnetic motor is only violating the second law of thermodynamics rather than the law of conservation of energy. If so the power output would be proportional to some function of the ambient temperature. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 08:57:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HFurPI030309; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:56:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HFuqWl030277; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:56:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:56:52 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=BEMpES9VM8YKhRq82vRWp8zx2f4hyOFSr+r/0ycUWdOJW+OoNrovLFGgjyfEQYY9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066617155642952@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:56:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ba0a158e68459d2f0ceaf44412031b6e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.205 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69122 X-Loop: vortex-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 Not thinking this morning. Metal plates with a machined cavity filled with water and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole. Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them against the ceramic, of course. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/17/2006 9:00:31 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc I think that one can get a stable arc by using a circulating pump to power a water jet immersed below the water pool surface squirting water from a nozzle onto the anode. The dish sprayer at the kitchen sink held beneath the surface of water in a pan shows that the jets emerge intact when pointed upward. Borax and/or Baking Soda should get the conductivity up enough to run off 24 volts or so DC, if the area of the jet is sufficient. http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/dischg.htm#Glow ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Not thinking this morning.
 
Metal plates with a machined cavity  filled with water
and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate
with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should
create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole.
Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them
against the ceramic, of course.
 
Fred
 
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/17/2006 9:00:31 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc

I think that one can get a stable arc by using a
circulating pump to power a water jet  immersed below
the water pool surface squirting water from a nozzle onto the anode.
 
The dish sprayer at the kitchen sink held beneath the surface
of water in a pan shows that the jets emerge intact when
pointed upward.
 
Borax and/or Baking Soda should get the conductivity
up enough to run off 24 volts or so DC, if the area of the jet
is sufficient.
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 10:13:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HHDDmj011605; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:13:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HHDCZq011592; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:13:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:13:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:31:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5HHD9SC011547 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69123 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Status: O X-Status: Hi Terry, it seems to me this experiment can be further simplified: hold a paper clip underneath a magnet, and then open your fingers. The paper clip will rise to the magnet, therefore increasing it's gravitational potential energy between it's initial and final positions, thanks to the magnet. Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total energy of the system hasn't been conserved? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 3:53 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell > > I do not know of any experimental evidence that demonstrates > excess energy from magnets or springs. > > <><><><><><> > > Okay, I have seen three. All involve magnetic gradients which most > certainly perform work. I will try, one more time, to explain the most > simple one: > > http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm > > In this image a ball is dropped from 31 mm and from 35 mm into a curved > glass tube which constitutes an inclined plane. This is done with the > fingers of the experimenter who eats food for an energy source. The > second drop causes the ball to roll further up the inclined plane with > an increased energy of 0.424 mJ. The earth provides the kinetic energy. > > Now the experimenter replaces his fingers with a permanent magnetic > field and gets the same result. He places the ball at the 31 mm level > of the field gradient and the gradient lifts the ball to 35 mm. What > does the magnet eat??? > > This device demonstrates a COP of 1.133. I have personally tested > another magnetic gradient field device which presently operates with a > COP of 2.33 and will soon operate with a much higher one. I will be > happy to arrange for you to view the device. It is here in the > metropolitan area. > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 10:20:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HHK4RI014755; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:20:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HHJVkb014433; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:19:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:19:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <200606171719.k5HHJSDp038043@mail1.mx.voyager.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 12:19:29 -0500 From: "OrionWorks" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: svj@orionworks.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Every magnetics researcher should have one . . . Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_217777b30098d22ed821fe69ccfd4b61" X-Mailer: CoreComm Webmail X-IPAddress: 66.168.30.131 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69124 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=_217777b30098d22ed821fe69ccfd4b61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From Terry: > http://www.magnetostatics.com/ > > pricey, tho. > > Terry > Interesting images. Where is the link to the Flux Capacitor? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks --=_217777b30098d22ed821fe69ccfd4b61 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > From Terry:
> http://www.magnetostatics.com/
>
> pricey, tho.
>
> Terry
>

Interesting images.

Where is the link to the Flux Capacitor?


Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks --=_217777b30098d22ed821fe69ccfd4b61-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 10:47:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HHlYwQ026464; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:47:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HHlXTw026452; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:47:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:47:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:47:25 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <3GEVEB.A.OdG.0AElEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69125 X-Loop: vortex-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: Michel Jullian Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total energy of the system hasn't been conserved? <><><><><><> If the clip is lifted by a chemical reaction to the same height, you would have conventional conservation. The magnet might be conservative; but, not by any "conservative" explanation. :-) My point is simply that if you use an electromagnet to lift the clip, the Lorentz explanation holds and you clearly have a relativistic effect. However, if the clip is lifted by the spin magnetic momentum of an unfilled electron shell, we have an entirely different case, a quantum effect. As posted earlier, these forms of magnetism are not equivalent. Permanent magnet work might be an exchange between ZPE and mass, as Robin opines. This discussion is not dissimilar to Puthoff's explanation of why the electron in angular accelerating around the hydrogen nucleus does not radiate and collapse into the nucleus. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 11:27:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HIQcix015572; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:26:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HIQXuq015488; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:26:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:26:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=F00h99BYpc3502UlpbOz2PK/rtwqvXrOYwkvrNFdQGsio2eVppj+PYKm1jzlVad7; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066617182514305@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 12:25:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94037140aba672d92411b47a8155d096dc9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.2 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69126 X-Loop: vortex-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 Possibly a water-filled standpipe on one side pressurized up to a few thousand psi with air. Several small holes in the ceramic plate instead of one larger is another possibility. Water "pinch shaft" resistance before arc=plasma: rho = R*area/ length or R = rho * length/area ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/17/2006 9:57:21 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Metal plates with a machined cavity filled with water and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole. Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them against the ceramic, of course. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Possibly a water-filled standpipe on one side pressurized
up to a few thousand psi with air.
 
Several small holes in the ceramic plate instead of one larger is
another possibility.
 
Water "pinch shaft" resistance before arc=plasma:
 
rho = R*area/ length  or R = rho * length/area
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/17/2006 9:57:21 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc
 
Metal plates with a machined cavity  filled with water
and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate
with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should
create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole.
Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them
against the ceramic, of course.
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 13:53:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5HKr4PK030862; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:53:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5HKr2c7030822; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:53:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:53:02 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=IK64jaGCy4kFBv2BH7iz99WnWZn8Co0zXjZIUA4qnkt4P8xK4OFUzHyxUkd0Rq3T; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066617205247445@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 14:52:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940a6ca0b92b106d7f9e38095373eb2c6f1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.183 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69127 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A grease fitting on the side of the bottom chamber will allow filling the cavities with water or an electrolyte with a grease gun which will pressurize the standpipe with air or other gases that were in the cavities. ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/17/2006 12:27:46 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Possibly a water-filled standpipe on one side pressurized up to a few thousand psi with air. Several small holes in the ceramic plate instead of one larger is another possibility. Water "pinch shaft" resistance before arc=plasma: rho = R*area/ length or R = rho * length/area ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/17/2006 9:57:21 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc Metal plates with a machined cavity filled with water and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole. Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them against the ceramic, of course. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A grease fitting on the side of the bottom chamber
will allow filling the cavities with water or an electrolyte
with a grease gun which will pressurize the standpipe with
air or other gases that were in the cavities.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/17/2006 12:27:46 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc

Possibly a water-filled standpipe on one side pressurized
up to a few thousand psi with air.
 
Several small holes in the ceramic plate instead of one larger is
another possibility.
 
Water "pinch shaft" resistance before arc=plasma:
 
rho = R*area/ length  or R = rho * length/area
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/17/2006 9:57:21 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Water Jet Arc
 
Metal plates with a machined cavity  filled with water
and "O" Ring sealed on each side of an alumina or quartz plate
with a hole through it's center with voltage applied should
create a pinch- plasma arc through the hole.
Insulated bolts on the perimeter of the plates holding them
against the ceramic, of course.
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 17:43:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I0hF7H003138; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:43:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I0hERV003121; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:43:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:43:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <018301c6926b$d374a1f0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:11:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5I0h8g3003092 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69128 X-Loop: vortex-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: To: Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 7:47 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total > energy of > the system hasn't been conserved? > > <><><><><><> > > If the clip is lifted by a chemical reaction to the same height, you > would have conventional conservation. Chemical energy is nothing special, it's a combination of kinetic energies and electron-around-protons potential energies. > The magnet might be > conservative; but, not by any "conservative" explanation. :-) > > My point is simply that if you use an electromagnet to lift the clip, > the Lorentz explanation holds and you clearly have a relativistic > effect. Wait a minute, what do you mean by a relativistic effect? Is any particle moving at a sizeable fraction of the speed of light? > However, if the clip is lifted by the spin magnetic momentum > of an unfilled electron shell, we have an entirely different case, a > quantum effect. As posted earlier, these forms of magnetism are not > equivalent. > > Permanent magnet work might be an exchange between ZPE and mass, as > Robin opines. You mean permanent magnets are a challenge to current science? I have never heard them quoted as such. > This discussion is not dissimilar to Puthoff's explanation of why the > electron in angular accelerating around the hydrogen nucleus does not > radiate and collapse into the nucleus. Sorry to be such an ignoramus, but what is Puthoff's explanation of this non-collapsing phenomenon, which indeed contradicts classical electromagnetism (and was one of the main causes for inventing QM, and before that the semi-classical Bohr model)? Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 17:55:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I0tPtZ009373; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:55:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I0tM6o009336; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:55:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:55:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4494A46D.1020607@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:55:09 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.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/69129 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Jullian > > Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total > energy of > the system hasn't been conserved? > > <><><><><><> > > If the clip is lifted by a chemical reaction to the same height, you > would have conventional conservation. The magnet might be > conservative; but, not by any "conservative" explanation. :-) > > My point is simply that if you use an electromagnet to lift the clip, > the Lorentz explanation holds and you clearly have a relativistic > effect. However, if the clip is lifted by the spin magnetic momentum > of an unfilled electron shell, we have an entirely different case, a > quantum effect. As posted earlier, these forms of magnetism are not > equivalent. OK, Terry, you left me in the dust :-) My QM is 'way too weak to deal with this -- I can handle current loops but real lumps of iron are beyond me, I admit it. > > Permanent magnet work might be an exchange between ZPE and mass, as > Robin opines. > > This discussion is not dissimilar to Puthoff's explanation of why the > electron in angular accelerating around the hydrogen nucleus does not > radiate and collapse into the nucleus. > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 17:59:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I0wgA9010840; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:58:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I0weYD010815; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:58:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 17:58:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4494A53A.6060207@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:58:34 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <018301c6926b$d374a1f0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <018301c6926b$d374a1f0$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69130 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 7:47 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michel Jullian >> >> Work is performed indeed by the magnet, but why conclude that total >> energy of >> the system hasn't been conserved? >> >> <><><><><><> >> >> If the clip is lifted by a chemical reaction to the same height, you >> would have conventional conservation. >> > > Chemical energy is nothing special, it's a combination of kinetic energies and electron-around-protons potential energies. > > >> The magnet might be >> conservative; but, not by any "conservative" explanation. :-) >> >> My point is simply that if you use an electromagnet to lift the clip, >> the Lorentz explanation holds and you clearly have a relativistic >> effect. >> > > Wait a minute, what do you mean by a relativistic effect? Is any particle moving at a sizeable fraction of the speed of light? > Magnetism is one of the few effects which seems clearly to be a "relativistic effect" but which occurs when velocities are far, far less than C. The predicted magnetic field of a current can be obtained simply by Lorentz transforming the electric field from the rest frame of the charges making up the current to the frame of the observer moving relative to them. Remarkably, the result is a first-order effect -- first order in the relative velocities -- unlike just about everything else predicted by relativity. > >> However, if the clip is lifted by the spin magnetic momentum >> of an unfilled electron shell, we have an entirely different case, a >> quantum effect. As posted earlier, these forms of magnetism are not >> equivalent. >> >> Permanent magnet work might be an exchange between ZPE and mass, as >> Robin opines. >> > > You mean permanent magnets are a challenge to current science? I have never heard them quoted as such. > > >> This discussion is not dissimilar to Puthoff's explanation of why the >> electron in angular accelerating around the hydrogen nucleus does not >> radiate and collapse into the nucleus. >> > > Sorry to be such an ignoramus, but what is Puthoff's explanation of this non-collapsing phenomenon, which indeed contradicts classical electromagnetism (and was one of the main causes for inventing QM, and before that the semi-classical Bohr model)? > > Michel > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 18:51:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I1pYip005008; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 18:51:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I1pXre004991; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 18:51:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 18:51:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 21:51:26 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86090D85BAC40-2A4-901B@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <018301c6926b$d374a1f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <4494A53A.6060207@pobox.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <4494A53A.6060207@pobox.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5I1pUCg004957 Resent-Message-ID: <7FU7uB.A.5NB.kGLlEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69131 X-Loop: vortex-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: Stephen A. Lawrence The predicted magnetic field of a current can be obtained simply by Lorentz transforming the electric field from the rest frame of the charges making up the current to the frame of the observer moving relative to them. Remarkably, the result is a first-order effect -- first order in the relative velocities -- unlike just about everything else predicted by relativity.  <><><><><> There are no charges (q) involved in permanent magnets. I hereby extract myself from this discussion. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 20:01:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I31WAZ003910; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:01:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I31UkU003894; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:01:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:01:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:01:51 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69132 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > The E and B fields together form a rank 2 tensor (the "Faraday" > tensor). The application of that tensor to a charged particle's > 4-velocity yields the 4-force on that particle due to the EM field. > Changing FoR changes the components of the Faraday tensor but doesn't > change the effect it has on a particular object. This seems like a correct way of looking at the problem. Aren't you agreeing with my original point that the statement "magnetic fields never do work" is really not helpful in understanding electromagnetic forces. In commercial finite element analysis software forces are commonly calculated by using changes in magnetic field energy with position without any reference to electric fields. Do we need to change the way engineers think about these useful techniques. So where does the energy come from? Do you agree with my statement that it comes from both the ring and the dipole or do you say it all comes from the ring. George Holz Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 20:22:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I3LpPR011910; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:21:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I3Loto011888; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:21:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:21:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:21:38 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> In-Reply-To: <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <_isgeC.A.s5C.NbMlEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69133 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> The E and B fields together form a rank 2 tensor (the "Faraday" >> tensor). The application of that tensor to a charged particle's >> 4-velocity yields the 4-force on that particle due to the EM field. >> Changing FoR changes the components of the Faraday tensor but doesn't >> change the effect it has on a particular object. >> > > This seems like a correct way of looking at the problem. > Aren't you agreeing with my original point that the > statement "magnetic fields never do work" is really not > helpful in understanding electromagnetic forces. > In general I would both agree and disagree with this statement. It doesn't usually help in getting the "big picture" but it's a worthwhile point to keep in the back of your mind, just as a point of reference; if you're assuming you're doing work as a result of a B field acting on charges then something's probably wrong. > In commercial finite element analysis software > forces are commonly calculated by using changes > in magnetic field energy with position without any > reference to electric fields. Do we need to change the > way engineers think about these useful techniques. > No, of course not -- field energy's E^2+B^2, up to a scale factor, and ExB tells you where it's going. I've got no beef with that. > So where does the energy come from? Do you agree with > my statement that it comes from both the ring and the dipole > or do you say it all comes from the ring. > Every time I start thinking about the inertial mass of an electron I get a headache. In this case, the energy was put in by spinning up the ring to start with, and that's the energy we get back out. Whether it resided in the magnetic field of the ring while the ring was spinning, or in the inertia of the ring itself, is something which is beyond me just now (and luckily, for this problem it doesn't really make a difference...). Here's another good one: Does a free-falling charge radiate? > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 22:08:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I58EWH023067; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:08:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I581F7022820; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:08:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:08:01 -0700 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:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=dc3yqMCrvgTYJ56ML2Ar06ffNOm0aCd3/eXyQefwawsYk14bcPKKNUcfck3G8H96SCcS0sUaNzPICrY5arU79lUwTifV1GwNciNlgkJANtPXWXuMVgSPAxwQa1U/wXg8Qwmvc9eJj39P/A1NnbAWaRGXDlU8pguRFMVo9iqNhqs= Message-ID: Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 01:07:58 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Hydrox cooks In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_31717_3502742.1150607278656" References: Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69134 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_31717_3502742.1150607278656 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline IF YOU PLEASE Will any or all VO let us know the general and-or specific energy [energies] of-for-with: WATER: electrolytic decomposition ... volts, currents... h as gas ...h2 as gas ...o as gas --o2 as gas. and PLEASE ..... permit some party to arrive at some general non ambiguous ....common term [terms] of and for::: H H2 O O2 ----------------- electrolytic parameters... current, temperature. Time .... electrode types [leave us not forget M Schwartz] ............. can ANY Vorta please try to arrive at some common terms???? Or is-are this tooooo rough?? THANK On 6/15/06, john herman wrote: > > > General comment regarding aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion > experiments: > > NB: With aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments electric > circuit causes power to be applied to electrodes in a reaction cell. > > > Questions and Comments = QC > > QC: Can someone let us know, in general, the values of votage and > current or ranges for these measures? > QC: In how many cases do we find H and O produced? > QC: Can anyone let us know the MEASURED amounts of H and O? > QC: How are the measures arrived at....? Or are the amounts of H and O > "calculated?" and not measured? > QC: If measured are there real world empirical values for the energy > conveyed by the H and O ? > QC: Have the volumes of H and O been conveyed to fuel cells and-or have > the volumes of H and O been combusted to yield real world > thermal information....? > As opposed to the CALCULATED energy that MIGHT be available if one > was to exploit H and O ?? > > -------- > > QC: Can anyone post any of this information? > > > NB: Without this information investigators can only present part of > the "picture" regarding > Input ------> VS ----> Output ---> of and for CF. > > Please let all of know of the holes in the Question..... > > QC: Can this question be asked in some form that is more accurate or > effective or both? > > > Thank to you, > > JH > > > > > nn > > > > On 6/14/06, Jones Beene wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > > > > > > "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether, > > > he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two > > > inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen. > > > > > > Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part... > > there is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for > > mainstream guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines > > is laughable, right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim either. It is > > an open issue. > > > > If Don Hotson is partially correct in his interpretation of Dirac > > (but not completely) then the epo-BEC, which is the "aether" may > > have a number of temporal or spatial realties that are "not-quite" > > fully condensed - for varying lengths of time, or in certain > > environments ...? > > > > Jones > > > > > > ------=_Part_31717_3502742.1150607278656 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
 
 IF YOU PLEASE
 
    Will any or all VO let us know the general and-or specific energy [energies] of-for-with:
 
     WATER:    electrolytic decomposition ... volts, currents... h as gas ...h2 as gas ...o as gas --o2 as gas.
 
    and PLEASE .....
 
 permit some party to arrive at some general non ambiguous ....common term [terms] of and for:::
 
 H
 
 H2
 
 O
 
 O2
 
 -----------------
 
      electrolytic parameters... current, temperature.
  Time .... electrode types
 
 [leave us not forget M Schwartz]
 
      .............
 
 can  ANY Vorta
  please try to arrive at some common terms????
 
       Or is-are this tooooo  rough??
 
                THANK


 
On 6/15/06, john herman <hermajohn@gmail.com> wrote:
 
   General comment regarding aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments:
 
     NB:   With aqueous electrolyte based cold fusion experiments electric circuit causes power to be applied to electrodes in a reaction cell.
 
      
Questions and Comments = QC
 
QC:   Can someone let us know, in general, the values of votage and current or ranges for these measures?
QC:   In how many cases do we find H and O produced?
QC:  Can anyone let us know the MEASURED amounts of H and O?
QC:  How are the measures arrived at....?  Or are the amounts of H and O "calculated?" and not measured?
QC:  If measured are there real world empirical values for the energy conveyed by the H and O ?
QC:  Have the volumes of H and O been conveyed to fuel cells and-or have the volumes of H and O been combusted to yield real world thermal information....?
       As opposed to the CALCULATED energy that MIGHT be available if one was to exploit H and O  ??
 
--------
 
QC:          Can anyone post any of this information?
 
 
   NB:  Without this information investigators can only present part of the "picture" regarding
Input  ------>  VS ---->  Output ---> of and for CF.
 
     Please let all of know of the holes in the Question.....
 
 QC:   Can this question be asked in some form that is more accurate or effective or both? 
 
 
     Thank to you,
 
                  JH
 
 
 
 
nn
 

 
On 6/14/06, Jones Beene <jonesb9@pacbell.net > wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: < hohlrauml6d@netscape.net >


> "In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the Aether,
> he put forward an incorrect hypothesis that there existed two
> inert chemical elements of lesser atomic weight than hydrogen.


Maybe ... but lest we be too hasty with the "incorrect" part...
there is also "helionon" of Walter Russell ... and to look for
mainstream guidance, well the "official" explanation for the lines
is laughable, right ? Too bad Mills can't take claim either. It is
an open issue.

If Don Hotson is partially correct in his interpretation of Dirac
(but not completely) then the epo-BEC, which is the "aether" may
have a number of temporal or spatial realties that are "not-quite"
fully condensed - for varying lengths of time, or in certain
environments ...?

Jones


 

------=_Part_31717_3502742.1150607278656-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 22:21:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I5LPKC028920; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:21:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I5LO2R028910; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:21:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:21:24 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=X5OKF8VSXHsu1JoeqvWz5jkJinee0/EIFtcmTm5hAthMR/dmfxMXFbsx+D98akvPHZ/KtEeVDHLWIv0IT5kgRjwVhO2dFN/m5kBlr224ZMOC3DaLKiY7zHpxRUsM20FSMFXeVg/ihQ3AEyzX+eSnLrsqheR5/cgL4uUwH0g8AM4= Message-ID: Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 01:21:21 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_31777_900556.1150608081587" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69135 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Status: RO X-Status: ------=_Part_31777_900556.1150608081587 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Vo, Will any contributor please let the lay population of Votex know what the general terms mean if one reads: GAGE GAGUE re gage re gague re gageu or any variants of the above.... I fully realize these terms may have been mis spelled can these be described or be re described in such a manner that lay persons can understand what the terms mean... are there units involved ... how will one know what these terms mean if one were to find them in general discussion in vortex venue? I ask this to understand this term, to begin with... Further..... I hope others in and of votrtex will ask this and similar terms to be understood.... some how.... OR: How will we know what vortexians are trying to talk about?? On 6/17/06, hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > > http://www.magnetostatics.com/ > > pricey, tho. > > Terry > > ------=_Part_31777_900556.1150608081587 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
 
 
   Dear Vo,
 
   Will any contributor  please let the lay population of Votex know what the general terms mean if one reads:
 
      GAGE
      GAGUE
    re gage
   re gague
  re gageu
 
     or any variants of the above....
 
    I  fully realize these terms may have been mis spelled
 
      can these be described  or be re described
 in such a manner that lay persons can understand what the terms mean... are there units involved ...
  how will one know what these  terms mean if one were to find them in general discussion in vortex venue?
 
         I ask this to understand this term, to begin with...
 
       Further.....
 
  I hope others in and of votrtex will ask this and similar terms to be understood.... some how....
 
        OR:
 
      How will we know what vortexians are trying to talk about??
 

 

------=_Part_31777_900556.1150608081587-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Jun 17 23:51:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I6pqCX001708; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:51:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I6pdvY001651; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:51:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:51:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060618065136394.603171C001C3@mwinf3004.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060618065138.00bbf4c8@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:51:38 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Resent-Message-ID: <3PXQ6D.A.vZ.6fPlEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69136 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 01:21 am 18/06/2006 -0400, John Herman wrote: > Dear Vo, > > Will any contributor please let the lay population of Votex know what >the general terms mean if one reads: > > GAGE > GAGUE > re gage > re gague > re gageu > > or any variants of the above.... > > I fully realize these terms may have been mis spelled > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" There is really no excuse for this type of sloppiness in a scientific discussion. It is insulting to other members. I know English may not be your first language and that might excuse the incorrect use of there instead of their, say, but it does not excuse the misspelling of vortex which even an bastardised American-English spelling checker will find. ;-) Cheers, Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 02:53:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5I9rRk5010210; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:53:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5I9rFOw010130; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:53:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:53:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <01c901c692b8$5ae5b880$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <12184788.1150426848932.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <8C85F5FC3DEC612-EC4-4457@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <8C85F635B285B4A-EC4-466D@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> <01f001c69159$fdadcae0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8604D3A7EED85-24DC-3EA0@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <018301c6926b$d374a1f0$3800a8c0@zothan> <4494A53A.6060207@pobox.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:19:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5I9rA69010099 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69137 X-Loop: vortex-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: "Stephen A. Lawrence" >>> My point is simply that if you use an electromagnet to lift the clip, >>> the Lorentz explanation holds and you clearly have a relativistic >>> effect. >>> >> >> Wait a minute, what do you mean by a relativistic effect? Is any particle moving at a sizeable fraction of the speed of light? >> > Magnetism is one of the few effects which seems clearly to be a > "relativistic effect" You are quite right indeed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field Although this page doesn't seem to make a distinction between macroscopic current loops as in electromagnets and the microscopic ones (electron orbits) at play in permanent magnets, I quite understand Terry's point about the mystery of the electron not loosing energy while orbiting it's nucleus leaving room to hope of tapping free energy from the process! > but which occurs when velocities are far, far less > than C. Amazingly so! In the case of a current loop, in a copper wire of cross-section 0.5 mm˛, carrying a current of 5 A, the drift velocity of the electrons is of the order of a millimetre per second. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current#The_drift_speed_of_electric_charges ) Almost unbelievable that such a low velocity leads to such a large relativistic effect, but I guess we can trust Einstein's maths :) > The predicted magnetic field of a current can be obtained simply by > Lorentz transforming the electric field from the rest frame of the > charges making up the current to the frame of the observer moving > relative to them. Remarkably, the result is a first-order effect -- > first order in the relative velocities -- unlike just about everything > else predicted by relativity. Indeed, thanks Terry and Stephen for making me less ignorant, I did remember that all electromagnetism stemmed from the coulombic force but I had completely missed the relativistic aspect of magnetic forces, which makes them frame-dependent indeed as Stephen said. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 04:56:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IBtxZ4000917; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 04:55:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IBtqjV000853; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 04:55:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 04:55:52 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=shJFV9cpTrFDBezwhLhU+BIHt4ZAjhTgB5OZt9p98y89OeFWAAgUnFBRQdvHhdce; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066018115537720@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:55:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94001df81e5659a5ce6e8c5d49c62c23460350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.234 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69138 X-Loop: vortex-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 Michel Jullian wrote: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current#The_drift_speed_of_electric_charges > > Almost unbelievable that such a low velocity leads to such a large relativistic > effect, but I guess we can trust Einstein's maths. > If you read between the lines Michel, I think you will find that the electron itself is the relativistic current loop with it's intrinsic charge "circling" at c. I = q* c/hbar = 19.8 amperes. If you go a step further you will start believing that the 1/R^2 gravity force is a time-dilated charge property (magneto-gravity) of these current loops that are the very essence of matter. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Michel Jullian wrote:
>
>
>
> Almost unbelievable that such a low velocity leads to such a large relativistic
> effect, but I guess we can trust Einstein's maths.
>
If you read between the lines Michel, I think you will find that
the electron itself is the relativistic current loop with it's
intrinsic charge "circling" at c.
I = q* c/hbar = 19.8 amperes. 
 
If you go a step further you will start believing that the 1/R^2
gravity force is a time-dilated charge property  (magneto-gravity)
of these current loops that are the very essence of matter.  :-)
 
Fred

 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 05:05:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IC5cYh005344; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:05:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IC5baT005322; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:05:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:05:37 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=TolgWzlKi2WXYC9YjsFGI8uU/LMhI5OFlTCLjMe9vvCQHE5Q+yEgHHe/mGOaQtah; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006601812528229@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:05:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940004b2fbb881707b31d6c9c69f59169da350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.234 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69139 X-Loop: vortex-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 Make that electron Loop Current I = q* c/lambda Lambda = 2(pi)R = the Compton Wavelength (h/mc) Sorry about that. :-( Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/18/2006 5:56:25 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) Michel Jullian wrote: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current#The_drift_speed_of_electric_charges > > Almost unbelievable that such a low velocity leads to such a large relativistic > effect, but I guess we can trust Einstein's maths. > If you read between the lines Michel, I think you will find that the electron itself is the relativistic current loop with it's intrinsic charge "circling" at c. I = q* c/hbar = 19.8 amperes. If you go a step further you will start believing that the 1/R^2 gravity force is a time-dilated charge property (magneto-gravity) of these current loops that are the very essence of matter. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Make that  electron Loop Current  I = q* c/lambda 
 
Lambda = 2(pi)R = the Compton Wavelength (h/mc)
 
Sorry about that. :-(
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/18/2006 5:56:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again)

Michel Jullian wrote:
>
>
>
> Almost unbelievable that such a low velocity leads to such a large relativistic
> effect, but I guess we can trust Einstein's maths.
>
If you read between the lines Michel, I think you will find that
the electron itself is the relativistic current loop with it's
intrinsic charge "circling" at c.
I = q* c/hbar = 19.8 amperes. 
 
If you go a step further you will start believing that the 1/R^2
gravity force is a time-dilated charge property  (magneto-gravity)
of these current loops that are the very essence of matter.  :-)
 
Fred

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 05:33:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ICX2ce016608; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:33:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ICWxrO016572; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:32:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 05:32:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000c01c692d3$5037b260$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:31:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C692A9.4787D390"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69140 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]:PLEASE...RE and not RE. Hunchbabe verbal shorthand Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C692A9.4787D390 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0009_01C692A9.4787D390" ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C692A9.4787D390 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blankjohn herman wrote... I hope others in and of votrtex will ask this and similar terms to be = understood.... some how.... OR: How will we know what vortexians are trying to talk about?? Howdy John, You may become aware as others that the English language is evolving = into a "hunchbabe" style communication medium. These evolving forms no = longer concern proper spelling and diction. Those old forms of English = are left to the Brits. Perhaps the most change is occurring in the = communities where a new combination of ebonics, rap, and latino is = melding into a "jungle " mumbo-jumb. This strange new language may = consist of certain English words used as terms of endearment and = entertainment such as Mo' F*u and other close personal idioms spoken = within one's particular family and culture.When spoken outside one's = family, the words may produce the anticipated results of gunfire but = within the family they are designed to fill a sentence that would = otherwise be incomplete since the connection between the brain and the = tongue of the people that practice this " hunch" language would = otherwise be seen as ignorant unless everyone listening has a "joint" = between their lips while listening or talking. The amazing product resulting from the discovery of this new form of = English is gobs of money that result from publishing dictionaries ( on = CD's) in the form of a curious cross between gestures and sound. Another = result has been the rise of a new form of capitalism called "FEMA = vouchers" and Welfare suppliments" that can lift one from poverty = instantly.The scientific breakthrough emerging from the money spent on = research by these groups is astonishing. New forms of chemistry like = "crack" and "meth" substances can catapult a person into entire new = world of reality that seemingly exceeds the speed of sound while they = are able to understand the music when off into space.Certain of these = new technologies still remain a mystery to the average "fringe" = scientist. Vorts refuse to keep up with the new language of " hunchbaby" and = therefore must use a "shorthand" type technical language described as " = tell it like it is". Difficult to fathom using a Webster's dictionary = but you " get the drift". Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C692A9.4787D390 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
john herman wrote...
 
  I hope others in and of votrtex will ask this and similar = terms to=20 be understood.... some how....
 
        OR:
 
      How will we know what vortexians are = trying=20 to talk about??

 

Howdy John,

You may become aware as others that the English language is evolving = into a=20 "hunchbabe" style communication medium. These evolving forms no longer = concern=20 proper spelling and diction. Those old forms of English are = left to=20 the Brits. Perhaps the most change is occurring in the  communities = where a=20 new combination of ebonics, rap, and latino is melding into a "jungle "=20 mumbo-jumb. This strange new language may consist of certain English = words used=20 as terms of endearment and entertainment such as Mo' F*u and other close = personal idioms spoken within one's particular family and culture.When = spoken=20 outside one's family, the words may produce the anticipated results of = gunfire=20 but within the family they are designed to fill a sentence that would = otherwise=20 be incomplete  since the connection between the brain and the = tongue of the=20 people that practice this " hunch" language would otherwise be seen as = ignorant=20 unless everyone listening has a "joint" between their lips while = listening or=20 talking.

The amazing product resulting from the discovery of this new form of = English=20 is gobs of money that result from publishing dictionaries ( on CD's) in = the form=20 of a curious cross between gestures and sound. Another result has = been the=20 rise of a new form of capitalism called "FEMA vouchers" and Welfare = suppliments"=20 that can lift one from poverty instantly.The scientific breakthrough = emerging=20 from the money spent on research by these groups is astonishing. New = forms=20 of chemistry like "crack" and "meth" substances  can = catapult a=20 person into entire new world of reality that seemingly  exceeds the = speed=20 of sound while they are able to understand the music when off into=20 space.Certain of these new technologies still remain a mystery to the = average=20 "fringe" scientist.

Vorts refuse to keep up with the new language of " hunchbaby" and = therefore=20 must use a "shorthand" type technical language described as " tell it = like it=20 is". Difficult to fathom using a Webster's dictionary but you " get the=20 drift".

Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0009_01C692A9.4787D390-- ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C692A9.4787D390 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000701c692d3$3046f830$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C692A9.4787D390-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 06:50:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IDoJvo019172; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:50:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IDoIbs019155; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:50:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:50:18 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=a0y1iU6TbWUo7J7HAolrMPdhM3wJhTPfliPVZcyX1SgL+MAgPntYkbnM5LAY/Pcv; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <28718704.1150638617238.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 09:50:16 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re:[VO]:PLEASE...RE and not RE. Hunchbabe verbal shorthand Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191c173453c6c4e11355850491b045cb346fc6838240c85ba05d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.27 Resent-Message-ID: <-1B__.A.PrE.aoVlEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69141 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: RC Macaulay wrote: >You may become aware as others that the English language is evolving into a "hunchbabe" style communication > medium. These evolving forms no longer concern proper spelling and diction. Those old forms of English are left > to the Brits. On the contrary, American Engish is older than most British dialects, and black American dialects are among the oldest. This is typical of language cut off from the mainstream in a sparsely populated area, as American English was for 300 years. Japanese and Chinese dialects S.E. Asia, S. America and even Los Angeles show the same pattern. In the late 18th century, many British visitors described language used by George Washington and others as quaint and absurdly formal. That is the impression some Americans now get from British English, but Americans are wrong -- we never dropped our "r"s. Custom period dramas with Americans speaking pseudo British accents have it backwards. The U.S. did reform spelling somewhat more than the British have done, starting in the early 19th century. > Perhaps the most change is occurring in the communities where a new combination of ebonics, rap, > and latino is melding into a "jungle " mumbo-jumb. Such combinations rarely survive, which is a darn shame. Regional variations of American English have been largely squashed by television and radio. Black American Gullah dialects on the East Coast are probably the oldest form of spoken English on earth. Practically Elizebethan. If you think they are "degraded" or "easy" try studying them. They should be declared a national treasure, but alas they are close to extinction. (Seriously, it would not be fair to force people to speak ancient and rare dialects, but it breaks my heart to see them disappear.) Needless to say, Spanish was spoken in North America 150 years before English become common. It is a little odd to say they are invading us. Who started the Mexican-American War? >The amazing product resulting from the discovery of this new form of English . . . You mean old. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 06:53:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IDqxl7021016; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:52:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IDqvUU020990; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:52:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 06:52:56 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.64231123"; Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:26:10 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <29635852.20060618082610@eskimo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: cheap medicine - wOrthy effect Thread-Index: Xuhby4turFpFr6CvvNarDRN8qS5fw5== From: "Heriberto" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Return-Path: billb@eskimo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: eskimo.com, Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:26:10 -0600 X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69142 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: cheap medicine - wOrthy effect Status: RO X-Status: A ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.64231123 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.64231123" ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.64231123 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 ERDFBdpTlnusmKKuqT14slPlIq1X6v6I8Q1u18VHCrfzuYddJP36u9z4frKhWUIKdcLILDvbkLx1 7nXUUWKjjDa6G0oUqhW2CEK9kqD7ar5kRZGWlgJAhQOF3wy7bY1cCj2zNep6EwZc046rev8PDORoJWf 04s9goyLCcBZAxd104ogzMrh80WaLqpLDooPHGUWs0zbYaO3JJySTregkyd8jYAzHmn9pr OVTCHxIbQOfEXdijAmLYCgR2mAfCRqg6d9rXYYjHuFUBba0YCbkG3bM0OstxXItxmrwa0Gs s2YE2Bhjrclotfr2AqZZTKQO21MmzESH0EttBpYv4ce5Sp2UedITFscfu0C5vjYwHka93A1m Xlmt4Zacwb7vCLdoVsdn9C2myDxDqz8YuN1P7gWOzEt4hg7ljGNKwhypw1YJtOFeGfzVWVRP2Iyjx Y5uTIIc6ELYHQVK8q20u8NvmcihTpzx1jhfMKRF5dePNMTz9JCbErD6IBlNOIpg1MlGwAAEQhnj3vB DNXBvUT4bCWNvm5eAApRyNVQJnQzWxasW0mQXeOhGPqDIZz2HcTmakj1lIwlHQvton0SW2GOK bRrjoRIb2uVi6Qryj74T8PCucz9d6lUEpTLCYzxnI3dWlnihdxuyVhexNoHm4Pj8qiqIWi9zfx X338phGcvjWa3OiD4tq1LY1uY0B2P8KPs4dh7TSIkEtxeIMvjbB0NgcrAr0ff3DJKvCRzer8ifk ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.64231123 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= /span>

ERDFBdpTlnusmKKuqT14slPlIq1X6v6I8Q1u18VHCrfzuYddJP36u9z4frKhWUIKdcLILDvbkLx1
7nXUUWKjjDa6G0oUqhW2CEK9kqD7ar5kRZGWlgJAhQOF3wy7bY1cCj2zNep6EwZc046rev8PDORoJWf
04s9goyLCcBZAxd104ogzMrh80WaLqpLDooPHGUWs0zbYaO3JJySTregkyd8jYAzHmn9pr
OVTCHxIbQOfEXdijAmLYCgR2mAfCRqg6d9rXYYjHuFUBba0YCbkG3bM0OstxXItxmrwa0Gs
s2YE2Bhjrclotfr2AqZZTKQO21MmzESH0EttBpYv4ce5Sp2UedITFscfu0C5vjYwHka93A1m
Xlmt4Zacwb7vCLdoVsdn9C2myDxDqz8YuN1P7gWOzEt4hg7ljGNKwhypw1YJtOFeGfzVWVRP2Iyjx
Y5uTIIc6ELYHQVK8q20u8NvmcihTpzx1jhfMKRF5dePNMTz9JCbErD6IBlNOIpg1MlGwAAEQhnj3vB
DNXBvUT4bCWNvm5eAApRyNVQJnQzWxasW0mQXeOhGPqDIZz2HcTmakj1lIwlHQvton0SW2GOK
bRrjoRIb2uVi6Qryj74T8PCucz9d6lUEpTLCYzxnI3dWlnihdxuyVhexNoHm4Pj8qiqIWi9zfx
X338phGcvjWa3OiD4tq1LY1uY0B2P8KPs4dh7TSIkEtxeIMvjbB0NgcrAr0ff3DJKvCRzer8ifk
------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.64231123-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.64231123 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image102.gif" Content-ID: Content-Description: image102.gif Content-Location: image102.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODdhoQGbACIAACwAAAAAoQGbAIIAAAD4+PgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/xi63P4w ykmrvTjrzbv/YCiOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK7vfO//wKBwSCwaj8ikcslsOp/QqHRKrVqv 2Kx2y+16v+CweEwum8/otHrNbrvf8Lh8Tq/b7/g5YA8I9D1/C3yDHIF5h4gQhnuAhoIMjhaR iZR5kZMYk46YEpyVn3GeHZoOoqWgqHamjA2skH2krYKsfH60qbhym7V+Cou+kL6xwb3Axcem ucpisb/Hxc6y0rPGyMvXas3EztHE3oyBsN7Y5GSX1dDb44/f7L3d5fFgm+zc267uz3/4+PL+ zIRelbok7tWgXbDCTfvHsCE6hxAbJotIMVW/ihgzatzIsf+jx48gQ4ocSbKkyZMoU6pcybKl y5cwY8qcSbOmzZs4c+rcybOnz59AgwodSrSo0aNIkypdyrSp06dQo0qVcRAenImaLpKY+IDr w2dFFdrCdVEsD60R0CK1R/aUkGRmm7K16DYI3HxM5/IStsjV3oHB+u1NODBhuMPCgAkeyzid 4IKz/P4qi5bXPsZ+GyOjDK7xZX4BcZq9bEws6bj1+FZTaLmuaXeGCyd+F9uaZnSntaJ2XPtW 69J4NyvuvXpnaGjHMbdKrg8331tfX6cG3hU29XTB45JOe05d8ebI/37HLh2sTW2AEX8dtx17 u1Pav2Mafb19d/CcOgOuP526J/r/7m3n1UrovddfdQe2N15g+Qi4nm3kJeiadxMqwt91EaZl XYCR8VRgbv4FF6CDF+53YS3zbUhieAutKE1ZIcpH4m7iSFeeTgcZpJpq4ICW32QI8aibiYnV piOKVfWIGELq2ZIVYTo6iWRsUDq543JWJqmklANOpaEIXZ4RJiALeVkImIeMOUqZZmYgngZq hRLnCTm2aeedeOap55589uknOXVCMcwEahLaQqFk3oBoBYsys8Wcs5UAKQiTmlBpCpcW0mgY /0k6A1YoeDXmpnDSsBuaD+rSiadUSRJqJmd+aqqIIZyqxyO0WJZZZz4+Jws/nh1GpUDCYnkO sJKlh1mx/1JeGSVtVOa6z5ZWyjbcs9XSthxrffHaLa4/Rlbjt9dmy+mOK/YG3Y3oOpuuZ7MB +FhucyEnX38K2vauvtPdN+2J4L77pnAc/vYibKcFfOA8KoprXz0BDfowvhhOa7B59WZ87zSr JLygchiyaVpy0JUWsYUfl3wfhyZfTCoT8mb33soNOmfdjflapbGE/LY4X0GsvUMsrgLV1bCy +Blt4JIfJ73xOplWEXN0MyttczdBV0y1zDxr3fM6GFNc44ZCi1yhv1dbPd6MXJeYM4KO3gvZ xCxDFi9eD8urn76PpXy1fiimBrRbKv8LcdHuHV13vPumOLfJTRf89cQvG6Fllv/M6qpuk+B2 iDjCTDs71rHMUmMsNaVL25WSmeHWY4OVqa55h95uK3qRW05JLZaoUzv7lZXXEfwIw/9Q/Kp/ MmpXF8cjn3wnUbsw8BTR11r989hnr/323Hfv/ffgz6N582hsSjPco1wvlFXKqP/5C7bKRasl hipfYQwDkl9SvoiIAur9MMjfWswTrEh1TjOze9NfcgSlBaoFWfTom68slKzRObB2q4HR7cw1 wQtOMCwIApDn1kUxjhVnMCU8GAerVR7/NQ5uvvGY6d62tcmlCigrc9HaeBc/lblufDl8EM5u 6LTEkU2GhKOABot2vqEEEUJHRB3RVre4tqGPf18zotH/2HY/AQ0jdmGTYhiP8kQaKS5rJgQe 2Dq1MMVpsUVPW9pDaIa2NGpRf/sLIcTosTHQhJCGT/sQymyYHxXx6lc9o6Ei6+jDsjmROX0L 0pQwRyskcclcHlRE6WhXQcatbhf2MhbrdsfJJyFwkqozYPjUhj4C+gCPq4TZBfj4lli+IWqB sqUud8nLXvryl8AMpjCVyByptUpRr7oCXNzHSo5FD5ZEjAIz4QRNTdKpmvBbxfzc1LHIcSeA sDpC/DCFg1HBEAvatJT91FRNUSFhnMm0gTkBSIV0sqp+7ATnskpJEFAecFdBKpcCA9cr+Bgu hpGqkhpTabtyiXFbqTwOIRQ6/73BANSAFQ0NZZDGQY0CyVq/Ihe0vvU7bQWLVFPjX0pzNRyB tW6MJJxjTKF1N5BZA4UwZeHh0siuDJaoXwoDmRnjSDkkpm2FUKypjc6ZyBR+YGoiKqMb/dmt JY5MgSWEanhK5komds2QF4viJdlUU75h1Ws7K+RRv2lHpTJ1hjKaXqnWdiqpElWM7BMrG6uY RUCqEq9fjeN6tEpFwAqWpxRKHOfI9sYidXFwrrQb4A5LKca+0a59veuXsni2FFJObYwMrBrJ SliUtbCNDS2iYs221rYGMmRTbCps12TWCNHytDLKLXjC9rikJnJvuM1sGBvJojUKDpHBBapN kzvY1v9a7I4UStFtfjtbRx60Zb7lJiif+9eOFguVpzRMQUW5OdnoiqaT9C53kao7I+3NYZ6b bu4Y+qz2Ym69BvEj74a2Qo/G90gknW+SrjhKx27wCdgcAy2bsOC8yKPBS4BwUuRKlmJG2MLD zLCGN8zhDnv4wyDu3/jKYb5mblMS0/RJXitsPVlFc8InVkX9lPhWfc5ygF3Fg/9cRU/puWmA WZkh6TAqO87kd1zueuBHA+PPZlFQPazLr0k34y/dcAa/IzaKIGV6XRsitqVn1GN/GwlP4qoU rjN1q2shxEUybrFpIixruPoaMUgmtmqoZQ9lU/qlborMryCEo29FCNzIQnagtWStWWR5tuOs vtWLMPzZGEdXQy2/edBhVsyjXzrpS0sX0Y0GWBfnqLQ6yrHTRNmyeFb6PshNmrk/PTUaR50l sIwtRt1Z5NnYluCN5FKV772vsDkN4Etm8sAnNW8n9wlSA2+0vUYq5SfDGy3gYRF8/4txDnod YvzdGGyv7LYWcIlhcZv73OhOt7rXze52u/vd8I63vOdN73rb+974JkICAAA7 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.64231123-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 08:10:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IF9mUD025562; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:09:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IF9liF025542; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:09:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:09:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:09:44 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <6fF9QB.A.9OG.6yWlEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69143 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Priceless ! Status: RO X-Status: Apologies in advance to European readers who will not appreciate the contextual nuances in this post (first in a series): which is a take-off on the "MasterCharge" series of television advertisements in the USA. It is perhaps appropriate to use this particular cultural gimmick for 'drama' - as opposed to parody, in the eponymous context of "charged-water", and furthering the outlandish possibility of that particular brew (electrically charged water) being produced and used as a substitute fuel for automotive transportation and home power. Anyway - the once-clever but now insufferable voice-over in this familiar Ad-theme, begins: and with a background camera shot panning a gentle rain on a mirrored country lane; then to a typical suburban home; and then to a close-up of its gurgling rain-gutter: 1) "Bucket of rainwater - ten cents" Then camera pans to a corner of the family garage, wherein a stainless steel contraption resides (seeming to glow): 2) "Overnight water treatment - twenty cents" Then the camera retreats to a sunny day and the soccer Mom cruising in the SUV filled with rowdy kids; a cell-phone glued to one-ear: 3) "Not stopping at the filing station - forty bucks saved" and then the camera flashes to a beautiful Pacific sunset, with the denouement: 4) "Pure air and clean water" [pause for effect] "Priceless" Ha! " in your dreams" ...that would be the first reaction, from the "establishment" lurkers on vortex... MasterCharged water: is it pure science fiction: Jules Verne at his best? Hmm, maybe... perhaps the establishment is correct (they usually are) but how often is Jules-jilted? Here is how they (the Don Lancaster tunnel-blinded clones of the world) could be wrong -and yet - with all our cherished laws of physics still intact. It is not magic, just a prior failure to look in the right places. ... And for that explosive touch of television overkill, we will add the voice-over: "we know drama" effect, which comes from you-know-who (TNT), as the use of such a fuel will involve making water into what is most accurately called an "exploding capacitor", not a "real fuel" but who cares?... ...and returning to our TV set, and the camera-shot of the glowing orange sunset... then- enter stage-left: Randy Mills, and stage-right: the reinterpreters of Randy Mills, and our host, James Burke, Jr. trying to explain to the PBS audience how all of this came-to-be "connected." The solar-derived hydrino-hydride, if it exists ... and Randy says it does, who are we mortals to argue ... is likely to be many wonderful things not anticipated by Mills himself, say his reinterpreters. Including the fact that a small percentage of rain-water, and a larger percentage of the oceans, and the so-called "fair weather" field, and core-heating of earth, and even the pervasive "dark matter" of the Cosmos [in that every star in the sky has been spewing them out for billions of years]: all of these are related directly to hydinohydride. This species consists of a maximum enthalpy hydrino (n=1/16) and two electrons in a very tight, very stable arrangement. It is about 4000 times more compact than hydrogen on earth but cannot aggregate closely in space with other Hy- because it has net charge and a strong near-field. It can filter its way into matter, since it will displace an electron. For all practical purposes it **is** a heavy stable electron. As with hydrogen itself - there really is NO monatomic hydrogen in nature (on a sensory timescale) and there is no unhydrided hydrino, except for the limpid ones made in labs. Forget the lab-made variety, who needs 'em? This species has a strong affinity for the positive end of an H-O-H molecule and will fall to earth as Hy-hydronium, in rainwater, or alternatively as carbonic acid with a Hy substitution - which is the likely way it enters our world in PPM or less quantities. Soon it will displace an electron somewhere and become truly "invisible". If a mass-spec were to be set up correctly, they could be detected, but if you think about it - most of these tools cannot be stet up correctly because this species was never considered to be possible before. Catch-22. On earth this species, hydrinohydride, is little-more than a substitute electron and is totally hidden in other atoms, and will slowly accumulate over geologic time in the oceans, but eventually migrate to the heavier elements, especially iron. Most of solar-derived hydrinohydride will have ended up in the earth's core, possibly providing the retained level of heating, upon its decay (pressure instigated decay). After decay, the reinflated hydrogen finds a carbon and becomes methane (of the non-bio-variety). However for an extended time, they are present in the ocean and especially in rain water in ppm quantities. For the sake of argument, lets consider the possibility that rainwater has a small but usable proportion. Normal rainwater has a pH of 5.6 (slightly acidic). This is normally attributed to the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The carbon dioxide gets dissolved in the rainwater and forms carbonic acid. However, as inasmuch as the Hy - [if it is a reality in nature'] - would strongly favor carbonic acid in the atmosphere, and immediately displace an electron there or attach to water vapor - so we can go on to suggest that a fair percentage of the small natural acidity of rainwater is due to solar-derived hydrinohydride. Does that factoid, if true, set the stage for Act II of this series: "Priceless: the Saga of MasterCharged Water" ? Stay tuned ... or set your spam filter appropriately. Signed, Harry F. Tuttle, a.k.a. El Filibustero From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 08:42:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IFfsjH012289; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:41:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IFfqWR012254; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:41:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:41:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004101c692ed$b73d2520$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:41:49 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69144 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Status: RO X-Status: It had been my intention to see who would be the first to comment on: > 1) "Bucket of rainwater - ten cents" ... as being related to the high cost of everything these days, if bought with nearly wothless warbucks ... but to clarify the point: ... here is the situation which could result in a substantial true-cost for collecting "active" rainwater. This also relates to a solution for retaining that (putative) solar-derived hydrinohydride, which is supposedly available in rainwater, before it can "disappear" into everything, including shingles, cistens, bottles or whatever. After all, if we look at hydrinohydride as lttle more than a very heavy electron, then it is obvious that it will diffuse into everything, given time and no "disincentive". In fact that is the very reason that this species can have gone undetected by modern science. The solution is a small negative charge, which must be active ab initio, from the start to the end product (when the charged-water is used in an ICE). That's right. A negatively-charged roof (metal roof required), charged-guttering, and charged-cistern, ect. will all probably be necessary in order to keep these elusive hydrino-guys from going anywhere, due to natural diffusion. Almost any small negative charge will likely be effective - and the 10 cents per bucketfull might suffice... although a kilowatt applied during a rain storm might be on the low side for a large roof .... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 09:19:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IGJI5n000433; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 09:19:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IGJH4A000413; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 09:19:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 09:19:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:19:13 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8610A1253D5AB-163C-A030@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <004101c692ed$b73d2520$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <004101c692ed$b73d2520$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5IGJFad000387 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69145 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re Priceless ! Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene Almost any small negative charge will likely be effective - and the 10 cents per bucketfull might suffice... although a kilowatt applied during a rain storm might be on the low side for a large roof ....     <><><><><><> If your hypothesis is correct, should not burning my grandmother's old rain barrel generate more heat than burning another equivalent mass of wood? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 10:08:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IH7ojD022891; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:07:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IH7lg1022855; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:07:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:07:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <005001c692f9$b69778d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <004101c692ed$b73d2520$6401a8c0@NuDell> <8C8610A1253D5AB-163C-A030@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:07:42 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69146 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Status: O X-Status: Terry, > If your hypothesis is correct, should not burning my grandmother's old > rain barrel generate more heat than burning another equivalent > mass of wood? Keen observation. However, if hydrinohydrides diffused out of rainwater and accumulates in wood preferentially (as opposed to them diffusing even further into ground over time), burning them in a normal fire would likely NOT release any extra energy. The solar variety would simply be too stable and would sruvive any fire intact. Once again, I am playing devil's advocate here, because there is no convincing evidence for any of this - only persistent anecdote and changing-hypotheses. The two electrons of this species are said by Mills to be very tightly bound at this level of shrinkage, in the keV range. Otherwise they would have already been "reinflated" in the solar corona (most are probably reinflated anyway, immediately after formation, and only the maximum entalpy variety gets this far). Their best use for "overunity" on earth, is if they can be captured immediately and enriched, and even then it would seem to hinge on being able to use them 'destructively' as capacitance without the need to reinflate or shrink further- i.e. to use them to retain less tightly bound charge temporarily -and then to anihilate that charge explosively in a situation, like in an ICE where the explosion can push a piston. Waterfuel likely does not really involve 'water' at all as an active modality- except for its property of very high dielectric constant and easy ionization. Water is most likely only a fuel in the sense of being involved in a mechanical failure such as exploding capacitance... but - only with hydrinos involved, as well as transitory peroxides, hydroxyl hydrates, hydronium and all of the other charged species which can be held in a temporal structure by the presence of a stable charge carrier (hydrinohydride) juxtaposed to a strong dielelctric material (water). There are other convincing views on this - including the possibility that - being small and dense, the Hy- would catalyze LENR, or would shrink even further. In terms of actual probability, my feeling is that the induced secondary *capacitance* in water, based on the reality of solar-derived hydrinos, is the only way to explain adequately what has been seen and reported in the large amount of recent anecdote relating to waterfuel. I find it interesting that Graneau, in a totally unrelated experiment, only gets good results using rainwater. Perhaps he is seeing a glimmer of the same effect in a brute force discharge, when he would be better off with a pretreated rainwater regime. That one is on my 'to-do' list also. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 10:48:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IHmZbb009190; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:48:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IHmWQt009165; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:48:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:48:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006301c692ff$68a6b770$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 10:48:28 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69147 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Status: O X-Status: Oops.. no doubt the inveterate TV viewers amongst us have noticed that the writer of the former piece has, in his groogy haste to belabor a point and hurry out a clever posting - totally and egrregiously misidentified the correct name of the charge-card and ad-campaign - it is MasterCard and not MasterCharge.... Probably a violation of someone's copyrights to boot... Hey, don't confuse me with the facts on Sunday morning [isn't 'consensual hallucination' what Sundays are designed-for anyway] ... esp. when I have already admitted some time ago to have done the infamous John-Prine-number on my TV set ... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 11:03:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5II3MlD016714; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:03:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5II3LUT016691; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:03:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:03:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:03:15 -0400 Message-Id: <8C861189B2D8F89-24DC-603A@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <003401c692e9$3bcfd7b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <006301c692ff$68a6b770$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <006301c692ff$68a6b770$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69148 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene - it is MasterCard and not MasterCharge.... <><><><><> It's okay, coming from a lysdexic. Terry (just returning from the blessing of the corner column of the Shri Mandir being built practically in my back yard) http://www.mandir.org Fascinating! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 12:07:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IJ70mn013922; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:07:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IJ6wHW013908; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:06:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:06:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060618190656518.7EA6F240008C@mwinf3102.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060618190656.00be0600@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:06:56 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69149 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:41 am 18/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: > In fact that is the very reason that this species > can have gone undetected by modern science. That's a very good point. Conventional science ain't very good with transient phenomena. That's why amateurs still make a big contribution in comet discovery, amongst other things. Even in the established disciplines the big breakthroughs often come from those outside [like engineers, hopefully ] Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 12:51:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IJonBF032194; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:50:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IJolub032156; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:50:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:50:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00a201c69310$7dc9e120$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <2.2.32.20060618190656.00be0600@pop.freeserve.net> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:50:45 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69150 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Priceless ! Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grimer" >> In fact that is the very reason that this species >> can have gone undetected by modern science. > That's a very good point. Conventional science ain't > very good with transient phenomena. That's why amateurs > still make a big contribution in comet discovery, amongst > other things. Yes. We must often look elsewhere for anything this transitory... even if it finally stabilizes in megaton quantities ... Is there megaton evidence for a transitory hydrogen-based species which could, for instance, arrive undetected from the sun as a "heavy electron", but yet end up in the interior of earth as "natural" gas ??? Yes ... This seach may be productive in more ways than one. This gas could still be 'natural' even if it did not come from the decay of vegetable matter. As we know, Earth's supply of methane, or natural gas- comes mostly as a byproduct of the digestion of organic compounds by microorganisms or decay by decomposition. A few studies of "deep methane" found in rock with no biological history, have indicated it **must have** been created by nonbiological means, as there is an absence of normal markers, and of previous biology. And there is an ORNL researcher who contends that more methane than previously thought may have been created by one nonbiological means, and has discovered that mechanism. That line of reasoning can be improved on with this hydrino-hypothesis, which also involves iron and other heavy minerals. In an article in the August 13 1999 "Science," Juske Horita and Michael Berndt of the University of Minnesota report on research that could explain [partially] why methane is found on the ocean floor, where organic compounds are virtually absent. "At these locations we don't see organic matter but still find methane. It's been suspected that it is being created abiotically, but the conditions for it haven't been known. We've discovered that the presence of nickel-iron alloys catalyzes a normally very slow reaction between carbon dioxide and hydrogen to create the methane, which is virtually indistinguishable from methane created through organic means," Horita says. "These aren't trivial amounts; there could be more of a contribution of methane by abiotic means in the earth's upper crust and on ocean floors than we thought." Horita and Berndt report that abiotic methane forms rapidly in the presence of nickel-iron alloys and say that other compounds could also be catalysts. Fast forward seven years ... are we ready now to add to that another mechanism which is more complex, in that the original hydrogen itself does not even have to be split from water, which is difficult at cold ocean depths, but came to earth in "invisible" form - i.e. as what would appear to be a "heavy electron" from its net charge - but from its mass of 1837 times the electrons mass - we suspect that is Mills' elusive hydrinohydride - only solar-derived. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 14:34:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ILXwQ6010237; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:33:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ILXvSB010221; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:33:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:33:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 17:31:33 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <8C86090D85BAC40-2A4-901B@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> 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 ultra5.eskimo.com id k5ILXtog010201 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69151 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: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > > The predicted magnetic field of a current can be obtained simply by > Lorentz transforming the electric field from the rest frame of the > charges making up the current to the frame of the observer moving > relative to them. Remarkably, the result is a first-order effect -- > first order in the relative velocities -- unlike just about everything > else predicted by relativity.  > > <><><><><> > > There are no charges (q) involved in permanent magnets. I hereby > extract myself from this discussion. > Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent magnetic body is not recognised by a relativistic charged based model of magnetism. The relativistic model implies that the permanence of a permanent magnetic body is a matter of opinion since one could execute some motion relative to the body and decide it is non-magnetic. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 14:42:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ILfUdn014097; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:41:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ILfRU4014076; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:41:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:41:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 17:41:20 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C861371215F167-EC4-A47A@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69152 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Beene's Floating Power Source Status: RO X-Status: Right idea, wrong power source: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0616-04.htm Floating nukes?? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 15:03:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5IM3OEd023031; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 15:03:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5IM3NJc023005; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 15:03:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 15:03:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 15:03:21 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: cheap medicine - spam In-Reply-To: <29635852.20060618082610@eskimo.com> Message-ID: References: <29635852.20060618082610@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/69153 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hmmm. If spammers send email to vortex-L, while forging the from address to be a vortex subscriber, then their spam gets through. (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 16:51:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5INoukr000937; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 16:50:57 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5INosbK000923; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 16:50:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 16:50:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4495E6D5.3000704@pobox.com> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:50:45 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) 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/69154 X-Loop: vortex-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: > hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> >> The predicted magnetic field of a current can be obtained simply by >> Lorentz transforming the electric field from the rest frame of the >> charges making up the current to the frame of the observer moving >> relative to them. Remarkably, the result is a first-order effect -- >> first order in the relative velocities -- unlike just about everything >> else predicted by relativity. >> >> <><><><><> >> >> There are no charges (q) involved in permanent magnets. I hereby >> extract myself from this discussion. >> >> > > Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent magnetic body > is not recognised by a relativistic charged based model of magnetism. The > relativistic model implies that the permanence of a permanent magnetic body > is a matter of opinion since one could execute some motion relative to the > body and decide it is non-magnetic. > Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any B field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric field, and so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, as long as the surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net charge contained in it is balanced, there won't be an E field exterior to the magnet.) You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. A simple argument shows this: Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is inertial in all frames. So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 will feel a net force. Since the only difference between the particles is their velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right away whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not but off hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One can, of course, also just write out the transform and look at it to check this particular case: Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also get it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): B'(parallel) = B(parallel) B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't change under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field you need to be moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E field, the perpendicular B field component transforms as: B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > Harry > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 18:42:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J1ghiL013872; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:42:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J1gf7l013829; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:42:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:42:41 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=I30VB9ru9YyKEBjF/m3YOb6yZyQE1lSi/LQKICC1M55qyu0+z5kcEhTbfsrLdX53; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <23868520.1150681357985.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:42:37 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]: Beene's Floating Power Source Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191c173453c6c4e113555bdfca2b9e62efa7bd6355a4fd6b880e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.26 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69155 X-Loop: vortex-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.commondreams.org/headlines06/0616-04.htm QUOTE: Sergey Kiriyenko, the head of Rosenergoatom, said: "There will be no floating Chernobyl," referring to the 1986 nuclear disaster. Sergey Obozov, a senior official at the agency, said they would be "reliable as a Kalashnikov assault rifle, which are a benchmark of safety." An assault rifle is the benchmark of Russian safety? Oddly enough, this seems in character. Russia is a remarkable civilization, but as my friend Margaret says, they should stick to poetry, literature and science. (She is not Russian but she might as well be after a lifetime of studying Russian language and literature.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 19:36:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J2Zhtm006260; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:35:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J2ZfTq006241; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:35:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:35:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:33:14 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <4495E6D5.3000704@pobox.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/69156 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >>> >> >> Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent magnetic body >> is not recognised by a relativistic charged based model of magnetism. The >> relativistic model implies that the permanence of a permanent magnetic body >> is a matter of opinion since one could execute some motion relative to the >> body and decide it is non-magnetic. >> > Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero > electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any B > field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric field, and > so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, as long as the > surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net charge contained in it > is balanced, there won't be an E field exterior to the magnet.) The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma?) that _all_ magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion. > You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a > nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. A > simple argument shows this: > > Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider two > identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle P2, moving > in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 feels a force, > and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) existence of an > acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we stick with inertial > frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is accelerating in all > frames; a particle which is "inertial" is inertial in all frames. So, > in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 will feel a > net force. Since the only difference between the particles is their > velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they are clearly subject to a > velocity-dependent force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it > can't account for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. > > There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right away > whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not but off > hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One can, of > course, also just write out the transform and look at it to check this > particular case: > > Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also get > it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): > > B'(parallel) = B(parallel) > > B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) > > B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't change > under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field you need to be > moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E field, the > perpendicular B field component transforms as: > > B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) > > and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magnetism is simply effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complementary to Maxwell's equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is complementary to the laws of thermodynamics. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 20:08:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J38YBH025240; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:08:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J38XIS025227; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:08:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:08:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 23:08:26 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C86164C45F30D3-EC4-AF0F@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69157 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Jones' Post-Nocturnal Rumblings Status: O X-Status: Have been documented in the UK? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/15/aurora/ excerpting: "The aircraft has also been spotted across the US, in Norway and the Netherlands, often to the accompaniment of a deafening sonic boom and its characteristic "donuts on a string" con trail - caused by its revolutionary scramjet propulsion plant..." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 20:23:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J3K7IF032436; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:22:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J3Egx5028678; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:14:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:14:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 23:14:21 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8616597ED4A44-10A0-B5C2@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5J3EVhU028575 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69158 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [YO] [DEVO] [OT] Yellow Snow Script? Status: O X-Status: http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/?articleID=4765 "That yellowish stain has attracted the attention of NASA and the Canadian Space Agency because it has a link to extraterrestrial life," Beauchamp, the executive director of the Arctic Institute of North America, told Canada.com. (Frank woulda been proud.) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 20:24:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J3NhRU003175; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:23:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J3Ncaa003138; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:23:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:23:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 23:23:33 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C86166E103CD04-10A0-B5F8@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69159 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [YO]: [MOFO]: [OT]: Kal-El est Iesus? Status: O X-Status: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/14/film.supermanchristfigur e.ap/ http://tinyurl.com/fbdl5 "Some have also seen the hero as a gay icon, forced to live a double life with his super-self in the closet. A recent edition of the gay magazine "The Advocate" even asked on its cover, "How gay is Superman?" But the comparison to Jesus is one that's been made almost since the character's origin in 1938, said Skelton, author of "The Gospel According to the World's Greatest Superhero." Many simply see the story of a hero sent to Earth by his father to serve mankind as having clear enough New Testament overtones. Others have taken the comparison even further, reading the "El" in Superman's original name "Kal-El" and that of his father "Jor-El" as the Hebrew word for "God," among other theological interpretations." (sorry, tough father's day) El-El From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 18 22:34:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J5Xark031318; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:33:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J5XRTI031239; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:33:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 22:33:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 01:30:58 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <4495E6D5.3000704@pobox.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/69160 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Following up my last reply... Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider two > identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle P2, moving > in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. A devout relativist (which I am not) would say there is no magnetic field for observer in P1's frame because that frame is at rest w.r.t. to a given charge distribution. > P2 feels a force, > and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) existence of an > acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we stick with inertial > frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is accelerating in all > frames; a particle which is "inertial" is inertial in all frames. Likewise, a devout relativist would say the relative motion of P2 w.r.t. to a given charge distribution generates a magnetic field. > So, > in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 will feel a > net force. Since the only difference between the particles is their > velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they are clearly subject to a > velocity-dependent force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it > can't account for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. For a devout relativist there is no a-priori magnetic field in every frame. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 00:54:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J7rsi3003673; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:53:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J7rpZY003642; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:53:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:53:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060619075346875.D5A007400082@mwinf3208.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060619075347.00bb68ac@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, 19 Jun 2006 08:53:47 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: cheap medicine - spam Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69161 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 03:03 pm 18/06/2006 -0700, you wrote: > >Hmmm. If spammers send email to vortex-L, while forging the from address >to be a vortex subscriber, then their spam gets through. > > I hope it's not my address cos someone is using the @ and bit after with random stuff in front of the @ to spam. I know because I keep getting stuff back like this: ========================================================== Return-Path: <> X-Sieve: Server Sieve 2.2 Envelope-to: wplcfjm@grimer2.freeserve.co.uk X-ME-UUID: 20060619061244415.0A16D1C00B51@mwinf3107.me.freeserve.com Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:12:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Mail Delivery Subsystem To: Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) X-AOL-INRLY: cable-cmts1-66-196-21-201.vvm.com [66.196.21.201] rly-yd01 X-me-spamlevel: not-spam X-me-spamrating: 0.001038 The original message was received at Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:12:02 -0400 (EDT) from cable-cmts1-66-196-21-201.vvm.com [66.196.21.201] *** ATTENTION *** Your e-mail is being returned to you because there was a problem with its delivery. The address which was undeliverable is listed in the section labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----". The reason your mail is being returned to you is listed in the section labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----". The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could not be delivered. The next line contains a second error message which is a general translation for other e-mail servers. Please direct further questions regarding this message to your e-mail administrator. --AOL Postmaster =================================================================== ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to air-yd03.mail.aol.com.: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND 550 ... User unknown Reporting-MTA: dns; rly-yd01.mx.aol.com Arrival-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:12:02 -0400 (EDT) Final-Recipient: RFC822; mwandaa@cs.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; air-yd03.mail.aol.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:12:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cable-cmts1-66-196-21-201.vvm.com (cable-cmts1-66-196-21-201.vvm.com [66.196.21.201]) by rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (v109.13) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYD110-1f44496402f3ae; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:12:00 -0400 Received: from gecws.rpi ([66.196.200.229]) by cable-cmts1-66-196-21-201.vvm.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id k5J6DYNm068432; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:13:34 -0600 Message-ID: <003801c69367$43a10c90$e5c8c442@gecws.rpi> From: "Nannie Lambert" To: Subject: pennant tense Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:02:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0034_01C69334.F9069C70" 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-AOL-IP: 66.196.21.201 X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:482485047:11811160 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 =================================================================== I've consulted my Russian Boffin who tells me there is nothing I can do about it short of changing my e-mail address, something I am reluctant to do for a variety of obvious reasons. So I'm just putting up with it until the problem gets too bad. Anybody got any suggestions. Trouble is, Vortex is very vulnerable cos everyone's address shows up on the posts. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 02:44:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5J9icE9023808; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:44:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5J9iba6023795; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:44:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 02:44:37 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=KLzYDgNrWD1Q+v8yNDXVYjaM0EUbCMRszkc5zr038Po1ZfhImozyDWUg1gTrUMMJkOGVvgGLN1EXyqKYkzBs1whX/3H+20TwsBPmvoSGrlS6OYagPrRWWoHXZ0r97BYtkoq/7SfCzpF6SjhtMd86UHRSSIDFnsfZcRU566Cgl44= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:44:35 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6389_29783390.1150710275734" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69162 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_Part_6389_29783390.1150710275734 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Dear Vo, Which what is-are information a given magnet is [1] "a conductor" ... OR [2] not "a conductor" [3] uh........ what IS the conductivity of ...uh..... some given magnet? [4] OR... is-are there any measure of conductivity in some given """" permanent"""" magnet??? HMmmmmm ? [5] Oh welll???? [6] Can we get-see- decide onr of these '''magnets.... [7] can we see the - uh ......... this magnet PLEASE ??????????? On 6/18/06, Harry Veeder wrote: > > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >>> > >> > >> Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent magnetic > body > >> is not recognised by a relativistic charged based model of magnetism. > The > >> relativistic model implies that the permanence of a permanent magnetic > body > >> is a matter of opinion since one could execute some motion relative to > the > >> body and decide it is non-magnetic. > >> > > Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero > > electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any B > > field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric field, and > > so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, as long as the > > surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net charge contained in it > > is balanced, there won't be an E field exterior to the magnet.) > > The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma?) that _all_ > magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion. > > > You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a > > nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. A > > simple argument shows this: > > > > Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider two > > identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle P2, moving > > in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 feels a force, > > and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) existence of an > > acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we stick with inertial > > frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is accelerating in all > > frames; a particle which is "inertial" is inertial in all frames. So, > > in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 will feel a > > net force. Since the only difference between the particles is their > > velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they are clearly subject to a > > velocity-dependent force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it > > can't account for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every > frame. > > > > There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right away > > whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not but off > > hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One can, of > > course, also just write out the transform and look at it to check this > > particular case: > > > > Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also get > > it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): > > > > B'(parallel) = B(parallel) > > > > B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) > > > > B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't change > 111111111111 > > under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field you need to be > > moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E field, the > > perpendicular B field component transforms as: > > > > B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) > > > > and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > > > > > Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magnetism is simply > effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complementary to Maxwell's > equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is complementary to the > laws > of thermodynamics. > > Harry > > ------=_Part_6389_29783390.1150710275734 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

 
Dear Vo,
 
   Which what is-are information a given magnet is
 
[1]       "a conductor" ... OR=
 [2]      not "a conductor"
  [3]     uh........ what IS the conductivity= of ...uh..... some given magnet?
   [4]    OR... is-are there any  measur= e of conductivity in some given
           &nbs= p;    """" permanent"""&q= uot;  magnet???
 
     HMmmmmm ?
 
      [5]   Oh welll????
 
        [6]   Can we get-= see- decide onr of these '''magnets....
 
         [7]   =
 
can we see the - uh ......... this magnet    PLEASE
 
???????????  
 
 
On 6/18/06, = Harry Veeder <eo200@fre= enet.carleton.ca> wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>>>
>>
>> Charges may be involved. However, th= e _reality_ of a permanent magnetic body
>> is not recognised by a relativistic charged based model of mag= netism. The
>> relativistic model implies that the permanence of a=   permanent magnetic body
>> is a matter of opinion sinc= e one could execute some motion relative to the
>> body and decide it is non-magnetic.
>>
> Actual= ly, this isn't true.  Given a pure magnetic field (with zero
&= gt; electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any B> field.  A typical permanent magnet has no associated elect= ric field, and
> so its field can't be transformed away.  (Classically, a= s long as the
> surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net char= ge contained in it
> is balanced, there won't be an E field exterior = to the magnet.)

The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma= ?) that _all_
magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion.
> You can't transform away a pure B field.  Most other frames= have a
> nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field.=   A
> simple argument shows this:
>
> Consider = a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S.  Consider two> identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle P2, movi= ng
> in S.  P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. =  P2 feels a force,
> and _is_ accelerating.  The (Bool= ean-valued) existence of an
> acceleration is absolute (at least as l= ong as we stick with inertial
> frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is accelerating in al= l
> frames; a particle which is "inertial" is inertial in a= ll frames.  So,
> in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no n= et force, while P2 will feel a
> net force.  Since the only difference between the partic= les is their
> velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they are cl= early subject to a
> velocity-dependent force.  The E field= isn't velocity dependent, so it
> can't account for the difference.  Ergo, there's a B fie= ld in every frame.
>
> There's a fairly simple mathematical tes= t that'll tell you right away
> whether a B field (or E field) can be= transformed away or not but off
> hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head.  = One can, of
> course, also just write out the transform and look at i= t to check this
> particular case:
>
> Here's the transfo= rm for the B field (from MTW=20 p.78 -- you can also get
> it just by transforming the Faraday tensor= ):
>
> B'(parallel) =3D B(parallel)
>
> B'(perpendi= cular) =3D gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular))
>
> B(= parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't change
111111111111          = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp; > under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field you nee= d to be
> moving perpendicular to it.  But if there's no E field, = the
> perpendicular B field component transforms as:
>
> = B'(perp) =3D B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2)
>
> and if B(perp) is nonz= ero, that will be nonzero too.
>


Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magn= etism is simply
effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complement= ary to Maxwell's
equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is comp= lementary to the laws
of thermodynamics.

Harry


------=_Part_6389_29783390.1150710275734-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 03:08:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JA7a8J004262; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:07:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JA7YrC004232; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:07:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:07:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=ohwJpKNVx3o/dlIM4wJlhQ814vSM5RAhImjR/bDikE8q2WkpC8dwi6up2yu2fwbT; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006611910724863@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:07:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408c317fce959eb74f056b55bb45c8b262350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.146 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69163 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re; Waterfuel and 300 PSI Hydrogen or Steam Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII In the mid 1930s C. G. Guy Suites at GE reported that arcs in Hydrogen were "totally unstable at a pressure of 300 psi or more", and reached temperatures in excess of 12,000 degrees Fahrenheit. In earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures above atmospheric were highly unstable. More fat for the Waterfuel Fire? Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
In the mid 1930s C. G. Guy Suites at GE reported that arcs
in Hydrogen were "totally unstable at a pressure of 300 psi
or more", and  reached temperatures in excess of 12,000 degrees
Fahrenheit.
In earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures
above atmospheric  were highly unstable.
 
More fat for the Waterfuel Fire?
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 03:54:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JAsJuZ025891; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:54:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JApaSr023933; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:51:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 03:51:36 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=KFK/6PAAC3VBP3aXjT7hPAtsp9jMY8Mb0NuhZaG42NukEgPPK1DPDn4b8UjNsGnt; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066119105122145@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: [Vo]: Re; Waterfuel and 300 PSI Hydrogen or Steam Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:51:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940d6a4dbaf452e56c16021ccced09ca59d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.197 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69164 X-Loop: vortex-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 earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures > above atmospheric were highly unstable. Lots and Lotz of good stuff. http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1998/pdf/7006x1157.pdf ARC COLUMN STABILIZED BY WATER VORTEX Figs. 2 and 3 show curves calculated from (2) and (3) for three plasma mediums - argon. nitrogen and water. "Principle of stabilization of arcs by liquid wall can be utilized for stabilization of long arc columns at very low flow rates of plasma gas. Thus, plasma jets with high temperatures can be generated in torches with liquid stabilization. In water plasma torches the oxygen-hydrogen plasma is produced, high content of hydrogen results in high enthalpy and sound velocity of plasma. Water-stabilized plasma torches thus generate plasma jet with extremely high plasma temperature and flow velocity." 1. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Wiss. Veroffentlichungen Siemenswerk 2, 489 (1922). 2. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Z. Tech. Phys. 4, 157 (1923). ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
> In earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures
> above atmospheric  were highly unstable.
 
Lots and Lotz of good stuff.

http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1998/pdf/7006x1157.pdf

ARC COLUMN STABILIZED BY WATER VORTEX

Figs. 2 and 3 show curves calculated from (2) and (3) for three plasma mediums - argon. nitrogen and

water.

"Principle of stabilization of arcs by liquid wall can be utilized for stabilization of long arc columns at very

low flow rates of plasma gas. Thus, plasma jets with high temperatures can be generated in torches with

liquid stabilization. In water plasma torches the oxygen-hydrogen plasma is produced, high content of

hydrogen results in high enthalpy and sound velocity of plasma. Water-stabilized plasma torches thus

generate plasma jet with extremely high plasma temperature and flow velocity."

1. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Wiss. Veroffentlichungen Siemenswerk 2, 489 (1922).

2. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Z. Tech. Phys. 4, 157 (1923).

 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 04:24:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JBOAmp005636; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:24:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JBMYHX004933; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:22:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:22:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=XmFjGvsDfV4lb0BXiK64UAKthsmLEgZ9wki0mjmjXqvK2HOT6vL+62AmsqIg+7/L; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006611911220238@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:22:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9407e1d336ac8541b940dcd7c3bafd939ac350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.46 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69165 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII The electric arc with the stabilization of arc column by water vortex was first described more than seventy years ago by Gerdien and Lotz (ref. 1, 2). Basic experimental investigations of the water stabilized arcs were performed in the fifties. Maecker et al. (ref. 3, 4) measured basic electric characteristics of the arc and studied effect of the length and diameter of the stabilizing channel. Several investigators measured arc plasma temperatures using methods of emission spectroscopy (ref. 5, 6, 7). All authors reported very high plasma temperatures in the arc column with maximum about 50 000 K in the centerline position. The principle of arc stabilization by water vortex was utilized in the plasma torch designed for plasma spraying and cutting (ref. 8). Despite of the potential of achieving extreme performance characteristics in plasma processing applications the development of liquid-stabilized torches has been limited, especially due to their more complex structure and due to lack of understanding of physical processes in the arc which is necessary for improvement of the torch design. ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/19/2006 4:52:19 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re; Waterfuel and 300 PSI Hydrogen or Steam > In earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures > above atmospheric were highly unstable. Lots and Lotz of good stuff. http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1998/pdf/7006x1157.pdf ARC COLUMN STABILIZED BY WATER VORTEX Figs. 2 and 3 show curves calculated from (2) and (3) for three plasma mediums - argon. nitrogen and water. "Principle of stabilization of arcs by liquid wall can be utilized for stabilization of long arc columns at very low flow rates of plasma gas. Thus, plasma jets with high temperatures can be generated in torches with liquid stabilization. In water plasma torches the oxygen-hydrogen plasma is produced, high content of hydrogen results in high enthalpy and sound velocity of plasma. Water-stabilized plasma torches thus generate plasma jet with extremely high plasma temperature and flow velocity." 1. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Wiss. Veroffentlichungen Siemenswerk 2, 489 (1922). 2. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Z. Tech. Phys. 4, 157 (1923). ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

The electric arc with the stabilization of arc column by water vortex was first described more than seventy

years ago by Gerdien and Lotz (ref. 1, 2). Basic experimental investigations of the water stabilized arcs

were performed in the fifties. Maecker et al. (ref. 3, 4) measured basic electric characteristics of the arc

and studied effect of the length and diameter of the stabilizing channel. Several investigators measured arc

plasma temperatures using methods of emission spectroscopy (ref. 5, 6, 7). All authors reported very high

plasma temperatures in the arc column with maximum about 50 000 K in the centerline position. The

principle of arc stabilization by water vortex was utilized in the plasma torch designed for plasma spraying

and cutting (ref. 8). Despite of the potential of achieving extreme performance characteristics in plasma

processing applications the development of liquid-stabilized torches has been limited, especially due to

their more complex structure and due to lack of understanding of physical processes in the arc which is

necessary for improvement of the torch design.

 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/19/2006 4:52:19 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re; Waterfuel and 300 PSI Hydrogen or Steam

> In earlier work Lotz reported that arcs in steam at pressures
> above atmospheric  were highly unstable.
 
Lots and Lotz of good stuff.

http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1998/pdf/7006x1157.pdf

ARC COLUMN STABILIZED BY WATER VORTEX

Figs. 2 and 3 show curves calculated from (2) and (3) for three plasma mediums - argon. nitrogen and

water.

"Principle of stabilization of arcs by liquid wall can be utilized for stabilization of long arc columns at very

low flow rates of plasma gas. Thus, plasma jets with high temperatures can be generated in torches with

liquid stabilization. In water plasma torches the oxygen-hydrogen plasma is produced, high content of

hydrogen results in high enthalpy and sound velocity of plasma. Water-stabilized plasma torches thus

generate plasma jet with extremely high plasma temperature and flow velocity."

1. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Wiss. Veroffentlichungen Siemenswerk 2, 489 (1922).

2. H. Gerdien, A. Lotz. Z. Tech. Phys. 4, 157 (1923).

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 05:06:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JC6GUg026506; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:06:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JC69Rx026449; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:06:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:06:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44969327.3080309@pobox.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:05:59 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) 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/69166 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >> Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent > >> magnetic body is not recognised by a relativistic charged based > >> model of magnetism. The relativistic model implies that the > >> permanence of a permanent magnetic body is a matter of opinion > >> since one could execute some motion relative to the body and > >> decide it is non-magnetic. > >> > > Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero > > electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any > > B field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric > > field, and so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, > > as long as the surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net > > charge contained in it is balanced, there won't be an E field > > exterior to the magnet.) > > The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma?) that > _all_ magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion. No, it's not true according to "current dogma". It's true according to a certain model, but that model is not intrinsic to relativity theory, nor is it built into Maxwell's equations, nor is it accepted by all mainstream scientists. As far as anyone knows at the present time, there is no such thing as a magnetic monopole, and absent magnetic monopoles, all B fields can be treated _as_ _if_ they are due to charges in motion. Any magnetic dipole can be treated as though it's caused by a current loop; mathematically, it might just as well be, even if it's actually intrinsic to a single particle which happens to have a nonzero magnetic moment. The model I've occasionally mentioned, which treats the A field as fundamental and the Faraday tensor as being the exterior derivative of A, with the E and B fields serving as components of the Faraday tensor, does indeed require that there be no magnetic monopoles. However, as I just said, that model is not a consequence of relativity, and not a consequence of Maxwell's equations, though it incorporates the latter. It's elegant but not necessary, and in fact work has been done on a version which allows monopoles (since, supposedly, GUTs generally predict their existence, this is a big issue in some circles). I haven't yet managed to grok the version which allows monopoles, but in any case it doesn't have much of anything to do with ordinary magnets, which don't include monopoles in anybody's theory AFAIK. > > You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a > > nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. > > A simple argument shows this: > > > > Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider > > two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle > > P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 > > feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) > > existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we > > stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is > > accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is > > inertial in all frames. So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel > > no net force, while P2 will feel a net force. Since the only > > difference between the particles is their velocity, yet they feel > > difference forces, they are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent > > force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account > > for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. > > > > There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right > > away whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not > > but off hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One > > can, of course, also just write out the transform and look at it to > > check this particular case: > > > > Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also > > get it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): > > > > B'(parallel) = B(parallel) > > > > B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) > > > > B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't > > change under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field > > you need to be moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E > > field, the perpendicular B field component transforms as: > > > > B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) > > > > and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > > Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magnetism is > simply effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complementary > to Maxwell's equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is > complementary to the laws of thermodynamics. That's correct, as I just said. However, it's also true that a static magnetic field due to a current loop _cannot_ be transformed away via the Lorentz transforms. The dipole field of a bar magnet is the same sort of field, and it can't be transformed away either. Electromagnetic radiation, which is also a phenomenon handled by relativity (indeed, it's a large part of what relativity theory was designed to "explain"), generally can't be transformed away, either, please note! > > Harry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 05:23:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JCNQ3F002266; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:23:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JCNMda002229; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:23:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:23:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4496972F.1060207@pobox.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:23:11 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) 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/69168 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Following up my last reply... > > > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider > > two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle > > P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. > > > A devout relativist (which I am not) would say there is no magnetic > field for observer in P1's frame because that frame is at rest w.r.t. > to a given charge distribution. C'mon Harry, your "devout relativist" is a strawman. If the spacelike cross terms in the Faraday tensor are nonzero then there's a B field present. If there's an inertial frame in which the timelike terms in Faraday are all zero and at least one spacelike cross term is nonzero, then there are nonzero spacelike cross terms in Faraday in _all_ inertial frames, and any "relativist" I know would certainly would say there's a B field present. The field of a solenoid (or a bar magnet) is one example of such a field. The B field around a long, uncharged wire is another example. If you disagree, then I think you'd better define "B field" and "devout relativist" because we're obviously talking past each other. > > P2 feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) > > existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we > > stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is > > accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is > > inertial in all frames. > > Likewise, a devout relativist would say the relative motion of P2 > w.r.t. to a given charge distribution generates a magnetic field. You detect a B field by observing a charged particle in motion in your frame of reference. If there's a velocity-dependent force on them in your frame of reference, then there's a B field in your frame of reference. This use of test particles is discussed in reasonable detail in, for example, "Gravitation" by Misner Thorne and Wheeler, who are certainly all "devout relativists" according to most people. > > > So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 > > will feel a net force. Since the only difference between the > > particles is their velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they > > are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent force. The E field > > isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account for the difference. > > Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. > > > For a devout relativist there is no a-priori magnetic field in every > frame. > > Harry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 05:52:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JCV4rf005770; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:31:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JCCCxj030095; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:12:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:12:11 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=VpLWgoDCcs5cLLaxh+npAsTXe03VGpxMzVaETLX/MXDmgJd24JymDJ+yRJPH/AjL; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066119121143437@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:11:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9403ed3df3283c215882477edd4637b0889350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.118 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69167 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Water Vortex Arc Waste Disposal Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII For the inquisitive, Richard. :-) Fred http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1999/71_10_pdf/7110bonizzoni_1879.pdf Several laboratory experiences have been internationally carried out using different types of non transferred arc plasma torches. The target is to test a process able to decompose chlorinated liquid or gases and to recovery chorine without pollution of the atmosphere (Fig. 2). For example, the decomposition of dichloromethane (CH2Cl2) has been deeply investigated by the Institute of Plasma Physics of Prague [6]. The plasma is generated in water plasma torch by heating and ionization of steam produced by the interaction of the electric arc with water vortex surrounding the arc column. Experiments were carried out with a total power of the torch of 84kW (Fig. 3) The reaction chamber is made by stainless steel with an alumina tube inserted 20mm downstream the torch exit. The substance was injected into the plasma jet in the upstream part of the tube. Oxygen was added into reaction chamber to avoid production of solid carbon. The treated liquid was injected at the rate of 60 cm3/min. The measured DRE was 99.9995%. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
For the inquisitive,  Richard.   :-)
 
Fred
 
 

Several laboratory experiences have been internationally carried out using different types of non

transferred arc plasma torches. The target is to test a process able to decompose chlorinated liquid or

gases and to recovery chorine without pollution of the atmosphere (Fig. 2).

For example, the decomposition of dichloromethane (CH2Cl2) has been deeply investigated by the

Institute of Plasma Physics of Prague [6]. The plasma is generated in water plasma torch by heating and

ionization of steam produced by the interaction of the electric arc with water vortex surrounding the arc

column. Experiments were carried out with a total power of the torch of 84kW (Fig. 3)

The reaction chamber is made by stainless steel with an alumina tube inserted 20mm downstream the

torch exit. The substance was injected into the plasma jet in the upstream part of the tube. Oxygen was

added into reaction chamber to avoid production of solid carbon. The treated liquid was injected at the

rate of 60 cm3/min. The measured DRE was 99.9995%.

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 08:38:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JFcJ5d016838; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:38:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JFcDdW016768; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:38:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:38:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060619113359.03fd0960@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:38:02 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_7052390==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69169 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Status: O X-Status: --=====================_7052390==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Finally here. See: Iwamura, Y., et al. Observation Of Surface Distribution Of Products By X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry During D2 Gas Permeation Through Pd Complexes. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiod.pdf This is a very important paper. I think this is solid proof of Storm's "nuclear active spots" hypothesis, that only a small part of the cathode surface takes part in the reaction. The papers and IR video published by Szpak et al. also lends support to this hypothesis. See: http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/USNavy.htm (This screen has a link to the video, which is available in two formats.) - Jed --=====================_7052390==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Finally here. See:

Iwamura, Y., et al. Observation Of Surface Distribution Of Products By X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry During D2 Gas Permeation Through Pd Complexes. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan.

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

This is a very important paper.

I think this is solid proof of Storm's "nuclear active spots" hypothesis, that only a small part of the cathode surface takes part in the reaction. The papers and IR video published by Szpak et al. also lends support to this hypothesis. See:

http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/USNavy.htm

(This screen has a link to the video, which is available in two formats.)

- Jed
--=====================_7052390==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 08:49:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JFnVXr022803; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:49:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JFnUtU022783; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:49:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:49:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:49:31 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69170 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > In this case, the energy was put in by spinning up the ring to start > with, and that's the energy we get back out. Whether it resided in the > magnetic field of the ring while the ring was spinning, or in the > inertia of the ring itself, is something which is beyond me just now > (and luckily, for this problem it doesn't really make a difference...). Agreed from a COE point of view. The point I was trying to lead up to is the way magnets compare to the spinning charged ring. Consider the problem as though we were using another spinning charged ring (B) in place of the dipole box. To start, the dipole box charged ring (B) is already spinning. To get attraction, the two rings need to spin in opposite directions. As we spin up the original charged ring (A), ring B will slow down as it outputs energy to the increasing magnetic field. It will slow down more as the two rings are attracted together increasing the field energy and providing the kinetic energy for the rings relative motion. Assuming similar rings with equal rotation rates at the time when both are spun up, both rings will subsequently provide equal energy. Energy is conserved at all times during these operations. A permanent magnet acts like a dipole box and not like a spinning charged ring. A permanent magnet acts like a spinning charged ring that does not slow down as it supplies energy. This is where questions of ZPE as the source of energy in permanent magnets become involved. With a PM in the box, energy is not conserved during this operation unless we include the energy source from which the PM keeps a constant dipole contribution. In finite element magnetic field simulation programs the PMs are modeled using soft magnetic materials with conductor loops driven by current sources at the poles as the required energy source. This brings us to the way that energy conservation in magnets needs to be described. No net energy is provided by the PM over any complete cycle that returns the magnet to the same field conditions. > > Here's another good one: Does a free-falling charge radiate? As an experimentalist, I would suggest that the answer might be found by studying black holes. I do not have much confidence in many of the theories of modern physics and prefer to direct my efforts to doing experiments suggested by a more conservative approach to how much we think we know. George Holz Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 10:01:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JH0TbE029937; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:01:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JGIUs9005404; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 09:18:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 09:18:30 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=VFSSFxqzPwZGMV91ye+TgCTVQEGlbWCxbiM7yv1ZsC02E/pSg6iAwH3K2xeibk2E; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066119161757304@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:17:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9401f8256a3b6ace2b6cf475041bb8cae9d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.70 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69171 X-Loop: vortex-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'm waiting for Jones Beene to jump on the Argon that is trapped in the lattice waiting for Deuterons to form the Hydrino-Deuteride. :-) Thanks Jed Fred Iwamura paper: "The surface of the plate was covered by layers of CaO and Pd, which were obtained by five times alternatingly sputtering 20-Ĺ-thick CaO and 200-Ĺ -thick Pd layers. Then a 400-Ĺ-thick Pd layer was sputtered on the surface of the CaO and Pd layers. These processes are performed by Ar ion beam sputtering method or magnetron sputtering method. After forming a Pd complex, Cs was deposited on the surface of the thin Pd layer. Cs was deposited by electrochemical method or ion implantation method." ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: 6/19/2006 9:38:57 AM Subject: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Finally here. See: Iwamura, Y., et al. Observation Of Surface Distribution Of Products By X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry During D2 Gas Permeation Through Pd Complexes. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiod.pdf This is a very important paper. I think this is solid proof of Storm's "nuclear active spots" hypothesis, that only a small part of the cathode surface takes part in the reaction. The papers and IR video published by Szpak et al. also lends support to this hypothesis. See: http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/USNavy.htm (This screen has a link to the video, which is available in two formats.) - Jed ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

I'm waiting for Jones Beene to jump on the Argon that

is trapped in the lattice waiting for Deuterons to form 

the  Hydrino-Deuteride.   :-)

Thanks Jed

Fred

Iwamura paper:

"The surface of the plate was covered

by layers of CaO and Pd, which were obtained by five times alternatingly sputtering 20-Ĺ-thick CaO and 200-Ĺ

-thick Pd layers. Then a 400-Ĺ-thick Pd layer was sputtered on the surface of the CaO and Pd layers. These

processes are performed by Ar ion beam sputtering method or magnetron sputtering method. After forming a Pd

complex, Cs was deposited on the surface of the thin Pd layer. Cs was deposited by electrochemical method or

ion implantation method."

 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/19/2006 9:38:57 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper

Finally here. See:

Iwamura, Y., et al. Observation Of Surface Distribution Of Products By X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry During D2 Gas Permeation Through Pd Complexes. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan.

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

This is a very important paper.

I think this is solid proof of Storm's "nuclear active spots" hypothesis, that only a small part of the cathode surface takes part in the reaction. The papers and IR video published by Szpak et al. also lends support to this hypothesis. See:

http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/USNavy.htm

(This screen has a link to the video, which is available in two formats.)

- Jed
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 10:22:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JHLlh1012397; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:21:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JHLkGS012368; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:21:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:21:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:21:35 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> In-Reply-To: <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> 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/69172 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> In this case, the energy was put in by spinning up the ring to start >> with, and that's the energy we get back out. Whether it resided in the >> magnetic field of the ring while the ring was spinning, or in the >> inertia of the ring itself, is something which is beyond me just now >> (and luckily, for this problem it doesn't really make a difference...). >> > > Agreed from a COE point of view. > > The point I was trying to lead up to is the way magnets compare > to the spinning charged ring. Consider the problem as though we > were using another spinning charged ring (B) in place of the dipole box. > To start, the dipole box charged ring (B) is already spinning. > To get attraction, the two rings need to spin in opposite directions. > As we spin up the original charged ring (A), ring B will slow down > as it outputs energy to the increasing magnetic field. It will slow down > more as the two rings are attracted together increasing the field energy > and providing the kinetic energy for the rings relative motion. > Assuming similar rings with equal rotation rates at the time when > both are spun up, both rings will subsequently provide equal energy. > Energy is conserved at all times during these operations. > > A permanent magnet acts like a dipole box and not like a spinning > charged ring. A permanent magnet acts like a spinning charged ring > that does not slow down as it supplies energy. > But this isn't quite correct, is it? The internal currents in a permanent magnet apparently _do_ change, quite a lot, when an external field is applied to it. In particular, the "induced" magnetic field exhibited by a piece of unmagnetized iron when it's in a magnetic field, as well as the changes in the magnetic field of a permanent magnet when it's in an external field, are due to changes in the internal currents (or whatever black magic one believes is taking place inside the magnet to give it the field). Remember, E and B fields (apparently!) follow the law of superposition, which means overlapping fields themselves don't interact; they just sum. But we're all quite familiar with the way the B field is "conducted" through iron filings (or ferrite transformer cores, for that matter). There's no "conduction" going on, really -- what we're seeing is the sum of the original B field, and the induced B field in the iron filings or transformer core. The "black box" I hypothesized, which produces a dipole field which is _fixed_, is rather unrealistic, really -- any real magnet changes its field as a result of external fields being applied to it. (Perhaps the box contains a wire loop driven by a current source...) The part which I, personally, don't understand is what determines _how_ the field of a piece of iron changes when an external field is applied to it -- the fact that it _does_ _change_ as the applied field changes, on the other hand, makes sense, and is, in fact, inevitable if there are really tiny currents of some sort inside the magnet causing the field. > This is where questions of ZPE as the source of energy in permanent > magnets become involved. With a PM in the box, energy is not > conserved during this operation unless we include the energy source > from which the PM keeps a constant dipole contribution. But, as I pointed out, it _doesn't_ keep a _constant_ dipole contribution. > In finite > element magnetic field simulation programs the PMs are modeled > using soft magnetic materials with conductor loops driven by > current sources at the poles as the required energy source. > This brings us to the way that energy conservation in magnets > needs to be described. No net energy is provided by the PM over any > complete cycle that returns the magnet to the same > field conditions. > > >> Here's another good one: Does a free-falling charge radiate? >> > > As an experimentalist, I would suggest that the answer might > be found by studying black holes. > Crikey, what kind of lab setup do you have?? > I do not have much confidence in many of the theories of > modern physics and prefer to direct my efforts to doing > experiments suggested by a more conservative approach > to how much we think we know. > When it comes to black holes, I certainly agree with you! :-) > > George Holz > Varitronics Systems > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 11:44:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JIhh7D020758; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:43:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JIhdtd020706; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:43:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:43:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:40:38 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <44969327.3080309@pobox.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/69174 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > > Harry Veeder wrote: >> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >> >>>> Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent >>>> magnetic body is not recognised by a relativistic charged based >>>> model of magnetism. The relativistic model implies that the >>>> permanence of a permanent magnetic body is a matter of opinion >>>> since one could execute some motion relative to the body and >>>> decide it is non-magnetic. >>>> >>> Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero >>> electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any >>> B field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric >>> field, and so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, >>> as long as the surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net >>> charge contained in it is balanced, there won't be an E field >>> exterior to the magnet.) >> >> The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma?) that >> _all_ magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion. > > No, it's not true according to "current dogma". It's true according to > a certain model, but that model is not intrinsic to relativity theory, > nor is it built into Maxwell's equations, nor is it accepted by all > mainstream scientists. > > As far as anyone knows at the present time, there is no such thing as a > magnetic monopole, Questioning the current party in power does not necessarily mean one is siding with the main opposition party. ;-) > and absent magnetic monopoles, all B fields can be > treated _as_ _if_ they are due to charges in motion. "_As if_" means don't take the _logic_ of an explanation seriously, because "_As if_" explanations are by definition useful but not necessarily truthful. For example Newton's theory of gravity was an _as if_ explanation of gravity. Newton never intended the logic of "a = g" to be taken seriously as Einstein did. If one takes the _logic_ of relativity seriously and if the magnetic force produced by a body depends on the relative motion of a test particle then when the relative motion of the test particle is zero then the magnetic field for the test particle is also zero. > Any magnetic > dipole can be treated as though it's caused by a current loop; > mathematically, it might just as well be, even if it's actually > intrinsic to a single particle which happens to have a nonzero magnetic > moment. > > The model I've occasionally mentioned, which treats the A field as > fundamental and the Faraday tensor as being the exterior derivative of > A, with the E and B fields serving as components of the Faraday tensor, > does indeed require that there be no magnetic monopoles. However, as I > just said, that model is not a consequence of relativity, and not a > consequence of Maxwell's equations, though it incorporates the latter. > It's elegant but not necessary, and in fact work has been done on a > version which allows monopoles (since, supposedly, GUTs generally > predict their existence, this is a big issue in some circles). I > haven't yet managed to grok the version which allows monopoles, but in > any case it doesn't have much of anything to do with ordinary magnets, > which don't include monopoles in anybody's theory AFAIK. > >>> You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a >>> nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. >>> A simple argument shows this: >>> >>> Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider >>> two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle >>> P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 >>> feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) >>> existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we >>> stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is >>> accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is >>> inertial in all frames. So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel >>> no net force, while P2 will feel a net force. Since the only >>> difference between the particles is their velocity, yet they feel >>> difference forces, they are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent >>> force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account >>> for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. >>> >>> There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right >>> away whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not >>> but off hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One >>> can, of course, also just write out the transform and look at it to >>> check this particular case: >>> >>> Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also >>> get it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): >>> >>> B'(parallel) = B(parallel) >>> >>> B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) >>> >>> B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't >>> change under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field >>> you need to be moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E >>> field, the perpendicular B field component transforms as: >>> >>> B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) >>> >>> and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > >> >> Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magnetism is >> simply effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complementary >> to Maxwell's equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is >> complementary to the laws of thermodynamics. > > That's correct, as I just said. > > However, it's also true that a static magnetic field due to a current > loop _cannot_ be transformed away via the Lorentz transforms. The > dipole field of a bar magnet is the same sort of field, and it can't be > transformed away either. > > Electromagnetic radiation, which is also a phenomenon handled by > relativity (indeed, it's a large part of what relativity theory was > designed to "explain"), generally can't be transformed away, either, > please note! > You appear to be have a better grasp of the mathematics of EM theory than me, so I can't comment the rest of your post. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 12:04:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JIeE4g018574; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:41:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JIHfSu008837; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:17:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 11:17:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:14:49 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <4496972F.1060207@pobox.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/69173 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > > Harry Veeder wrote: >> Following up my last reply... >> >> >> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >>> Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider >>> two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle >>> P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. >> >> >> A devout relativist (which I am not) would say there is no magnetic >> field for observer in P1's frame because that frame is at rest w.r.t. >> to a given charge distribution. > > C'mon Harry, your "devout relativist" is a strawman. If the spacelike > cross terms in the Faraday tensor are nonzero then there's a B field > present. If there's an inertial frame in which the timelike terms in > Faraday are all zero and at least one spacelike cross term is nonzero, > then there are nonzero spacelike cross terms in Faraday in _all_ > inertial frames, and any "relativist" I know would certainly would say > there's a B field present. > > The field of a solenoid (or a bar magnet) is one example of such a > field. The B field around a long, uncharged wire is another example. > > If you disagree, then I think you'd better define "B field" and "devout > relativist" because we're obviously talking past each other. ok. Let me divide B-fields into two types. Those that depend on relative motion and those that do not. A "devout relativist" would say the existence of a B-field is relative to one's motion . Let us call the other relativist an "instrumental relativist". They would say every B-field is real and independent of motion. Both relativists agree that a B-force is relative to motion. > >>> P2 feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) >>> existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we >>> stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is >>> accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is >>> inertial in all frames. >> >> Likewise, a devout relativist would say the relative motion of P2 >> w.r.t. to a given charge distribution generates a magnetic field. > > You detect a B field by observing a charged particle in motion in your > frame of reference. If there's a velocity-dependent force on them in > your frame of reference, then there's a B field in your frame of reference. > > This use of test particles is discussed in reasonable detail in, for > example, "Gravitation" by Misner Thorne and Wheeler, who are certainly > all "devout relativists" according to most people. Philosophically, I would classify them as instrumental relativists. I don't know if this classification is novel or not, but I think it is helpful. >> >>> So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel no net force, while P2 >>> will feel a net force. Since the only difference between the >>> particles is their velocity, yet they feel difference forces, they >>> are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent force. The E field >>> isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account for the difference. >>> Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. >> >> >> For a devout relativist there is no a-priori magnetic field in every >> frame. >> >> Harry >> Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 12:46:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JJjdZI026343; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:45:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JJjZJg026311; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:45:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:45:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:43:06 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Free energy in magnets? (was Re: Read it again) In-reply-to: <44969327.3080309@pobox.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/69175 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Please excuse this resend. Harry Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > Harry Veeder wrote: >> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >> >>>> Charges may be involved. However, the _reality_ of a permanent >>>> magnetic body is not recognised by a relativistic charged based >>>> model of magnetism. The relativistic model implies that the >>>> permanence of a permanent magnetic body is a matter of opinion >>>> since one could execute some motion relative to the body and >>>> decide it is non-magnetic. >>>> >>> Actually, this isn't true. Given a pure magnetic field (with zero >>> electric field) there is no inertial frame in which there isn't any >>> B field. A typical permanent magnet has no associated electric >>> field, and so its field can't be transformed away. (Classically, >>> as long as the surface of the magnet is a conductor and the net >>> charge contained in it is balanced, there won't be an E field >>> exterior to the magnet.) >> >> The point is, it is "true" according to the theory (dogma?) that >> _all_ magnetism is simply an effect of charges in motion. > > No, it's not true according to "current dogma". It's true according to > a certain model, but that model is not intrinsic to relativity theory, > nor is it built into Maxwell's equations, nor is it accepted by all > mainstream scientists. > > As far as anyone knows at the present time, there is no such thing as a > magnetic monopole, Questioning the current party in power does not necessarily mean one is siding with the main opposition party. ;-) > and absent magnetic monopoles, all B fields can be > treated _as_ _if_ they are due to charges in motion. "_As if_" means don't take the _logic_ of an explanation seriously, because "_As if_" explanations are by definition useful but not necessarily truthful. For example Newton's theory of gravity was an _as if_ explanation of gravity. Newton never intended the logic of "a = g" to be taken seriously as Einstein did. If one takes the _logic_ of relativity seriously and if the magnetic force produced by a body depends on the relative motion of a test particle then when the relative motion of the test particle is zero then the magnetic field for the test particle is also zero. > Any magnetic > dipole can be treated as though it's caused by a current loop; > mathematically, it might just as well be, even if it's actually > intrinsic to a single particle which happens to have a nonzero magnetic > moment. > > The model I've occasionally mentioned, which treats the A field as > fundamental and the Faraday tensor as being the exterior derivative of > A, with the E and B fields serving as components of the Faraday tensor, > does indeed require that there be no magnetic monopoles. However, as I > just said, that model is not a consequence of relativity, and not a > consequence of Maxwell's equations, though it incorporates the latter. > It's elegant but not necessary, and in fact work has been done on a > version which allows monopoles (since, supposedly, GUTs generally > predict their existence, this is a big issue in some circles). I > haven't yet managed to grok the version which allows monopoles, but in > any case it doesn't have much of anything to do with ordinary magnets, > which don't include monopoles in anybody's theory AFAIK. > >>> You can't transform away a pure B field. Most other frames have a >>> nonzero E field as well, but they all also have a nonzero B field. >>> A simple argument shows this: >>> >>> Consider a pure B field (no E field) in inertial frame S. Consider >>> two identical particles, particle P1, at rest in S, and particle >>> P2, moving in S. P1 feels no force, and is not accelerating. P2 >>> feels a force, and _is_ accelerating. The (Boolean-valued) >>> existence of an acceleration is absolute (at least as long as we >>> stick with inertial frames) -- a particle which is accelerating, is >>> accelerating in all frames; a particle which is "inertial" is >>> inertial in all frames. So, in all inertial frames, P1 will feel >>> no net force, while P2 will feel a net force. Since the only >>> difference between the particles is their velocity, yet they feel >>> difference forces, they are clearly subject to a velocity-dependent >>> force. The E field isn't velocity dependent, so it can't account >>> for the difference. Ergo, there's a B field in every frame. >>> >>> There's a fairly simple mathematical test that'll tell you right >>> away whether a B field (or E field) can be transformed away or not >>> but off hand I don't recall what it is off the top of my head. One >>> can, of course, also just write out the transform and look at it to >>> check this particular case: >>> >>> Here's the transform for the B field (from MTW p.78 -- you can also >>> get it just by transforming the Faraday tensor): >>> >>> B'(parallel) = B(parallel) >>> >>> B'(perpendicular) = gamma*(B(perpendicular) - VxE(perpendicular)) >>> >>> B(parallel) obviously can't be transformed away since it doesn't >>> change under the Lorentz transform, so to get rid of the B field >>> you need to be moving perpendicular to it. But if there's no E >>> field, the perpendicular B field component transforms as: >>> >>> B'(perp) = B(perp) / sqrt(1 - v^2) >>> >>> and if B(perp) is nonzero, that will be nonzero too. > >> >> Maxwell's equations do not actually state that all magnetism is >> simply effect of charges in motion. Such a theory is complementary >> to Maxwell's equations, much like the kinetic theory of heat is >> complementary to the laws of thermodynamics. > > That's correct, as I just said. > > However, it's also true that a static magnetic field due to a current > loop _cannot_ be transformed away via the Lorentz transforms. The > dipole field of a bar magnet is the same sort of field, and it can't be > transformed away either. > > Electromagnetic radiation, which is also a phenomenon handled by > relativity (indeed, it's a large part of what relativity theory was > designed to "explain"), generally can't be transformed away, either, > please note! > You appear to be have a better grasp of the mathematics of EM theory than me, so I can't comment the rest of your post. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 14:10:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JL9sfu003357; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:09:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JL9mOQ003313; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:09:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:09:48 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=cSSYV/Oxb33qDKkytgRg7zWcbLzXaQ0Lz4Mx4EaNphXPtEhh8SIG/68rNFq8nY3l; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006611921936938@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 15:09:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94030f07d08d66d3c1115afd7632c6aeb7c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.245 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69176 X-Loop: vortex-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 It would take four Deuterons (Deutero-Hydrinos?) or two 2-Helium-4 atoms to form 59-Prasodymium-141 from a Stable 55-Cesium-133 atom. http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Cs/isot.html "Caesium (cesium in USA) is not a common element - about the 45th most abundant in the earth's crust. Caesium occurs in pollucite (a hydrated caesium silicate of aluminium - 2Cs2O.2Al2O3.9SiO2.H2O). Pollucite is found in Norh America, Italy, Kazakstan, and Sweden. Caesium is also found in rhodizite, a borate mineral containing aluminium, caesium, beryllium, and sodium. This is found in the Urals and in Madgascar. Caesium is also contained in some potassium ores." There's that possible radio Potassium-40 and Argon Electronium (*e-) exposure again. where the stable (*e-) is formed in the Cesium Stable 59-Prasodymium-141 Isotope. Fred >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jed wrote: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiod.pdf ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/19/2006 11:03:37 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper I'm waiting for Jones Beene to jump on the Argon that is trapped in the lattice waiting for Deuterons to form the Hydrino-Deuteride. :-) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IwamuraYobservatiod.pdf Thanks Jed Fred Iwamura paper: "The surface of the plate was covered by layers of CaO and Pd, which were obtained by five times alternatingly sputtering 20-Ĺ-thick CaO and 200-Ĺ -thick Pd layers. Then a 400-Ĺ-thick Pd layer was sputtered on the surface of the CaO and Pd layers. These processes are performed by Ar ion beam sputtering method or magnetron sputtering method. After forming a Pd complex, Cs was deposited on the surface of the thin Pd layer. Cs was deposited by electrochemical method or ion implantation method." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
It would take four Deuterons (Deutero-Hydrinos?) or two 2-Helium-4
atoms to form 59-Prasodymium-141 from a Stable 55-Cesium-133 atom.
 
 
"Caesium (cesium in USA) is not a common element - about the 45th most abundant in the earth's crust. Caesium occurs in pollucite (a hydrated caesium silicate of aluminium - 2Cs2O.2Al2O3.9SiO2.H2O). Pollucite is found in Norh America, Italy, Kazakstan, and Sweden. Caesium is also found in rhodizite, a borate mineral containing aluminium, caesium, beryllium, and sodium. This is found in the Urals and in Madgascar. Caesium is also contained in some potassium ores."
 
There's that possible radio Potassium-40 and Argon Electronium (*e-) exposure again.
where the stable (*e-) is formed in the Cesium
 
Stable 59-Prasodymium-141 Isotope.
 
Fred
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
Jed wrote:
 
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/19/2006 11:03:37 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper

I'm waiting for Jones Beene to jump on the Argon that

is trapped in the lattice waiting for Deuterons to form 

the  Hydrino-Deuteride.   :-)

 

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

Thanks Jed

Fred

Iwamura paper:

"The surface of the plate was covered

by layers of CaO and Pd, which were obtained by five times alternatingly sputtering 20-Ĺ-thick CaO and 200-Ĺ

-thick Pd layers. Then a 400-Ĺ-thick Pd layer was sputtered on the surface of the CaO and Pd layers. These

processes are performed by Ar ion beam sputtering method or magnetron sputtering method. After forming a Pd

complex, Cs was deposited on the surface of the thin Pd layer. Cs was deposited by electrochemical method or

ion implantation method."

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 14:53:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JLqp98026839; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:52:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JLqnnl026827; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:52:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:52:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001501c693ea$af4ac0e0$74027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: Re: [VO]: Water Vortex Arc Waste Disposal Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:52:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C693C0.C5DD5AE0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69177 X-Loop: vortex-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_0011_01C693C0.C5DD5AE0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0012_01C693C0.C5E06820" ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C693C0.C5E06820 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank For the inquisitive, Richard. :-) http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1999/71_10_pdf/7110bonizzoni_1879.p= df Fred Howdy Fred, Thanks for the link. Percentage destruction looks great. Wonder if they = are able to sustain the efficency under extended load application. = Plasma arc is pure trouble in actual use. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C693C0.C5E06820 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 
For the inquisitive, =20 Richard.   :-)
http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1999/71_10_pdf/7110boni= zzoni_1879.pdf
 
Fred
 
Howdy Fred,
 
Thanks for the link. Percentage = destruction=20 looks great. Wonder if they are able to sustain the efficency under = extended=20 load application. Plasma arc is pure trouble in actual use.
 
Richard
------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C693C0.C5E06820-- ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C693C0.C5DD5AE0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001001c693ea$ae9e0620$74027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C693C0.C5DD5AE0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 16:36:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5JNa8fi006531; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:36:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5JNa67v006493; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:36:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:36:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 19:36:15 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69178 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > A permanent magnet acts like a dipole box and not like a spinning > > charged ring. A permanent magnet acts like a spinning charged ring > > that does not slow down as it supplies energy. > But this isn't quite correct, is it? The internal currents in a > permanent magnet apparently _do_ change, quite a lot, when an external > field is applied to it. It is quite correct and a very good approximation of a dipole. For a typical neo magnet internal mu is very close to mu_zero and internal currents do not change in an easily measureable manner. I can look up the numbers if you wish but changes will typically be less than 1%. > In particular, the "induced" magnetic field exhibited by a piece of > unmagnetized iron when it's in a magnetic field, as well as the changes > in the magnetic field of a permanent magnet when it's in an external > field, are due to changes in the internal currents (or whatever black > magic one believes is taking place inside the magnet to give it the field). Permanent magnets are very poor soft materials and thus do not have large internal variable alignment currents. IIRC strontium based ceramics give about less than 1.5 x mu_zero and oriented barium ceramics give about 3 x mu_zero in the aligned direction. Typical soft materials have large internal alignment currents with mu from 5 x mu_zero to 10^6 x mu_zero. > Remember, E and B fields (apparently!) follow the law of superposition, > which means overlapping fields themselves don't interact; they just > sum. They really don't just sum, it's more complex than that in real geometries with real materials, mu and saturation. Thats why we need finite element programs. > But we're all quite familiar with the way the B field is > "conducted" through iron filings (or ferrite transformer cores, for that > matter). There's no "conduction" going on, really -- what we're seeing > is the sum of the original B field, and the induced B field in the iron > filings or transformer core. This is close but oversimplified. > > The "black box" I hypothesized, which produces a dipole field which is > _fixed_, is rather unrealistic, really -- any real magnet changes its > field as a result of external fields being applied to it. Not true, it is a close approximation at frequencies where eddy currents can be ignored. Special magnets can be constructed to minimize eddy currents and they are generally insignificant in oxide ceramic magnets. >(Perhaps the > box contains a wire loop driven by a current source...) The part which > I, personally, don't understand is what determines _how_ the field of a > piece of iron changes when an external field is applied to it -- the > fact that it _does_ _change_ as the applied field changes, on the other > hand, makes sense, and is, in fact, inevitable if there are really tiny > currents of some sort inside the magnet causing the field. The currents are almost entirely electron spin dipoles aligned within in changing domains which reorient to aid the applied field. Standard magnetic materials have only a small contribution from orbital dipoles. Unusual materials with large spin-orbit coupling do exist but even here the electron spin dipoles dominate. >> Here's another good one: Does a free-falling charge radiate? > >> > > > > As an experimentalist, I would suggest that the answer might > > be found by studying black holes. > > > Crikey, what kind of lab setup do you have?? Couldn't resist that black hole on Ebay last month. :-) It would be fun to play God wouldn't it. > > I do not have much confidence in many of the theories of > > modern physics and prefer to direct my efforts to doing > > experiments suggested by a more conservative approach > > to how much we think we know. > > > When it comes to black holes, I certainly agree with you! :-) George Holz Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 17:47:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5K0kl5D006707; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:46:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5K0kk9x006692; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:46:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:46:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: References: <2.2.32.20060618065138.00bbf4c8@pop.freeserve.net> Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:46:40 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <1q4qtD.A.goB.2V0lEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69179 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: > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course > of one short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > "lay population of Votex" > "I hope others in and of votrtex" I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental evidence for their existence. > There is really no excuse for this type of sloppiness in a > scientific discussion. It is insulting to other members. Really now, there is a lot that goes on here which is insulting to other list members, and you ALL know that. Be it politics, religion, completely ignoring reasonable posts by list members, and most annoying of all to me at least, propagation of conjecture for which there is either no evidence at all, or of which no tests are even SUGGESTED to test for said evidence. Now, to ask a few questions of my own and rephrase a few of John's so that (perhaps) someone will answer them: 1. I know what "ZPE" is supposed to be. Besides the Casimir effect and some theoretical predictions, is there and HARD evidence that such actually exists in any way shape or form that is similar to what is being bandied about here? 2. "Beta atmosphere"....? What is this supposed to be, really? What is "Alpha" and or (insert other Greek letters) in this context? What experimental proof is there that this exists? How can we measure it, test for it, test its properties, and use it to our advantage? 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. 4. What John has been asking, I believe is basically this. Has anyone doing these cold fusion/electrolysis experiments been taking into account evolved H and O (either in atomic or molecular form) and figuring it into net energy output either by 1. Volume of gas evolved 2. Total mass of gas evolved 3. Heat produced by burning this nicely volatile mixture John, anything else to add here please? I will say this in closing, John is a very smart guy and he knows his stuff...anyone who has actually spoken with him for any length of time will appreciate this. Don't dismiss him so readily, he has important things to say. Granted, maybe his method of posting is a little at right angles to the way we normally post, but as Maxwell might well remind us, sometimes right angles are pretty damned important. Regards, --Kyle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 20:46:07 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5K3jx8r020125; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:45:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5K3jvNd020107; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:45:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:45:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: "vortex-l" Subject: Re: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:45:53 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6mqe925tk8vhqriq2ccaddfdnjpt3t0k9n@4ax.com> References: <410-22006611921936938@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-22006611921936938@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.53.65] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 20 Jun 2006 03:45:52 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5K3jsRL020083 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69180 X-Loop: vortex-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 TP Sparber's message of Mon, 19 Jun 2006 15:09:36 -0600: Hi Fred, [snip] >It would take four Deuterons (Deutero-Hydrinos?) or two 2-Helium-4 >atoms to form 59-Prasodymium-141 from a Stable 55-Cesium-133 atom. > >http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Cs/isot.html > Consider the following. A small hydrino attaches to a proton forming a dihydrino molecular ion, which is positively charged, and looks somewhat like a large deuteron. Now look at a He4 nucleus, and notice that it could well be two deuterons side by side, in a flat square with protons in opposite corners (see http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/checker.ppt ) - (this allows the protons to be maximally separated). Now just suppose that two hydrino molecular ions can combine in a similar fashion, i.e. side by side with the "protons" in opposite corners. We would have a unit comprising four nuclei and two electrons, i.e. with a net charge of +2, and a mass ~= 4 amu. If we now substitute a real deuteron for each proton, then we have a very small unit with a net charge of +2, and a mass ~= 8 amu. Now let a couple of electrons take up residence around this central structure, and shrink to the point where they are not much bigger than the central unit itself. We now have a unit with a mass ~= 8 amu, and virtually no charge. This little critter could fuse with other nuclei, and would add 8 amu / reaction. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 19 22:11:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5K5BLc4027675; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:11:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5K5B77F027598; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:11:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:11:07 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Wzqjv///m3X1/8xJGvm33DNBNHVB+W4A2soQvSQBuPiF1IEoQx72Pc4BjQW+7Tu2; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200662205104647@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Long awaited Iwamura paper Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:10:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c1dfb08387f08f54749fe45664af18ef350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.200 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69181 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > In reply to TP Sparber's message of Mon, 19 Jun 2006 15:09:36 > -0600: > Hi Fred, > [snip] > >It would take four Deuterons (Deutero-Hydrinos?) or two 2-Helium-4 > >atoms to form 59-Prasodymium-141 from a Stable 55-Cesium-133 atom. > > > >http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Cs/isot.html > > > Consider the following. > > A small hydrino attaches to a proton forming a dihydrino molecular > ion, which is positively charged, and looks somewhat like a large > deuteron. Now look at a He4 nucleus, and notice that it could well > be two deuterons side by side, in a flat square with protons in > opposite corners (see > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/checker.ppt ) - (this allows > the protons to be maximally separated). Now just suppose that two > hydrino molecular ions can combine in a similar fashion, i.e. side > by side with the "protons" in opposite corners. We would have a > unit comprising four nuclei and two electrons, i.e. with a net > charge of +2, and a mass ~= 4 amu. If we now substitute a real > deuteron for each proton, then we have a very small unit with a > net charge of +2, and a mass ~= 8 amu. Now let a couple of > electrons take up residence around this central structure, and > shrink to the point where they are not much bigger than the > central unit itself. We now have a unit with a mass ~= 8 amu, and > virtually no charge. This little critter could fuse with other > nuclei, and would add 8 amu / reaction. > Hmmm, sort of a momentary neutral 4-Beryllium-8 particle which would also explain Kervran's Chickens where 16-sulfur-32 undergoes transmutation into 20-Calcium-40. Henny Penny and Chicken Lickin pick up lots of sulfides around the barnyard. And so does Goosey Lucey, Duckey Luckey, and Turkey Lurkey, if they keep an eye out for Foxey Loxey. and falling skies. The 6 electron M Shell of Sulfur is a natural for Hydrino-Type reactions as is it's possible Auger Cascade ~3.48 KeV K shell electron Fred > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition provides the motivation, > Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 00:49:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5K7msle008042; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:48:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5K7moPl008019; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:48:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 00:48:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060620074843400.61A1CB0000BA@mwinf3213.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060620074844.009a5be8@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, 20 Jun 2006 08:48:44 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69182 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 08:46 pm 19/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: > I will say this in closing, John is a very > smart guy and he knows his stuff...anyone > who has actually spoken with him for any > length of time will appreciate this. I don't doubt it, Kyle - and I shouldn't have been pedantic and picked on his spelling mistakes. I must have been feeling liverish that morning. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. 8-( [strikes breast three times as a sign of contrition] Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 04:28:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KBSbmR005539; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:28:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KBSX8D005510; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:28:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:28:33 -0700 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:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CPe5jSd/TdvIRxcZuoHwU0eTFab7/ywoPJI95B6B8pYhSFUnCKcRBP1h2XGZAxjuJb1KZbZs4EjmslLQs6tkkmqTC034dPMDsWOy+7fqE61qxg/yuOccmdXMMXnwO/0fukfRCDfhsPM+qmkp7zXWSPr19vXNoraQFhn+x6vWXtc= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 07:28:31 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . In-Reply-To: <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <2.2.32.20060618065138.00bbf4c8@pop.freeserve.net> <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69183 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: Dear Vortex People, I admit I am not the best speller. I admit I get somewhat excited and or exercised when I type fast. I do not generally use of have a "spell check" program. I thank Kyle and I thank those of you who are ''lurking'' and may or may not agree. My main reason for posting is to ask questions. Would someone, maybe a lurker... or not... help me to help the whole of vortex to learn the basics of the differences between: (A) Theory (B) Experimental support.... or not support .. of one or more theories. (C) Mathmatical ideas, armchair expositions, and the history of the basis of or for some given post or posts. (D) Personal comment: I happen to LIKE real world, nuts and bolts, belt and suspenders engineering. This helps me to not only understand physics and the observations of the behavior of ? the universe? ?? our place in space?? and the grand love of discovery. Theory is GRAND.... but the real fun and excitement ....for myself .... arrives when I can not only understand the idea and theory... but when I can demonstrate the idea to others. Over the last 10 to 20 years I have found if one is able to bring the idea to the "see here it is and here is how it works and here is what we MIGHT do with it.... then in a few cases people learn, people make money, people can teach the general idea to others... AND THEN comes the fun part.... Other persons who I may never have known or met... and may never know or meet ... will be albe to make some good use of the ideas I have been lucky enough to be exposed to ..... and the world becomes... for me anyway ... a more beautiful, richer and interesting place to ... not Live In.... but... far more importantly... to be a part of. SO: Simple questions... cannot we have either simple answers ....or responses along the lines of...: i] "I understand or think I understand this part.... but I am not sure of this other part" OR ii] "I am not sure but I read a really useful text that may help us to understand" OR iii] "This is really interesting and I will do the best I can to attempt to TRY to reproduce the work.... and if or when I am successful, I will hope to be able to put the matter into such words as I can so that you also will be able to understand" NB The last form several years ago as a poster reported his long and useful effort to substantiate the "black Light Power" ..... I am ashamed to to admit I do not remeber his name at this time. ------------------ Will any vortex "VOs" please help me to say this a little better so that Vortex can become closer to the hopeful love that I look toward that can help us all bridge the gap.... and this is a very important gap... Grand Ideas ... and the use of these ideas to help all of humankind. I happen to be in love, at present, with the History and Ethics of Sciences and Technology ... Will any of the Vos help me to learn more of the sciences we see posted? Thanks for the time to read this. I do not think knowing will hurt. I do think words with not common meaning do not well communicate ...... Is that ANY part of the above which in hard to understand? Will any Vos help to re-write and-or re-phase this so that the idea may obtain? I am most grateful if any vo can even entertain the idea of trying to put this hope into cleaner works. NB: Some time ago a Vo offered the idea of BBGB .... BBGB meant "Blow By Grinding Blow" as a desription of.... I guess... a fight or battle.... But for a time the term BBGB was meant to lead some poster to explain EXACTLY what the idea, technology, experiment or other was about. BBGB is kind of hard, as I am in principle a peace loving person.... Maybe we can adopt another acronym to help us move forward ...through the place between "ideas-words" toward ..."OH! ... Now I can understand this!!" And even better........."AH...Now I can make one or at least can demonstrate or observe the '''effect''' or science...." And FAR more important One may then be able to inflict the operational demonstration of the idea or some actual Working Gizmo to one or more than one person of any age, nationality or gender in order to promote knowledge and the fruit of these understanding ...... far and wide.... As I understand matters, this is what communication is all about. The exchange of words, pictures and other is a part of the Human condition. For myself the great fun come in the discovery... but the BIG fun comes from being able to share the "ooohhh really coool" secret with other persons. But, Hey, I am just a General joe who would rather be a private 3rd class bean.... and drink the coffee from those beans. ____________ ___________________ __________________________ ____________________________________ ---------> ENDIT-40 --------------> WOOLEY BOOLEY --------- On 6/19/06, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course > > of one short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > "lay population of Votex" > > "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L with any > number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic particles of which > there is not the least bit of experimental evidence for their existence. > > > There is really no excuse for this type of sloppiness in a > > scientific discussion. It is insulting to other members. > > Really now, there is a lot that goes on here which is insulting to other > list members, and you ALL know that. Be it politics, religion, completely > ignoring reasonable posts by list members, and most annoying of all to me at > least, propagation of conjecture for which there is either no evidence at > all, or of which no tests are even SUGGESTED to test for said evidence. > > Now, to ask a few questions of my own and rephrase a few of John's so that > (perhaps) someone will answer them: > > 1. I know what "ZPE" is supposed to be. Besides the Casimir effect and some > theoretical predictions, is there and HARD evidence that such actually > exists in any way shape or form that is similar to what is being bandied > about here? > > 2. "Beta atmosphere"....? What is this supposed to be, really? What is > "Alpha" and or (insert other Greek letters) in this context? What > experimental proof is there that this exists? How can we measure it, test > for it, test its properties, and use it to our advantage? > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a bound > state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. What then is > electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a "thing" with mass of > 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for this thing please? I seem to > recall an experiment involving playing with the vertical drive coils of a > small TV, and looking for a less deflected lineon the phosphor screen which > would correspond to something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I > recall also that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I > can think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits positrons > is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > 4. What John has been asking, I believe is basically this. Has anyone doing > these cold fusion/electrolysis experiments been taking into account evolved > H and O (either in atomic or molecular form) and figuring it into net energy > output either by > > 1. Volume of gas evolved > 2. Total mass of gas evolved > 3. Heat produced by burning this nicely volatile mixture > > John, anything else to add here please? > > I will say this in closing, John is a very smart guy and he knows his > stuff...anyone who has actually spoken with him for any length of time will > appreciate this. Don't dismiss him so readily, he has important things to > say. Granted, maybe his method of posting is a little at right angles to the > way we normally post, but as Maxwell might well remind us, sometimes right > angles are pretty damned important. > > Regards, > --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 04:54:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KBsPTo019111; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:54:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KBsNoW019086; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:54:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:54:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001201c69460$411b0960$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> From: "Nick Palmer" To: References: <2.2.32.20060618065138.00bbf4c8@pop.freeserve.net> <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:54:11 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69184 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 Herman" wrote << NB: Some time ago a Vo offered the idea of BBGB .... BBGB meant "Blow By Grinding Blow" as a desription of.... I guess... a fight or battle....>> The "Vo" who offered the idea of BBGB was John Schnurer whose email used to be herman@antioch something or other. From the style and phrasing of the writing, clearly John Herman and John Schnurer are the same person. John, why are you dissociating yourself from your former self? Nick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 06:30:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KDUGJm028942; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:30:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KDUEXc028922; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:30:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:30:14 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=i8SHNx4Mz2d4n8cRAsDEnSmgQteoFYhWHyVJWCZiAVQ+Laeg+oTNnGk+fXiRFZ5t; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006622013301430@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 07:30:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9405af591b8adbae3090f44a7b19017bfdc350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.207 Resent-Message-ID: <_gWYMC.A.yDH.mh_lEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69185 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Kervrans Chickens Status: RO X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII If 55-Cesium-133 is using a "momentary 4-Beryllium-8" Hydrino-Deuterino species to transmutate into 59-Prasodymiu-141 Then a hen can use biological transmutations such as 11-Sodium-23 ----> 15-Phosphorous--31 and 16-Sulfur-32 ------> 20-Calcium-40 and possibly galvanize the eggs with the reaction 26-Iron-56 -----> 30-Zinc-64 for quality egg product. Self-Galvanizing ReBar, Frank. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
If 55-Cesium-133 is using a "momentary 4-Beryllium-8" Hydrino-Deuterino
species to transmutate into 59-Prasodymiu-141
Then a hen can use biological transmutations such as
11-Sodium-23 ----> 15-Phosphorous--31
and 16-Sulfur-32 ------> 20-Calcium-40 and possibly
galvanize the eggs with the reaction
26-Iron-56 -----> 30-Zinc-64 for quality egg product.
 
Self-Galvanizing ReBar, Frank.   :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 06:55:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KDt2Ca013564; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:55:02 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KDt0PX013526; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:55:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 06:55:00 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=VI2LJTZQ4FGtDHPMat+4HIUE0r3LkoiNatb148qTBZuRpKSclqwaLEY7eb39pvp9; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066220135444567@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Kervrans Chickens Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 07:54:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94040ab1cc71014b97cd5fef87f058f03d2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.122 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69186 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW. Strangely enough in the photosynthesis reaction: CO2 + H2O + Photons -----> CH2O + O2 Use of an Oxygen-18 tracer shows that none of the Oxygen comes from the H2O molecule. Nature-Evolution (accepted by the Anti-CF establishment) has ways of looking after it's interests. Is the evolution of`"Cold Fusion" any different? ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/20/2006 7:31:01 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Kervrans Chickens If 55-Cesium-133 is using a "momentary 4-Beryllium-8" Hydrino-Deuterino species to transmutate into 59-Prasodymium-141 Then a hen can use biological transmutations such as 11-Sodium-23 ----> 15-Phosphorous--31 and 16-Sulfur-32 ------> 20-Calcium-40 and possibly galvanize the eggs with the reaction 26-Iron-56 -----> 30-Zinc-64 for quality egg product. Self-Galvanizing ReBar, Frank. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW.
 
Strangely enough in the photosynthesis reaction:
 
CO2 + H2O + Photons -----> CH2O + O2
 
Use of an Oxygen-18 tracer shows that none of the
Oxygen comes from the H2O molecule.
 
Nature-Evolution (accepted by the Anti-CF establishment) has
ways of looking after it's interests.
 
Is  the evolution of`"Cold Fusion" any different?
----- Original Message -----
From: TP Sparber
Sent: 6/20/2006 7:31:01 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Kervrans Chickens

If 55-Cesium-133 is using a "momentary 4-Beryllium-8" Hydrino-Deuterino
species to transmutate into 59-Prasodymium-141
Then a hen can use biological transmutations such as
11-Sodium-23 ----> 15-Phosphorous--31
and 16-Sulfur-32 ------> 20-Calcium-40 and possibly
galvanize the eggs with the reaction
26-Iron-56 -----> 30-Zinc-64 for quality egg product.
 
Self-Galvanizing ReBar, Frank.   :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 08:37:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KFbg8B006647; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:37:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KFbeqR006621; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:37:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:37:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060620153735165.03FA0B000042@mwinf3213.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060620153735.00be1ed8@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, 20 Jun 2006 16:37:35 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69187 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 07:28 am 20/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: > Dear Vortex People, > > I admit I am not the best speller. I admit I get > somewhat excited and or exercised when I type fast. > I do not generally use of have a "spell check" program. > > I thank Kyle and I thank those of you who are ''lurking'' > and may or may not agree. > > My main reason for posting is to ask questions. > > Would someone, maybe a lurker... or not... help me to > help the whole of vortex to learn the basics of the > differences between: > > (A) Theory > > (B) Experimental support.... or not support .. of > one or more theories. > > C) Mathematical ideas, armchair expositions, and the > history of the basis of or for some given post or posts. You are obviously a person full of natural curiosity about the world, John, a curiosity that is so sadly lacking in today's scientists who have had grooves worn into their brains by too much dogmatic education - scientists who are by and large incapable of climbing out of those grooves and contemplating the broad uncharted vistas of the plateau above. You want an exciting theory? What could be more exciting than a theory which stands conventional physics on its head and claims that materials are held together by external compressions, not by internal tensions - which claims that internal tensions, bonds and the like, are negations and no more real that the vacuum of the wifey's hoover. You "LIKE real world, nuts and bolts, belt and suspenders engineering." What could be more real world than that of the civil engineers who are famous for wearing both belt and braces (in England suspenders hold up socks, not trousers 8-) ). What could be more real world than that of concrete and soil mechanics where the Beta- atmosphere was conceived all those years ago. What could be more real than tests on 12 by 6 inch concrete cylinders crushed in a stiffened 1000 ton long-column test machine or squeezed by a simulated aether in a high pressure steel cell. You say you like, "the grand love of discovery." - then come and read the member's File Section at, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Beta-atmosphere_group/ and learn how the experiments demonstrating the reality of the Beta-atmosphere were developed surreptitiously in British government laboratories. Learn how they were published in defiance of the establishment's opposition. Learn how the ideas were put on trial in front of a panel of experts who were incapable of faulting them. Learn how the author was the only scientist who ever appealed to the very top of the British Civil Service on the grounds that, if true, the ideas could have serious safety implications for prestressed structures. You wont find anything too difficult to understand. You wont find any complicated mathematics - But you will find that you have to make a huge Gestalt switch - that you have to turn your present views inside out - that you have to leave behind ideas to which you may have become inordinately attached. If you were still a student I wouldn't want to seduce you from the status quo in case it compromised your graduation or doctorate but since you seem to be past education, what about it? Do you feel up to the challenge? 8-) Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 10:10:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KHAAIs010183; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:10:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KGmFJT024624; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 09:48:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 09:48:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449826B8.1090405@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:47:52 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . References: <2.2.32.20060618065138.00bbf4c8@pop.freeserve.net> <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> In-Reply-To: <004701c69402$ffabea60$5280163f@DFBGQZ91> 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/69188 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: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one > > short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L > with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic > particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental > evidence for their existence. I believe the charter for Vortex includes just such things as being "on topic". I admit that some of the things bandied about here set my teeth on edge with their imprecision and improbability but, in general, this is supposed to be a friendly forum in which one can air oddball and/or absurd theories without getting shot down by folks armed with Conventional Wisdom. If you like your science to always be of the most "hard" sort then this may not be the best possible forum for you. > > There is really no excuse for this type of sloppiness in a > > scientific discussion. It is insulting to other members. > > Really now, there is a lot that goes on here which is insulting to > other list members, and you ALL know that. > Be it politics, religion, > completely ignoring reasonable posts by list members, and most > annoying of all to me at least, propagation of conjecture for which > there is either no evidence at all, or of which no tests are even > SUGGESTED to test for said evidence. > > Now, to ask a few questions of my own and rephrase a few of John's so > that (perhaps) someone will answer them: > > 1. I know what "ZPE" is supposed to be. Besides the Casimir effect > and some theoretical predictions, is there and HARD evidence that > such actually exists in any way shape or form that is similar to what > is being bandied about here? I think the answer is "no, not yet" but I have the general impression that work is being done even as we speak on detecting the ZPE and we may expect some results in the next year or two. In particular, it's supposed to be possible to detect a nonzero "background" energy flux in an accelerated frame; the effect is similar to Hawking radiation around a black hole and is closely related to the notion of the zero point energy. Experiments are under way to detect that flux. Is that "similar" to what is bandied about here? Well, not exactly; the idea is carried 'way, 'way past that point on Vortex. But, again, that's the sort of thing the list is for, I think. By the way, the theory which leads to a belief in hydrinos also rules out existence of the ZPE, or at any rate that's the impression I have. The problem is that the ZPE is intimately bound up with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and Heisenberg and hydrinos are mutually incompatible. (If I'm completely off base here I hope someone will take the time to point it out.) > 2. "Beta atmosphere"....? What is this supposed to be, really? Oops I shouldn't answer this one :-) But I'll say a few words anyway. "Beta atmosphere" is also sometimes called the "Beta aether" (at least in the older posts on the subject). I have the general impression that it's supposed to be a variant on a classical aether, and it's supposed that EM radiation travels as vibrations in the beta aether. Of course it has lots of other interesting properties as well, but as far as I'm concerned its behavior as a classical aether is certainly its most interesting property in that it provides the opportunity to actually test for it; see below. > What > is "Alpha" and or (insert other Greek letters) in this context? What > experimental proof is there that this exists? How can we measure it, > test for it, test its properties, and use it to our advantage? To the extent that the beta aether is a classical aether, it must behave in a way that is consistent with the results of experiments which were done to test classical aether theories. In particular, it must behave in a way that is consistent with the Fizeau, Sagnac, and Michelson-Morley experiments, with all the different materials which have been used in those experiments. Classical aether theories typically have trouble with these experiments. MMX is consistent with a "fully dragged" aether -- one which co-moves with the Earth -- but is inconsistent with an undragged aether or a Fresnel (partially dragged) aether. MMX has been repeated with gas, glass, and vacuum in the paths carrying the light rays, and, IIRC, it has been repeated with one leg in glass and one leg in gas and/or vacuum; in all cases the result is consistent only with a fully dragged aether (or relativity, of course). Fizeau's result is consistent with a Fresnel aether which is partially dragged along with the apparatus, but is inconsistent with an aether which is not dragged at all or which is fully dragged with the apparatus. (This the experiment in which light rays pass longitudinally through a moving stream of water. Travel time went as predicted by the SR composition of velocities formula; Fresnel aether shares that -- to second order IIRC -- but other classical aethers don't.) Sagnac effect with an evacuated apparatus is consistent with an _undragged_ aether, but is inconsistent with an aether which is dragged along with the apparatus. Sagnac effect with glass fibers is consistent with a Fresnel aether which is partially dragged with the apparatus, but is inconsistent with an undragged aether or with a fully dragged aether. (It's fully consistent with relativity, of course.) By the way, you can go out and buy an iFOG device which will sit on your desk and demonstrate the Sagnac effect using glass fibers. The other experiments here are a bit too complex to do in the typical home laboratory. This set of experiments (along with some others I'm less familiar with) "bracket" the territory in which aether theories can exist. In short, any viable aether theory is constrained to produce the same transformation equations as special relativity if it's to be consistent with the experiments which have already been done. There is such a theory; it's typically referred to as Lorentz Ether Theory or LET, and AFAIK its predictions are indistinguishable from those of special relativity. So, since it's basically the same theory as SR but it adds an undetectable aether without measurable properties along with some very strange assertions about how things behave (in order to arrive at Fitzgerald contraction and time dilation, which must, of course, be part of it) it doesn't have a lot of currency save among diehard aether "believers". I hope this is of some help. (In any case, I should probably apologize at this point because I'm quite sure I have gone 'way over the line in violating the charter of the group with this post...) > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a > bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. > What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a > "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for > this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing > with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less > deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to > something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also > that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can > think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits > positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > 4. What John has been asking, I believe is basically this. Has anyone > doing these cold fusion/electrolysis experiments been taking into > account evolved H and O (either in atomic or molecular form) and > figuring it into net energy output either by > > 1. Volume of gas evolved 2. Total mass of gas evolved 3. Heat > produced by burning this nicely volatile mixture Yes, if I understand your question, that's absolutely been done, many times. In fact, the more recent experiments (like, during the last 20 years...) typically recombine the H and O and include the heat of recombination in the measured energy budget. Open-cell experiments in which the H and O are just vented to the atmosphere are the exception; among other things it makes it very hard to figure out what the net energy balance really was. There's a lot of platinum in a typical CF experiment... It's worth pointing out that CF is _not_ "crank science" in any sense of the term. It's still hard to reproduce it on demand and it still hasn't been accepted by a lot of the mainstream but it's nowhere near the category of orgone accumulators and permanent-magnet "free energy" motors. > > John, anything else to add here please? > > I will say this in closing, John is a very smart guy and he knows his > stuff...anyone who has actually spoken with him for any length of > time will appreciate this. Don't dismiss him so readily, he has > important things to say. Granted, maybe his method of posting is a > little at right angles to the way we normally post, but as Maxwell > might well remind us, sometimes right angles are pretty damned > important. > > Regards, --Kyle > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 10:51:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KHpUDs009263; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:51:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KHpSOe009227; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:51:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:51:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:58:13 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5KHpNvF009175 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69189 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 Status: O X-Status: From PURDUE UNIVERSITY News Service June 20, 2006 SONOFUSION RESEARCH EXAMINATION COMMITTEE COMPLETES REVIEW WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. ­ A Purdue University examination committee reviewing issues concerning research on the use of sound waves to create nuclear fusion reactions has completed its work. "The committee has submitted a report, and I will take appropriate action after studying the recommendations," said Charles O. Rutledge, vice president for research, who appointed the committee in March. "Any further action in this matter will be conducted as an internal matter under appropriate university procedures." Rutledge appointed the examination committee after the British research journal Nature reported on its Web site that some researchers had raised questions about the research of Rusi Taleyarkhan, a Purdue professor of nuclear engineering. Since joining the Purdue faculty in 2004 and previously at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Taleyarkhan has published research findings in several refereed journals showing evidence that "sonofusion" generates nuclear reactions by creating tiny bubbles that implode with tremendous force. Experimental nuclear fusion reactors have historically required large, multibillion-dollar machines, but sonofusion devices might be built for a fraction of the cost and theoretically could be an unlimited source of clean energy. "Specific recommendations of the examination committee and any subsequent steps by the university will be treated as confidential internal matters," Rutledge said. In a statement issued at the time the committee was appointed, Provost Sally Mason said: "Purdue is well aware that there are legitimate differences of scientific opinion about the theories behind Dr. Taleyarkhan's work. Those differences are the reason scientists share their findings. "The research claims are very significant, and the allegations are very serious. As in any scientific endeavor, Purdue's ultimate goals are truth and integrity." Taleyarkhan first reported observing the bubble fusion effect in March 2002 in the journal Science. In addition to its potential as a new source of clean energy, Taleyarkhan and other researchers believe sonofusion could be used in a wide range of applications from homeland security to the study of neutron stars and black holes. Source: Joseph L. Bennett, vice president for university relations, (765) 494-2082, jlbennett@purdue.edu Related Web site: Purdue University Home Page: http://www.purdue.edu - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PURDUE UNIVERSITY News Service 400 Centennial Mall Drive, Rm. 324 West Lafayette, IN 47907-2016 (765) 494-2096 fax: (765) 494-0401 purduenews@purdue.edu - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 11:33:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KIXRhq031363; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KIXOsg031327; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:24 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=NEnf6vRV5QYQzC34lPeFS0j8KlELF57SJJOFPSYEM6i2PVQXRZhF1Ec26mItbGD8; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066220183310217@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:33:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ad2633121e7861d776dd4f62914e37d3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.229 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69192 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: Stephen A. Lawrence > > > Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one > > > short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > > > "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L > > with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic > > particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental > > evidence for their existence. > > I believe the charter for Vortex includes just such things as being "on > topic". > > > > > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a > > bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. > > What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a > > "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for > > this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing > > with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less > > deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to > > something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also > > that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can > > think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits > > positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > > Looks like my postulated stable bound Electron-Positron-Electron, Negative Particle (mass ~ 2.0 to 2.7 elecderived from the Positronium Anion (Ps-) being pursued by the "establishment" is on trial. http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/ato/psminus/ "Introduction" "The study of simple systems has been of particular interest since the very first days of physics. Simple systems, consisting of just a few particles do not show the puzzling variety of phenomena known from solid state physics, for example. But they offer invaluable insights into the the properties of particles and fundamental forces. To gain a first understanding of atomic physics it is a much more promising approach to study hydrogen instead of complex molecules, for instance. The object of our studies is one of these simple systems: the Positronium negative ion. This exotic entity is a bound state of a positron and two electrons. It is similar to the negative ion of hydrogen (H-). In fact, it is the most simple three body problem imaginable. Its constituents are pointlike particles (at least to the best of our knowledge) and there are no pertubations due to strong interactions to be considered. There has been quite a lot of theoretical activity around Ps- but there is not much known experimentally. Only one experiment can be found in the literature: A.P. Mills observed the Positronium negative ion experimentally and made a first lifetime measurement. With an error of about 4% it is not sufficiently precise to allow for a test a QED effects. A new measurement of the lifetime with improved precision is the first objective of this project. We have a 22Na source (on the left) emitting positrons at 0.55 MeV. A tungsten foil moderates the positrons to thermic velocities (about 30 eV). The slow positrons enter the field of an S-shaped solenoid which leads them into the experiment chamber (on the right). The ß+ decay of 22Na leads to a excited 22Ne nucleus, which decays further by ? emission at 1.27 MeV. To remove these photons from the background the solenoid shifts the positron beam out of the gamma beam. In the experimental chamber the positrons pass through a grounded copper grid and get accellerated onto a thin carbon foil. This foil is just a few atomic layers thick. In the Carbon foil most of the positrons capture one electron and form the electrically neutral Positronium. Very rarely a positron captures two electrons and forms the negative charged Ps-. A second grid after the carbon foil is on high voltage (about 4kV) and accellerates the Ps- ions. This Doppler-shifts the decay-?s to higher energies in forward direction, while the energy of the ?s from the neutral Positronium remains at 511 keV. To measure the spectra a Germanium detector at the temperature of liquid nitrogen detects the ? radiation from the decays of the positronium and positronium ion." http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=1186 (October 31, 2005) "RIVERSIDE, Calif. – What happens when two atoms, each made up of an electron and its antimatter counterpart, called the positron, collide with each other? UC Riverside physicists are able to see for the first time in the laboratory that these atoms, which are called positronium atoms and are unstable by nature, become even more unstable after the collision. The positronium atoms are seen to destroy one another, turning into gamma radiation, a powerful type of electromagnetic radiation. “Our research also gives the first hint of the presence of double positronium molecules, each of which is made up of two electrons and two positrons,” said Allen Mills, professor of physics and leader of the research project. “This kind of matter-antimatter pairing has never been formed or studied in the laboratory until now, and paves the way for a new field of study on its properties.” " I'm not into rewriting accepted physics, but I'm not above looking for a particle that most likely exists (since time zero) and has been overlooked in the shuffle. IOW, for every postron-electron pair produced, obviously near many electrons there could be a major fraction that form the stable Triad "Electronium". Thus Electron-Positron Annihilation Radiation could mask the existence of the bound Triad that except for it's mass, radius and nuclear magnetic moment looks like any other electron. It cannot be detected by electrotatic CRTs but can be detected using a magnetic mass spect The researchers in the above links and others have been made aware of this possibility, but, you or me won't be hearing from them while they are feverishly shooting for a free trip to Stockholm. Fred > > > > > Regards, --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 11:34:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KIYVZo031843; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:34:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KIYSxa031795; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:34:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:34:28 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=CCNoBxC+Q5IJo4uSkHgAt11udgotYH7VwAE65JB9ywRxggvKle333QRIPt9sg5LR; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066220183312850@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:33:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940ad2633121e7861d77ecd01d33b56cb2b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.229 Resent-Message-ID: <7WA-IC.A.lwH.y-DmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69194 X-Loop: vortex-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 > > > Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one > > > short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > > > "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L > > with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic > > particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental > > evidence for their existence. > > I believe the charter for Vortex includes just such things as being "on > topic". > > > > > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a > > bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. > > What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a > > "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for > > this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing > > with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less > > deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to > > something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also > > that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can > > think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits > > positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > > Looks like my postulated stable bound Electron-Positron-Electron, Negative Particle (mass ~ 2.0 to 2.7 elecderived from the Positronium Anion (Ps-) being pursued by the "establishment" is on trial. http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/ato/psminus/ "Introduction" "The study of simple systems has been of particular interest since the very first days of physics. Simple systems, consisting of just a few particles do not show the puzzling variety of phenomena known from solid state physics, for example. But they offer invaluable insights into the the properties of particles and fundamental forces. To gain a first understanding of atomic physics it is a much more promising approach to study hydrogen instead of complex molecules, for instance. The object of our studies is one of these simple systems: the Positronium negative ion. This exotic entity is a bound state of a positron and two electrons. It is similar to the negative ion of hydrogen (H-). In fact, it is the most simple three body problem imaginable. Its constituents are pointlike particles (at least to the best of our knowledge) and there are no pertubations due to strong interactions to be considered. There has been quite a lot of theoretical activity around Ps- but there is not much known experimentally. Only one experiment can be found in the literature: A.P. Mills observed the Positronium negative ion experimentally and made a first lifetime measurement. With an error of about 4% it is not sufficiently precise to allow for a test a QED effects. A new measurement of the lifetime with improved precision is the first objective of this project. We have a 22Na source (on the left) emitting positrons at 0.55 MeV. A tungsten foil moderates the positrons to thermic velocities (about 30 eV). The slow positrons enter the field of an S-shaped solenoid which leads them into the experiment chamber (on the right). The ß+ decay of 22Na leads to a excited 22Ne nucleus, which decays further by ? emission at 1.27 MeV. To remove these photons from the background the solenoid shifts the positron beam out of the gamma beam. In the experimental chamber the positrons pass through a grounded copper grid and get accellerated onto a thin carbon foil. This foil is just a few atomic layers thick. In the Carbon foil most of the positrons capture one electron and form the electrically neutral Positronium. Very rarely a positron captures two electrons and forms the negative charged Ps-. A second grid after the carbon foil is on high voltage (about 4kV) and accellerates the Ps- ions. This Doppler-shifts the decay-?s to higher energies in forward direction, while the energy of the ?s from the neutral Positronium remains at 511 keV. To measure the spectra a Germanium detector at the temperature of liquid nitrogen detects the ? radiation from the decays of the positronium and positronium ion." http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=1186 (October 31, 2005) "RIVERSIDE, Calif. – What happens when two atoms, each made up of an electron and its antimatter counterpart, called the positron, collide with each other? UC Riverside physicists are able to see for the first time in the laboratory that these atoms, which are called positronium atoms and are unstable by nature, become even more unstable after the collision. The positronium atoms are seen to destroy one another, turning into gamma radiation, a powerful type of electromagnetic radiation. “Our research also gives the first hint of the presence of double positronium molecules, each of which is made up of two electrons and two positrons,” said Allen Mills, professor of physics and leader of the research project. “This kind of matter-antimatter pairing has never been formed or studied in the laboratory until now, and paves the way for a new field of study on its properties.” " I'm not into rewriting accepted physics, but I'm not above looking for a particle that most likely exists (since time zero) and has been overlooked in the shuffle. IOW, for every postron-electron pair produced, obviously near many electrons there could be a major fraction that form the stable Triad "Electronium". Thus Electron-Positron Annihilation Radiation could mask the existence of the bound Triad that except for it's mass, radius and nuclear magnetic moment looks like any other electron. It cannot be detected by electrotatic CRTs but can be detected using a magnetic mass spectrometer type device. Ther modified scope experiment was a rough cut mass attempt, with the tought that one might shake out a few if they come off the emitter in CRT The researchers in the above links and others have been made aware of this possibility, but, you or me won't be hearing from them while they are feverishly shooting for a free trip to Stockholm. Fred > > > > > Regards, --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 12:08:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KJ0YjM014034; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:08:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KIWb3B031077; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:32:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:32:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44983F36.5060204@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:32:22 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> In-Reply-To: <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> 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/69191 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A "successful" exchange in a science group is, IMHO, one in which I learn something. This one's been successful ;-) George Holz wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: [ snip ] > > > Remember, E and B fields (apparently!) follow the law of > > superposition, which means overlapping fields themselves don't > > interact; they just sum. > > They really don't just sum, it's more complex than that in real > geometries with real materials, mu and saturation. Thats why we need > finite element programs. Um ... As I learned E&M ... and this is just quoting from Griffiths, I sure can't claim to have proved this experimentally -- both E and B fields obey superposition perfectly, and the "pure" form of Maxwell's equations holds everywhere, inside matter as well as outside. The _apparently_ different equations we get in matter -- with D vs E and H vs B and with funky values for mu and strange saturation effects -- _just_ result from the superposition of E and B fields induced in the matter as a result of the effect of the externally applied fields. They can come from tiny current loops, or from rotated/stretched electric dipoles, but either way it's actually an additional field associated with the matter which is added to the applied field. Or so say the textbooks I've read. But as I said, I certainly can't claim to have _verified_ that! :-) But in any case finite element programs are needed to understand the unbelievable hair which grows even if you take the classical theory at face value. [ snip ] > The currents are almost entirely electron spin dipoles aligned > within in changing domains which reorient to aid the applied field. > Standard magnetic materials have only a small contribution from > orbital dipoles. Unusual materials with large spin-orbit coupling do > exist but even here the electron spin dipoles dominate. Well, well. Well, well, well. Hmmm.. An electron in a B field has a magnetic dipole field, and unless Wikipedia got it totally wrong, the strength of the electron's dipole is independent of the strength of the external field. If my mental picture is right, then a free electron's dipole must be aligned with the external field (parallel or antiparallel). But in that case an electron in a non-uniform B field must feel a force, proportional to the gradient of the field ('cause that's what magnetic dipoles _do_, and besides, if the electron sourced a dipole field but didn't feel a force as a result of being immersed in somebody else's dipole field we'd violate conservation of linear momentum which would be unfortunate). But then if we let the electron go in a non-uniform B field it'll accelerate, which means something did work on it; it gained kinetic energy. Where'd the energy come from? I have no idea. Since the force on the electron depends on whether it's spin-up or spin-down there's certainly no simple "potential-gradient" model one can use here, either. Interesting. There must be something wrong with this picture, but I don't know what. :-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 12:08:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KJ0YjO014034; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:08:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KITbNs029484; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:29:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:29:37 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=dxoF3X+vEIY68VHNO/nhpusgebzcCNcPWrM3yR5jcsYQmR0FSrfq6OHEZk3rcUpT; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066220182916661@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:29:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b2db92f8fcadbfbc2dcc3e2cbf34b2e0350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.229 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69190 X-Loop: vortex-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 > > > Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one > > > short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > > > "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L > > with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic > > particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental > > evidence for their existence. > > I believe the charter for Vortex includes just such things as being "on > topic". > > > > > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a > > bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. > > What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a > > "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for > > this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing > > with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less > > deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to > > something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also > > that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can > > think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits > > positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > > Looks like my postulated stable bound Electron-Positron-Electron, Negative Particle (mass ~ 2.0 to 2.7 elecderived from the Positronium Anion (Ps-) being pursued by the "establishment" is on trial. http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/ato/psminus/ "Introduction" "The study of simple systems has been of particular interest since the very first days of physics. Simple systems, consisting of just a few particles do not show the puzzling variety of phenomena known from solid state physics, for example. But they offer invaluable insights into the the properties of particles and fundamental forces. To gain a first understanding of atomic physics it is a much more promising approach to study hydrogen instead of complex molecules, for instance. The object of our studies is one of these simple systems: the Positronium negative ion. This exotic entity is a bound state of a positron and two electrons. It is similar to the negative ion of hydrogen (H-). In fact, it is the most simple three body problem imaginable. Its constituents are pointlike particles (at least to the best of our knowledge) and there are no pertubations due to strong interactions to be considered. There has been quite a lot of theoretical activity around Ps- but there is not much known experimentally. Only one experiment can be found in the literature: A.P. Mills observed the Positronium negative ion experimentally and made a first lifetime measurement. With an error of about 4% it is not sufficiently precise to allow for a test a QED effects. A new measurement of the lifetime with improved precision is the first objective of this project. We have a 22Na source (on the left) emitting positrons at 0.55 MeV. A tungsten foil moderates the positrons to thermic velocities (about 30 eV). The slow positrons enter the field of an S-shaped solenoid which leads them into the experiment chamber (on the right). The ß+ decay of 22Na leads to a excited 22Ne nucleus, which decays further by ? emission at 1.27 MeV. To remove these photons from the background the solenoid shifts the positron beam out of the gamma beam. In the experimental chamber the positrons pass through a grounded copper grid and get accellerated onto a thin carbon foil. This foil is just a few atomic layers thick. In the Carbon foil most of the positrons capture one electron and form the electrically neutral Positronium. Very rarely a positron captures two electrons and forms the negative charged Ps-. A second grid after the carbon foil is on high voltage (about 4kV) and accellerates the Ps- ions. This Doppler-shifts the decay-?s to higher energies in forward direction, while the energy of the ?s from the neutral Positronium remains at 511 keV. To measure the spectra a Germanium detector at the temperature of liquid nitrogen detects the ? radiation from the decays of the positronium and positronium ion." http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=1186 (October 31, 2005) "RIVERSIDE, Calif. – What happens when two atoms, each made up of an electron and its antimatter counterpart, called the positron, collide with each other? UC Riverside physicists are able to see for the first time in the laboratory that these atoms, which are called positronium atoms and are unstable by nature, become even more unstable after the collision. The positronium atoms are seen to destroy one another, turning into gamma radiation, a powerful type of electromagnetic radiation. “Our research also gives the first hint of the presence of double positronium molecules, each of which is made up of two electrons and two positrons,” said Allen Mills, professor of physics and leader of the research project. “This kind of matter-antimatter pairing has never been formed or studied in the laboratory until now, and paves the way for a new field of study on its properties.” " I'm not into rewriting accepted physics, but I'm not above looking for a particle that most likely exists (since time zero) and has been overlooked in the shuffle. IOW, for every postron-electron pair produced, obviously near many electrons there could be a major fraction that form the stable Triad "Electronium". Thus Electron-Positron Annihilation Radiation could mask the existence of the bound Triad that except for it's mass, radius and nuclear magnetic moment The researchers in the above links and others have been made aware of this possibility, but, you or me won't be hearing from them while they are feverishly shooting for a free trip to Stockholm. Fred > > > > > Regards, --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 12:10:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KJALxG020587; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:10:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KJAGUv020516; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:10:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:10:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:46:52 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <3QlOXD.A.WAF.WgEmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69195 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steven Krivit wrote: > From PURDUE UNIVERSITY News Service > > > June 20, 2006 > > > SONOFUSION RESEARCH EXAMINATION COMMITTEE COMPLETES REVIEW > > WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. ­ A Purdue University examination committee > reviewing issues concerning research on the use of sound waves to > create nuclear fusion reactions has completed its work. > > "The committee has submitted a report, and I will take appropriate > action after studying the recommendations," said Charles O. Rutledge, > vice president for research, who appointed the committee in March. > "Any further action in this matter will be conducted as an internal > matter under appropriate university procedures." This doesn't exactly sound good for Taleyarkhan. When the executive summary of the report is that the researcher in question behaved in an exemplary fashion and no further questions about the quality of the research remain people do not say they will conduct "any further action" as an "internal matter". > > Rutledge appointed the examination committee after the British > research journal Nature reported on its Web site that some > researchers had raised questions about the research of Rusi > Taleyarkhan, a Purdue professor of nuclear engineering. > > Since joining the Purdue faculty in 2004 and previously at the Oak > Ridge National Laboratory, Taleyarkhan has published research > findings in several refereed journals showing evidence that > "sonofusion" generates nuclear reactions by creating tiny bubbles > that implode with tremendous force. Experimental nuclear fusion > reactors have historically required large, multibillion-dollar > machines, but sonofusion devices might be built for a fraction of the > cost and theoretically could be an unlimited source of clean energy. > > "Specific recommendations of the examination committee and any > subsequent steps by the university will be treated as confidential > internal matters," Rutledge said. Again, /vindication/ never needs to be treated as a "confidential internal matter". > > In a statement issued at the time the committee was appointed, > Provost Sally Mason said: "Purdue is well aware that there are > legitimate differences of scientific opinion about the theories > behind Dr. Taleyarkhan's work. Those differences are the reason > scientists share their findings. > > "The research claims are very significant, and the allegations are > very serious. As in any scientific endeavor, Purdue's ultimate goals > are truth and integrity." > > Taleyarkhan first reported observing the bubble fusion effect in > March 2002 in the journal Science. In addition to its potential as a > new source of clean energy, Taleyarkhan and other researchers believe > sonofusion could be used in a wide range of applications from > homeland security to the study of neutron stars and black holes. > > Source: Joseph L. Bennett, vice president for university relations, > (765) 494-2082, jlbennett@purdue.edu > > > Related Web site: > > Purdue University Home Page: http://www.purdue.edu > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > PURDUE UNIVERSITY > News Service > 400 Centennial Mall Drive, Rm. 324 > West Lafayette, IN 47907-2016 > (765) 494-2096 > fax: (765) 494-0401 > purduenews@purdue.edu > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - > - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 12:22:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KJMPbh028105; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:22:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KJMN1K028074; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:22:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:22:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060620152107.03eb9508@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 15:22:17 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 In-Reply-To: <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.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/69196 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >This doesn't exactly sound good for Taleyarkhan. > >When the executive summary of the report is that the researcher in >question behaved in an exemplary fashion and no further questions >about the quality of the research remain people do not say they will >conduct "any further action" as an "internal matter". I agree. You never know, but this does have an ominous ring to it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 12:35:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KIXc5b031441; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KIXYR2031404; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:33:34 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=tmJAw6zFsbS9dJt0+dg8XVuxcuie5VBLOE9S8YYHP34oEvGe2F0cghmDezPJ6i1B; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066220183316155@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: PLEASE.... RE and not RE . Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:33:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94027435fff02d9fb0e3dd494a044b40e2f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.229 Resent-Message-ID: <9Dz2LB.A.lqH.89DmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69193 X-Loop: vortex-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 > > > Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > > Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course of one > > > short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE! > > > > > > "lay population of Votex" "I hope others in and of votrtex" > > > > I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L > > with any number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic > > particles of which there is not the least bit of experimental > > evidence for their existence. > > I believe the charter for Vortex includes just such things as being "on > topic". > > > > > > 3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a > > bound state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. > > What then is electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a > > "thing" with mass of 3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for > > this thing please? I seem to recall an experiment involving playing > > with the vertical drive coils of a small TV, and looking for a less > > deflected lineon the phosphor screen which would correspond to > > something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I recall also > > that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I can > > think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits > > positrons is relatively high quantities. But who knows. > > > Looks like my postulated stable bound Electron-Positron-Electron, Negative Particle (mass ~ 2.0 to 2.7 elecderived from the Positronium Anion (Ps-) being pursued by the "establishment" is on trial. http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/ato/psminus/ "Introduction" "The study of simple systems has been of particular interest since the very first days of physics. Simple systems, consisting of just a few particles do not show the puzzling variety of phenomena known from solid state physics, for example. But they offer invaluable insights into the the properties of particles and fundamental forces. To gain a first understanding of atomic physics it is a much more promising approach to study hydrogen instead of complex molecules, for instance. The object of our studies is one of these simple systems: the Positronium negative ion. This exotic entity is a bound state of a positron and two electrons. It is similar to the negative ion of hydrogen (H-). In fact, it is the most simple three body problem imaginable. Its constituents are pointlike particles (at least to the best of our knowledge) and there are no pertubations due to strong interactions to be considered. There has been quite a lot of theoretical activity around Ps- but there is not much known experimentally. Only one experiment can be found in the literature: A.P. Mills observed the Positronium negative ion experimentally and made a first lifetime measurement. With an error of about 4% it is not sufficiently precise to allow for a test a QED effects. A new measurement of the lifetime with improved precision is the first objective of this project. We have a 22Na source (on the left) emitting positrons at 0.55 MeV. A tungsten foil moderates the positrons to thermic velocities (about 30 eV). The slow positrons enter the field of an S-shaped solenoid which leads them into the experiment chamber (on the right). The ß+ decay of 22Na leads to a excited 22Ne nucleus, which decays further by ? emission at 1.27 MeV. To remove these photons from the background the solenoid shifts the positron beam out of the gamma beam. In the experimental chamber the positrons pass through a grounded copper grid and get accellerated onto a thin carbon foil. This foil is just a few atomic layers thick. In the Carbon foil most of the positrons capture one electron and form the electrically neutral Positronium. Very rarely a positron captures two electrons and forms the negative charged Ps-. A second grid after the carbon foil is on high voltage (about 4kV) and accellerates the Ps- ions. This Doppler-shifts the decay-?s to higher energies in forward direction, while the energy of the ?s from the neutral Positronium remains at 511 keV. To measure the spectra a Germanium detector at the temperature of liquid nitrogen detects the ? radiation from the decays of the positronium and positronium ion." http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=1186 (October 31, 2005) "RIVERSIDE, Calif. – What happens when two atoms, each made up of an electron and its antimatter counterpart, called the positron, collide with each other? UC Riverside physicists are able to see for the first time in the laboratory that these atoms, which are called positronium atoms and are unstable by nature, become even more unstable after the collision. The positronium atoms are seen to destroy one another, turning into gamma radiation, a powerful type of electromagnetic radiation. “Our research also gives the first hint of the presence of double positronium molecules, each of which is made up of two electrons and two positrons,” said Allen Mills, professor of physics and leader of the research project. “This kind of matter-antimatter pairing has never been formed or studied in the laboratory until now, and paves the way for a new field of study on its properties.” " I'm not into rewriting accepted physics, but I'm not above looking for a particle that most likely exists (since time zero) and has been overlooked in the shuffle. IOW, for every postron-electron pair produced, obviously near many electrons there could be a major fraction that form the stable Triad "Electronium". Thus Electron-Positron Annihilation Radiation could mask the existence of the bound Triad that except for it's mass, radius and nuclear magnetic moment looks like any other electron. It cannot be detected by electrotatic CRTs but can be detected using a magnetic mass spectrometer type device. Ther modified scope experiment was a rough cut mass attempt, with the thought that one might shake out a few if they come off the emitter in CRT. The researchers in the above links and others have been made aware of this possibility, but, you or me won't be hearing from them while they are feverishly shooting for a free trip to Stockholm. Fred > > > > > Regards, --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 13:03:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KK34YG016685; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:03:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KK34kI016675; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:03:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:03:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:00:15 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 In-reply-to: <7.0.1.0.2.20060620152107.03eb9508@mindspring.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/69197 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> This doesn't exactly sound good for Taleyarkhan. >> >> When the executive summary of the report is that the researcher in >> question behaved in an exemplary fashion and no further questions >> about the quality of the research remain people do not say they will >> conduct "any further action" as an "internal matter". > > I agree. You never know, but this does have an ominous ring to it. > > - Jed > > It could also mean those who made the allegations are in trouble. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 13:13:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KKCbJB021375; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:12:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KKCZaX021354; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:12:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:12:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008b01c694a5$dc44d110$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:12:30 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69198 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Microcavities & Negative Resistance Status: O X-Status: One of the more important factoids not yet covered by "Wiki" (the 'expert-on-everything' online-resource) at least not covered specifically, is the "cavity diode" ... (working on it). You will get over 50,000 hits on google for this - and for vortexians, this could be an important subject (wrt: energy and thermodynamics) in that it is a cross-over area between EM waves, photons, and solid matter vibrational energy (phonon or sound waves). If ZPE can ever be harnessed, in such things as Casimir micromachines (Valone has mention of these in his book), or hydrogen-bond breaking, then it will probably involve this spectrum of overlap. In a related arena - and considering the amount of attention given to HTSC (high temperature superconducting) materials - which have zero electrical resistance to DC (but not to AC) ; it is surprising that the property usually called "Negative Resistance" is so little studied. It almost always involves cavities of some type. Part of the problem is that it is a misnomer - and should be called Negative Differential Resistance, as the phenomenon is active over only a limited range. On either side of the range, normal resistance takes hold - so nobody has really been able to capitalize on the phenomenon for significant "free-energy". The negative range is always above ground, so to speak, as the image on this page demonstrates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunn_diode Devices exploiting this effect - and it is the prototypical "resonance effect" - are used in amplifiers and oscillators, mostly in the microwave to terahertz frequency range, which lies between conventional RF electronics and infrared optics. It is a most exciting spectrum for the proponents of alternative energy, as mentioned - as it is the only range in nature where there can be significant overlap of robust photon and phonon vibrational frequencies - which may or may not be fully conservative when linked together at Casimir dimensions. And in general, photons in the IR range are "free" insofar as they are the "blackbody radiation" of low grade heat, even ambient heat. One need not even seek to harness ZPE, or LENR, or the hydrino, or other exotic modalities IF one can convert low grade heat efficiently. That is why the overblown announcements from a few companies, who have claimed for years to have made efficient thermoelectric devices, are so insidious. These companies have been raising investment funds over the internet for years, with little to show but vacuous promises. Not even a single testable prototype has been shown to the public. All bark and no bite. However there is also reliable evidence that this can be done on a very small scale. In a special type of cavity thermal diode, heat causes electrons to flow from one semiconductor layer to another with a very short "hop" across a vacuum. The device could operate at about 18-20 percent efficiency with a low grade heat source. Yan Kucherov, chief scientist at Eneco, Inc. who are the same folks who once owned the P&F cold fusion patent, before letting it lapse, are the focus of attention on this one too. http://www.eneco-usa.com/tech_science.html The diodes also have the potential to be more efficient. "We should be able to improve the existing devices to 20 to 23 percent efficiency" ... Kucherov claimed 5 years ago (compared to the 5% of normal thermoelectrics) : http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/2001/121901/Chips_turn_more_heat_to_power_121901.html ...but... hello Yan, where is your prototype? Can Yan cook ? with all those millions invested (or is that an exaggeration) ? [You have to appreciate Chinese cuisine - to get that attempted Pun Chun ] Anyway, assuming that this 'easy solution' to the energy crisis (efficient thermal diode) does not emerge from the Lab soon, there are other materials and techniques, using cavities as the 'sine-qua-non,' which can exhibit a short range of negative resistance and a one-way diode effect: IMPATT diodes and especially the Gunn diode. Here is some more info in this important device - which when combined with a "cavity" of exactly the wavelength being sought - can provide both coherency and very high efficiency. http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/data/semicond/gunndiode/gunndiode.php There is the potential here to go beyond even thermal diodes if one can arrange everything into a both a negative energy regime and with near coherency in the heat source. Normally, in order to get 'coherency,' one must sacrifice efficiency or vice versa, and indeed high output lasers, in general, despite their energy-density - are extremely inefficient. That was before microlithography allowed us to make cavities small enough for semiconductor lasers. In a subsequent post to vortex ... err... unless the sci-police crack down on such speculation, I will attempt to tie-together the importance of the *cavity diode* into three previous posts - all relevant to the possibility of the impossible: water-fuel. Those other posts involve: 1) the surface bubble effect (i.e. "tiny bubbles") ... ...and for those too-dense to get-it, a 'bubble' is by definition a cavity - and if uniform bubbles are formed near an electrode, then the stage is set for a "natural" Gunn-type diode, based on the geometric size of the bubbles. If this sounds like sonoluminescence, it should. 2) the possibility that a "natural" (solar derived), negatively charged, nucleating agent - which may exist in some types of water 3) the possibility that this agent is the Mills hydrino, but solar-derived - 4) the possibility that all of these things [in one complicated] package can explain the ever-increasing anecdotal reports of automotive ICEs running (a least partly) on electrolyzed water: i.e. waterfuel. At least, by attempting to tie together a number of shorter postings, related to what must be overall the most complicated simple-subject of all time [waterfuel] I am making a concerted effort to break up long boring posts into something more manageable... [short boring posts?] ... now, if only I could resist the temptation to toss in an awful pun, ever now and again. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 13:18:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KKI9a4024588; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:18:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KKI8N1024571; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:18:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:18:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000e01c694a6$a084d660$fd027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 15:17:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C6947C.B726D9B0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69199 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: PLEASE.....RE and not RE Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C6947C.B726D9B0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C6947C.B7286050" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C6947C.B7286050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. You want an exciting theory? What could be more=20 exciting than a theory which stands conventional=20 physics on its head and claims that materials are=20 held together by external compressions, not by=20 internal tensions - which claims that internal=20 tensions, bonds and the like, are negations and=20 no more real that the vacuum of the wifey's=20 hoover. Howdy Frank, Been reading John Herman's posts. curious. Exciting theory in action is the eyewall of a hurricane of the size and = scope of Katrina, a near 200 MPH wind with an eyewall at one poijnt in = excess of 40miles diameter. What " held" the vertical eyewall in = place???? Differential pressure?? What pressure are we seeing since the = pressure absolute psia vs the psig can be understood and measured by = aircraft flying into the storm. Frank has the explanation"nailed". = BETA.. NOT all the forces associated with huerricanes are understood and = BETA is understood. The curious part of the study of the forces in hurricane creation and = dissapation is the " strange" events taking place on the opposite side = of the earth in harmony with the vortex... hmmm! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C6947C.B7286050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..

You want an exciting theory? What could be more
exciting than a = theory=20 which stands conventional
physics on its head and claims that = materials are=20
held together by external compressions, not by
internal tensions = - which=20 claims that internal
tensions, bonds and the like, are negations and =
no=20 more real that the vacuum of the wifey's
hoover.

Howdy = Frank,

Been reading John Herman's posts. curious.

Exciting theory in action is the eyewall of a hurricane of the size = and scope=20 of Katrina, a near 200 MPH wind with an eyewall at one poijnt in excess = of=20 40miles diameter. What " held" the vertical eyewall in place???? = Differential=20 pressure?? What pressure are we seeing since the pressure absolute psia = vs the=20 psig can be understood and measured by aircraft flying into the storm. = Frank has=20 the explanation"nailed". BETA.. NOT all the forces associated with = huerricanes=20 are understood and BETA is understood.

The curious part of the study of the forces in hurricane creation and = dissapation is the " strange" events taking place on  the opposite = side of=20 the earth in harmony with the vortex... hmmm!

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C6947C.B7286050-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C6947C.B726D9B0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c694a6$9ff54090$fd027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C6947C.B726D9B0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 14:49:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KLmx5d008508; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:48:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KLmv2c008493; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:48:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:48:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060620214849993.F29361C00090@mwinf3006.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060620214850.00beab34@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, 20 Jun 2006 22:48:50 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: PLEASE.....RE and not RE Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69200 X-Loop: vortex-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 03:17 pm 20/06/2006 -0500, Richard wrote: > Grimer wrote.. >> You want an exciting theory? What could be more >> exciting than a theory which stands conventional >> physics on its head and claims that materials are >> held together by external compressions, not by >> internal tensions - which claims that internal >> tensions, bonds and the like, are negations and >> no more real that the vacuum of the wifey's >> hoover. > Howdy Frank, > > Been reading John Herman's posts. curious. > > Exciting theory in action is the eyewall of a > hurricane of the size and scope of Katrina, > a near 200 MPH wind with an eyewall at one point > in excess of 40miles diameter. What " held" the > vertical eyewall in place???? Differential > pressure?? What pressure are we seeing since the > pressure absolute psia vs the psig can be > understood and measured by aircraft flying into > the storm. Frank has the explanation"nailed". > BETA.. NOT all the forces associated with > hurricanes are understood and BETA is understood. > The curious part of the study of the forces in > hurricane creation and dissapation is the > "strange" events taking place on the opposite > side of the earth in harmony with the vortex... > hmmm! > > Richard Ah well Richard, you have the advantage of being in close contact with phenomena at the bleeding edge and have not been lulled into a false sense of security by the dogmatic prescriptions which necessarily fill the text books. If students realised how little was really known, it would undermine confidence in their mentors. How then would they ever manage to jump through those academic hoops? If they all became disillusioned like Hotson, where would the next generation of hot fusion fodder come from. ;-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 17:44:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L0hkms001136; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:43:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L0hePI001077; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:43:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:43:39 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 20:38:24 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69202 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Status: O X-Status: Gnorts, Vorts! Thursday afternoon I will meet with the inventor, company officers, and the CEO of a potential licensee of the technology whose firm did $5.4 B in business in 2005. I have been in offline discussions with some of the members of the list whom I respect highly. Lately, Michel and I have been discussing the issue with the data given by the inventor regarding the electrical input of the motor. Michel's position is that the current measurement is off by a factor of 10 (20A instead of 2A). His position is understandable since the coil resistance is less than 1 ohm and the supply voltage is 20 V. See: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ for the public data. I am now offering the opportunity for questions from the peanut gallery that I might pose to the inventor or actually test myself on the referenced subject. Since I am under a NDA, I might not be able to answer all questions; but, since I brought this subject to this forum, I'll give it my best shot. Any takers? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 18:05:53 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L15XR5015486; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:05:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L15SaE015412; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:05:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:05:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001501c694ce$bd7eb790$9c027841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: [VO]:Re:[VO]: Please...Re and not Re Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 20:05:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C694A4.D41DADA0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69203 X-Loop: vortex-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_0011_01C694A4.D41DADA0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0012_01C694A4.D41DADA0" ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C694A4.D41DADA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankColin wrote.. Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the antipodes? Howdy Colin, A tried to find my file on a corresponding article to the link below but = ! alas! couldn't locate. Iy had to do with some earth related phenomena = observed on the opposite side of the earth to the hurricane.Hope this = helps. We have attempted to understand how our vortex generator can in turn = produce sympathic vortexes adjacent to the main tube. These djacent = tubes arrive and dissipate spontaneously and can be horizontal, vertical = or diagonal within our plexiglas test tank. http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0506162 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C694A4.D41DADA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Colin wrote..
 
Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the = antipodes?
 
 
Howdy Colin,
A tried to find my file on a corresponding article to the link = below but !=20 alas! couldn't locate. Iy had to do with some earth related phenomena = observed=20 on the opposite side of the earth to the hurricane.Hope this = helps.
We have attempted to understand how our vortex generator can in = turn=20 produce  sympathic vortexes adjacent to the main tube. These = djacent tubes=20 arrive and dissipate spontaneously and can be horizontal, vertical or = diagonal=20 within our plexiglas test tank.
 
http://arxiv.org/abs/physic= s/0506162

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C694A4.D41DADA0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C694A4.D41DADA0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001001c694ce$bce90740$9c027841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C694A4.D41DADA0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 16:17:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5KNHGS7015415; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:17:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5KNHERr015399; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:17:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:17:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:Message-ID:Reply-To:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=qSBl5cnZrMaE2wvjf/oa/QO2LbdxppGNHL3bRj3fDti6QOOuK/F17RLAXLe2ZMnGMtYlVey5D7DetP2j4V+++BTq7/wYhL8wfwpuGFVkgsZKDxxIgY/WkrcfvHWMApYxl7QI3Rjsjc3t8roeeK2qbAJrzpgXPrhmzAWiLGZtpdU= ; Message-ID: <03e201c694bf$a8c401c0$4b01a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" From: "Colin Quinney" To: References: <000e01c694a6$a084d660$fd027841@xptower> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 19:17:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03DE_01C6949E.2157E5B0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <2e0CDB.A.fwD.6HImEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69201 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Re:[VO]: PLEASE.....RE and not RE X-Suspected-Spam: billb friends5 Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03DE_01C6949E.2157E5B0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_03DF_01C6949E.2157E5B0" ------=_NextPart_001_03DF_01C6949E.2157E5B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankRichard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the antipodes? Colin :) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: RC Macaulay=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 4:17 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: PLEASE.....RE and not RE Grimer wrote.. You want an exciting theory? What could be more=20 exciting than a theory which stands conventional=20 physics on its head and claims that materials are=20 held together by external compressions, not by=20 internal tensions - which claims that internal=20 tensions, bonds and the like, are negations and=20 no more real that the vacuum of the wifey's=20 hoover. Howdy Frank, Been reading John Herman's posts. curious. Exciting theory in action is the eyewall of a hurricane of the size = and scope of Katrina, a near 200 MPH wind with an eyewall at one poijnt = in excess of 40miles diameter. What " held" the vertical eyewall in = place???? Differential pressure?? What pressure are we seeing since the = pressure absolute psia vs the psig can be understood and measured by = aircraft flying into the storm. Frank has the explanation"nailed". = BETA.. NOT all the forces associated with huerricanes are understood and = BETA is understood. The curious part of the study of the forces in hurricane creation and = dissapation is the " strange" events taking place on the opposite side = of the earth in harmony with the vortex... hmmm! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_03DF_01C6949E.2157E5B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the = antipodes?
 
Colin :)
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 RC = Macaulay=20
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 = 4:17=20 PM
Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: = PLEASE.....RE and=20 not RE

Grimer wrote..

You want an exciting theory? What could be more
exciting than a = theory=20 which stands conventional
physics on its head and claims that = materials=20 are
held together by external compressions, not by
internal = tensions -=20 which claims that internal
tensions, bonds and the like, are = negations and=20
no more real that the vacuum of the wifey's =
hoover.

Howdy=20 Frank,

Been reading John Herman's posts. curious.

Exciting theory in action is the eyewall of a hurricane of the size = and=20 scope of Katrina, a near 200 MPH wind with an eyewall at one poijnt in = excess=20 of 40miles diameter. What " held" the vertical eyewall in place????=20 Differential pressure?? What pressure are we seeing since the pressure = absolute psia vs the psig can be understood and measured by aircraft = flying=20 into the storm. Frank has the explanation"nailed". BETA.. NOT all the = forces=20 associated with huerricanes are understood and BETA is understood.

The curious part of the study of the forces in hurricane creation = and=20 dissapation is the " strange" events taking place on  the = opposite side=20 of the earth in harmony with the vortex... hmmm!

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_03DF_01C6949E.2157E5B0-- ------=_NextPart_000_03DE_01C6949E.2157E5B0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <03dd01c694bf$a86985b0$4b01a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_03DE_01C6949E.2157E5B0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 19:13:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L2DdWG026722; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 19:13:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L2Dasm026683; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 19:13:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 19:13:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:10:31 -0500 From: Harry Veeder In-reply-to: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_/9mg+ufmK3UuZyl6G7KTbA)" 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/69204 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: New look for "Newton's bucket" 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. --Boundary_(ID_/9mg+ufmK3UuZyl6G7KTbA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT New look for "Newton's bucket" 12 May 2006 What happens when you rapidly rotate the bottom plate of an otherwise stationary cylinder filled with water? According to new work by physicists in Denmark, you produce rotating polygons with up to six corners on the water's surface. This new and spectacular type of "instability" could be used to study a wide variety of complex systems in physics, including rotating flows on Earth, hydraulic machinery in industry, vortices and tornadoes (Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 174502) ... http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/5/8/1#0605084 --Boundary_(ID_/9mg+ufmK3UuZyl6G7KTbA) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT New look for "Newton's bucket"


New look for "Newton's bucket" 12 May 2006

What happens when you rapidly rotate the bottom plate of an otherwise
stationary cylinder filled with water? According to new work by physicists
in Denmark, you produce rotating polygons with up to six corners on the
water's surface. This new and spectacular type of "instability" could be
used to study a wide variety of complex systems in physics, including
rotating flows on Earth, hydraulic machinery in industry, vortices and
tornadoes (Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 174502) ...

http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/5/8/1#0605084

 --Boundary_(ID_/9mg+ufmK3UuZyl6G7KTbA)-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 21:09:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L48xfn025912; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:09:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L48suq025832; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:08:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:08:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621040843689.A834E1C00082@mwinf3103.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621040844.009ce938@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 05:08:44 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: New look for "Newton's bucket" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69205 X-Loop: vortex-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 10:10 pm 20/06/2006 -0500, Harry wrote: > New look for "Newton's bucket" 12 May 2006 > > What happens when you rapidly rotate the > bottom plate of an otherwise >stationary > cylinder filled with water? According > to new work by physicists in Denmark, > you produce rotating polygons with up > to six corners on the water's surface. > This new and spectacular type of > "instability" could be used to study a > wide variety of complex systems in > physics, including rotating flows on > Earth, hydraulic machinery in industry, > vortices and tornadoes. > (Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 174502) ... > >> http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/5/8/1#0605084 Mmm... Sounds a bit like 8th power vapour writ large. 8-) ======================================== http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/strange.html ======================================== Strong shearing of the water is going to be the 2 dimensional analogue of magnetisation in ordering the micro hexagonal domains into macro domains. Since the Griggs device involves similar strong shearing forces it suggests that it probably is OU and is getting its energy from inverse Carnot-type cycling of the Beta-atmosphere. Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 22:34:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L5XkNo010442; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:33:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L5XiJW010414; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:33:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:33:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 01:30:36 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [VO]:Re:[VO]: Please...Re and not Re In-reply-to: <001501c694ce$bd7eb790$9c027841@xptower> 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: <1ZzocC.A.oiC.3oNmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69207 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: RC Macaulay wrote: > Colin wrote.. > > Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the antipodes? > > > Howdy Colin, > A tried to find my file on a corresponding article to the link below but ! > alas! couldn't locate. Iy had to do with some earth related phenomena observed > on the opposite side of the earth to the hurricane.Hope this helps. > We have attempted to understand how our vortex generator can in turn produce > sympathic vortexes adjacent to the main tube. These djacent tubes arrive and > dissipate spontaneously and can be horizontal, vertical or diagonal within our > plexiglas test tank. > > http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0506162 > Richard >From the above link: "A non-conventional vertical seismometer, with good low-frequency sensitivity, was used to study earth motions in Macon, Georgia USA during the time of hurricane Charley, August 2004. During its transitions between water and land, the powerful storm showed an interesting history of microseisms and also generated more than half-a-dozen surprisingl coherent oscillations, whose frequencies ranged from 0.9 to 3 mHz." Could the reverse happen? Could seismic activity alter the weather? I say this because last year I noticed a curious coincidence. We had a small quake ( hardly noticeable) in our area at around 8pm or 9pm. The next day we got good weather instead of the bad weather which had been forecasted the day before. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 23:11:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L6BP1A002027; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:11:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L6BLNF001990; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:11:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:11:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620231656.0292cfd8@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:18:11 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060620152107.03eb9508@mindspring.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060620152107.03eb9508@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/69209 X-Loop: vortex-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 read it the opposite, in addition to what I wrote in the other message. Didn't you notice how they made his work sound so promising? They did not have to do that. At 12:22 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: >Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >>This doesn't exactly sound good for Taleyarkhan. >> >>When the executive summary of the report is that the researcher in >>question behaved in an exemplary fashion and no further questions about >>the quality of the research remain people do not say they will conduct >>"any further action" as an "internal matter". > >I agree. You never know, but this does have an ominous ring to it. > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 23:27:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L6AASo001169; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:10:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L6A8Oj001131; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:10:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:10:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620230351.02a745f0@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:16:44 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 In-Reply-To: <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.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/69208 X-Loop: vortex-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 doesn't exactly sound good for Taleyarkhan. > >When the executive summary of the report is that the researcher in >question behaved in an exemplary fashion and no further questions about >the quality of the research remain people do not say they will conduct >"any further action" as an "internal matter". This isn't just about Taleyarkhan's possible culpability. It's just as much about the other two physicists who had issues with Rusi's work, (one perhaps the head of the department.) What they did was to go behind Rusi's back, and also circumvented the administration, and aired their gripes to a reporter instead of escalating their differences internally to the U admininstration, which should have happened in the first place. The issues were largely personal, not scientific. The other two physicists were not getting along with Rusi. Rusi became unresponsive to their "requests" and then he reacted belligerently to them. After the blow up, one of the other two physicists claimed that they were "misquoted" by Nature and then within hours, both of them refused to respond to any other press requests - very suspicious behavior. Putterman just "happened" to have fit into the picture nicely to give the conflict some "science" behind it. Be sure to read the IEEE article. Tells a lot about Puttermans "replication." http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/MediaTrackOfThePurdueBubbleFusionStory.htm Reminds me of Fleischmann to Lewis in Los Angeles on May 8, 1989. "The horror of the Caltech cell was revealed to me. I said to Nate Lewis, 'You can't do it this way.'" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 02:46:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L9jvti022765; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 02:45:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L9juE7022745; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 02:45:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 02:45:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:45:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5L9jnBM022703 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69210 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Harry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor overunity disputed Status: O X-Status: (should be _Harry_ Paul Sprain according to the US 6954019 patent document, not Henry, I have corrected the subject line and added "overunity disputed" to make the thread look more appealing to our fellow Vorts) Thanks Terry for your objective introduction of my position, in spite of your not agreing with it and of the big dollars at stake. The documents I will refer to are in the public file folders you gave us a link to: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ 1/ The coil's DC resistance argument you reported was inspired to me by the rough "sanity check" Ohm's law prediction of coil current at page 5 of the "Sprain Motor Early Analysis by Independent Lab" pdf document. The damped oscillation current trace in CH2 of the "Sprain Motor electric drive pulse waveform photo (BMP)" oscillogram, of which we see more than a half-period, clearly converges to ~2 divisions. This suggests that 2 divisions on the oscillogram scale to 20A (steady state current of a ~1 ohm static resistance coil driven by 20VDC) rather than 2A as claimed. 2/ I have a second argument pointing to the same conclusion: the voltage drop of the coil driving FET, which Terry told me was of the IRF250 family, is of at least 1V as can be seen on the oscillogram (CH1). I remember Jonfli on this list noted that 1V drop was a lot for the claimed low current of 2A, and might be improved by using a FET with a lower ON resistance. I looked up the IRF250 ON resistance (RDSon) and found it is in fact quite low already, 0.085 ohms max, which requires more than 10A to yield the observed 1V voltage drop (Ohm's law again). This suggests that coil current is at least 5 times the claimed value of 2A. My conclusion from 1/ and 2/ is that the Sprain motor's COP, claimed to be overunity ~2, is in fact possibly 10 times and at least five times lower than that i.e. well below unity, due to an erroneous scaling of the input current waveform. I have no explanation as to the source of the error though. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 2:38 AM Subject: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor > Gnorts, Vorts! > > Thursday afternoon I will meet with the inventor, company officers, and > the CEO of a potential licensee of the technology whose firm did $5.4 B > in business in 2005. I have been in offline discussions with some of > the members of the list whom I respect highly. > > Lately, Michel and I have been discussing the issue with the data given > by the inventor regarding the electrical input of the motor. Michel's > position is that the current measurement is off by a factor of 10 (20A > instead of 2A). His position is understandable since the coil > resistance is less than 1 ohm and the supply voltage is 20 V. See: > > http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ > > for the public data. > > I am now offering the opportunity for questions from the peanut gallery > that I might pose to the inventor or actually test myself on the > referenced subject. Since I am under a NDA, I might not be able to > answer all questions; but, since I brought this subject to this forum, > I'll give it my best shot. > > Any takers? > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 05:46:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LCkZIp021521; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 05:46:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LCkVtA021490; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 05:46:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 05:46:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001901c69530$b1a30ea0$9f037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:46:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C69506.C818AAC0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69211 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[Vo]: Please vortex fields Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C69506.C818AAC0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0016_01C69506.C818AAC0" ------=_NextPart_001_0016_01C69506.C818AAC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Harry and Colin, Here is a link to the smoke gun blaster fun. Watch carefully as one = smoke ring intercepts another, Some of the rings destruct ,some bounce = and some encircle and enhance by encircling the first torus ring and = accelerate. http://cgi.ebay.com/SUPER-ZERO-SMOKE-RING-GUN-FLUID-ZERO-BLASTER-LAUNCHER= _W0QQitemZ6035048462QQihZ009QQcategoryZ38287QQssPageNameZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZ= ViewItem The Test tank we use is a clear plexiglas 3x3x4 ft deep hex tank water = filled . The vertical rotating member is inserted from the open top and = with a VFD able to reach speed od 10,500 RPM. It is a variation of our = 35F seen on our website www.gasmastrrr.com Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0016_01C69506.C818AAC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Harry and Colin,
 
Here is a link to the smoke gun blaster fun. Watch carefully as one = smoke=20 ring intercepts another, Some of the rings destruct ,some bounce and = some=20 encircle and enhance by encircling the first torus ring and = accelerate.

http://cgi.ebay.com/SUPER-ZERO-SMOKE-RING-GUN-FLUID-ZER= O-BLASTER-LAUNCHER_W0QQitemZ6035048462QQihZ009QQcategoryZ38287QQssPageNam= eZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

The=20 Test tank we use is a clear plexiglas 3x3x4 ft deep hex tank water = filled . The=20 vertical rotating member is inserted from the open top and with a VFD = able to=20 reach speed od 10,500 RPM. It is a variation of our 35F seen on our = website www.gasmastrrr.com

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_0016_01C69506.C818AAC0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C69506.C818AAC0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001401c69530$b0df7080$9f037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C69506.C818AAC0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:15:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDEvIW005666; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:14:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDEtW8005637; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:14:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:14:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621131452325.4F81B1C00084@mwinf3202.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:14:52 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Resent-Message-ID: <9S2m9B.A.BYB.PZUmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69213 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:38 pm 20/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > Gnorts, Vorts! ... > See: > http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ > > for the public data. ... > Any takers? > > Terry Michel has written, ------------------------------------------------ "My conclusion from 1/ and 2/ is that the Sprain motor's COP, claimed to be overunity ~2, is in fact possibly 10 times and at least five times lower than that i.e. well below unity, due to an erroneous scaling of the input current waveform. I have no explanation as to the source of the error though." ------------------------------------------------ Let's hope he's wrong - but if he isn't then I think the Finsrud machine is the best bet for proving a point of principle. The solution is more elegant than the Sprain in the cunning way it achieves the different advance and retreat speed in relation to the magnets. This means that only the smallest input is required to keep the ball moving. Also, it will show whether or not the reverse direction pumps energy into the Beta-atmosphere rather than taking it out. In other words it will show that the ball is indeed travelling around a Carnot-style cycle and extracting energy from Beta-atmosphere "heat". Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:18:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDHnlh007689; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:17:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDHlIf007650; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:17:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:17:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:17:42 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8634C365F875C-1910-6597@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: New look for "Newton's bucket" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69214 X-Loop: vortex-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: Harry Veeder New look for "Newton's bucket" 12 May 2006 <><><><><> What remarkable synchronicity as I am presently reading The fabric of the cosmos: space, time, and the texture of reality by Greene, Brian R., which offers an incredible discussion on Newton, Mach and Einstein's view of space(time). Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:20:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDKGvj009651; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:20:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDCIoU004386; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:12:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:12:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:12:14 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <1SdPWC.A.TEB.yWUmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69212 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian (should be _Harry_ Paul Sprain according to the US 6954019 patent document, not Henry, I have corrected the subject line and added "overunity disputed" to make the thread look more appealing to our fellow Vorts) TB: Ackshully "Hairy" would be more apropos. BTW, "overunity disputed" is somewhat redundant as this is always the case. :-) MJ: Thanks Terry for your objective introduction of my position, in spite of your not agreing with it and of the big dollars at stake. The documents I will refer to are in the public file folders you gave us a link to: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ 1/ The coil's DC resistance argument you reported was inspired to me by the rough "sanity check" Ohm's law prediction of coil current at page 5 of the "Sprain Motor Early Analysis by Independent Lab" pdf document. The damped oscillation current trace in CH2 of the "Sprain Motor electric drive pulse waveform photo (BMP)" oscillogram, of which we see more than a half-period, clearly converges to ~2 divisions. This suggests that 2 divisions on the oscillogram scale to 20A (steady state current of a ~1 ohm static resistance coil driven by 20VDC) rather than 2A as claimed. TB: Yes, but your cognitive dissonance is not allowing you to see that there is a large reverse electromotive force caused by the approaching rotor magnet which must be overcome by the power supply. You also acknowledged that the power supply display shows a RMS current of less than 0.06 A, from a video that is no longer publicly available. MJ: 2/ I have a second argument pointing to the same conclusion: the voltage drop of the coil driving FET, which Terry told me was of the IRF250 family, is of at least 1V as can be seen on the oscillogram (CH1). I remember Jonfli on this list noted that 1V drop was a lot for the claimed low current of 2A, and might be improved by using a FET with a lower ON resistance. I looked up the IRF250 ON resistance (RDSon) and found it is in fact quite low already, 0.085 ohms max, which requires more than 10A to yield the observed 1V voltage drop (Ohm's law again). This suggests that coil current is at least 5 times the claimed value of 2A. TB: You also refuse to accept that I have data which shows that there is a 5 V drop between the drain and source of the gating circuit indicating that the field effect transistor is operating in the linear region and is unsaturated. This data is not public; but, I will get permission to send it to anyone who cares to see it. MJ: My conclusion from 1/ and 2/ is that the Sprain motor's COP, claimed to be overunity ~2, is in fact possibly 10 times and at least five times lower than that i.e. well below unity, due to an erroneous scaling of the input current waveform. I have no explanation as to the source of the error though. TB: And I certainly understand your position regardless of your refusal to accept the data. The inventor has actually operated the motor on a 14.5 volt supply without the FET in the circuit. The back EMF is at least 8 V when triggered as indicated by the referenced data, which all refutes your position. In addition, if 20 A at 20 V were being input to the coil, I could feel the warmth of the coil with a 400 W input even at a duty cycle of 3.7%. I feel no such warmth (from the coil). What you do not understand is that we repealed Ohm's law here in Georgia in 1966. As a result we have saved a fortune on power costs. Near the same time we rounded pi to exactly 3.0 which attracted many students to study architecture at our universities. Despite the s(c)eptics, we continue to try to get the motor to self-run. The 3 phase alternator that Jones found on the web is only 50% efficient at 90 RPM. Paul has eliminated the FET from the circuit by using it to gate a second coil which closes a magnetic reed switch to gate the motor coil. This drops the voltage to a level near the alternator output. Because the potential customer is coming tomorrow, I have asked Paul to put the torque sensor back in place (removing the alternator) for the demonstration; however, efforts to make it self-run will continue afterward. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:21:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDKk1H010160; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:20:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDKiF0010130; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:20:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:20:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:20:38 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8634C9F03E5BC-1910-65D3@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [VO]:Re:[VO]: Please...Re and not Re Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69215 X-Loop: vortex-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: Harry Veeder Could the reverse happen? Could seismic activity alter the weather? I say this because last year I noticed a curious coincidence. We had a small quake ( hardly noticeable) in our area at around 8pm or 9pm. The next day we got good weather instead of the bad weather which had been forecasted the day before. <><><><><> I would think so. If you study Grimer Beta-atm theories, you certain could understand why an Alpha-atm change could allow slippage of the continental plates. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:30:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDUKe5017857; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:30:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDSKhv016503; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:28:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:28:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:23:08 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8634CF85654A4-1910-65EF@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20060620230351.02a745f0@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620230351.02a745f0@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69216 X-Loop: vortex-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: Steven Krivit The issues were largely personal, not scientific. <><><><><> As Mr. Beene has pointed out here and elsewhere, the claims by the opposition were preposterous. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 06:49:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LDn6eH028003; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:49:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LDn4kD027987; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:49:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 06:49:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621094055.03fb20e8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:49:05 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 In-Reply-To: <8C8634CF85654A4-1910-65EF@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20060620230351.02a745f0@mail.newenergytimes.com> <8C8634CF85654A4-1910-65EF@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <0RD-9C.A.P1G.Q5UmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69217 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >As Mr. Beene has pointed out here and elsewhere, the claims by the >opposition were preposterous. That is why I find the outcome troubling. A proper enquiry would have dismissed the charges and published a definitive statement clearing Taleyarkhan of all charges. That is what happened to Bockris in the end. The fact that they did not do that tells us they still take the charges seriously, and that tells us they are fools who are likely to pull some random decision out of a hat. I am merely speculating, however, and I hope I am wrong. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 07:24:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LENhqP014603; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:23:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LENfGJ014585; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:23:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:23:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <0b6d01c6953e$45f62cb0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:23:31 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LENZFf014527 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69218 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: airy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Status: O X-Status: (changed "hairy" to possibly even more appropriate "airy") > What you do not understand is that we repealed Ohm's law here in > Georgia in 1966. Ah, that's why reactive currents don't heat up the wires there :) (sorry I couldn't "resist" ;-) More seriously, as you know from our private discussion I have found your counterarguments unconvincing, and I told you why, in particular a hypothetical unsaturated FET's VGS=5V plus Vcoil~19V does not add up to Vsupply=20VDC, whereas they _should_ because they are in series, whatever the emfs or back emfs contributing to Vcoil. I would appreciate if other electronics-literate Vorts, preferably less involved personally with the inventor, could examine and comment/criticize my objections. I would love to be proven wrong, really. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 07:55:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LEsgr6007213; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:54:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LEsd0A007179; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:54:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:54:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004101c69542$9a594680$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <001901c69530$b1a30ea0$9f037841@xptower> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:54:30 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69220 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Vortex fields Status: O X-Status: Blank ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay Here is a link to the smoke gun blaster fun. Watch carefully as one smoke ring intercepts another, Some of the rings destruct , some bounce and some encircle and enhance by encircling the first torus ring and accelerate. http://cgi.ebay.com/SUPER-ZERO-SMOKE-RING-GUN-FLUID-ZERO-BLASTER-LAUNCHER_W0QQitemZ6035048462QQihZ009QQcategoryZ38287QQssPageNameZWD1VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem WAY COOL... imagine the possibilities ... ...of course, one wonders if Richard isn't thinking about trying to do something similar in liquid, intead of a gas .... perhaps by rapdily moving his vortex stirrer up and down in the orthogonal vector. Methings the tank could not take that kind of stress however. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 08:11:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LFALJx020036; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 08:10:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LEubvG008718; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:56:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:56:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003701c69541$730443b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060620105749.02b4c0e8@mail.newenergytimes.com> <4498429C.4040905@pobox.com> <6.2.0.14.2.20060620230351.02a745f0@mail.newenergytimes.com> <8C8634CF85654A4-1910-65EF@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:46:14 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <6MXwNC.A.tHC.j4VmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69221 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: NEW ENERGY TIMES NEWS FLASH (tm) JUNE 20, 2006 Status: O X-Status: > As Mr. Beene has pointed out here and elsewhere, the claims by > the > opposition were preposterous. > > Terry Let me clarify that the only preposterous claim was the one made by Putterman's graduate assistant - where he stated that the spectrum 'looked like 251-Californium's or something to that effect. And this was from a crude computer simulation. Cf251 is an strong alpha emitter. RT claimed to be seeing only neutrons. When Putterman echoed the grad student's idiotic claim, he threw himself into the arena without stating that he was a competitor for funding doing similar work, and that he had failed to duplicate RT's results with his own half-hearted experiment. Yet in his own alternative experiment, which was not replicated by anyone, Putterman was claiming even grander things. This is an egregious lapse of good judgment and professionally unforgivable. RT still could have been faking his findings - make no mistake about that - but there is not enough information to tell from the public record. However, the involvement of Putterman was ethically wrong - even if RT did fake the findings (which I doubt). Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 08:11:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LFALK1020036; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 08:11:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LEnuSL003118; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:49:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:49:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:49:47 -0400 Message-Id: <8C863591356C75A-2014-6448@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <0b6d01c6953e$45f62cb0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <0b6d01c6953e$45f62cb0$3800a8c0@zothan> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.131 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LEnq0F003061 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69219 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Airy (?) Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Michel Jullian I would appreciate if other electronics-literate Vorts, preferably less involved personally with the inventor, could examine and comment/criticize my objections. I would love to be proven wrong, really. <><><><><> No one else here is involved with the inventor. And your arguments have been discussed with other Vorts privately. Indeed, Knagel has taken me to task many times over the current probe measurements. Maybe Keith would like to take a shot or two. Terry :-Ţ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 09:57:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LGvBlu025645; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:57:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LGvAiZ025623; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:57:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:57:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:57:04 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jun 2006 16:57:08.0297 (UTC) FILETIME=[BB3F9B90:01C69553] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69222 X-Loop: vortex-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, Michael, Vo, Here are some edited comments from a member of the MPI engineering team that might be of interest. Comments that would reveal proprietary information have been omitted. "The PDF details a properly done analysis of True Power input, and actual torque output. Sprain does not seem to capture BEMF, but still this carefully, and independently measured performance is a mere 25% by accurate means!!! (Sprain) is ignorant of how to measure, and the best (no losses) simulation of his form is reciprocal. (You will find that the rest of the power is eaten by I^2R, and friction - ...it is nothing more than a pulse motor with the added (drag mostly) of the spiral ramp of stator mags added to the pulse motor. the ramp of PM's does nothing but add a reciprocal boost and drag, and contributes nothing to the gain mechanism, except eddy drag of the conductive magnets.) ..(there is nothing of merit in Sprain's design). (This measurement of Sprain's device is doing only useful COP - ... and is only 25% useful). Mark Magnetic Power Inc. >From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Subject: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor >Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:12:14 -0400 > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Michel Jullian > >(should be _Harry_ Paul Sprain according to the US 6954019 patent document, >not >Henry, I have corrected the subject line and added "overunity disputed" to >make >the thread look more appealing to our fellow Vorts) > >TB: Ackshully "Hairy" would be more apropos. BTW, "overunity disputed" is >somewhat redundant as this is always the case. :-) > >MJ: Thanks Terry for your objective introduction of my position, in spite >of your >not agreing with it and of the big dollars at stake. The documents I will >refer >to are in the public file folders you gave us a link to: >http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ > >1/ The coil's DC resistance argument you reported was inspired to me by the >rough "sanity check" Ohm's law prediction of coil current at page 5 of the >"Sprain Motor Early Analysis by Independent Lab" pdf document. The damped >oscillation current trace in CH2 of the "Sprain Motor electric drive pulse >waveform photo (BMP)" oscillogram, of which we see more than a half-period, >clearly converges to ~2 divisions. This suggests that 2 divisions on the >oscillogram scale to 20A (steady state current of a ~1 ohm static >resistance >coil driven by 20VDC) rather than 2A as claimed. > >TB: Yes, but your cognitive dissonance is not allowing you to see that >there is a large reverse electromotive force caused by the approaching >rotor magnet which must be overcome by the power supply. You also >acknowledged that the power supply display shows a RMS current of less than >0.06 A, from a video that is no longer publicly available. > >MJ: 2/ I have a second argument pointing to the same conclusion: the >voltage drop of >the coil driving FET, which Terry told me was of the IRF250 family, is of >at >least 1V as can be seen on the oscillogram (CH1). I remember Jonfli on this >list >noted that 1V drop was a lot for the claimed low current of 2A, and might >be >improved by using a FET with a lower ON resistance. I looked up the IRF250 >ON >resistance (RDSon) and found it is in fact quite low already, 0.085 ohms >max, >which requires more than 10A to yield the observed 1V voltage drop (Ohm's >law >again). This suggests that coil current is at least 5 times the claimed >value of >2A. > >TB: You also refuse to accept that I have data which shows that there is a >5 V drop between the drain and source of the gating circuit indicating that >the field effect transistor is operating in the linear region and is >unsaturated. This data is not public; but, I will get permission to send >it to anyone who cares to see it. > >MJ: My conclusion from 1/ and 2/ is that the Sprain motor's COP, claimed >to be >overunity ~2, is in fact possibly 10 times and at least five times lower >than >that i.e. well below unity, due to an erroneous scaling of the input >current >waveform. I have no explanation as to the source of the error though. > >TB: And I certainly understand your position regardless of your refusal to >accept the data. The inventor has actually operated the motor on a 14.5 >volt supply without the FET in the circuit. The back EMF is at least 8 V >when triggered as indicated by the referenced data, which all refutes your >position. In addition, if 20 A at 20 V were being input to the coil, I >could feel the warmth of the coil with a 400 W input even at a duty cycle >of 3.7%. I feel no such warmth (from the coil). > >What you do not understand is that we repealed Ohm's law here in Georgia in >1966. As a result we have saved a fortune on power costs. Near the same >time we rounded pi to exactly 3.0 which attracted many students to study >architecture at our universities. > >Despite the s(c)eptics, we continue to try to get the motor to self-run. >The 3 phase alternator that Jones found on the web is only 50% efficient at >90 RPM. Paul has eliminated the FET from the circuit by using it to gate a >second coil which closes a magnetic reed switch to gate the motor coil. >This drops the voltage to a level near the alternator output. > >Because the potential customer is coming tomorrow, I have asked Paul to put >the torque sensor back in place (removing the alternator) for the >demonstration; however, efforts to make it self-run will continue >afterward. > >Terry > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:12:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHBdlN003305; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHBaBF003238; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621130651.03e19858@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:11:32 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: References: <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.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/69223 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mark Goldes wrote: >Comments that would reveal proprietary information have been omitted. > >"The PDF details a properly done analysis of True Power input, and >actual torque output. Sprain does not seem to capture BEMF, but >still this carefully, and independently measured performance is a >mere 25% by accurate means!!! Mark: To maintain confidentiality, you were forced to chop up this paragraph. But you chopped it so much, I cannot make head or tail of it. What performance is 25% of what?!? I cannot even tell whether you mean input or output. Please try to summarize again in somewhat simpler, more direct terms. What did Sprain measure wrong? And if you can tell us, what is the actual input and output (ratio or absolute power)? - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:16:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHBw1e003518; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHBth4003461; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:11:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:11:46 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8636CE92897D8-17E8-2A5C@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LHBrXE003391 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69224 X-Loop: vortex-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: Mark Goldes Terry, Michael, Vo,    Here are some edited comments from a member of the MPI engineering team that might be of interest. Comments that would reveal proprietary information have been omitted.    "The PDF details a properly done analysis of True Power input, and actual torque output. Sprain does not seem to capture BEMF, but still this carefully, and independently measured performance is a mere 25% by accurate means!!!    (Sprain) is ignorant of how to measure, and the best (no losses) simulation of his form is reciprocal.    (You will find that the rest of the power is eaten by I^2R, and friction - ...it is nothing more than a pulse motor with the added (drag mostly) of the spiral ramp of stator mags added to the pulse motor. the ramp of PM's does nothing but add a reciprocal boost and drag, and contributes nothing to the gain mechanism, except eddy drag of the conductive magnets.) ..(there is nothing of merit in Sprain's design).    (This measurement of Sprain's device is doing only useful COP - ... and is only 25% useful).  <><><><><> Yes, BEMF could add to the efficiency. I do not understand what is meant by "simulation of his form is reciprocal". You seem to agree with Michel. Thanks for your input. Possibly some day you can share more of the analysis so that my feeble mind can understand what is being said. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:30:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHUVQs015071; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:30:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHMuGt010450; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:22:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:22:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <008201c69557$512b3f80$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:22:46 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69225 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: More Waterfuel videos Status: O X-Status: If you have the time and a broadband connection ... [and perhaps you should make time, if you are interested in the full range of alternative-energy options], then courtesy of Google video (beta software) and Sterling Allan, there is a new crop of videos mostly from Oz, purporting to show vehicles running on treated (electrolyzed) water (variations of the JC or Joe-cell). Here is an short one - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7785149275674305332&q=joe+cell but the newer ones are running over an hour in length and greatly in need of editing. The new Google video software simplifies this and will list them in the right hand column. I have found the time to view them all, and there are many hours worth. Some have already been removed, as disk-space is always a problem with videos. Unless they are all "pure fraud", and let me add a massively-coordinated and senseless fraud (since no one is asking for money), then this is something to get excited about. Really excited, depending on how resilient is you ability to "suspend disbelief" and keep an open mind amid the non-scientific demeanor of the mechanics who are doing this. Maybe it is 'something' in the Fosters. After all, isn't the hops used in beer supposedly related, in the plant world, to cannabis? Otherwise, there can be little in the way of self-deception in such circumstances - as the engine, fueled with treated water, is running for extended periods - consequently either we have pure, senseless fraud -or else this is the makings of the discovery of the century. THE NEXT BIG THING. Plain and simple. There is little room for a middle ground. Even if some of the energy used to power these autos is being provided by burning lubricating oil (and they are mostly old engines for obvious reasons), it is still a major discovery. One guy is claiming 70 kilometers per liter of water, and even if he is burning a quart of oil in addition, it is still amazing and highly marketable as such. There are nearly one hundred of these JC conversion in NSW Australia, it is claimed. Mind-boggling to say the least (that is: if not an outright deception or a good laugh. Aussie-style). Personally, my take on it is this: if it were it not for the number and diversity of these videos and claims (and a few in the US and Europe) then it would look more like fraud or a good knee-slapping joke than anything real. That is because the implications are so very revolutionary - *impossible* really. Apparently the upcoming demo for the US in Salt Lake City is still possible for next month - so it will be interesting to see where we are at the end of July. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:34:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHXqrl016993; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:33:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHXpbs016973; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:33:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:33:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:33:47 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.135 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69226 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer Let's hope he's wrong - but if he isn't then I think the Finsrud machine is the best bet for proving a point of principle. The solution is more elegant than the Sprain in the cunning way it achieves the different advance and retreat speed in relation to the magnets. This means that only the smallest input is required to keep the ball moving. Also, it will show whether or not the reverse direction pumps energy into the Beta-atmosphere rather than taking it out. In other words it will show that the ball is indeed travelling around a Carnot-style cycle and extracting energy from Beta-atmosphere "heat". <><><><><><> What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem to get anyone to even go see it. A few people will discuss it; but, I have yet to convince anyone to go with me and help verify the measurements. One engineer used the excuse that he did not want to sign the non-disclosure agreement; but, when I said he did not have to sign it, he still backed out. It reminds me of the people in sci.physics.fusion who refused to even read the CF papers and the people who would not look through Galileo's telescope. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:47:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHlBcU023996; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:47:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHl8T7023951; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:47:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:47:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:41:53 -0400 Message-Id: <8C863711E13756D-2484-153FD@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <008201c69557$512b3f80$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <008201c69557$512b3f80$6401a8c0@NuDell> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: More Waterfuel videos Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.135 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LHl5CW023891 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69227 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene Otherwise, there can be little in the way of self-deception in such circumstances - as the engine, fueled with treated water, is running for extended periods - consequently either we have pure, senseless fraud -or else this is the makings of the discovery of the century. THE NEXT BIG THING. Plain and simple.  <><><><><> And I always thought those UFOs were taking water to get the deuterium! Okay, there's a new group on Yahoo called 'hydroxy' if you haven't found it already. They have some really simple plans for JCs. Suppose I built one but did not want to use my Scion for experimentation, how could I "test the water" so to speak? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 10:59:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LHxQOr031503; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:59:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LHxOF7031481; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:59:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:59:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621135116.03e1ed60@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:59:23 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> References: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.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/69228 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem to get anyone to even >go see it. A few people will discuss it; but, I have yet to >convince anyone to go with me and help verify the measurements. I would love to go see it, but I am not qualified to verify the measurements. I wouldn't know were to start, and I would not want to waste the inventor's time. I think this calls for a better meter. If someone wants to rent a deluxe power meter, I would be happy to chip in and come watch the thing in operation. It is hard to imagine how we would measure output, but if the deluxe meter agrees with the inventor's input measurements, that would be a good sign. If the inventor decides to go fully public and wants to write a report, I would be happy to assist editing the English. >It reminds me of the people in sci.physics.fusion who refused to >even read the CF papers and the people who would not look through >Galileo's telescope. Actually, the results from Galileo's telescope were ambiguous and required expert observation, training and patience. An ordinary person looking through it (or you or I) would see nothing. The instrument quality was poor, and there was no proper mounting to aim it or keep it steady. Stars often appeared duplicated or distorted because of internal reflections, and the whole thing vibrated. Much better telescopes emerged a few years later, confirming the results. At the beginning, it was unconvincing, like some of the early cold fusion experiments. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 11:38:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LIcStt016379; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:38:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LIcPnq016343; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:38:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:38:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621142803.03e304b0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:33:35 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621135116.03e1ed60@mindspring.com> References: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060621135116.03e1ed60@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/69229 X-Loop: vortex-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: >Actually, the results from Galileo's telescope were ambiguous and >required expert observation, training and patience. It may seem a little odd to talk about expert training for a brand new instrument type, such as the telescope. What I mean is you had to be an expert astronomer. A naked-eye astronomer, such as Tycho Brahe, who was the last and greatest of them. It is a shame he never got a chance to use a telescope. If he had, he would have known instantly what he was seeing despite the problems with the early instruments. Along the same lines, in 1989 and 1990, experts in electrochemistry, tritium and other related subjects were confident that they knew what they were saying when they first observed cold fusion, even though it was the first time in history anyone ever saw it. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 11:40:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LIe5G5017227; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:40:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LIe0qt017154; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:40:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:39:59 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00b101c69561$23e849f0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <008201c69557$512b3f80$6401a8c0@NuDell> <8C863711E13756D-2484-153FD@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:33:05 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69230 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: More Waterfuel videos Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: > Suppose I built one but did not want to use my Scion for > experimentation, how could I "test the water" so to speak? > Terry I am planning on trying to prove/disprove that part of the equation (pretreatment) soon. A simple but meaningful test would be something like this: Prepare several batches of 100 gram (or more) water samples - and then heat for exactly one minute each in a microwave oven - then test for temperature rise with a digital thermometer... using several iterations of: 1) untreated rainwater vs. 2) treated rainwater vs 3) untreated municipal water (control) vs 4) treated municipal water. Many other types of water may be tested. I suspect the treated rainwater, since it may have more hydroxyl radicals (if there are indeed solar hydrinos in rainwater), will heat up significantly faster. The devil is in the details, but if there is nothing significant in this simple kind of experiment - then this solar-hydrino-hypothesis is likely incorrect, and it will be time to move on to some other hypothesis. Perhaps in the best-case scenario - the treated water might even explode after a short time in the oven - if fully electrolyzed for 10-12 hours in one of the alternative JoeCell regimes - which looks to be the most promising method - using a battery or battery charger (drawing a fractional watt per hour - a few watts total per liter). The idea of pretreatment is apparently that you are trying to "force" the maximum unbalanced negative charge into a nearly pure dielectric in order to displace the ppm quantities of (negative) hydrinohydrides which are already there, and then using them in turn to force the remaining water, over time, into a changed nanostructure - to form "strings" of hydronium and hydroxyl-hydrate bound and linked ions (the polywater analogy) or else some kind of natural clathrate water structure --- Fred mentioned a few of these water structures, and more are on the Chaplin site; such that after an extended treatment, the water is near-neutral in pH, discolored with colloidal scum, higher in viscosity, and has a large "hidden" capacitance. It is said by the JC enthusiasts, that one will get a huge shock just by touching it (with bare feet). Shocking, indeed.... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 12:19:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LJIsF7010469; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:18:55 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LJIn2B010420; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:18:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:18:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621191845114.1BA6E1C0004A@mwinf3203.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 20:21:41 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" 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: <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69232 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem to get anyone to even go > see it. A few people will discuss it; but, I have yet to convince > anyone to go with me and help verify the measurements. Terry, Several months ago, I watched a car crash of discussion threads evolve on the Y! free_energy group between Paul Sprain, his partner and Tom Schum on one side, and most everyone else - led by Dave Howe - on the other. The way that things fizzled out was with Paul disappearing off the group. However, before leaving, both he and his partner claimed that they could run their motor just from a charged cap - with no outside power source. For example, see this post from Paul: ---quote--- >From paulsprain@... Thu Apr 06 16:26:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: paulsprain@... X-Apparently-To: free_energy@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 20637 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2006 23:26:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Apr 2006 23:26:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n19b.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com) (66.163.187.186) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Apr 2006 23:26:37 -0000 Received: from [66.163.187.122] by n19.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2006 23:26:36 -0000 Received: from [66.218.69.3] by t3.bullet.sc5.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2006 23:26:36 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.81] by t3.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2006 23:26:36 -0000 Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 23:26:36 -0000 To: free_energy@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose X-Originating-IP: 66.163.187.186 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 67.191.162.107 From: "metalspiderkiller" Subject: To: davehowe17, EMILIE TEST X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=139802037; y=D5oqnRpUu3WLGd4bEh6iwvbhVrBN_mkWzwTavkSSfWgvi8sG-WmFX9iYbuM X-Yahoo-Profile: metalspiderkiller Jesus Christ you fuc*#^*g people make me nuts! Here it is in a nut shell: THE MOTOR WILL SELF RUN WITH NO OUTSIDE POWER SOURCE. NO MEASUREMENTS NEEDED, NO GUESSING, NO MISTAKES! E.M.I.L.I.E WILL START FROM A FULLY CHARGED 25V 5000uF CAP THEN WILL CONTINUE TO RUN UNTIL YOUR ARE SATISFIED OR 3 HOURS WHICH EVER COMES FIRST. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE THE DEVICE, LOOK UNDERNEATH IT, TEST IT USING YOUR OWN METERS. NO HIDDEN COMPARTMENTS, NOTHING WILL BE OFF LIMITS TO YOU. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? ANYTHING YOU WANT TO TEST YOU CAN! This is what I'm claiming! Using NO outside power source! The torque force created by the magnetic field gradient, when converted into electricity will be enough to pulse the electromagnet and allow the rotor magnet to slip by. Sincerely, Harry Paul Sprain ---ends--- Now, things may have changed since then. However, at that time, he was confident in it (effectively) self running. If that still stands, it would make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... [I'm sure you're aware of the msgs that I'm referring to. If not, search Y! free_energy for posts from 'metalspiderkiller' (Sprain) and 'magnetpowerman' (his oppo)] Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/372 - Release Date: 21/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 12:28:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LJRiqZ016444; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:27:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LJRhjl016425; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:27:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:27:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621150232.03e27300@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:27:37 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621142803.03e304b0@mindspring.com> References: <2.2.32.20060621131452.00bf58bc@pop.freeserve.net> <8C8636FFC89FB24-2484-1538D@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060621135116.03e1ed60@mindspring.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060621142803.03e304b0@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/69233 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Let me extend this comparison a little more. I wrote: >It is a shame [Tycho Brahe] he never got a chance to use a >telescope. If he had, he would have known instantly what he was >seeing despite the problems with the early instruments. Furthermore, if Tycho had seen Galileo's initial setup, he would have been disgusted. (He was never one to hide his opinions.) I expect his reaction would have been similar to that of a modern-day expert at Los Alamos or MIT looking at an early cold fusion experiment. Compared to Tycho's instruments, the mounting, aiming, and data collection capabilities of Galileo's early telescope was an amateur joke. Plus, as I said, people would aim the telescope at one bright visible star, and they would sometimes see two stars, or none. So it was no surprise that experts in astronomy doubted the initial reports of satellites orbiting Jupiter. Fortunately for Galileo, the Pope -- who was a good friend -- supported him, and quickly supplied major government funding for improved instrumentation. The popular version of the story, in which the Pope's emissaries "refused to look" and did not support Galileo, is completely incorrect and backwards. He only got in trouble with the ecclesiastical establishment years later. Galileo used lousy equipment because he was in a mad rush to publish quickly before others got a chance. He first circulated a cryptic poem to establish priority without letting on exactly what he had discovered. Then as I recall, he published a deliberately incomplete and misleading report so that others would not replicate too quickly. He was a piece of work -- a nasty backstabber who was always willing to steal credit, deny an obvious fact for political expediency, or produce a second-rate obsolete instrument on a huge government military grant (a telescope for harbor defense). However, he was a brilliant scientist, and he improved the science of optics by leaps and bounds in a matter of months. By the way, Galileo's proof that all bodies fall in the gravitational field with the same acceleration was not experimental. He never dropped anything off the Tower of Pisa. It was a pure "thought experiment," like Einstein's early work in special relativity. He asked a simple question: "If a large body falls faster than a small one, what happens when you chain the two together? Do they fall at the average speed? Does the lighter one retard the heavy one?" Everyone could see that was absurd. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 12:52:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LJqGQQ030659; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:52:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LJqFgK030642; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:52:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:52:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:48:22 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-reply-to: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621150232.03e27300@mindspring.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: <17Opx.A.qeH.uNamEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69234 X-Loop: vortex-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: > By the way, Galileo's proof that all bodies fall in the gravitational > field with the same acceleration was not experimental. He never > dropped anything off the Tower of Pisa. It was a pure "thought > experiment," like Einstein's early work in special relativity. He > asked a simple question: "If a large body falls faster than a small > one, what happens when you chain the two together? Do they fall at > the average speed? Does the lighter one retard the heavy one?" > Everyone could see that was absurd. > > - Jed Well he did study balls rolling down a ramp inclined at various angles. He found the distance covered was proportional to the square of the time. He also noticed that the time of descent (as he could measure it) did not appear to be affected by the weight of the ball. By extrapolation he reasoned that if free fall corresponded to a vertical ramp all weights should fall the same distance in the same time. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:01:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LK1W2m003441; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:01:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LK1VHA003422; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:01:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:01:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:58:25 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-reply-to: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621142803.03e304b0@mindspring.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/69235 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > >> Actually, the results from Galileo's telescope were ambiguous and >> required expert observation, training and patience. > > It may seem a little odd to talk about expert training for a brand > new instrument type, such as the telescope. What I mean is you had to > be an expert astronomer. A naked-eye astronomer, such as Tycho Brahe, > who was the last and greatest of them. It is a shame he never got a > chance to use a telescope. If he had, he would have known instantly > what he was seeing despite the problems with the early instruments. > > Along the same lines, in 1989 and 1990, experts in electrochemistry, > tritium and other related subjects were confident that they knew > what they were saying when they first observed cold fusion, even > though it was the first time in history anyone ever saw it. > > - Jed > > This is a better historical comparison than the story of "refusing to look through the telescope". Also P&F were hoping to see something that could be called cold fusion before they built a cell. It is likely Galileo was hoping to see satellites orbiting a planet before he had a telescope. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:03:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LK2qP0004172; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:02:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LK2p2E004141; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:02:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:02:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <002101c6956d$a6cc7970$9f037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:02:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C69543.BD7162F0"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69236 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Vortex fields. Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C69543.BD7162F0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001E_01C69543.BD7162F0" ------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C69543.BD7162F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankJones wrote.. ...of course, one wonders if Richard isn't thinking about trying=20 to do something similar in liquid, intead of a gas .... perhaps by=20 rapdily moving his vortex stirrer up and down in the orthogonal=20 vector. Methings the tank could not take that kind of stress=20 however.=20 Howdy Jones, Yes! I picked up on the link that mentioned production of orthogonal = structures. Wow! Right about the rect.plexiglas tank, it wouldn't take the thrust much = less the stress. Next step for us is to design the magnetron (dual) array. Terry = mentioned " focus" the two magetrons. Hmmm???? Microwave dont lend itself to focus unless I am missing his point. = Granted in WW@ they found a way to "beam" radar but we dont have the sky = to work with, just a 3x3x4 ft rect.tank. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C69543.BD7162F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Jones wrote..
 
...of course, one wonders if Richard isn't thinking about trying =
to do=20 something similar in liquid, intead of a gas .... perhaps by
rapdily = moving=20 his vortex stirrer up and down in the orthogonal
vector. Methings = the tank=20 could not take that kind of stress
however.

Howdy = Jones,
 
Yes! I picked up on the link that mentioned production of = orthogonal=20 structures. Wow!
 
Right about the rect.plexiglas tank, it wouldn't take the thrust = much less=20 the stress.
 
Next step for us is to design the magnetron (dual) array. Terry = mentioned "=20 focus" the two magetrons. Hmmm????
Microwave dont lend itself to focus unless I am missing his point. = Granted=20 in WW@ they found a way to "beam" radar but we dont have the sky to work = with,=20 just a 3x3x4 ft rect.tank.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_001E_01C69543.BD7162F0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C69543.BD7162F0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001c01c6956d$a6445db0$9f037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C69543.BD7162F0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:08:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LK8eXo008222; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:08:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LK8cqT008187; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:08:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:08:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4499A739.7000605@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:08:25 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor 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/69237 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick Vessey wrote: > > Terry wrote: > > > > What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem to get anyone to even > > go see it. A few people will discuss it; but, I have yet to > > convince anyone to go with me and help verify the measurements. > > Terry, > > Several months ago, I watched a car crash of discussion threads > evolve on the Y! free_energy group between Paul Sprain, his partner > and Tom Schum on one side, and most everyone else - led by Dave Howe > - on the other. > > The way that things fizzled out was with Paul disappearing off the > group. > > However, before leaving, both he and his partner claimed that they > could run their motor just from a charged cap - with no outside power > source. For example, see this post from Paul: > > ---quote--- [ snip ] > Here it is in a nut shell: > > THE MOTOR WILL SELF RUN WITH NO OUTSIDE POWER SOURCE. NO MEASUREMENTS > NEEDED, NO GUESSING, NO MISTAKES! > > E.M.I.L.I.E WILL START FROM A FULLY CHARGED 25V 5000uF CAP THEN WILL > CONTINUE TO RUN UNTIL YOUR ARE SATISFIED OR 3 HOURS WHICH EVER COMES > FIRST. This is a very strange statement. Why would it self-run for "3 hours"? Why would it not run until the bearings wore out? Why would an observer who was not satisfied in 3 hours have to remain unsatisfied (which is the implication here)? I'm sorry, I know this sounds like a nit, but an apparently arbitrary time limit like that makes it sound like either (a) the message wasn't serious or (b) _something_ runs down after 3 hours in which case the claim of self-running is not quite right. > YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE THE DEVICE, LOOK UNDERNEATH IT, TEST IT > USING YOUR OWN METERS. NO HIDDEN COMPARTMENTS, NOTHING WILL BE OFF > LIMITS TO YOU. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? ANYTHING YOU WANT TO TEST YOU CAN! > > This is what I'm claiming! > > Using NO outside power source! Again, I'm sorry to pick a nit this way, but if it uses a charged capacitor to get it going, and if it stops after 3 hours (after which the cap must be recharged?) it sounds like, well, there _is_ an outside power source, after all. > The torque force created by the > magnetic field gradient, when converted into electricity OK, this is another nit. You can't convert torque to electricity. Torque is force, not power. A small nit, it's true, but when discussing a power system where precise details of power production and consumption are absolutely critical, it would be nice if people would be careful to state things like this correctly. > will be enough to pulse the electromagnet and allow the rotor magnet to slip > by. > > > Sincerely, Harry Paul Sprain ---ends--- > > Now, things may have changed since then. However, at that time, he > was confident in it (effectively) self running. Again, the claim was that it would self-run for 3 hours, not indefinitely. > If that still > stands, it would make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... Only if it self-runs indefinitely. > [I'm sure you're aware of the msgs that I'm referring to. If not, > search Y! free_energy for posts from 'metalspiderkiller' (Sprain) and > 'magnetpowerman' (his oppo)] > > Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG > Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/372 - > Release Date: 21/06/2006 > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:16:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKFts8012589; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:15:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKFrax012562; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:15:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:15:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621201550649.9E8471C000AE@mwinf3012.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621201551.00bed950@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:15:51 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69239 X-Loop: vortex-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 01:33 pm 21/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Grimer > >Let's hope he's wrong - but if he isn't then I think >the Finsrud machine is the best bet for proving a >point of principle. The solution is more elegant than >the Sprain in the cunning way it achieves the different >advance and retreat speed in relation to the magnets. >This means that only the smallest input is required to >keep the ball moving. Also, it will show whether or not >the reverse direction pumps energy into the Beta-atmosphere >rather than taking it out. In other words it will show >that the ball is indeed travelling around a Carnot-style >cycle and extracting energy from Beta-atmosphere "heat". > ><><><><><><> > > What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem > to get anyone to even go see it. A few people > will discuss it; but, I have yet to convince > anyone to go with me and help verify the > measurements. > > One engineer used the excuse that he did not > want to sign the non-disclosure agreement; but, > when I said he did not have to sign it, > he still backed out. It reminds me of the > people in sci.physics.fusion who refused to > even read the CF papers and the people who > would not look through Galileo's telescope. > > Terry I doesn't amaze me. I've had 40 years of it - so I'm quite used to the fact that people avoid cognitive dissonance like the plague. When they challenge the existence of the Beta-atmosphere and ask for the evidence I invite them to go to the Yahoo discussion group, but with a few commendable exceptions, they never turn up. As for the so-called Expert Panel I was dragged before - what a farce - what an absolute farce. The only technical question they tackled they got egregiously wrong - or at least, one of the three did and the other two were to embarrassed or cowardly to admit it and stop the idiot from digging his hole deeper and deeper. Get used to it. It's a sign you're exploring the new millennium frontiers. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:21:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKLi98016526; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:21:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKLfGt016495; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:21:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:21:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621161523.03e37260@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:21:41 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621142803.03e304b0@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/69240 X-Loop: vortex-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: >Also P&F were hoping to see something that could be called cold >fusion before they built a cell. Yes, they were. Fleischmann have been thinking about it on and off for decades. I do not think he was expecting to see quite what he found. >It is likely Galileo was hoping to see satellites orbiting a planet >before he had a telescope. My understanding is that he was as surprised as anyone to find them. He heard about telescopes, saw a sketchy description of one, and then he made one. He rapidly improved it while he developed a solid understanding of optics. It must have been the best telescope in the world when he decided to begin astronomical observations, but the mounting and other peripherals were amateur and rushed together. Some cold fusion experiments have the same combination of elegant design and sloppy execution. Others are just plain sloppy. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:22:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKM908016772; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:22:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKM70D016740; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:22:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:22:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:22:03 -0400 Message-Id: <8C863877DF8C607-2050-72E@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <2.2.32.20060621201551.00bed950@pop.freeserve.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.20060621201551.00bed950@pop.freeserve.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.135 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69241 X-Loop: vortex-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: Grimer I doesn't amaze me. I've had 40 years of it - so I'm quite used to the fact that people avoid cognitive dissonance like the plague. <><><><><><> But it only hurts for a short time then you feel better than you did before. :-) Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:23:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKNAaw017560; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:23:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKN5co017497; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:23:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:23:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:22:59 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C863879F67038F-2050-73A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C86384FDB0E7C7-2050-62A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.135 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LKN1VZ017392 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69242 X-Loop: vortex-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: Patrick Vessey    Now, things may have changed since then. However, at that time, he was  confident in it (effectively) self running. If that still stands, it would  make verifing his claims somewhat simpler...    <><><><><>    Indeed it would!    The problem has been finding a low speed efficient generator. Jones found a motor used on a Fisher & Paykel washing machine which is about 50% efficient at 90 RPM. The problem is that the voltage output is a ramp since the torque is generated by a magnetic gradient. Here is a plot of the output (open circuit) voltage when the generator is run by the motor:    http://geocities.com/terry1094/427_V_CH1.xls    It is a permanent magnet, three phase rectified alternator output. It is slightly clipped; so, it actually goes from almost 14 V to a peak around 27 V.    If it does self-run, you'll see it on CNN! Do you get CNN in the UK? :-)    Terry  From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:44:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKiBko030428; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKiAGG030411; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006501c69554$d08caeb0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <0b6d01c6953e$45f62cb0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C863591356C75A-2014-6448@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:04:52 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69243 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: > From: Michel Jullian > I would appreciate if other electronics-literate Vorts, > preferably less involved personally with the inventor, could > examine and comment/criticize my objections. I would love to be > proven wrong, really. <><><><><> I hope that either Keith, George Holtz or Jon Flickinger tunes into this discussion, from Terry/Michel [please excuse the spelling, if incorrect] Pulse-power is one of George's areas of expertise, and Jon's too. George spotted the apparent Naudin error in MAHG, which may be somewhat similar (if there is indeed error) almost immediately. One more good reason why nothing less than a self-powered device will ever satisfy the (justified) demands of all concerned. BTW - I finally have conjured-up a possible (and simplified) way to construct a self-powered CF cell, if it is capable of a COP of about 3. No external fuel cell required - more on that later. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:45:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKj0nU030871; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKiwpw030844; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621163716.03e393c8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:44:56 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: <8C863879F67038F-2050-73A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> References: <8C86384FDB0E7C7-2050-62A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> <8C863879F67038F-2050-73A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <2ynlR.A.2hH.K_amEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69244 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Now, things may have changed since then. However, at that time, he was >confident in it (effectively) self running. If that still stands, it would >make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... > ><><><><><> > >Indeed it would! > >The problem has been finding a low speed efficient generator. In the previous message, he discussed running it for hours with the energy stored in a capacitor. Running from a small battery or a capacitor would be nearly as convincing as full self sustained stand-alone operation, because one can estimate approximately how much energy it takes to run the thing, and the amount of energy in a battery is known with precision. Rather than moving on to a full self-sustaining mode, I suggest he should do a demonstration on video with a battery or capacitor. An ordinary dry cell one-use (non-rechargeable) battery would be best, I think. The trick would be to demonstrate approximately how much friction and air resistance the thing is encountering. There should be some simple first principle method of doing that. I would start by spinning it up by hand and letting it coast until it stops, then I would spin it with an ordinary electric motor and monitor the power consumption, to calibrate. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 13:45:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKjMFK031097; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKjKiv031055; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621204517235.3977DC4000A9@mwinf3216.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:48:14 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" 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: <8C86384FDB0E7C7-2050-62A@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69245 X-Loop: vortex-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 it does self-run, you'll see it on CNN! Do you get CNN in the UK? If we stay up late enough, we're treated on (terrestrial) TV to something like 'ABC World News'. However, the 'world' bit means the same as in 'World Series', as opposed to 'World Cup' :-( -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/372 - Release Date: 21/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 14:38:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKAbOA009875; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:10:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKAS1E009707; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:10:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:10:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:10:10 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86385D5113BAD-2050-686@mblkn-m17.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <002101c6956d$a6cc7970$9f037841@xptower> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <002101c6956d$a6cc7970$9f037841@xptower> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.135 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <574veD.A.7WC.weamEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69238 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Vortex fields. Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay Terry mentioned " focus" the two magetrons. <><><><><> No, not exactly focus; but, create interference patterns between the two sources. Unfortunately this doesn't work unless the two sources are in sync. :-( Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 14:47:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LIoSB9024636; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:50:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LIoMbl024584; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:50:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:50:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [64.174.37.158] X-Originating-Email: [mgoldes@msn.com] X-Sender: mgoldes@msn.com In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621130651.03e19858@mindspring.com> From: "Mark Goldes" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:11:55 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jun 2006 18:12:01.0260 (UTC) FILETIME=[31435AC0:01C6955E] Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69231 X-Loop: vortex-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, The short response is he is getting an output of 25% of the input on a usable basis. This means that without drastic redesign that seems far beyond his capabilities, the motor cannot be made to self run. We would be happy to be proven wrong. Magnetic motors that self-run are indeed possible. Demonstration Devices are the way to prove that is the case. We hope to have such ready for a licensee to manufacture later this year. Mark >From: Jed Rothwell >Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Hairy Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor >Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:11:32 -0400 > >Mark Goldes wrote: > >>Comments that would reveal proprietary information have been omitted. >> >>"The PDF details a properly done analysis of True Power input, and actual >>torque output. Sprain does not seem to capture BEMF, but still this >>carefully, and independently measured performance is a mere 25% by >>accurate means!!! > >Mark: > >To maintain confidentiality, you were forced to chop up this paragraph. But >you chopped it so much, I cannot make head or tail of it. What performance >is 25% of what?!? I cannot even tell whether you mean input or output. >Please try to summarize again in somewhat simpler, more direct terms. What >did Sprain measure wrong? And if you can tell us, what is the actual input >and output (ratio or absolute power)? > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 14:52:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LKjgI9031262; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LKjOCM031109; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:45:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621204519139.21EBEC4000A4@mwinf3216.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:48:15 +0100 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: <4499A739.7000605@pobox.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69246 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > This is a very strange statement. > > Why would it self-run for "3 hours"? Why would it not run until the > bearings wore out? Why would an observer who was not satisfied in 3 > hours have to remain unsatisfied (which is the implication here)? > > I'm sorry, I know this sounds like a nit, but an apparently arbitrary > time limit like that makes it sound like either (a) the message wasn't > serious or (b) _something_ runs down after 3 hours in which case the > claim of self-running is not quite right. [snip] > Again, I'm sorry to pick a nit this way, but if it uses a charged > capacitor to get it going, and if it stops after 3 hours (after which > the cap must be recharged?) it sounds like, well, there _is_ an outside > power source, after all. [snip] > Again, the claim was that it would self-run for 3 hours, not indefinitely. > > > If that still > > stands, it would make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... > > Only if it self-runs indefinitely. OK, I picked a poor msg to illustrate my point. Try this one: ---quote--- >From paulsprain@... Sat Apr 08 10:39:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: paulsprain@... X-Apparently-To: free_energy@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 83346 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2006 17:39:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2006 17:39:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n27.bullet.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.56) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2006 17:39:30 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys Received: from [66.218.69.4] by n27.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Apr 2006 17:39:29 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.72] by t4.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Apr 2006 17:39:29 -0000 Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 17:39:27 -0000 To: free_energy@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose X-Originating-IP: 66.94.237.56 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 67.191.162.107 From: "metalspiderkiller" Subject: Dave this is my last post X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=139802037; y=UZudDc0_k42Ov7bevz-_aq3wnFgP3k31fjKuVaZSzTJ6RmCIh1BOEWmsan8 X-Yahoo-Profile: metalspiderkiller Have you even seen my motor? Because your questions make no sense. There is no flywheel at all. What the hell is wrong with you. I will start with one charged cap 25V 5000uF that's all! The device will constantly produce far more than what the cap can store. We will light a 4 watt bulb for hours and hours. NO FLYWHEEL on earth that is started using that cap could produce 4 watts. Hell if you want we will use a drained cap and start EMILIE by hand to charge the cap. Then it will keep running on it's own producing 4 watts or more! Do you understand! I'll start it by hand just like a model A ford. NO OUTSIDE POWER SOURCE! It will run on it's own producing 4 watts or more for as long as to care to watch it. Last post from me, Paul Sprain ---ends--- -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/372 - Release Date: 21/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 14:56:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LLufvF004226; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:56:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LLufbv004217; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:56:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:56:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621215638272.428ADB4001D6@mwinf3013.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621215639.00be3a84@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:56:39 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69247 X-Loop: vortex-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 08:21 pm 21/06/2006 +0100, Patrick wrote: >> Terry wrote: >> >> What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem to get anyone to even go >> see it. A few people will discuss it; but, I have yet to convince >> anyone to go with me and help verify the measurements. > >Terry, >Several months ago, I watched a car crash of discussion threads evolve on >the Y! free_energy group between Paul Sprain, his partner and Tom Schum on >one side, and most everyone else - led by Dave Howe - on the other. > >The way that things fizzled out was with Paul disappearing off the group. > >However, before leaving, both he and his partner claimed that they could run >their motor just from a charged cap - with no outside power source. For >example, see this post from Paul: >Here it is in a nut shell: > >THE MOTOR WILL SELF RUN WITH NO OUTSIDE POWER >SOURCE. NO MEASUREMENTS NEEDED, NO GUESSING, NO >MISTAKES! > >E.M.I.L.I.E WILL START FROM A FULLY CHARGED 25V 5000uF CAP >THEN WILL CONTINUE TO RUN UNTIL YOUR ARE SATISFIED OR 3 >HOURS WHICH EVER COMES FIRST. >YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE THE DEVICE, LOOK UNDERNEATH >IT, TEST IT USING YOUR OWN METERS. NO HIDDEN >COMPARTMENTS, NOTHING WILL BE OFF LIMITS TO YOU. DO >YOU UNDERSTAND? ANYTHING YOU WANT TO TEST YOU CAN! > > >This is what I'm claiming! If my calculation is correct the energy in his capacitor is about a foot pound. The windage and other losses of turning that rotor for 3 hours must be greater than that, surely. If what Sprain claims is true he has a right to be pissed off. However, I would be happier if Sprain had said, "they had run their motor just from a charged cap - with no outside power source". rather than, "they could run their motor just from a charged cap - with no outside power source", which might suggest that they were confident it would work but they hadn't actually tried it yet. Perhaps Terry could enlighten us on this point. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 15:02:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LM2aI9007995; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:02:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LM2Yt6007973; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:02:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:02:34 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621220231198.307101C00170@mwinf3009.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621220232.00bf2bfc@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, 21 Jun 2006 23:02:32 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5LM2Vga007923 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69248 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:22 pm 21/06/2006 -0400, you wrote:   > If it does self-run, you'll see it on CNN! > Do you get CNN in the UK? > :-)  >  > Terry  Only if you pay the dirty digger for Sky TV. I don't on principle. ;-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 15:11:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LMB8ZT013013; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:11:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LMB6wR012994; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:11:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:11:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060621175948.03e27300@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:11:09 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor In-Reply-To: <006501c69554$d08caeb0$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C8634B730F063C-1910-6544@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> <0b6d01c6953e$45f62cb0$3800a8c0@zothan> <8C863591356C75A-2014-6448@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <006501c69554$d08caeb0$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69249 X-Loop: vortex-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: >One more good reason why nothing less than a self-powered device >will ever satisfy the (justified) demands of all concerned. Of course a self-powered device would be ideal, but as I said, I think something run from a battery where the total friction of the gadget was previously calibrated would be pretty good. I am assuming it would be much easier, faster and cheaper to implement a battery test. However, if a battery test is nearly as complicated and expensive as a self regenerating generator configuration, you might as well go on to the latter. Perhaps it is more difficult to establish total friction than I imagine, because friction and magnet cogging may change when the motor is run in the "magic motor" configuration. It is very difficult to judge these issues without detailed knowledge of the gadget, and in the past I have found that getting detailed knowledge of such devices is somewhat harder than pulling one's own teeth while dancing the Macarena on ice while being chased by angry sea lions. That is why most people will not go to see these machines. It is not amazing. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 15:16:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5LMGBtT016678; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:16:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5LMG8A7016640; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:16:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:16:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060621221601592.90B591C0008B@mwinf3012.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060621221602.00c02448@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 23:16:02 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Resent-Message-ID: <9J2kuC.A.8DE.oUcmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69250 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:44 pm 21/06/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Terry wrote: > >>Now, things may have changed since then. However, at that time, he was >>confident in it (effectively) self running. If that still stands, it would >>make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... >> >><><><><><> >> >>Indeed it would! >> >>The problem has been finding a low speed efficient generator. > >In the previous message, he discussed running it for hours with the >energy stored in a capacitor. Running from a small battery or a >capacitor would be nearly as convincing as full self sustained >stand-alone operation, because one can estimate approximately how >much energy it takes to run the thing, and the amount of energy in a >battery is known with precision. > >Rather than moving on to a full self-sustaining mode, I suggest he >should do a demonstration on video with a battery or capacitor. An >ordinary dry cell one-use (non-rechargeable) battery would be best, I >think. The trick would be to demonstrate approximately how much >friction and air resistance the thing is encountering. There should >be some simple first principle method of doing that. I would start by >spinning it up by hand and letting it coast until it stops, then I >would spin it with an ordinary electric motor and monitor the power >consumption, to calibrate. > >- Jed Yep. I had come to a similar conclusion before I read the above. A simple string and pulley system with a falling weight would show how much windage and friction there was and the energy needed to keep it going for three hours could be easily calculated. I don't think any reasonable person could argue against such a demonstration. If he can keep it going for 3 hours on his capacitor, I'll buy shares. 8-) Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 18:24:50 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M1OaRo012674; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:24:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M1OTBG012602; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:24:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:24:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <4499F140.2090300@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:24:16 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor 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/69251 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick Vessey wrote: >> Stephen wrote: >> >> This is a very strange statement. >> >> Why would it self-run for "3 hours"? Why would it not run until the >> bearings wore out? Why would an observer who was not satisfied in 3 >> hours have to remain unsatisfied (which is the implication here)? >> >> I'm sorry, I know this sounds like a nit, but an apparently arbitrary >> time limit like that makes it sound like either (a) the message wasn't >> serious or (b) _something_ runs down after 3 hours in which case the >> claim of self-running is not quite right. >> > [snip] > >> Again, I'm sorry to pick a nit this way, but if it uses a charged >> capacitor to get it going, and if it stops after 3 hours (after which >> the cap must be recharged?) it sounds like, well, there _is_ an outside >> power source, after all. >> > [snip] > >> Again, the claim was that it would self-run for 3 hours, not indefinitely. >> >> >>> If that still >>> stands, it would make verifing his claims somewhat simpler... >>> >> Only if it self-runs indefinitely. >> > > > OK, I picked a poor msg to illustrate my point. Try this one: > > > ---quote--- > [snip] > Have you even seen my motor? Because your questions make no sense. > There is no flywheel at all. > What the hell is wrong with you. > I will start with one charged cap 25V 5000uF that's all! The device will > constantly produce far more than what the cap can store. We will light a 4 > watt bulb for hours and hours. NO FLYWHEEL on earth that is started > using that cap could produce 4 watts. Hell if you want we will use a > drained cap and start EMILIE by hand to charge the cap. Then it will keep > running on it's own producing 4 watts or more! > > Do you understand! > Yup, I understand. Either he's lying or it's the most revolutionary thing anyone's ever seen, and it will set _everything_ on its head -- or get him murdered, if the wrong people start to believe him too soon. If anything, I'm _understating_ the significance of his claim. Why's the capacitor there at all, I wonder? It couldn't light a 4 watt bulb for 10 seconds, let alone "hours and hours" (however long that may actually be -- once again, it seems like there's a hint that something runs down after a while, which continues to seem odd to me: why is it "hours and hours" and not "indefinitely" or "forever"?). And if he's really got a working perpetual motion machine of the first kind, why's he wasting his time arguing about it on the internet? Surely there's some better way to apply it? And why does he write in the future tense rather than the past tense? Not a precise statement like "We have lit a 4 watt bulb for 17 hours" but "We _will_ light a 4 watt bulb for hours and hours". Not "We have started with a drained cap" but rather "We _will_ _use_ a drained cap..." Very odd phrasing. Future tense, in English, at least, usually means it hasn't been done yet, and may be used as an alternative to the subjunctive, meaning it's a contrary-to-fact situation .... or it could just be sloppy phrasing on his part, I suppose. Oh, well, whatever -- I'm just a pathological skeptic when it comes to perpetual motion of the first kind so I should recuse myself from all future discussions of the Sprain motor. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 20 22:00:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5L509fZ023122; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:00:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5L5009d022825; Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:00:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:59:59 -0700 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=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:Message-ID:Reply-To:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=fdxHaK+scqllk2PA1YJP7iJs9O2+He93WakdkOyHLSmssximqszQW1zK2EgDPdkSRjGkoH4k3S/NoIEA92s1GfyTWbqVlN1+hZkypFm/CAQWFv84JLsTqsq47Wb+d5qPwbkZmnjxEfWQeoa+dx8Pd/safagygYyPnyzdpt1nJt4= ; Message-ID: <05a801c694ef$8b1f3290$4b01a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> Reply-To: "Colin Quinney" From: "Colin Quinney" To: References: <001501c694ce$bd7eb790$9c027841@xptower> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:59:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05A4_01C694CE.03ABC380"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69206 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Vortex fields? (was: Re: [VO]:Re:[VO]: Please...Re and not Re) X-Suspected-Spam: billb friends5 Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_05A4_01C694CE.03ABC380 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_05A5_01C694CE.03ABC380" ------=_NextPart_001_05A5_01C694CE.03ABC380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHi Richard, I assume the "main tube" is also inside the test tank? I'm not sure I = have properly visualized the setup.=20 Are you suggesting the generation of spin fields ? .. Colin ---- Original Message -----=20 From: RC Macaulay=20 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 9:05 PM Subject: [VO]:Re:[VO]: Please...Re and not Re Colin wrote.. Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the antipodes? Howdy Colin, A tried to find my file on a corresponding article to the link below = but ! alas! couldn't locate. Iy had to do with some earth related = phenomena observed on the opposite side of the earth to the = hurricane.Hope this helps. We have attempted to understand how our vortex generator can in turn = produce sympathic vortexes adjacent to the main tube. These djacent = tubes arrive and dissipate spontaneously and can be horizontal, vertical = or diagonal within our plexiglas test tank. http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0506162 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_05A5_01C694CE.03ABC380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Hi Richard,
 
I assume the "main tube" is also inside the test tank? I'm not sure = I have=20 properly visualized the setup.
 
Are you suggesting the generation of spin fields ?  = ..
 
Colin
 
---- Original Message -----
From:=20 RC = Macaulay=20
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 = 9:05=20 PM
Subject: [VO]:Re:[VO]: = Please...Re and=20 not Re

Colin wrote..
 
Richard, to what "strange" events do ye speak of at the = antipodes?
 
 
Howdy Colin,
A tried to find my file on a corresponding article to the link = below but=20 ! alas! couldn't locate. Iy had to do with some earth related = phenomena=20 observed on the opposite side of the earth to the hurricane.Hope this=20 helps.
We have attempted to understand how our vortex generator can in = turn=20 produce  sympathic vortexes adjacent to the main tube. These = djacent=20 tubes arrive and dissipate spontaneously and can be horizontal, = vertical or=20 diagonal within our plexiglas test tank.
 
http://arxiv.org/abs/physic= s/0506162

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_05A5_01C694CE.03ABC380-- ------=_NextPart_000_05A4_01C694CE.03ABC380 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <05a301c694ef$8abb1990$4b01a8c0@colin5fc9e2583> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_05A4_01C694CE.03ABC380-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 19:32:01 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M2ViIK017225; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 19:31:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M2Vg4g017203; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 19:31:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 19:31:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001001c695a3$f8525130$68037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: [VO]:Re: Vortex fields Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:31:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C6957A.0EE698E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69252 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C6957A.0EE698E0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000D_01C6957A.0EE698E0" ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C6957A.0EE698E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankTerry mentioned " focus" the two magetrons. <><><><><> No, not exactly focus; but, create interference patterns between the=20 two sources. Unfortunately this doesn't work unless the two sources=20 are in sync. :-( Terry Howdy Terry, Magnetrons.. oops my spelling... Give us a suggestion on how you imagine = creating interference.. Interesting thought! I can send you pdf pics of the test rig.=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C6957A.0EE698E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Terry mentioned " focus" the two=20 magetrons.

<><><><><>

No, = not=20 exactly focus; but, create interference patterns between the
two=20 sources.  Unfortunately this doesn't work unless the two sources =
are in=20 sync.  :-(

Terry

Howdy Terry,

Magnetrons.. oops my spelling... Give us a suggestion on how you=20 imagine  creating interference.. Interesting thought!

 I can send you  pdf pics of the test rig. 

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000D_01C6957A.0EE698E0-- ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C6957A.0EE698E0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000b01c695a3$f7a40fd0$68037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C6957A.0EE698E0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 22:05:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M55cUv013547; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:05:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M55ZpK013517; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:05:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:05:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449A24EB.3070803@usfamily.net> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:04:43 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Harry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor overunity disputed References: <8C862E223B104DC-BF0-2CB9@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <0ac301c69517$7a4841a0$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69253 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: >(should be _Harry_ Paul Sprain according to the US 6954019 folders you gave us a link to: >http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ > > I visited this website, I was hoping for a diagram of the proposed motor, but I failed to notice one. Having seen many proposals for using permanent magnets of extract energy from the ZPE, I have yet to see one work. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 21 22:49:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M5mmsv009757; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:48:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M5mgav009711; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:48:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:48:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1F1873ED-5651-491B-9508-6F123078059A@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed To: Vortex-l From: Randy Souther Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:48:35 -0700 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69254 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Steven Jones and 9/11 conspiracy Status: O X-Status: http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm Randy From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 00:02:13 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M71rtC022332; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:01:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M71pdU022314; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:01:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:01:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060622070145652.9F3DD9000082@mwinf3207.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060622070146.00be2d18@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, 22 Jun 2006 08:01:46 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Henry Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69255 X-Loop: vortex-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 09:24 pm 21/06/2006 -0400, Stephen wrote: > > >Patrick Vessey wrote: [ covered previously] >> OK, I picked a poor msg to illustrate my point. Try this one: >> >> >> ---quote--- >> >[snip] >> Have you even seen my motor? Because your questions make no sense. >> There is no flywheel at all. >> What the hell is wrong with you. >> I will start with one charged cap 25V 5000uF that's all! The device will >> constantly produce far more than what the cap can store. We will light a 4 >> watt bulb for hours and hours. NO FLYWHEEL on earth that is started >> using that cap could produce 4 watts. Hell if you want we will use a >> drained cap and start EMILIE by hand to charge the cap. Then it will keep >> running on it's own producing 4 watts or more! >> >> Do you understand! >> >Yup, I understand. Either he's lying or it's the most revolutionary >thing anyone's ever seen, and it will set _everything_ on its head -- or >get him murdered, if the wrong people start to believe him too soon. There is another alternative, Stephen. He could just be making an honest mistake. There wouldn't be a lot of point in murdering him. Too many people know about it. Anyway, in principle, it's no different from the Finsrud machine and that has been around for yonks. >If anything, I'm _understating_ the significance of his claim. > >Why's the capacitor there at all, I wonder? It couldn't light a 4 watt >bulb for 10 seconds, let alone "hours and hours" (however long that may >actually be -- once again, it seems like there's a hint that something >runs down after a while, which continues to seem odd to me: why is it >"hours and hours" and not "indefinitely" or "forever"?). > >And if he's really got a working perpetual motion machine of the first >kind, why's he wasting his time arguing about it on the internet? >Surely there's some better way to apply it? If it works, it's no more a "perpetual motion machine of the first kind" than is a Crookes radiometer. It's just drawing its energy from a different scale of motion and is not different in essence from a windmill or water mill. >And why does he write in the future tense rather than the past tense? >Not a precise statement like "We have lit a 4 watt bulb for 17 hours" >but "We _will_ light a 4 watt bulb for hours and hours". Not "We have >started with a drained cap" but rather "We _will_ _use_ a drained >cap..." Very odd phrasing. Future tense, in English, at least, usually >means it hasn't been done yet, and may be used as an alternative to the >subjunctive, meaning it's a contrary-to-fact situation .... or it could >just be sloppy phrasing on his part, I suppose. I'm afraid you might have put your finger on it there. I asked the same question - though not at such length. ;-) > Oh, well, whatever -- I'm just a pathological > skeptic when it comes to perpetual motion of > the first kind so I should recuse myself from all > future discussions of the Sprain motor. Trouble is, Stephen, that you refuse to see a magnet as the equivalent of a small turbine at the bottom of a deep ocean. Education had prevented you from seeing flux as flow. People who have not been exposed to scientific dogma can see things scientists can't - like stones falling from the sky. If a member of the French scientific establishment had seen that a century or two ago, he would have dismissed it as an alcoholic induced hallucination. 8-) Thermodynamics recognises that: "There are no truly reversible processes in practice." [http://www.taftan.com/thermodynamics/REVERSIB.HTM] The $64,000 question is, does the Sprain Cycle consume more energy than it generates, or does it generate more energy than it consumes? Evidence from the Finsrud machine suggests that the latter is entirely possible. Let's hope it proves to be so. Cheers, Frank Grimer From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 00:23:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5M7NN6I001106; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:23:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5M7NMV9001082; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:23:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:23:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060622072317336.521129000089@mwinf3207.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Paul Sprain Magnetic Motor (Y! mails) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:26:14 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 In-Reply-To: <4499F140.2090300@pobox.com> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69256 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > And if he's really got a working perpetual motion machine of the first > kind, why's he wasting his time arguing about it on the internet? > Surely there's some better way to apply it? A couple of points: 1) It's obviously possible to spoof someone's identity via mail. Somebody needs to ask Paul if that really was him - although, as one who trudged through the increasingly vitriolic exchanges, I've little doubt that they were genuine. 2) There was little talk of anything else on Y! free_energy for a *long* time. All of the arguments that you could possibly imagine (including you point, above) were rehearsed there. If you're interested, I'd suggest that you read through the archives, starting from around 27 Feb this year. Patrick -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/372 - Release Date: 21/06/2006 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 03:51:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MApWRA009072; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 03:51:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MApS4M009033; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 03:51:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 03:51:28 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=X1DsaSkZ+aNvRwU6RHnRchFmvhQq5k1L+zt2H5qnqNVwygfBxQdkmeYSDcbuAPRS; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066422105112576@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: More Waterfuel videos Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 04:51:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94055d7494c9d04759b5aab8356a1b50860350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.26 Resent-Message-ID: <3HFKjC.A.CNC.wYnmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69257 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > > I am planning on trying to prove/disprove that part of the equation (pretreatment) soon. > A simple but meaningful test would be something like this: > Prepare several batches of 100 gram (or more) water samples - and then > heat for exactly one minute each in a microwave oven - then test for > temperature rise with a digital thermometer... > using several iterations of: > 1) untreated rainwater vs. > 2) treated rainwater vs > 3) untreated municipal water (control) vs > 4) treated municipal water. > > Many other types of water may be tested. BTW, Jones, Liquid Ammonia Autoionizes in a manner similar to water (2 H2O <---> H3O+ + OH-): 2 NH3 <---> NH4+ + NH2- Page 57 of this 83 page pdf: http://daq.state.nc.us/monitor/projects/nstatusreport.pdf shows Jones how much nitrogren (3 NO2 + H2O ---> HNO3 + NO ) is in his rainwater. Ammonia from the Sun, Jones? :-) Fred 4 NO + 2 O2 ----> 4 NO2 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Jones wrote:
>
> I am planning on trying to prove/disprove that part of the equation (pretreatment) soon.
> A simple but meaningful test would be something like this:
> Prepare several batches of 100 gram (or more) water samples - and then
> heat for exactly one minute each in a microwave oven - then test for
> temperature rise with a digital thermometer...
> using several iterations of: 
> 1) untreated rainwater vs.
> 2) treated rainwater vs
> 3) untreated municipal water (control) vs
> 4) treated municipal water.
>
> Many other types of water may be tested.
 
BTW, Jones, Liquid Ammonia Autoionizes in a manner
similar to water (2 H2O <---> H3O+ + OH-):
 
2 NH3 <---> NH4+ + NH2-
 
Page 57 of this 83 page pdf:
 
shows Jones how much nitrogren
(3 NO2 + H2O ---> HNO3 + NO )  is in his rainwater. 
 
Ammonia from the Sun, Jones?   :-)
 
 
 
 
Fred
 
4 NO + 2 O2 ----> 4 NO2
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 05:03:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MC2tBE015786; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:02:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MC2rvk015764; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:02:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:02:53 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=CO5M0mh7T1MFqxit1igTyezima++N2rw6GA2KPWnfszBIPIjpIacQSA0shggaA37; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006642212221952@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: [Vo]: Re: More Waterfuel videos Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:02:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402bc17e638e4aaa521f91e20fe1019817350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.147 Resent-Message-ID: <7MZo.A.M2D.sbomEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69258 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A Fantastic Web Site with great pictures etc. The Sun: http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xiii/chap13.html H. THE SOLAR WIND AND THE SUN'S MAGNETIC FIELD "The solar corona is an extremely thin but intensely hot region surrounding the Sun. The extreme heat produces two effects. The first is that atoms tend to become ionized; that is, one or more electrons surrounding the nucleus tend to be ripped away and sent off on their own through space, leaving behind a positively charged atom. The second is that the coronal gases possess too much thermal energy to be constrained by the Sun's gravitational field, and they are literally blown away into the surrounding space. This outward flow of charged particles is known as the solar wind. In a very real sense, the solar wind is an extension of the corona. Its ionized gases are continually expanding outward from the Sun, and so must be replenished from the transition region below. The exact mechanism by which this replenishment occurs remains one the Sun's mysteries, however." Interactions Beyween The Sun And Earth: http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xiv/chap14.html The Fate of The Earth, The Impact of Mankind: http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xvi/chap16.html " There is no shortage of suggestions. In recent decades the public has been bombarded with warnings of imminent disaster from scientists and environmentalists alike to the point that many are weary of the constant doomsaying. In addition, for many who live in the industrialized countries, the quality of life does not appear to have suffered. Where it has, it is often perceived as a local problem." http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/news-release/releases/2001/01-74.htm "When the sun's protons hit the atmosphere they break up molecules of nitrogen gas and water vapor. When nitrogen gas molecules split apart, they can create molecules, called nitrogen oxides, which can last several weeks to months depending on where they end up in the atmosphere. Once formed, the nitrogen oxides react quickly with ozone and reduce its amounts. When atmospheric winds blow them down into the middle stratosphere, they can stay there for months, and continue to keep ozone at a reduced level. Protons similarly affect water vapor molecules by breaking them up into forms where they react with ozone. However, these molecules, called hydrogen oxides, only last during the time period of the solar proton event. These short-term effects of hydrogen oxides can destroy up to 70 percent of the ozone in the middle mesosphere. At the same time, longer-term ozone loss caused by nitrogen oxides destroys a maximum of about nine percent of the ozone in the upper stratosphere. Only a few percent of total ozone is in the mesosphere and upper stratosphere with over 80 percent in the middle and lower stratosphere. "If you look at the total atmospheric column, from your head on up to the top of the atmosphere, this solar proton event depleted less than one percent of the total ozone in the Northern Hemisphere," Jackman said. While impacts to humans are minimal, the findings are important scientifically." ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A Fantastic Web Site with great pictures etc.

The Sun:

http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xiii/chap13.html

H. THE SOLAR WIND AND THE SUN'S MAGNETIC FIELD

"The solar corona is an extremely thin but intensely hot region surrounding the Sun. The extreme heat produces two effects. The first is that atoms tend to become ionized; that is, one or more electrons surrounding the nucleus tend to be ripped away and sent off on their own through space, leaving behind a positively charged atom. The second is that the coronal gases possess too much thermal energy to be constrained by the Sun's gravitational field, and they are literally blown away into the surrounding space. This outward flow of charged particles is known as the solar wind.

In a very real sense, the solar wind is an extension of the corona. Its ionized gases are continually expanding outward from the Sun, and so must be replenished from the transition region below. The exact mechanism by which this replenishment occurs remains one the Sun's mysteries, however."

Interactions Beyween The Sun And Earth:

http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xiv/chap14.html

The Fate of The Earth, The Impact of Mankind:

http://mac01.eps.pitt.edu/harbbook/c_xvi/chap16.html

" There is no shortage of suggestions. In recent decades the public has been bombarded with warnings of imminent disaster from scientists and environmentalists alike to the point that many are weary of the constant doomsaying. In addition, for many who live in the industrialized countries, the quality of life does not appear to have suffered. Where it has, it is often perceived as a local problem."

 
"When the sun's protons hit the atmosphere they break up molecules of nitrogen gas and water vapor. When nitrogen gas molecules split apart, they can create molecules, called nitrogen oxides, which can last several weeks to months depending on where they end up in the atmosphere. Once formed, the nitrogen oxides react quickly with ozone and reduce its amounts. When atmospheric winds blow them down into the middle stratosphere, they can stay there for months, and continue to keep ozone at a reduced level.

Protons similarly affect water vapor molecules by breaking them up into forms where they react with ozone. However, these molecules, called hydrogen oxides, only last during the time period of the solar proton event. These short-term effects of hydrogen oxides can destroy up to 70 percent of the ozone in the middle mesosphere. At the same time, longer-term ozone loss caused by nitrogen oxides destroys a maximum of about nine percent of the ozone in the upper stratosphere. Only a few percent of total ozone is in the mesosphere and upper stratosphere with over 80 percent in the middle and lower stratosphere.

"If you look at the total atmospheric column, from your head on up to the top of the atmosphere, this solar proton event depleted less than one percent of the total ozone in the Northern Hemisphere," Jackman said.

While impacts to humans are minimal, the findings are important scientifically."

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 06:11:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MDAJ59017104; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:11:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MCemRr032157; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:40:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:40:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:25:12 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8640E0B34780F-D20-EDD@mblkn-m11.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <001001c695a3$f8525130$68037841@xptower> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <001001c695a3$f8525130$68037841@xptower> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [VO]:Re: Vortex fields Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5MCeg2c032097 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69259 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay Give us a suggestion on how you imagine  creating interference.. Interesting thought! <><><><><> If you had two synchronous sources of energy you could have them interfere constructively (combine) by adjusting the distance between them. However, I know of no way to synchronize magnetrons that are not designed to do so. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 08:36:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MFadEk018445; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:36:39 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MFab1D018430; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:36:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:36:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,166,1149480000"; d="scan'208"; a="514950131:sNHT24000764" Message-ID: <382525887.1150990594626.JavaMail.root@fepweb01> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 8:36:34 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69260 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Pensioner's UFO plans scuppered Status: O X-Status: Vorts, See: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/216/216371_pensioners_ufo_plans_scuppered.html or http://tinyurl.com/lb449 Worth commenting on? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 08:38:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MFbeIK019041; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:37:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MFbcX1019020; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:37:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:37:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:37:13 -0400 From: George Holz Subject: Re: [Vo]: Read it again To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <001101c69611$bbe70dd0$6501a8c0@GEH> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <44983F36.5060204@pobox.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69261 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: > A "successful" exchange in a science group is, IMHO, one in which I > learn something. > > This one's been successful ;-) Ditto! > > > Remember, E and B fields (apparently!) follow the law of > > > superposition, which means overlapping fields themselves don't > > > interact; they just sum. > > > > They really don't just sum, it's more complex than that in real > > geometries with real materials, mu and saturation. Thats why we need > > finite element programs. > > Um ... As I learned E&M ... and this is just quoting from Griffiths, I > sure can't claim to have proved this experimentally -- both E and B > fields obey superposition perfectly, and the "pure" form of Maxwell's > equations holds everywhere, inside matter as well as outside. The > _apparently_ different equations we get in matter -- with D vs E and H > vs B and with funky values for mu and strange saturation effects -- > _just_ result from the superposition of E and B fields induced in the > matter as a result of the effect of the externally applied fields. They > can come from tiny current loops, or from rotated/stretched electric > dipoles, but either way it's actually an additional field associated > with the matter which is added to the applied field. Or so say the > textbooks I've read. Ok, I agree that superposition holds as long as all the materials present are operating in linear ranges. We should keep in mind however that if any material in the system is significantly nonlinear then the entire problem should be considered nonlinear and superposition no longer holds. Fortunately, the small nonlinear effects in diamagnetic and paramagnetic materials can normally be ignored. Unfortunately, most of the useful magnetic materials are highly nonlinear at fields where they are commonly used. Nonlinear materials also cause interactions between orthogonal fields. The separation of the magnetic field into B and H components as is done in all of the texts can also be misleading. There is really only one field that is measurable at any point in space. We have no way to separate out that part which is due to material dipoles from that part which is caused by current carrying coils. Standard texts only consider what I call the "available magnetic energy" which corresponds to the energy which can be recovered by a coil from an excited soft magnetic material. The energy inside high mu materials is however just as real even though it is mostly due to internal dipoles. Remember that essentially all of the space inside materials has mu equal to mu_zero and that this real energy can be 10^6 times larger than the applied exciting energy. > > An electron in a B field has a magnetic dipole field, and unless > Wikipedia got it totally wrong, the strength of the electron's dipole is > independent of the strength of the external field. Correct as far as we can measure and suggestive of some form of energy source within electrons. ZPE? > > If my mental picture is right, then a free electron's dipole must be > aligned with the external field (parallel or antiparallel). This is experimentally observed but is something that I find extremely strange. Although one of the orientations is a true stable equilibrium the other should be an unstable equlibrium and the dipole should flip with any pertubation. Spin must come in here somehow but I don't see quite how. > > But in that case an electron in a non-uniform B field must feel a force, > proportional to the gradient of the field ('cause that's what magnetic > dipoles _do_, and besides, if the electron sourced a dipole field but > didn't feel a force as a result of being immersed in somebody else's > dipole field we'd violate conservation of linear momentum which would be > unfortunate). > > But then if we let the electron go in a non-uniform B field it'll > accelerate, which means something did work on it; it gained kinetic energy. > > Where'd the energy come from? I have no idea. Since the force on the > electron depends on whether it's spin-up or spin-down there's certainly > no simple "potential-gradient" model one can use here, either. > > Interesting. There must be something wrong with this picture, but I > don't know what. :-) The electrons in macroscopic magnets source and sink energy so I don't have any problem with that here. Perhaps the spin of the electrons needs to be considered to apply the relativistic model of magnetics here. I always find it more intuitive to apply magnetic energy considerations in calculating magnetic forces. The answers always seem to come out right even though the relativistic model holds that magnetic fields do no work on charged particles. George Holz From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 09:08:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MG8QC6005413; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:08:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MG8Pqj005404; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:08:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:08:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060622115545.0400fea8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:08:26 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Pensioner's UFO plans scuppered In-Reply-To: <382525887.1150990594626.JavaMail.root@fepweb01> References: <382525887.1150990594626.JavaMail.root@fepweb01> 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/69262 X-Loop: vortex-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 agree with the judge and the Patent Office, which "demanded to see a working model." People who make this kind of claim are obliged to prove it, unless they have some legitimate excuse. For example, if a prototype would cost millions of dollars, the inventor cannot be expected to make one, but the rest of us cannot be expected to believe him, either. That is a tough situation, making it hard to be fair to the inventor. In this case, based on a cursory description of the gadget, I suppose it would be easy to build a demonstration prototype, or pay someone a few thousand dollars to fabricate one. The inventor should be willing to do this, if he believes the gadget will work. Along the same lines, a person who has invented a magnetic motor should be willing to do some first principle physics demonstrations to prove to observers that it is producing energy. Perhaps for some reason the magnetic motor cannot self-sustain at this stage. But I do not think we are moving the goal posts unreasonably when we ask for something along the lines Grimer and I discussed yesterday; i.e., calibrating with an ordinary electric motor, or: "A simple string and pulley system with a falling weight would show how much windage and friction there was and the energy needed to keep it going for three hours could be easily calculated." If there is a reason why these particular tests cannot be done, the inventor should describe the reason and try to come up with something similar that will satisfy reasonable demands for proof. It is in the inventor's own best interests to do so, because if he is mistaken, and the gadget is not producing energy, he is wasting his time. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 09:21:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MGL02e013941; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:21:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MGKwiG013917; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:20:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:20:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001101c69617$cfaf1550$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:20:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C695ED.CE5CE4E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <4-d7aD.A.QZD.pNsmEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69263 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [VO];Re: Vortex fields Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C695ED.CE5CE4E0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000E_01C695ED.CE5FF220" ------=_NextPart_001_000E_01C695ED.CE5FF220 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank Richard wrote.. Give us a suggestion on how you imagine creating=20 interference.. Interesting thought! <><><><><> If you had two synchronous sources of energy you could have them=20 interfere constructively (combine) by adjusting the distance between=20 them. However, I know of no way to synchronize magnetrons that are not=20 designed to do so. Terry Howdy Terry, Thanks Terry, we have been scratching our head ever since Jones Beens = suggested we look into aiming microwave energy into the water vortex = created by our rotational speed distributor. Our first thought was to = attempt to aim the microwave energy down a hollow shaft to the vortex. = BUT ! Alas!. As Pancho Villa's sidekicks learned to their dismay, when = free firing a Gatling gun one must anchor the mount or expect friendly = fire casualties. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000E_01C695ED.CE5FF220 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
 
Richard wrote..
Give us a suggestion on how you imagine creating
interference.. = Interesting = thought!

<><><><><>

If=20 you had two synchronous sources of energy you could have them =
interfere=20 constructively (combine) by adjusting the distance between =
them. =20 However, I know of no way to synchronize magnetrons that are not =
designed to=20 do so.

Terry

Howdy Terry,

Thanks Terry, we have been scratching our head ever since Jones Beens = suggested we look into aiming microwave energy into the water vortex = created by=20 our rotational speed distributor. Our first thought was to attempt to = aim the=20 microwave energy down a hollow shaft to the vortex. BUT ! Alas!. As = Pancho=20 Villa's sidekicks learned to their dismay, when free firing a = Gatling gun=20 one must anchor the mount or expect friendly fire casualties.

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000E_01C695ED.CE5FF220-- ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C695ED.CE5CE4E0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000c01c69617$b704ff10$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C695ED.CE5CE4E0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 09:32:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MGW58O020021; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:32:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MGW2GB020001; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:32:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:32:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006f01c69619$61cd2160$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <44983F36.5060204@pobox.com> <001101c69611$bbe70dd0$6501a8c0@GEH> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:31:57 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69264 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Read it again Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: George Holz & Stephen Lawrence > If my mental picture is right, then a free electron's dipole > must be > aligned with the external field (parallel or antiparallel). This is experimentally observed but is something that I find extremely strange. Although one of the orientations is a true stable equilibrium the other should be an unstable equilibrium and the dipole should flip with any perturbation. Spin must come in here somehow but I don't see quite how. Eight? Aha ... maybe the answer is "eight" in the sense of QM (excuse this comment from the peanut gallery, as this is an interesting thread) - aren't you assuming in that 'mental picture' that the electron dipole is a result of classical spin - when it could just as well be the "figure eight" type looping from the QM model ? And going much further afield ... 'field' being the operative word, does the honeybee routinely use QM principles in the insect's characteristic "figure eight" type looping (performed to communicate a food source to other bees)? http://www.physics.helsinki.fi/~matpitka/honey.html One of those synchronicity things - I happened to be reading the honeybee thing when this post came in... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 11:58:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5MIw5kV030182; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:58:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5MIw4ME030160; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:58:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:58:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449AE826.3060704@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:57:42 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Read it again References: <29c785c40606151133y16e9870aq5b051902d798d4ca@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060615143954.03eab140@mindspring.com> <8C85ED1661C0C1B-163C-2431@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <4491CCE0.2080301@pobox.com> <017f01c691a6$d8fa2a70$6501a8c0@GEH> <44935DCA.1020808@pobox.com> <01ad01c691c7$9f0bd4f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <4493F4E6.9080902@pobox.com> <002a01c69283$8c029b70$6501a8c0@GEH> <4494C6C2.70204@pobox.com> <005f01c693b7$f467f630$6501a8c0@GEH> <4496DD1F.7040603@pobox.com> <012301c693f9$281b85f0$6501a8c0@GEH> <44983F36.5060204@pobox.com> <001101c69611$bbe70dd0$6501a8c0@GEH> <006f01c69619$61cd2160$6401a8c0@NuDell> In-Reply-To: <006f01c69619$61cd2160$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69265 X-Loop: vortex-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: > ----- Original Message ----- From: George Holz & Stephen Lawrence > > > If my mental picture is right, then a free electron's dipole must > > be aligned with the external field (parallel or antiparallel). > > This is experimentally observed but is something that I find > extremely strange. Although one of the orientations is a true stable > equilibrium the other should be an unstable equilibrium and the > dipole should flip with any perturbation. Spin must come in here > somehow but I don't see quite how. > > Eight? > > Aha ... maybe the answer is "eight" in the sense of QM (excuse this > comment from the peanut gallery, as this is an interesting thread) - > aren't you assuming in that 'mental picture' that the electron dipole > is a result of classical spin - when it could just as well be the > "figure eight" type looping from the QM model ? I was assuming no such thing -- my mental picture is not nearly that sophisticated in this case! All I was assuming was that the electron has just 2 so-called spin states, spin-up and spin-down, and that its dipole is connected to its so-called spin states, and I was assuming that because ... the textbooks say so. I've actually read some sufficiently confusing things about so-called "spin" states that I would not even hazard a guess as to what its so-called "spin" "really" is! :-) But, moving along, if it's got just two states, and those states are referenced to a vector field in 3-space, then they've got to be parallel and antiparallel to the vector field. If it's got a crosswise state versus the field, then, in 3-dimensional space, it could have an infinite number of possible "spin states" -- all rotations of its "spin axis" with the direction of the B field. It doesn't, so its dipole axis must be aligned to the B field. Deep reasoning here, huh... not! As to those "confusing things" I've read about spin -- my understanding is that the "spin" terminology is actually related to how far around you have to "spin" the particle before it gets back to its original state. In other words, it's an expression of the particle's symmetry rather than a statement of what the particle is doing. In this case it happens to be tied to a magnetic dipole moment, and since it's a charged particle that makes it _seem_ like it must also refer to some internal rotation of the particle -- but since electrons are apparently point particles, there's no way any physical "spin" of the electron could produce a finite B field anyway, AFAICS... Spin 1/2 particles act like little tops, but it's not clear they really are. Spin 1 particles don't act like tops. And spin 2 particles are just plain weird. > And going much further afield ... 'field' being the operative word, > does the honeybee routinely use QM principles in the insect's > characteristic "figure eight" type looping (performed to communicate > a food source to other bees)? > http://www.physics.helsinki.fi/~matpitka/honey.html When bees do the dance outside the hive, the other bees watch them and then act on what they just saw. But ... when bees do the dance _inside_ the hive, how do the other bees know what they're doing? It's _dark_ inside the hive, after all. Just one of those questions... > > One of those synchronicity things - I happened to be reading the > honeybee thing when this post came in... > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 20:33:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N3XWBf025308; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:33:33 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N3XUcI025285; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:33:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:33:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.18341261"; Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:16:40 +0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <26751576.20060622221640@eskimo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PeOple are different; we care fOr all Of them Thread-Index: FXcCf6eVqf6FZLwUrNIE5Iww0u8ND1== From: "Al" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Return-Path: billb@eskimo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: eskimo.com, Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:16:40 +0500 X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69266 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: PeOple are different; we care fOr all Of them Status: RO X-Status: ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.18341261 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.18341261" ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.18341261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 l2YkHpbeeX369LPM4TDdx3prRvPMVMGcbUdf9LBFQxx9YJuz4skS3qPhBvhgsetjoeNVvyomyObR HNNKRdoa6hiMn1HDOJ8UjE8jMpJSc5oXEgYXjVEC7UelEAldubBU0EW3eWGMwTvJoJGRogFjhplOUL3 0Z0C4lB8BYcAK8tQP3kPh3V3IFVIKkBePuxx8ZW9ifrLBseJQMxgOR3TmuIGcbvzA17lws zrdsaPRvKUMC6LeXhLoodt4eWQZQ3mX1NSRc6DgPn5acYGVj1LAkX94slgVb5xMMmNT9PqS S6JOeqRBliIxVS1q7poKjnxi9flL9YRA8kZXlpR30gXsWUplVK9XGKrmGJ1aiJHJrI8jIjAq BHz0A3WZbsukeK0xaitjI2NNsggEaFfn5rXFEIe3qrvkZzTuao3DJLwXXtCqIlaETbBfXAcJX4nae RcL6d69tyTDzpVLkAmpdaP4HmnL33enxvfGjZtM0UFMWsCpTPWeuhTi35Xgfp0a51s0UnqWwHKdtxh zs3wWPMmYQCIwmnEFeaxGbhOXV5FOBdimJhSmJwoFnfXdAhxRiTVqacZlMRJSjLHDW12jyjXz MNhudc4YMbKBjZeX7OwM7nMAJlrAhzQw1tqqXMW3pRX4MaDJB874zrzbMbh7jNaAhr43M8LRKV OyCgBC0SYZi04G35Ubey2M3CTsGNZxJCXXzm8DPD9jxoIlv6fI6DrOIT2PvafmOO7E77rYNVJjS ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.18341261 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= /span>

l2YkHpbeeX369LPM4TDdx3prRvPMVMGcbUdf9LBFQxx9YJuz4skS3qPhBvhgsetjoeNVvyomyObR
HNNKRdoa6hiMn1HDOJ8UjE8jMpJSc5oXEgYXjVEC7UelEAldubBU0EW3eWGMwTvJoJGRogFjhplOUL3
0Z0C4lB8BYcAK8tQP3kPh3V3IFVIKkBePuxx8ZW9ifrLBseJQMxgOR3TmuIGcbvzA17lws
zrdsaPRvKUMC6LeXhLoodt4eWQZQ3mX1NSRc6DgPn5acYGVj1LAkX94slgVb5xMMmNT9PqS
S6JOeqRBliIxVS1q7poKjnxi9flL9YRA8kZXlpR30gXsWUplVK9XGKrmGJ1aiJHJrI8jIjAq
BHz0A3WZbsukeK0xaitjI2NNsggEaFfn5rXFEIe3qrvkZzTuao3DJLwXXtCqIlaETbBfXAcJX4nae
RcL6d69tyTDzpVLkAmpdaP4HmnL33enxvfGjZtM0UFMWsCpTPWeuhTi35Xgfp0a51s0UnqWwHKdtxh
zs3wWPMmYQCIwmnEFeaxGbhOXV5FOBdimJhSmJwoFnfXdAhxRiTVqacZlMRJSjLHDW12jyjXz
MNhudc4YMbKBjZeX7OwM7nMAJlrAhzQw1tqqXMW3pRX4MaDJB874zrzbMbh7jNaAhr43M8LRKV
OyCgBC0SYZi04G35Ubey2M3CTsGNZxJCXXzm8DPD9jxoIlv6fI6DrOIT2PvafmOO7E77rYNVJjS
------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.18341261-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.18341261 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image270.gif" Content-ID: Content-Description: image270.gif Content-Location: image270.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODdhrQGaACIAACwAAAAArQGaAIIAAAD4+PgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/xi63P4w ykmrvTjrzbv/YCiOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK7vfO//wKBwSCwaj8ikcslsOp/QqHRKrVqv 2Kx2y+16v+CweEwum8/otHrNbrvf8Lh8Tq/b7/i8fs/v+/+AgYKDhIUzAA6ICooMAI6MFpCG k5SNiRKMkhOalZ2EmpwLmRihnqZ+oKKXi6qOoq6sp7KBqbGWAZCuiqO4s76oj8GqDcG8u8Ol v8pxtb3Et5LGy9N2zc3O0cjU23LWq87gtsnc5GfexI+3jbDh5e7v8PHy8/T19vf4+fr7/P3+ /wADChxIsKDBgwgTKlzIsKHDhxAjSpxIsaLFixgzatzIsf+jx48gQ4ocSbKkyZMoU6pcyZKa sGFwxsFMxC6FzAc3n30byasdn1A5a+TsubJn0G4Qjh6KNFOl0XXoMtWsuU4qVXaIqIazCvOY 1qxZoeGKli4qVqxjk2odK03Xq6lQzYaF2+uqUoRPY0nDpk0nX3F6j6n7S3hXWHRpjQkGB1Sd YZ+E+2IDW7irLceLHzO+TPGlXsmLAfvNLJro59J9a5HevDWp49Ov/aaGvRdy3sqsLXLyehvt 2tq8LevMW3vV6uKNhZcyvSjX6dV81+YGLlo3zuajhy8HjT02YuWSjaOGDbk1+eyun9NGlqz3 +PIQd7/Plhv8+vqvYhcfPv9y8vf/32ynHm4EekfdZBjJ11wubpW1oFpWMXibbGxVFRp/rBnl GYUOtudWVWL9tSFX11UH3YctiXBXiXmsWIKLKbLoAYxm0KhijDd+YGMZO+qIY44z/kSDgz8W aeSRSCap5JKfbBiFghT0uNMKUmZQZZBUCiLTlU21MNQJSsHIJVNDdgnkmGRsCaYMX5oQZgdo RimUmSEwJ2QrhnU4CiyUxVWMWXi+Zd+CDAJqaF0kvgVdWmzxKV2H04Ho3IM47UlWVIR+h6hc m4LYKU15NngpK2fFuUSh9Qn2IZ/cBYjdca1mKJx+h7kX6a0K7jmrVyHm2t2BJwZmW36yMnoO Y7Amdl6N/wbalyx+4wWLHIDnqBres965+tlcztLpE7Ct7gUluJzdWqyI5aIxaaRo6cdouvs9 Ne2n6w5KLYAz/QYet9HGRaGs7eLWJ3y4xrrrvsxJl2az3TWl2JT4ynttw/5pS19k2HZ5LK+H TQelxuyh9/Bg2goMsokhk+ytGOvaenGwFqNXsXnzumvzfROW63LLxP5Lrsk4YzLooij3V96F YfxpboWcaVivohpfhZmeEn4FKaaKRihoV4+uOuuDRBHpqccSIjpVwCw6XZeZRPaGNtMEL2Oq j1zMHYHdTgGBdw57Q8wkmT70bYPg//5dAeGk1F2m4Yw37vjjkEcuuTLXFHLlx/93q6jwSU+3 uMkF/yHut5wf2XnHOEGFfsOKottz4dXfKiupypQ2PPC7FI99O6llN7odXWafnc7tiU4NIajC ++mkRh2fCwplbdGeLIoZZ9j8r0XfDfPRxIpbItKRkfxs666/XN1sxY7br/Mxx35f3JPmfPCy IaadHr7pbmQ+tNamb/+5vAtU+/4nP9lsT2Yaup++8sezYYGkWifrH7IUGLFRETBz70Nd/Uxn K7b5jE4NxBxHIKizAU3wgsYS2cnCdzPTzQ9a2buY+EpmwFiRrx67EZ5qxEE97dWqVqAaG9bg o7Z8Ie9QqivNo2qHKcwNj4k39IiLokgKKk4uCVM0ghX/r3iELHIxIWHa3BfHSMYymvGMaEwj y5SWBcJtcW5bHEHqxKiBNm3NSji4SxxJF7cX8Q1OFJyCHf14ONqBLo911OLK3PRHDiRRCoMk wSBpZMUGVoiN/oIb9KDmKeI974l2uU7AgmMpmggQbljb3fJy56i2CUOVQEnepixoyjuislG2 JFSidpfLT9UuVBtrV9jsFsLz9SpkXotWx8AnFfyxynqye+ZzgOhAzRRwfAqs3vQ2ST8Jbk+C NRSWr75zIAaij0Dgk+PNPKhCdAWtQPNLWLhMCLR0ss88LQTh0KbkPXjec14a7JbM9jkzURat nGvaVefc505stoOXB8UdQfsX/793PQ+FGIsZ8BAYwEoJNDgDxFYz7wfAgRoNn5eAWVvQFDaH sdNm3qyg0JSIwXqSRzP6bGdGRVa5eKrJfwgK5M8eStL9ZOukCyVVRIWFgpY27aXTe2f47ESc FUYVneFR2VBVc0CGufCqRAvqVguHT3vKM4OGjOFJJSm2l7TteHekqCv5JUSG3dJEZZGrXUwj NkEtM2seLd4ji2dLUNKma8jqnS6ZyKG3NRGBycyffyLrmb5eYY9ewCyQWKJZxVWhs/kAbRut IFp8lJYKlm1CatXI2ta69rWwje3kejqIy8mopjqiI0mSWo3PAc6kbNrAaSm3yDkEtJD/m1Mi S9e0Ufum9HpPBOHZTinRrpXyGbLEJHZ5hsk/Ea+XiYWrhRRrrFUmqKzGTMxf18ZOca3XqA+7 KFYx8c1srg9D4+TnWjsitfehr586pajB7ktQ+G0wpwXDoIC4Z6/iWief+CXwRLdL3QZD2MA2 DKTH7EvDwRi1jxUhoftimrsJZ1Ki6wzwIiuaXrVK74PmtDCIOxNS8aAzidZUsU5rLFkXM3hp DrRqUTPc44nksGo25spXV0VNIaYWdiV7a9T2ykGfJufJKBIfky15RS8SQbeyHa1wFRnmhY25 zPcI43DRzOY2u/nNcI6znOdM5zrb+c54zrOe98znPvv5z4AONEESAAA7 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.18341261-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 22 21:14:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N4ENre008826; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:14:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N4EMeE008802; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:14:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:14:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.35364295"; Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:38:07 -1100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <36094525.20060622223807@eskimo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Amazing and cheap Online pharm@cy.org Thread-Index: JFvsXxup5KAjYu80k3451quqAHHtye== From: "Jerri" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Return-Path: billb@eskimo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: eskimo.com, Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:38:07 -1100 X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: <3DW06.A.YJC.dq2mEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69267 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: RO X-Status: ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.35364295 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.35364295" ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.35364295 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 vgqWyh1dYIIh6LByeS03SZl1Hf6gheQYpT2Hd9jp76o4KDQ2gkU9xXZSV62jcM7KXgIfWkg0pHy4 wqstmnWBjEtxjO5vTNiovQzFlN0BZqcuRNJ3WKpXNO02TlTaTLUAI38oSG7MX2j15U7scunYKB80OKP sW2z2tMtZLclxwfTCiwlev3P1vd4XxHoEbcApkxDSmIc6mpaXhXrh78xUSclHxyRquZVEi 1JwikPTYnR0SyiS0vTCUqWgzVm2nO9MiKrfX2c3FWa0TLJqZgqAJTf7eECHVefd8w3f0UIg Ji2qAMEQRUS5FmcUTBJI764vtBesMbCLaqXiYD8RSTXmlwSJJqYEs3cHiwjjMnLFQ530CZ0y acw9caz1DAKpzqGkGv6pBdi96etx8Ix80ARMA8d7Ad6XlQMOLtm771saQlSJoMS1Hrt7e2ZU0Z7cB hBVZQw0rcaLanBWR2FW2FAn3KTrNft89nRfyLLP68WY4V7sPr8FRAee08sikZ1oE3ACdlc7dg2TXaE Yb4mp6B02Lc2rcmbfaiCHRAPqacQUaoOoVt4Dn9qvJbCpVRoE94yDiZhyIgDsqjlrLgLjQYRu bWzdTeshTCmw2oB3XTEIYOTg3lKDs3DGeoPq3PmJ04uGJ6aDfoxwLGdF42mXEZ9gjojeW91gME pUAba6GVvsBjhZzrXFZVYiZELlLfx4sQClPj1p540JbMttDrZYyu5lb3K1Ggo5bUkpjCM1erEwC ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.35364295 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= /span>

vgqWyh1dYIIh6LByeS03SZl1Hf6gheQYpT2Hd9jp76o4KDQ2gkU9xXZSV62jcM7KXgIfWkg0pHy4
wqstmnWBjEtxjO5vTNiovQzFlN0BZqcuRNJ3WKpXNO02TlTaTLUAI38oSG7MX2j15U7scunYKB80OKP
sW2z2tMtZLclxwfTCiwlev3P1vd4XxHoEbcApkxDSmIc6mpaXhXrh78xUSclHxyRquZVEi
1JwikPTYnR0SyiS0vTCUqWgzVm2nO9MiKrfX2c3FWa0TLJqZgqAJTf7eECHVefd8w3f0UIg
Ji2qAMEQRUS5FmcUTBJI764vtBesMbCLaqXiYD8RSTXmlwSJJqYEs3cHiwjjMnLFQ530CZ0y
acw9caz1DAKpzqGkGv6pBdi96etx8Ix80ARMA8d7Ad6XlQMOLtm771saQlSJoMS1Hrt7e2ZU0Z7cB
hBVZQw0rcaLanBWR2FW2FAn3KTrNft89nRfyLLP68WY4V7sPr8FRAee08sikZ1oE3ACdlc7dg2TXaE
Yb4mp6B02Lc2rcmbfaiCHRAPqacQUaoOoVt4Dn9qvJbCpVRoE94yDiZhyIgDsqjlrLgLjQYRu
bWzdTeshTCmw2oB3XTEIYOTg3lKDs3DGeoPq3PmJ04uGJ6aDfoxwLGdF42mXEZ9gjojeW91gME
pUAba6GVvsBjhZzrXFZVYiZELlLfx4sQClPj1p540JbMttDrZYyu5lb3K1Ggo5bUkpjCM1erEwC
------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.35364295-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.35364295 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image386.gif" Content-ID: Content-Description: image386.gif Content-Location: image386.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODdhygGPACIAACwAAAAAygGPAIIAAAD4+PgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/xi63P4w ykmrvTjrzbv/YCiOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK7vfO//wKBwSCwaj8ikcslsOp/QqHRKrVqv 2Kx2y+16v+CweEwum8/otHrNbrvf8Lh8Tq/b7/i8fs/vEwEOgAGCMIRKAIiGFogeiiKODImQ I4yDgpITk35Cjppgng2VCqIUoBWmmQ+TpKKoo6mvsbIQrps6nWm1uIsgtbSqv6ELurCDw5HF tn+Bs8yJo6zPxsjUyNLGlZjD15at3dCswquzipiA2dza2NHsl9zrhOPq2+iMhueS79PVzcpA u55axSO3r1mngZaOKbxHMGGsXcfGFYTobSG1igwn9nM4Tf8ipIwIHyoUVsrfn3zZJGTceGmk y4YrOwKzSJOkzJkxZcVsyazmTZv8ePb8OFPjPojJTP4AqDJoJGkhXxq9l29bqKpTiwolmfPo U3WkpmLlyPJisFXlXApNy0tpEKYRdo4cSBTo1oBR1W7EJlWk1Kh49RYMlBfmWZUhQb4k5vbf 0KaCV54rGpnf4Z5+nVn2+lcwZMWw6urEbGqtWYMXfDUu9Diu06N0KUPzCTrzz9vWnurWSfF1 7dt3y86l2rd2PNMcVK92AXewUd6T+zrHl3ee9Wsgw7LU96z3V6oVoYM/ztbgO+7Y6/0sj5ns ciTKk0LmEf+9XftL6rtuSx9/o83//n2h3Xw5DBigBvodqOCCDDbo4IMQRijhhBRWaOGFGGao 4YYcdujhhyCGKOKIJJZo4okopqjiiiy26OKLMMYo44w01mjjjTjmqOOOPPbo449ABmkGSoXl wdhVzH2gnGhCIthagEgtc4p0TSb3pH9RDuFKkVVayRU9430npirYfQNmRNqxBZZZYVEHjkXp 2HNVPXQdZOCa8Lz5Spng2DkZn27S41yQcP0W3HORIZTdYuKc9tBHx9GEkVU2LdoeUjwJtJCi DVUzKUdrJRgjkbThRBmmhpVaaaq2veaXoaQ5SqBwcmWF6GiSyioqjJq4c52m36Wpa58pdWbb oRKlCuuq/z4RNmCbnQL36Dy4vjpsl4O2OheSe1XWbLQReatttJle66mszJKp6rHjnpvrulX2 KhytySB7KjCAsXrfu+ymi5tnl9UKGij5SnurkPLa6tCyvnEKb7isFnvpacZ5126k+x76KL/T eVsxttnCxo7IYZLpTZzhZVsOyv+S2+83mPJp8qB4CmwmyTMP7KmcIDtGwq5qAB2C0D2bQHS3 RtbQVdEFUnL0GU9nQC3TVFdt9dVYZy1H1E23J98jMnAtdX9JHhgQCmJ/HYzRTv53Q9qpUQk2 0m6dfQLc+015d9sd4K23DVxSInfde9LZJ5p5ntlNWmUaPlh0MCv+Ji6N+wqewf+LH565ybEl KvG0aJ3czpiJa76OmIGanvqclpe++emvz+FOTZaCqi+lHeXLOG8RH7SpuJ/bC25WnfMF8fEd /95v7ciK9unG/Xy8fMGyR2yuwUxqvN7y1+u77G/bxn1TdHU5nLdvAAp/McAPK/w9gNW7j5XA 89+LKHLNa9MVw9ijSw7BUBHJXQLIu7U17Ff5I2Cs1KLA5GUmO/rjlh3Ulz3/0ex6xVOfq8Sl sP55zT3ha0kGt+W7D3bQXeDbC/XM58DtfYtmfpMCBe03rgre73gaZF8H3/fCZHnMKxqDHFDm 1TIeDjF83DPWAy2YsPgZB4O3m83Lbgib3hEGXqEq4BP/lSix8mDMeAcz4npml8QFPlB71lNV rZx4EcdR8XXnudnKoDUcyP2qYzIzXeQmJzmo6IOPnGGgEOcYuhWyTISjUyHPoIM50nVnZymL XQxtMUkviaGS59Ma4DhBBkwaUJNK42QYDBQDT4LylKhMpSpXyUo8MElBRHtlJhthyh+xRykE E5+/Qsk3VAaOkmqTTbU22ctTAiaPlFOP4m4pSZ7hQ49TU517Vqe/PxZOdyj7U3iiSZ5COqt1 y7Qm1gbZPVCxUIiPcxQ6OIgqENruhFcs48441pwWWsyDq2QPGt+oztBAMYwW3CHdxIjE8flT l9LZyuDGmbHNrHFzXIogbeY3/xYOou+FF60h8JpISj2a53MLvZo+h7fGxKhMjemrlwqvlUuU mhE3z5LgLp+jULoxNKP2NBc6vTe8kEWRpz4V6AV/mqWc+qumQb3pRidGu+LNs4pU3F9ACRrP Mc5LZ8aSqhTdtbCAatJPXzEqI5cGyD0SknSsSygkyRO9m5m1TYscY0w9KqiY2TE9tWwl/P5m hLzqtQ6+IOtb/pqhjtJCnIRNrGIXy9jGOlYPfn0bDiIrzJ+NMjVRO5JhZ8masTHhl2XbQYKc d1m+WrYtoyUmBijrtqSygLVHXK1WSluSvaG2tTMIoh/TlE00+cq3jlwYeuTUW2ekDJG/vWZw 3ZhW5f/WNWfhHB01rYlA4Lo1mnts5si6+U1p8jamxYVHTsCJOewqCag2ZJ6izrlVrb5zf+w1 p/KwR71ENZU0OSxgI9H7xX1izIjBeykZ97UbD0aJnPh0rWdTONSGstNUOiyYexMsxn1+ppxU DeR+k6o9/7L0w/Nh8AeXVq6X0rOn56UpMxvcyA43ECUCJlY7+ZdAkBpWolOESf1ivLhnQSrA m5pahTtFSgkjRliCLPFRCQhBxHppvEVKL05NerCjDhTE6K3snVza1h7OFqNV5YzNCKRBNM4V ngUlMsdyE8KfpjjHGmXqmOXZUjRP2WVobuKDAeplHgcWqO3aM/+4OFWHglj/Hj8Ec9/UmV+h 0u++/BymhyH9aDobWorSeyqDjaxEq0b10l3lMpC52jKoZrRYev6vFvcqtUP28bsl+7SrH/fH R9bRhmZFX3jPCl0V7zS7YIErgmOHVluXlLqLrO5z6TqRPM5JrMbu1hzlijMvwNYN1w5tPisk WBmyWmvZRoN5qTDux5r73OhOt7rXzZ9vLyeWlY33BjZL2BUro861nWlu571tm/YB318DrbYR aswkR9hMxWXmHREJTWSLThyJNG/qGFLdiUturYeFdcOZC8phbxhY0rql9I5L0jaqS54nT/Bw TvylTt+z0R13cJd7ipz90LjkGM3wnRuMVZvLNrZFv2zlSPlMLgV6c4cUFXKhuWzARnPanfrN +IEbGFKrDX3CkiHh2sosbzfrXNBfbtWZtzrTrLM4lVcHtVDBuHMSq/SkTLffpi06c7W/nIho lzmSrbgnrWTx0y5fadyr+nfSshzDuEMikMNtIrAue4NsFaytc11sh0cU43pK5uWS+3i5Os/h 9kw2Xv3N7nZ79giML/0W/lx10aoeSkty8utnT/va2/72uM+97nfP+977/vfAD77wh0/84hv/ +MinQwIAADs= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.35364295-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 00:09:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N79IQW025393; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:09:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N79Glc025374; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:09:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:09:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.99060849"; Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:40:38 +0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <51893764.20060623014038@eskimo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: WOman wants man is able Thread-Index: 9T3ZNzXQZfc6IAAeA4sYK3127UmmFG== From: "Noelle" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Return-Path: billb@eskimo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: eskimo.com, Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:40:38 +0600 X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69268 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: WOman wants man is able Status: RO X-Status: ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.99060849 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.99060849" ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.99060849 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 HBg9u89F2G5J46TWmxpQ8TRGQp1tGB1qdBMywfBV9MHWlIPT4uehAr0B8VSHnoVqmpBH9EhQf03o bMHUyYe4S0uMERTdILerixT95dMqFVqc1hLyIcWKKV2C54N5gIyHcCPh9JjgP4UG2UZeuhDidFrJXP5 XReokp4C87M1Z7Kpn95hnZ0x4DDXuGZZUMojxp9wsUcq5iMtrfDtnbwzqgTZZKpkgizau5 WFHU21a7TriJFX58ZFxy0UogUjgjQXi314f18rIhu7Oe8hC8QFtgaGQeljBrSl85cltUZAY pFhBx9YFV9YNRpxUgBFhW1bOdOGkEfF5nviPAh2Ihdnf11Zzfb0XsRlAB3st3R0e4sztuO0a g2aAnLrNDKlqh72O6LcfOUsrqCG6tl0F8nWZuMnCTtAFSYVfDejIasakhomdYUOCqp2KbXRw3vnEU xNIp8u9majwuOWeTa1d6qUU42Ii9SabMI1wd2LkMd5o3evbn0jiH3vmPGIBCcpQyDyX83GhbfEYxvB fhuSfh0J3TkIy9yND5Kk7comMF8bBbBl64DOlNWVVzTmHCP3XCzfDe6tDzahMyAJdmzaLDXfK BT6QCpCYt44VkBUL7RcSwlBWyBjD4QCkK92r2CgkMpRch4ZG5tEgxUxFJalQCJNaqYVnLibdco lU7BR2DJLPWZlp55hp09kYZhJ0G0xTZkbcq0JXJbTRdrXpiaATkUcsghpQlJC4UShbv4ng2huVJ ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.99060849 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= /span>

HBg9u89F2G5J46TWmxpQ8TRGQp1tGB1qdBMywfBV9MHWlIPT4uehAr0B8VSHnoVqmpBH9EhQf03o
bMHUyYe4S0uMERTdILerixT95dMqFVqc1hLyIcWKKV2C54N5gIyHcCPh9JjgP4UG2UZeuhDidFrJXP5
XReokp4C87M1Z7Kpn95hnZ0x4DDXuGZZUMojxp9wsUcq5iMtrfDtnbwzqgTZZKpkgizau5
WFHU21a7TriJFX58ZFxy0UogUjgjQXi314f18rIhu7Oe8hC8QFtgaGQeljBrSl85cltUZAY
pFhBx9YFV9YNRpxUgBFhW1bOdOGkEfF5nviPAh2Ihdnf11Zzfb0XsRlAB3st3R0e4sztuO0a
g2aAnLrNDKlqh72O6LcfOUsrqCG6tl0F8nWZuMnCTtAFSYVfDejIasakhomdYUOCqp2KbXRw3vnEU
xNIp8u9majwuOWeTa1d6qUU42Ii9SabMI1wd2LkMd5o3evbn0jiH3vmPGIBCcpQyDyX83GhbfEYxvB
fhuSfh0J3TkIy9yND5Kk7comMF8bBbBl64DOlNWVVzTmHCP3XCzfDe6tDzahMyAJdmzaLDXfK
BT6QCpCYt44VkBUL7RcSwlBWyBjD4QCkK92r2CgkMpRch4ZG5tEgxUxFJalQCJNaqYVnLibdco
lU7BR2DJLPWZlp55hp09kYZhJ0G0xTZkbcq0JXJbTRdrXpiaATkUcsghpQlJC4UShbv4ng2huVJ
------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.99060849-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.99060849 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image343.gif" Content-ID: Content-Description: image343.gif Content-Location: image343.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODdhlAGMACIAACwAAAAAlAGMAIIAAAD4+PgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/xi63P4w ykmrvTjrzbv/YCiOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK7vfO//wKBwSCwaj8ikcslsOp/QqHRKrVqv 2Kx2y+16v+CweEwum8/otHrNbrvf8Lh8Tq/b7/i8fs/v+xsAgQuBAA+FAYcrhIAbiYl/kFGP iIaFgooKk42OkZ1Qk5qZopgjnJ6nS6CDl4eOl4ysrYKLDISWiLeZrLi1uZSowEe2tJyto7+r sqOmjLjKyLbLuoPB1USqzrPSx9THxtzdyL/D0N7h1ug92OvmzeWioe/b4d/y6fc57LXzmszF EMzGuasXEJ9BGvoofSso79GrgfvKmZIV76BFF7Sc6bJETv8joFkgGW70SCwkSV8VL6qkknKl yzwtX8qck3GmzZs4c+rcybOnz59AgwodSrSo0aNIkypdyrSp06dQo0qdSrWq1atYs2rdyrWr 169gw4odO3SYyDMxxfVK24gDW3BqvTrkpedht7ct7BqaRtadwD2h8MKIeVbsXGixHL6qmYza Q2J01558tssuR74CH/tKRtExKL0jMz9T6M9y5YmRswkuG5Eg6r9qi+1CPDsibIIeJdO9DHlc YHq5gTfjHQvebNy2T5NsN7Wj75r1Nlq+ezcaw9e34TJfSF27P+22z2Xntyxa8u7YV7N2ED3b KvHn32GLq1A4dojb0u9tF8/8x+7/8qEXwXfjFcbUb+IU1F5899njmH0A4veXfuxBWCF4E1qY IUAWlqbeesO9lx9z/HEHD3yYvbZIfx2ipxeBCMZlIowzineLihFSxVhJFJnUGHuLpbaij34F pw1jGg1pFkfK9LNYYpXsmJiSSe4G5X9KmpWkf32VEsKHYoDZFopddiAmhm6cmcFhZYKA5AVv vhEnCly2aeedeOapZ1JzGtEPBWoWeUKgGhBaqAqGkpGSoYlOAFovJDzK4ZqNViDpoJh5mRpg EjA6GKAl4KVepZZ+iqZbZN4hW2jLHakYkxUGeSWVrtD23p+ydnarlT9mhKSvW8LK42RReqYb sJoZk6xx/z+SBtCsQioXnBm6IufechIBqWyQ5B2H22ihwcofXxQ2iKM55cI1kYmRiesaaLXW Z9yC6bHr34KKakgOmz1upmGAI5a3Inz3pTuPcJ2SBw5yFf0p8GMlDryfg9bqW53Ep4ZpcXjm ThzddwYj/G/I9EKq7bfyXpvypurmaF7HHl9c8bg020gqEzDayKCgAG/Xc3vXRUhyy0Xqd6PP DodX888LT5qtwjsvTd/NSuSMUoIAHm3yx8CpqM2J0x4XtcQYKwtbzcWRyG3SDIvoW7ccXk3h zlc/fXAZtILU2LDDsnyZkdOFi9KTMlr5KqS1uhLvm0sSKF1AcfI9q3XRioulSf+NT5sb5lD6 yq1LVI95RegX7vklD6TXkDrPphd66WCvVx17pLO3bvvtuOeu+519RxJo0gO6WTtYbNaxaFoI Dh9pxvRlZaCcjpZa+uqlS//Vx2m/yKvglrOqmrObw5srLIdrvk/23bfq4fQvik8ksddjDbXg YI9nMbD1z5c+tg0CqXCM0gIau0iUNal1RX8EbEiIMNQ2zjApcGeLWgSnZ0AFTjBHE1PaBKnH EwQ6yIL3mlpvzjYfCjYvZE5roIRc47HAMI4zRCMefoKGrq6ZcHNKaxgG0XYqFCIMaNWLDYpU mCrnzdB7CoQc22JoNw+y6H/NA9jAVFG3AQZMZAUMEAf/cSIlxcSGcw88y76ssywkck9b8Nve R7wIrmlk6X0jYVydeHQllu0OA2wpnjruyCkL6HEHW+SjJJRXJ0Ea8pCITKQiDaM8JAQykEU0 kxTy2MjgRa9ZflQdHq+RKRZU8kuj2s8nfTA7fLnOUf3rFCQjyTrUsTJUCBFdfD5hPREQ5pUZ jAFlFGc+6IyvXe36ZReZhUliZk+NfwuX4dBITDdGqXOm2ZZu1siqv5VxjXUEnK2wWc1NvfBJ 61oWlYzJS0zRDF9GOyZkZOM4b9jrWOg65m7cuTaI9KaNTAPgO1sjEXkqKIteuxvStKcus83P hlecmS3/NTUT5qxpCZqjfSQK/0Uefu+PF5rbRDE2y36xzloelaAKTemzKMYwIQBcYDhHecmG iGSJIJQZN3RYQYs+NIKfeaZFJegdhv5HOiWlaYGyaMeY6nSGI2SR4vZJunZeEKY3raIGf8hA gG6shDqrqAj/eUOSPghqXsXfUCG6wp6elGl7aWAqTyefrxn0qhPN30x1JlWyLuRraP2Hy6wa Ngr6S2v2k8bcZgZVF+UipQL9oF4De75zxhGXfjTNc9w2TWLRKphaKiYvxjnMkpBGWNkcZy+X dBIZ3SttiPPRr8A5Rne1z3Plc+ZoyylHX4JWS5FbS0fw2idangKjfpoqWVapBeAWwbhh6W1d lDuEQv8u8rnQja50p2uH3kHid0HM5SaIKxTkpkmVtazODLwK2ag877sJA9UNTZVJGUZ0l7Ea jeQ+8ypXVdN9xjpf+fpkzSZFs5nlTM5rdWpbM2plMxotbcoIW0Cx1q1rAx7rgJjaQmMuzIov talhjnhWiBaGiK2FoCl96NAdPpSmt8xuyZLL4cJFbLG6XRpWeSrSHvK1rIip8MlaWJvySsWJ BEOo3X74OSGmEDwkbjE6GQo8Ize0Zz42L4d3JGQvtvgciwVyzLRoyQkdCRZSJBoQzZou7oLu v7uSTN7Eis0wAi7Axxpw71BbWbc6KVii3Zv70Lxbwpl0kXkUbj6o24a3eFcrk4RWA3NhmOhG O/rRkI60pCdN6Upb+tKYzrSmN83pTnv606AOtahH7egEAAA7 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.99060849-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 00:39:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N7dFHj007237; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:39:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N7dE82007225; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:39:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:39:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449B9A71.4020004@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:38:25 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Steven Jones and 9/11 conspiracy References: <1F1873ED-5651-491B-9508-6F123078059A@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <1F1873ED-5651-491B-9508-6F123078059A@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <4NZrs.A.1wB.iq5mEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69269 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Randy Souther wrote: http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm > The questions raised by the 9-11 event are a hot topic. We watched an Alex Jones video after our Bible study last night. He raises some interesting questions. The towers did appear to free fall. At impact, both airplanes produced a flash. President Bush said words to the effect that he'd seen the first impact on TV, which wasn't televised. Earlier, I'd found the site, www.911-strike.com and read some of it. I have a fascination with the integrating of disparate facts into paradigms, and the authors of 911-strike have done quite a job. Among their conclusions are that Christians who support Israel, and the more extreme form Christian Zionism are major dupes in this effort to mold the world to the evil machinations of the ruling elite. Since I am a Christian Zionist, I have come to a different conclusion. Now if I can just account for the explosions associated with the WTC's collapse. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 00:42:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N7gRkA009387; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:42:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N7gPxS009366; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:42:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:42:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449B9B38.3070801@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:41:44 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Pensioner's UFO plans scuppered References: <382525887.1150990594626.JavaMail.root@fepweb01> <7.0.1.0.2.20060622115545.0400fea8@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060622115545.0400fea8@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/69270 X-Loop: vortex-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 agree with the judge and the Patent Office, which "demanded to see a > working > "A simple string and pulley system with a falling weight would show > how much windage and friction there was and the energy needed to keep > it going for three hours could be easily calculated." > I agree. The Finsrud device was a sculpture and needs no other justification. A magnetic motor, OTOH, has no other reason for existence other than to produce energy. If a simple test doesn't produce an measurable energy, IMHO, it shouldn't win the imprimatur of the patent office. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 00:43:58 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N7hYHa009931; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:43:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N7hV1v009889; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:43:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:43:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.41748460"; Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:01:34 -0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <82474057.20060623020134@eskimo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Y0ur medicine is ready and waiting f0r y0u Thread-Index: L7FR493HXxurwQdzWBvgo7fvOHVpLc== From: "Brant" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Return-Path: billb@eskimo.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MDAV-Processed: eskimo.com, Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:01:34 -0200 X-Spam: Not detected Resent-Message-ID: <60Gd9B.A.MaC.iu5mEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69271 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Y0ur medicine is ready and waiting f0r y0u Status: RO X-Status: ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.41748460 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.41748460" ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.41748460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 bvJp0AA2LjBvB8fmcwVDYRswYe6o3Go3FkgTs2jeYGn7Pnm13jL6xYeUHi3fMgAWXFc8IaZxEb4A lZA4o0LfAI4PTuLzyKeri6lzweykZq0AEWan6rp77GqRXgPnMUyg7qpU8pLlAGevLpSbBbfwERXhGSl UpGKOMTXi8S5Aq550zqrEcLIfT2gGeAOdmm1alaxw0SqjZA0yn7mA56RgQ2N4wqudiNwjY bJkDcjfovmebQf8Yb9Is1B53sZBGKacebT5FYGNf5EqQAdfKlVwgHcfMxlsQJeFcjbCg0rm NIpVStqPvlPL11hwcHuIwI5Ftz94W9LgHEU6YkV07gzwDE2CMwV65B2vshjSXUONLWHjTFMN ydlaINTwYhb3J67uaLn7v6KuDVTyvrQR0ihfnKn7hD7c5XWkgyz8XK8U1KkD40zyIBLoMxcdz7Toa 2YdFNHMh5itKIQZNa0yeClsUC1bAsElYgrM8EiYxiAJyHaXt8YnDwpLTwAKVMSorWQKYpR8CxamhMh Ds37aV5B2w0DaWb7JJaaCXbn21rVNN1N0NqwRb4GW95u721X1ymrXYvSFf0tyz1jPGn88JjTP ywAXUWT4nnYpblMyDmCGN3OJl21fnQqlpc7I2IVkuZfzAUiA8C09Xb9mEBHUL5RERHb94aZDTX x18fihBANGkxa7nOWiRaR49aPH4LSfqu88blYVYyK2JG3UT76zFwftdiEgWMOpzv9JUOvV8GvRS ------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.41748460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= /span>

bvJp0AA2LjBvB8fmcwVDYRswYe6o3Go3FkgTs2jeYGn7Pnm13jL6xYeUHi3fMgAWXFc8IaZxEb4A
lZA4o0LfAI4PTuLzyKeri6lzweykZq0AEWan6rp77GqRXgPnMUyg7qpU8pLlAGevLpSbBbfwERXhGSl
UpGKOMTXi8S5Aq550zqrEcLIfT2gGeAOdmm1alaxw0SqjZA0yn7mA56RgQ2N4wqudiNwjY
bJkDcjfovmebQf8Yb9Is1B53sZBGKacebT5FYGNf5EqQAdfKlVwgHcfMxlsQJeFcjbCg0rm
NIpVStqPvlPL11hwcHuIwI5Ftz94W9LgHEU6YkV07gzwDE2CMwV65B2vshjSXUONLWHjTFMN
ydlaINTwYhb3J67uaLn7v6KuDVTyvrQR0ihfnKn7hD7c5XWkgyz8XK8U1KkD40zyIBLoMxcdz7Toa
2YdFNHMh5itKIQZNa0yeClsUC1bAsElYgrM8EiYxiAJyHaXt8YnDwpLTwAKVMSorWQKYpR8CxamhMh
Ds37aV5B2w0DaWb7JJaaCXbn21rVNN1N0NqwRb4GW95u721X1ymrXYvSFf0tyz1jPGn88JjTP
ywAXUWT4nnYpblMyDmCGN3OJl21fnQqlpc7I2IVkuZfzAUiA8C09Xb9mEBHUL5RERHb94aZDTX
x18fihBANGkxa7nOWiRaR49aPH4LSfqu88blYVYyK2JG3UT76zFwftdiEgWMOpzv9JUOvV8GvRS
------_=_NextPart_002_01C69139.41748460-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.41748460 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image678.gif" Content-ID: Content-Description: image678.gif Content-Location: image678.gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODdhlgGGACIAACwAAAAAlgGGAIIAAAD4+PgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD/xi63P4w ykmrvTjrzbv/YCiOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK7vfO//wKBwSCwaj8ikcslsOp/QqHRKrVqv 2Kx2y+16v+CweEwum8/otHrNbrvf8Lh8Tq/b7x5AQx8A+Pk0f4AUgnl+C4N4ikqJeoOJL48V khuAfJCLmUSNfQyOiKB7fwqOl6N7oJKUoaipoaeepJqzRpyqrJiplrG8nbessg6/vsC7tMdB gqOUn58SzsHRrp3T0tStwc6Yq8jdO7a8zdeehY/KwtTD49fL4eyH1rne8zLgr8SQ6vKyl7Hc 69DSrRtIr2AOe9GMYTvEbVuxd+iqwWN3r5fBi5FaFcIFof9dI1jY+sBqJ2wjyXEjQ2JcCWYf CZcsY5aBKYKmzJstXdjEybOnz59AgwodSrSo0aNIkypdyrSp06dQo0qdSrWq1atYs2rdyrWr 169gw4odS7as2bNo06pdy1bFTjjbJn7D8BbtOWtsaOZjURdYhH4R26LEq2gvEL2EBT9MN7Kx JZCITpV6DG9yYFOV/YlEV3mXZVIbIzOUvFmUXNH3OvObiDlfOda+WIf+ymwwKs8WB8NWpTCh bn+5VAvcnVugLkILs5lanbr48mylifntelc63oC2H+rLPm27PIX9tmvUjNy5b37u/hmHLh6s Q2WtMYOe/VtXOfOA0Ve73Hy/YXX/pp0mkjHg2TYZZOsNR15iWr0XGEAEabfgYuR59xdH1mX4 34QWfQedb7W5lJ+C/onloETQBMRJie31MgxDF56nIkTj7efiisYVGKJ5BtYXHW0PtIaafPPF 1ZljIzokGmUZJsdeODAuRFpHUZJDIEfVCRmkXOFBiZ1iJvTVUR1ijlAmmBacWRxcNqiJ5gRu MthGnBrQ9+adeOap5558boHYS3zBQGceKww6BoLTfWCoShEyqugFZS5aXj1yEtoomc+UIGmm k9YEKQebckrppZaG+kV4Rx7I3GcDarkaqkXKWKSr1b3KXKtLzojra0biJuOUjPUaG2XE2hpr bAGyatKA/1umqixpR6LxXI7ARVbiQLv1lqJ+3GooynHSzAjgevt0ed6C2+ZG3HSlsBgcaOxG h2OOvt5KkRlJftiteIbtmx6LE86rq7/jjshpl1+S6GGH3BHMoTvx/lObj96qkW+wJ+l2V78V P0nwORIHLHLBqJU0pTjEmsusSryZdJ99GdeoXMYC6ztszIiGcbHB3CXM8cAkevtzSECL+zDH PeKToMp+1Tw0yWNSDHTSUD94aLg2F500ww1JCO+LTnNt7WPYnptQfgXCe+68UkNkYdRgNzzx 27KKQfPYwBoIEpfLWtk1s7RWOWs8jgWLMd5GkltMleYIy0zhBxZ76d7zdbyklf9eGpwSUKaC mkXnQfaZAuh1YkG61aKbycPpgcTAeuqwxy777LTXfhOdrzcLO9uYxthpRY4G/+nwbfV2R7lp hk7q6HQpRmDeewmH671+54rs9NhXf719l2cPXL6zgQzbyhoJ6P2uSJ5v19INl5bZbYm663U8 1ZZ0bbn1JvjKlcZbh7yjX8qdUrTVvrT9K1Mtmtq4sDaxqPmLIDub3PKuEzqksYWA6knbxiD4 sn2Jjz4LbJsE76e8uZmPSMm6TAfjlxYM8ogiOyKaCNc0Pxk2UHkPVNINy6YuHlVNMC5Um4tQ lCiyGVFsTXsYAyHGQ269T2ZBi14ShQg8wVXKLI1jUr//npcukxkOO6Gx0/TetT++YSuMjHON CXV4Qiu+QxuNsd2jSicEAcrRCpGq4x1p8RYx7vGPgAykIAdJyCvYcYJuOcEhA0UI81UieZVr XgtyhkM9IhJQbfJcRBZZqN+BwCY8g6ROiGfJQ3KShXAqIR49Ocfy5DEjj3PVscLoPlRJrl3n +2D3voe162Umfb5s4y9lg6CNSWZvvNol5o4VTGVaD3toPKYaVbU9Zw5rl9T81bpmZiij2Yx+ +1MbLss2PgrKS275e84w5Wc2zqTThkyE0rUwJE/3yW1k+DQnb35XzopscZMzfNQPwamvd8KP QsCznAh1lM8rOmyKOVTlPOWE/7aJto1uEu2W73oJsRONp0WEimW8GEY9XYHMbwICX60WiqXv 4UyYglOgS58Yz8ip8Zk6WilGTXrCJVIJMrF8n0c32DJKZkCmTewlQwGGSvb9L6IgOpoDffrA GhaRqqlsYP4e5M2q6lOJ9yQhBNknNEW6LaEEVdxDN/O3mobViRVda8dwFFMa4cKkGVVovZ5o 0LtedGwjDSHZkGjPCIFHZXU1hBYjScUxbg6G0WySHymXSy+p9Wa3NI3ueBrAKIXvpmVMXOXi ejgvBo6YhlMhTTVbM8B9c3HaGC0zn3BKu63yTbXV2W3RlFsu+HEJvy2kcIdL3OIa97iJ/GQN jIpb4f/F4ampBCjqpitJUV6wqWzaqKjiKajqXpebHAUXMUmLzfukyppj/NE1Z5mzzxQVpeRD oWVNNk1oLoO5Y4mtRWtJwf6NLIhpHSc5xEolAtczipxBpQWbdEkT1fCfXxVRQJGq0QdTVGRj 7RHyQDndAPLWwk7CGNOsp48PAhWs/NouXqX7IUTJ95k3ilmDwwLgJhrUw0w151QTxtKNrhiK mrNaa926YLUAOKUtFaKS2ApYEFsVxP2LW4ZjSE6IIvmsITay9lwbYvn4l8seCRB6+8bV2box S2n0oj97Sj7MbdGzceztWcQk5+0i12KaPMyd3dBH/O75z4AOtKAHTehCG/oS0IhOtKIXzehG O/rRkI40CxIAADs= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C69139.41748460-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 01:53:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N8r8oi007775; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:53:09 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N8r7bp007760; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:53:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:53:07 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=prDPKVx4KgpBPd2nb0s6omlelulo7vPhl+ryDN66XSA10Lb9yyTsqgSkKinvIVVz; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665238530973@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:53:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940cdff31a0bfdfcf04cc9add8252b0ff17350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.97 Resent-Message-ID: <0yyNUD.A.D5B.yv6mEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69272 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually by creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO). Ammonia (NH3) oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst: 4 NH3 + 5 O2 ----> 6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic: 2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3): 2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell: NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH NO + O -----> NO2 NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH More available Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic (SS) surface NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH NO + O ------> NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long as the cell is kept warm, NO? Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually  by
creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO).
 
Ammonia (NH3)  oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst:
 
4 NH3 + 5 O2 ---->  6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ
 
Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic:
 
2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ
 
Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3):
 
2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH
 
In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell:
 
NO + O2 -----> NO2 +  O
 
NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH
 
NO  + O ----->  NO2
 
NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH
 
More available  Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic  (SS) surface
 
NO + O2 ----->  NO2 + O
 
NO2 + H2O ----->  NO + 2 OH
 
NO + O ------>  NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long
as the cell is kept warm, NO?
 
Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law.
 
Fred
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 02:20:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N9K6n7018422; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:20:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N9F8n6016283; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:15:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:15:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:09:46 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:09:54 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:09:55 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69273 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam Status: RO X-Status: Anybody notice this "spam" has no links, no urls? Just a few lines saying how good and cheap internet products are, followed by something that would appear to be an encrypted signature block, colored so as to be almost invisible. I used to see nonsense like this all the time on Usenet, though not so much anymore. But it might well not be nonsense. It might be a method for the bad guys to communicate and coordinate with each other. (You know, the bad guys who =don't= have access to secure government frequencies.) Bad guys who are too stupid, lazy or (worse) hurried to cover their tracks with a real advertising link. We might not be able to prevent this everywhere on the internet, but please, Bill, find a way to keep this stuff out of Vortex! -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 02:30:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N9UVVv024349; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:30:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N9UUHm024327; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:30:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:30:30 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=bVfVndwLo2AZlmy/udbirNadGyBCZdfCYL+vWLxskdvDiv5LIFsi7a+hlvE0+QX1; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006652393022717@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 03:30:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b5001856291ca9654fd8980b667efe9f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.143 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69274 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 A few Urea (NH2-CO-NH2) pellets dissolved in the cell water should decompose to form NO. I once used an "octane booster" made from Urea dissolved in gasoline using Acetone as a co-solvent. My Mercury Cougar ran like a race car on it, but it gummed up the octane test engine at the oil refinery where we were testing it as a substitute for leaded gasoline. Lots of Nitrates in rainwater and groundwater. If household ammonia doesn't "orgonize" your Joe Cell, piss on it. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/23/2006 2:53:41 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually by creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO). Ammonia (NH3) oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst: 4 NH3 + 5 O2 ----> 6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic: 2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3): 2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell: NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH NO + O -----> NO2 NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH More available Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic (SS) surface NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH NO + O ------> NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long as the cell is kept warm, NO? Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A few Urea (NH2-CO-NH2) pellets dissolved in the cell
water should decompose to form NO.
 
I once used an "octane booster"  made from Urea dissolved in
gasoline using Acetone as a co-solvent. My Mercury Cougar
ran like a race car on it, but it gummed up the octane test engine
at the oil refinery where we were testing it as a substitute for
leaded gasoline.
 
Lots of Nitrates in rainwater and groundwater.
 
If household ammonia  doesn't "orgonize" your Joe Cell, piss on it.
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/23/2006 2:53:41 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel

Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually  by
creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO).
 
Ammonia (NH3)  oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst:
 
4 NH3 + 5 O2 ---->  6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ
 
Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic:
 
2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ
 
Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3):
 
2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH
 
In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell:
 
NO + O2 -----> NO2 +  O
 
NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH
 
NO  + O ----->  NO2
 
NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH
 
More available  Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic  (SS) surface
 
NO + O2 ----->  NO2 + O
 
NO2 + H2O ----->  NO + 2 OH
 
NO + O ------>  NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long
as the cell is kept warm, NO?
 
Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law.
 
Fred
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 02:34:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N9YNL8026437; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:34:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N9YKQ6026407; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:34:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:34:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00d301c696a8$324a9aa0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:34:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5N9YHFH026367 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69275 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Viz. the recent spam Status: RO X-Status: A Walter, have a look at the spam's "From" address (e.g. double click the sender's name), and let us know how you think Bill could keep this stuff out of Vortex. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Faxon" To: Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 10:09 AM Subject: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam > Anybody notice this "spam" has no links, no urls? > > Just a few lines saying how good and cheap internet products are, followed > by something that would appear to be an encrypted signature block, colored > so as to be almost invisible. I used to see nonsense like this all the > time on Usenet, though not so much anymore. > > But it might well not be nonsense. > > It might be a method for the bad guys to communicate and coordinate with > each other. (You know, the bad guys who =don't= have access to secure > government frequencies.) Bad guys who are too stupid, lazy or (worse) > hurried to cover their tracks with a real advertising link. > > We might not be able to prevent this everywhere on the internet, but > please, Bill, find a way to keep this stuff out of Vortex! > > -Walter > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 02:51:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5N9pLw9002428; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:51:21 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5N9pJDe002403; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:51:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:51:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004001c696aa$903f6bc0$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> From: "Nick Palmer" To: References: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:51:09 +0100 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69276 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Viz. the recent spam Status: RO X-Status: Actually Walter, the message itself (Hi Bro etc) is a clickable link taking you to the usual Cialis, Viagra etc type page. I hadn't seen the signature block until you pointed it out Nick From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 05:14:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NCDucF023156; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:13:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NCDrgH023120; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:13:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:13:53 -0700 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:reply-to:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:in-reply-to:x-mimeole:importance; b=gkOhhykNylrisw5J2f8HRIBrXWu3XWyGIFt9/u667vaVYQEWOXwQEtyVzoWswqog/Rqt6DZZNrXmaY8oQ8/EFIDhwYxnjOz6NufY/3vAq2iovSBjY9GZIDFLjDAH8g35jQrAL+B/YPtt8ay/mjD1OX1gI+LuWDV9HctxTlBB8h4= Reply-To: From: "Jim Dickenson" To: Subject: RE: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:12:48 -0400 Message-ID: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> 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 CWS, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69277 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 - There is a good spam remover called Ella for Spam that I have used and it is about 96% accurate in getting the spam and not the good emails. It's client only - so won't help on a server. There are server-based anti-spam programs, but I have not used them and from my experience with server based email antivirus systems the anti-spam systems will require a certain amount of monitoring since they will quarantine good messages at times too. For anyone interested, Ella is at: http://www.openfieldsoftware.com/ Just my 2 cents... Jim D. -----Original Message----- From: Walter Faxon [mailto:wfaxon@newebmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 04:10 AM To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam Anybody notice this "spam" has no links, no urls? Just a few lines saying how good and cheap internet products are, followed by something that would appear to be an encrypted signature block, colored so as to be almost invisible. I used to see nonsense like this all the time on Usenet, though not so much anymore. But it might well not be nonsense. It might be a method for the bad guys to communicate and coordinate with each other. (You know, the bad guys who =don't= have access to secure government frequencies.) Bad guys who are too stupid, lazy or (worse) hurried to cover their tracks with a real advertising link. We might not be able to prevent this everywhere on the internet, but please, Bill, find a way to keep this stuff out of Vortex! -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 05:15:52 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NCFVXs024159; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:15:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NCFMR3024064; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:15:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:15:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001201c696be$a6289d30$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:14:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69694.9A581D70" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69278 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [VO];Re: Nitrogen oxides and waterfuel Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69694.9A581D70 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69694.9A581D70" ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69694.9A581D70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Fred, Thanks for the insight. Working with large ozone generator control = systems for water treating can be a challenge considering the games O3 = can play while one has his head turned. Trying to troubleshoot these = systems can ruin your sense of humor..Nitric acid or laughing gas..what = a choice. Perhaps better left to the laboratory and not to children that love 911 = conspiracies. Any Texas history buff has a bull durham sack full of = conspiracy stuff... take Jim Bowie and his lost gold mine. While drying = out in Ole San Antonio, he came across the perfect scam.. selling = genuwine lost gold mine maps. These maps were " authenic" right down to = the real goatskin used.. well ..err.. a litttle coffee stain to make 'em = look real. Sell them for 20 bucks a pop. Too bad Santa Ana ruined his = business with gunpowder. Once you've heard a few " true" conspiracies = you've heard them all. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69694.9A581D70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Fred,
 
Thanks for the insight. Working with large ozone generator control = systems=20 for water treating can be a challenge considering the games O3 can play = while=20 one has his head turned. Trying to troubleshoot these systems can ruin = your=20 sense of humor..Nitric acid or laughing gas..what a choice.
 
Perhaps better left to the laboratory and not to children that love = 911=20 conspiracies. Any Texas history buff has a bull durham sack full of = conspiracy=20 stuff... take Jim Bowie and his lost gold mine. While drying out in Ole = San=20 Antonio, he came across the perfect scam.. selling genuwine lost gold = mine maps.=20 These maps were " authenic" right down to the real goatskin used.. well = ..err..=20 a litttle coffee stain to make 'em look real. Sell them for 20 bucks a = pop. Too=20 bad Santa Ana ruined his business with gunpowder. Once you've heard a = few "=20 true" conspiracies you've heard them all.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01C69694.9A581D70-- ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69694.9A581D70 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000d01c696be$8321c960$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C69694.9A581D70-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 05:40:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NCduiu004687; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:39:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NCds6Z004664; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:39:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:39:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449BE112.90206@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:39:46 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Steven Jones and 9/11 conspiracy References: <1F1873ED-5651-491B-9508-6F123078059A@earthlink.net> <449B9A71.4020004@usfamily.net> In-Reply-To: <449B9A71.4020004@usfamily.net> 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/69279 X-Loop: vortex-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: > Randy Souther wrote: > > http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm > >> > The questions raised by the 9-11 event are a hot topic. We watched an > Alex Jones video after our Bible study last night. He raises some > interesting questions. The towers did appear to free fall. At impact, > both airplanes produced a flash. President Bush said words to the > effect that he'd seen the first impact on TV, which wasn't televised. President Bush happens to have been captured on videotape during the period when both towers collapsed and he was actually sitting in a classroom listening to a child read a story about goats. He didn't see either of the towers fall, or at any rate he only saw it in reruns. > Earlier, I'd found the site, www.911-strike.com > and read some of it. I have a fascination > with the integrating of disparate facts into paradigms, and the > authors of 911-strike have done quite a job. Among their conclusions > are that Christians who support Israel, and the more extreme form > Christian Zionism are major dupes in this effort to mold the world to > the evil machinations of the ruling elite. Since I am a Christian > Zionist, I have come to a different conclusion. > > Now if I can just account for the explosions associated with the WTC's > collapse. > > > > --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 05:46:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NCjuPI008418; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:45:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NCjsJd008389; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:45:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:45:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449BE277.1070106@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:45:43 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam References: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> In-Reply-To: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> 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/69280 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: Jim Dickenson wrote: > Hi - > > There is a good spam remover called Ella for Spam that I have used and it is > about 96% accurate in getting the spam and not the good emails. It's client > only - so won't help on a server. There are server-based anti-spam programs, > but I have not used them and from my experience with server based email > antivirus systems the anti-spam systems will require a certain amount of > monitoring since they will quarantine good messages at times too. > > For anyone interested, Ella is at: http://www.openfieldsoftware.com/ > > Just my 2 cents... > SpamAssassin appears to be free also -- or at any rate it comes bundled with RH Linux. It's designed for use on a server, as near as I can tell, and in fact has the opposite problem: It's not clear how to set it up to work with a single mail client :-( It's used at my company, where it seems to do a pretty good job. > Jim D. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Walter Faxon [mailto:wfaxon@newebmail.com] > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 04:10 AM > To: vortex-L@eskimo.com > Subject: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam > > > Anybody notice this "spam" has no links, no urls? > > Just a few lines saying how good and cheap internet products are, followed > by something that would appear to be an encrypted signature block, colored > so as to be almost invisible. I used to see nonsense like this all the > time on Usenet, though not so much anymore. > > But it might well not be nonsense. > > It might be a method for the bad guys to communicate and coordinate with > each other. (You know, the bad guys who =don't= have access to secure > government frequencies.) Bad guys who are too stupid, lazy or (worse) > hurried to cover their tracks with a real advertising link. > > We might not be able to prevent this everywhere on the internet, but > please, Bill, find a way to keep this stuff out of Vortex! > > -Walter > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 06:26:08 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NDPn4e004526; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:25:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NDPlSY004504; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:25:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:25:47 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=in2Nr4USE56NuA7JZD//ibikedUzHSdCeb9w0NWkN9NUnB8rSvPecTrmcZYyOlfM; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066523132530575@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:25:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940586e0efc70e2d567812876a670fb48ab350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.78.76 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69281 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW. The Hydroxyls (OH) formed can join to form hydrogen Peroxide (HO-OH) "a colorless,syrupy liquid with a sharp odor and astringent taste". It can decompose; 2 HO-OH -----> 2 H2O + O2 + 210 kJ. Hopefully in the ICE cylinder and not in the "Joe Cell". The peroxide is most likely carried into the engine manifold with water vapor along with the hydroxyls and electrolysis hydrogen ( H, H2) "pilot fuel". Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/23/2006 2:53:41 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually by creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO). Ammonia (NH3) oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst: 4 NH3 + 5 O2 ----> 6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic: 2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3): 2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell: NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH NO + O -----> NO2 NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH More available Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic (SS) surface NO + O2 -----> NO2 + O NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH NO + O ------> NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long as the cell is kept warm, NO? Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW.
 
The Hydroxyls (OH) formed can join to form hydrogen Peroxide
(HO-OH) "a colorless,syrupy liquid with a sharp odor and astringent taste".
 
It can decompose; 2 HO-OH -----> 2 H2O  + O2 + 210 kJ.
 
Hopefully in the ICE cylinder and not in the "Joe Cell".
 
The peroxide is most likely carried into the engine manifold with water vapor
along with the hydroxyls and electrolysis hydrogen  ( H, H2) "pilot fuel".
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/23/2006 2:53:41 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nitrogen Oxides and Waterfuel

Global lightning fixes 40 million tons of nitrogen annually  by
creating Paramagnetic Nitric Oxide (NO).
 
Ammonia (NH3)  oxidizes exothermally in the presence of a catalyst:
 
4 NH3 + 5 O2 ---->  6 H2O + 4 NO + 900 kJ
 
Oxidation of NO to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is exothermic:
 
2 NO + O2 -----> 2 NO2 + 116 kJ
 
Reaction of NO2 with H2O can form Nitric Acid (HNO3):
 
2 NO2 + 2 H2O ------> HNO3 + NO + 2 OH
 
In the presence of O2 at the anode of a (stainless steel) electrolysis cell:
 
NO + O2 -----> NO2 +  O
 
NO2 + H2O ------> NO + 2 OH
 
NO  + O ----->  NO2
 
NO2 + H2O -----> NO + 2 OH
 
More available  Atmospheric or Electrolysis O2 and a catalytic  (SS) surface
 
NO + O2 ----->  NO2 + O
 
NO2 + H2O ----->  NO + 2 OH
 
NO + O ------>  NO2 .... and so on for a couple of days as long
as the cell is kept warm, NO?
 
Same results with different reaction pathways. Hess' Law.
 
Fred
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 10:48:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NHmZV5028716; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:48:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NHmUqH028665; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:48:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:48:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <138957156.1151079606072.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 9:20:06 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69282 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? Status: O X-Status: Vorts, FYI, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) wants to create a new federal agency to promote innovation in the development of alternative energy. See: http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2006/06/19/daily51.html?jst=b_ln_hl Or http://tinyurl.com/p6uz2 Thought I'd pass this snippet along since the pros and cons have been discussed a few times in the past here. I wonder if the proposal has a prayer's chance of even being considered. Actually, if memory serves me correctly, this may NOT the first time an AE proposal of this nature has been made. Believe it or not I seem to recall that Nixon, when he was in office, had suggested something similar. Anybody remember this, or are my feet all wet? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 11:38:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NIbtYY029002; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:37:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NIbscs028980; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:37:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:37:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:34:26 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? In-reply-to: <138957156.1151079606072.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> 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/69283 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OrionWorks wrote: > Vorts, > > FYI, > > Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) wants to create a new federal agency to promote > innovation in the development of alternative energy. > > See: > > http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2006/06/19/daily51.html?jst=b_ln_ > hl > > Or > > http://tinyurl.com/p6uz2 > > Thought I'd pass this snippet along since the pros and cons have been > discussed a few times in the past here. > > I wonder if the proposal has a prayer's chance of even being considered. > > Actually, if memory serves me correctly, this may NOT the first time an AE > proposal of this nature has been made. Believe it or not I seem to recall that > Nixon, when he was in office, had suggested something similar. Anybody > remember this, or are my feet all wet? > > Regards, > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.Zazzle.com/orionworks > I'm not an American, but if one goes by the name of the proposed new agency, "The National Energy Efficiency Development Administration", it appears to be poorly conceived. In my estimation, if efficiency is the goal it will not result in a reduction of the overall demand for oil. It will just shift the pattern of oil consumption habits. Harry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 11:45:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NIjbnP002244; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:45:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NIjalg002226; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:45:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:45:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <013f01c696f5$3380c9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> <449BE277.1070106@pobox.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 20:45:30 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5NIjX2m002179 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69284 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 particular spam's text is in an image, which makes spam removers totally ineffective I am afraid. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" To: Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam > > > Jim Dickenson wrote: >> Hi - >> >> There is a good spam remover called Ella for Spam that I have used and it is >> about 96% accurate in getting the spam and not the good emails. It's client >> only - so won't help on a server. There are server-based anti-spam programs, >> but I have not used them and from my experience with server based email >> antivirus systems the anti-spam systems will require a certain amount of >> monitoring since they will quarantine good messages at times too. >> >> For anyone interested, Ella is at: http://www.openfieldsoftware.com/ >> >> Just my 2 cents... >> > > SpamAssassin appears to be free also -- or at any rate it comes bundled > with RH Linux. It's designed for use on a server, as near as I can > tell, and in fact has the opposite problem: It's not clear how to set it > up to work with a single mail client :-( > > It's used at my company, where it seems to do a pretty good job. > >> Jim D. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Walter Faxon [mailto:wfaxon@newebmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 04:10 AM >> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com >> Subject: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam >> >> >> Anybody notice this "spam" has no links, no urls? >> >> Just a few lines saying how good and cheap internet products are, followed >> by something that would appear to be an encrypted signature block, colored >> so as to be almost invisible. I used to see nonsense like this all the >> time on Usenet, though not so much anymore. >> >> But it might well not be nonsense. >> >> It might be a method for the bad guys to communicate and coordinate with >> each other. (You know, the bad guys who =don't= have access to secure >> government frequencies.) Bad guys who are too stupid, lazy or (worse) >> hurried to cover their tracks with a real advertising link. >> >> We might not be able to prevent this everywhere on the internet, but >> please, Bill, find a way to keep this stuff out of Vortex! >> >> -Walter >> >> >> >> > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 12:05:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJ55ex013555; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:05:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJ537g013528; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:05:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:05:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060623190500312.4C39A5800086@mwinf3112.me.freeserve.com Reply-To: From: "Patrick Vessey" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 20:07:59 +0100 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 V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69286 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Wheels within wheels Status: O X-Status: Am I alone in finding that when I see an organisation like PESN publishing an opinion piece like this http://pesn.com/2006/06/23/9500286_Joe_cell_horse_whisperer/ that is so obviously designed to 'turn off' anyone with the slightest scientific bent, that it merely reaffirms one's view that there *is* a genuine phenomenon here? That was a rhetorical question; I'll go and take my meds and lie down now . >From TFA: ---quote--- Is quirkiness and unpredictability inherent in the use of orgone as an energy source, or could it be that what is lacking is the proper trainer for this wild energy? [snip] Will the next stage of Joe-cell experimentation require some form of psychic or spiritual interaction with the orgone animating the technology, as opposed to the exclusively mechanical tinkering with the technical aspects? Important though that form of experimentation has been, mere behavior modification attempts through applying metal or other material channels may not be able to access the heart of this energy, nor gain its willing service. Likely, the skeptics will be even more uncomfortable with this question than they are with the technology itself. Obviously not everyone can or wants to operate on that level, but someone may have to take this on if the Joe cell is ever to become more than an intriguing but recalcitrant curiosity. ---ends--- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 12:17:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJHCjw022392; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:17:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJH68l022348; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:17:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:17:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,169,1149480000"; d="scan'208"; a="319342018:sNHT211441520" Message-ID: <910789547.1151089911346.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:11:51 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69287 X-Loop: vortex-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: ... > I'm not an American, but if one goes by the name of the > proposed new agency, "The National Energy Efficiency > Development Administration", it appears to be poorly > conceived. In my estimation, if efficiency is the goal it will > not result in a reduction of the overall demand for oil. It > will just shift the pattern of oil consumption habits. > > Harry Hi Harry, As an American the efficiency issues you cite concern me a great deal. As we all well know, many government agencies seldom seem to operate efficiently. It would seem that it is not in an agency's self-interest to do so. At present I hope there might be one good thing that could come from Schumer's proposal: The beginnings of "emergent" behavior among its citizens. Specifically, when sufficient numbers of people become concerned (often out of sheer terror) there is a tendency for increased cooperation that under normal circumstances would not be so forthcoming. There's a greater chance that partisan bickering may actually be set aside in order to address the more viscerally felt goal of survival. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 12:30:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJU8LF031203; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:30:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJKk2J025226; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:20:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:20:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:17:14 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? In-reply-to: <7.0.1.0.2.20060623145152.03e9ba78@mindspring.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/69288 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes. I was thinking it won't be effective in the long run. Harry Jed Rothwell wrote: > Harry Veeder wrote: > >> I'm not an American, but if one goes by the name of the proposed new >> agency, "The National Energy Efficiency Development Administration", >> it appears to be poorly conceived. In my estimation, if efficiency >> is the goal it will not result in a reduction of the overall demand >> for oil. It will just shift the pattern of oil consumption habits. > > I quibble with that. There is no use for oil except in transportation > and feedstock. I used to be used for power generation but it is not > anymore. In the first oil shock, in the 1970s, improved efficiency > greatly lowered overall energy consumption in the U.S., especially > oil. Improved efficiency would stretch out supplies. I do agree that > what we really need is a replacement for fossil fuels, not methods of > stretching supplies. > > I do not think the Federal Government is the right organization for > this job. It makes no difference whether the new agency is supposedly > independent or not. The government is only good at implementing or > financing specific technology after the exerts agree it is the right > choice. The government has a stellar track record for doing this, for > canals, steamships, telegraphs, the transcontinental railroad, > airports, nuclear weapons, highways, digital computers and so on. It > has had some large failures too, notably cost-effective fission > reactors and plasma fusion. I think it should offer more support for > wind energy, and much less support for fossil fuel extraction > technology, which is where the bulk of Federal R&D dollars go today. > The government, and everyone else, should immediately terminate > biofuels programs which are net energy sink. This is a complicated > way to waste oil and destroy the topsoil, the water table and the ecology. > > - Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 12:38:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJc53g002695; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:38:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJc3Nu002673; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:38:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:38:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060623150320.03e97398@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:05:58 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam In-Reply-To: <013f01c696f5$3380c9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> References: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> <449BE277.1070106@pobox.com> <013f01c696f5$3380c9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69289 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: Michel Jullian wrote: >This particular spam's text is in an image, which makes spam >removers totally ineffective I am afraid. I use the latest version of Eudora 7.0 with spam control, and I have not seen hide or hair of these spam messages you people are discussing. They went straight into the trash. It makes me wonder if I have trashed other, real messages. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 12:59:20 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJx6t0016912; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:59:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJx5KK016891; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:59:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:59:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060623154904.03f27270@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:58:53 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060623145152.03e9ba78@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/69290 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:17 PM 6/23/2006, Harry Veeder wrote: >Yes. >I was thinking it won't be effective in the long run. Yup. Stretching out supplies only buys time, but that's valuable. However, in the case of oil, a project to improve efficiency may actually serve two other purposes: 1. It would slow down global warming. 2. If it focuses on plug-in hybrid development, it may help the transition to pure electric vehicles and/or cold fusion powered vehicles. As several people here have noted, a plug-in hybrid may act as a "bridge" to pure electric or CF designs, by improving and lowering the cost of batteries, the transmission and other subsystems. I am assuming that CF will work best in a hybrid heat-engine/electric vehicle, rather than direct drive with a steam turbine or piston. As I noted in the book, this would solve the problem of the sluggish startup time of a CF cell. I assume the cell would remain hot in stand-by mode. Generation would be either with a steam turbine or advanced thermoelectric chips. Present day thermoelectric chips would not be suitable, because the engine would be huge. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 13:03:21 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NJ2nxU011966; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:02:49 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NJ2jHQ011909; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:02:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:02:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060623145152.03e9ba78@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:02:17 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? In-Reply-To: References: <138957156.1151079606072.JavaMail.root@fepweb08> 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/69285 X-Loop: vortex-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: >I'm not an American, but if one goes by the name of the proposed new >agency, "The National Energy Efficiency Development Administration", >it appears to be poorly conceived. In my estimation, if efficiency >is the goal it will not result in a reduction of the overall demand >for oil. It will just shift the pattern of oil consumption habits. I quibble with that. There is no use for oil except in transportation and feedstock. I used to be used for power generation but it is not anymore. In the first oil shock, in the 1970s, improved efficiency greatly lowered overall energy consumption in the U.S., especially oil. Improved efficiency would stretch out supplies. I do agree that what we really need is a replacement for fossil fuels, not methods of stretching supplies. I do not think the Federal Government is the right organization for this job. It makes no difference whether the new agency is supposedly independent or not. The government is only good at implementing or financing specific technology after the exerts agree it is the right choice. The government has a stellar track record for doing this, for canals, steamships, telegraphs, the transcontinental railroad, airports, nuclear weapons, highways, digital computers and so on. It has had some large failures too, notably cost-effective fission reactors and plasma fusion. I think it should offer more support for wind energy, and much less support for fossil fuel extraction technology, which is where the bulk of Federal R&D dollars go today. The government, and everyone else, should immediately terminate biofuels programs which are net energy sink. This is a complicated way to waste oil and destroy the topsoil, the water table and the ecology. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 13:10:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NK9h8F023937; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:09:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NK9fMn023911; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:09:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:09:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <449C4205.3040703@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:33:25 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Viz. the recent spam References: <001701c696be$57e8b920$2a05890a@wtwi01ntw012> <449BE277.1070106@pobox.com> <013f01c696f5$3380c9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> In-Reply-To: <013f01c696f5$3380c9b0$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69291 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: Michel Jullian wrote: > This particular spam's text is in an image, which makes spam removers totally ineffective I am afraid. > Actually SpamAssassin considers an email message with just images in it to be highly suspicious. It uses a configurable scoring system based on a number of criteria, and particularly in a forum where the rule is text-only messages or mostly-text messages with very small attachments, it should be possible to configure it to zap out such spam pretty reliably. Baysian filter systems, such as are used by Mozilla and Thunderbird, are of course useless in filtering such messages, as well as messages with "word salads" included in them. But SpamAssassin's quite a bit more flexible than that. Sorry, this is getting pretty far off-topic ... but maybe somebody'll find it useful for something... [ snip ] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 14:52:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NLq5IO019292; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:52:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NLq3ec019275; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:52:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:52:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 17:51:57 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C8652661FAAE64-12D4-4397@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: A new 'Manhattan Project' for energy innovation? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69292 X-Loop: vortex-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: Harry Veeder I'm not an American, <><><><><> Actually, you are. As one Canadian Customs official pointed out to me when asked my nationality, "We're all from North America. What country?" :-) Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 23 15:39:27 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5NMdC38013137; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:39:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5NMdBTx013110; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:39:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:39:10 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=JNsd60jhoH+5/XWW7DL/NYQVwyPVjWmir6x1cVzbG0XUN28apUvEocTbXMJIrTus; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006652322397340@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:39:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d8a610688c90667550d7571aec7bf398dbbd9aa8b00e01cd47350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.83.133 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69293 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 23, 2006 Status: RO X-Status: Forward from aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) > [Original Message] > From: What's New To: Date: 6/23/2006 2:00:44 PM Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 23, 2006 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC 1. MISSILES: THE DEFENSE SYSTEM IS COMMENSURATE WITH THE THREAT. President Bush pledged a ballistic missile defense in place by the end of 2004. By election time, interceptors were snug in their silos, http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN04/wn102204.html . It worked perfectly -- not a single ballistic missile has fallen on the U.S. since. However, North Korea is now threatening to test a new ballistic missile capable of reaching our mainland. In response the U.S. "activated" the system. Bring it on! Wait, you mean we've been spending $10B a year for a system that wasn't on? "Leaving it on would cost even more," I was told. Besides, it's never been tested against a surprise missile, it was bad enough when we knew the exact launch time and trajectory. 2. CONSPIRACIES: PHYSICIST'S NEW THEORY IS AS GOOD AS HIS FIRST. A few weeks ago a cab picked me up at the U. of Wisconsin Physics Dept. to take me to the airport. The driver began, "You a physicist? I like physics. You know this guy Steven Jones? He's a physicist. He proved the World Trade Center couldn't have fallen that fast on 9/11 unless it was rigged with explosives." I'd heard it before. Today there's a good story about Jones and the 9/11 "conspiracy" by John Gravois in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Seventeen years ago Steven Jones imagined that cold fusion is responsible for Earth's molten interior. That's what led Fleischmann and Pons to rush into print with their dumb idea. 3. HEAT: MAYBE GLOBAL WARMING DENIERS ARE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS. The 1999 Mann Report concluded that the 1990s were the warmest decade in a thousand years. It helped solidify public concern over warming. It also infuriated many Republican lawmakers and industry groups. At the request of the House Science Committee, the National Academies reviewed the Report, and agreed with the overall thrust. The same deniers objected to the review 4. LIES: REPLACING POLYGRAPHS WITH BRAIN IMAGING IS A BAD IDEA. WN has long recommended that the polygraph be replaced by a coin toss. It would catch half of the lies, which is a lot better than the polygraph. There would be a little "collateral damage" from false positives, but there's a lot of that anyway. However, the Wash Post on Tuesday had a story about discrepancies between polygraph results obtained by different federal agencies. Who could be surprised? We are forced to admit that the coin toss would suffer the same difficulty, presumably to the same extent. According to an editorial in yesterday's Nature, however, there are two start-up companies preparing to offer fMRI brain scanning devices as lie detectors. Many neuroscientists think the claims made for fMRI are overblown. Should company officials therefore be asked to submit to brain scans? That's the real problem. If it works, it would represent the ultimate invasion of privacy. 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.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnew&A=1 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Jun 25 20:16:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5Q3GHib023971; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:16:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5Q3GF2q023953; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:16:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:16:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060626031611522.7F7351C000E1@mwinf3001.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060626031611.009cc030@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 04:16:11 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5Q3GCfd023929 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69336 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 02:49 pm 25/06/2006 -0400, Frank wrote: >> hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: >> >>> . . . they are there; but, we don't know why. > >>> http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1946 >> >>> Space is fizzing. Above our heads, where the Earth's magnetic >>> field meets the constant stream of gas from the Sun, thousands >>> of bubbles of superheated gas are constantly growing and popping. >>> Their discovery could allow scientists to finally understand the >>> interaction between the solar wind and the Earth's magnetic field. >> Michael wrote >> This is fascinating stuff. At 1000km diameter they're not so tiny, >> now are they? It would be interesting if Frank could describe this >> from the standpoint of his beta-ether theory. Frank wrote > Bow waves on ships and the like are associated > with intense cavitation. I suggest that what > you've got here is huge cavitation bubbles in > the beta-atmosphere. In other words, negative > (relative to the arbitrary ambient) pressures > of many Alpha-atmospheres. > As for the increase in temperature, easy-peasy. 8-) > Compreture x (Temperature^n) = a constant > What is Compreture you might ask? Well if you > search the word in the mail archives you will find > where I have used it (ad nauseum) as being the > reciprocal of temperature. In other words I was > viewing the inverse of temperature as a > pressure which holds thing together. > Clearly, in this case Compreture is governing > the speed of the Alpha-atmosphere particles > embedded in the Beta-atm. - the higher the > Compreture the lower the speed of the Alpha-atm. > particles (which is another way of saying the > lower their temperature) - and vice-versa, of > course, which is what you have here. > This also gives us a fabulous insight on cold-fusion. > In the paper, > ==================================================== > Aether Vacua and COLD FUSION, > Infinite Energy, Issue 46, 2002 pp.28-33 > There is a .pdf version in the File Section at: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Beta-atmosphere_group/ > ==================================================== > I wrote: > ----------------------------------------------------- > What happens if hydrogen nuclei are spat out from a > high-pressure region into a low pressure region, like > orange pips at a school dinner table. Would it be > analogous to a temperature drop? Would the hydrogen > nuclei condense? > ----------------------------------------------------- > Apparently, what is happening in the Beta-atm. vacuum > cavities in palladium is the bits are speeding up, not > slowing down. No wonder people are reporting fusion. > Probably means that those reports of sono-fusion are > genuine too. Googling a reference to Taleyarkhan's stuff on bubble fusion to see what the claimed temperatures were, I find: ===================================================== http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/ nuclear_fusion_020304.html ----------------------------------------------------- The device created a bubble that reached 10 million degrees Kelvin -- as hot as the center of the Sun -- and also appears to have emitted high-energy neutrons, similar to neutrinos that are produced by the Sun. These neutrons are the telltale sign of fusion. ===================================================== Whereas in the "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . ." article we have ===================================================== http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file= article&sid=1946 ----------------------------------------------------- The bubbles, known as density holes, are regions of space where the density of gas suddenly falls by ten times but the temperature of the remaining gas leaps from 100,000 şC to 10,000,000 şC. ===================================================== Ooo....Two separate references to ten million degrees. Coincidence? Nah! Or to use the Jonesian expression: "NO (zero nada zip nil)" © Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 01:40:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5Q8eGXf014750; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:40:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5Q8eD85014721; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:40:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:40:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,174,1149436800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="323004236:sNHT131812260" Message-ID: <449F9C39.7080009@iinet.net.au> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:35:05 +1000 From: Wesley Bruce User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050706040003080702080408" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69337 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: joe cell water fuel pumps Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050706040003080702080408 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A key experiment that has to be done is to take nickel sheet formed into Joe cell cylinders chrome them and build a cell. What happens if there is no iron at all? Is chromium the key. No-one has checked chromium for Fleischmann/ Pons effect. Cold fusion could be driving thermal dissolution of water, occurs at ~2000^o C. If the ions produced are stripped of their electrons then we have O^+ 3 and ^+ H. A non combustible cold plasma with interesting properties. It should be hard to compress, it should hold more energy than hydrogen and oxygen. It may be a superconducting fluid. The assumption is that we get O2 and H2 or hydroxides. However if we get huge temperatures and very large arcs then we get electron stripping and the geometry of concentric unearthed plates, capacitors, prevents the plasmas coming into contact with electrons so they can't react chemically. When they reach the carburetor or the spark plug they acquire electrons and they then react powerfully. The key accusation on these machines is that they are burning lubricants. To control for this a simple test is to build a humphrey pump engine. http://www.steamengine.com.au/ic/history/humphrey_pumps/ This replaces the piston and gear box and lubricated components with water. The explosion of the fuel/air mix pushes the the water out trough a one way valve. The catch is that humphrey pumps engines are low compression power plants. However if we are dealing with an implosive fuel then the working stroke of the power plant would be the up to top dead center not the 'pushing' down stroke. The joe/ humphrey unit will have no lubricants so can't be burning it. It's an all water system. Please don't try both experiments; a chrome cell and a humphrey system, together; you multiply the complexity and if it does not work you wont know which bit failed. The real irritation is that this the "joe cell" is clearly a power plant best suited for stationary application. It needs to be in a controlled environment and the engine bay of a car is far from that. We need to build cells and run stationary "emergency" generators from them to power portable equipment. This can be taken to people instead of asking them to come out to see the car in the car park. --------------050706040003080702080408 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A key experiment that has to be done is to take nickel sheet formed into Joe cell cylinders chrome them and build a cell. What happens if there is no iron at all? Is chromium the key. No-one has checked chromium for Fleischmann/ Pons effect. Cold fusion could be driving thermal dissolution of water, occurs at ~2000oC. If the ions produced are stripped of their electrons then we have O+3 and +H. A non combustible cold plasma with interesting properties. It should be hard to compress, it should hold more energy than hydrogen and oxygen. It may be a superconducting fluid.
The assumption is that we get O2 and H2 or hydroxides. However if we get huge temperatures and very large arcs then we get electron stripping and the geometry of concentric unearthed plates, capacitors, prevents the plasmas coming into contact with electrons so they can't react chemically. When they reach the carburetor or the spark plug they acquire electrons and they then react powerfully.


The key accusation on these machines is that they are burning lubricants. To control for this a simple test is to build a humphrey pump engine.
http://www.steamengine.com.au/ic/history/humphrey_pumps/
This replaces the piston and gear box and lubricated components with water. The explosion of the fuel/air mix pushes the the water out trough a one way valve. The catch is that humphrey pumps engines are low compression power plants. However if we are dealing with an implosive fuel then the working stroke of the power plant would be the up to top dead center not the 'pushing' down stroke.  The joe/ humphrey unit will have no lubricants so can't be burning it.  It's an all water system.

Please don't try both experiments; a chrome cell and a humphrey system, together; you multiply the complexity and if it does not work you wont know which bit failed.

The real irritation is that this the "joe cell" is clearly a power plant best suited for stationary application. It needs to be in a controlled environment and the engine bay of a car is far from that. We need to build cells and run stationary "emergency" generators from them to power portable equipment. This can be taken to people instead of asking them to come out to see the car in the car park.
--------------050706040003080702080408-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 01:50:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5Q8o6IV020458; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:50:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5Q8mhPR019648; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:48:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:48:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060626084838930.E32945800082@mwinf3108.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060626084839.0099bedc@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, 26 Jun 2006 09:48:39 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69338 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Whilst on the subject of Beta-atmosphere vacua taking off the pressure that holds things together, why do you think things like salt fall apart when dropped into water. Water molecules are electrets, and consequently form a jangle of struts and ties with plenty of nooks and crannies where Na and Cl can hide away from the external Beta atmosphere pressure. The sodium an chlorine atoms fall apart cos they are no longer pushed together and so they can wander off on their own though the system of underground, oops....underwater caves that the water structure provides. Of course you can look at things from the bottom up instead of the top down if you want to - but who'd want to - only a reductionist chemist like my friend, Alfred, who when asked what that delicious smell coming from the kitchen is will reply, "It is molecules impinging on your olfactory nerve cells." whereas my grandson, Edwin, answers "Mum's cooking apple pie." =========================================== ex ore infantium et lactantium perfecisti laudem propter adversarios meos ut quiescat inimicus et ultor =========================================== Cheers, Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 05:00:19 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QBxxlH020091; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 05:00:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QBxf2t019904; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 04:59:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 04:59:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001601c69917$fb354e30$0100007f@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 06:58:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C698ED.F93F8AC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <35ovbB.A.12E.tw8nEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69339 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C698ED.F93F8AC0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0013_01C698ED.F93F8AC0" ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C698ED.F93F8AC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankGrimer wrote.. > What happens if hydrogen nuclei are spat out from a=20 > high-pressure region into a low pressure region, like=20 > orange pips at a school dinner table. Would it be=20 > analogous to a temperature drop? Would the hydrogen=20 > nuclei condense? > ----------------------------------------------------- > Apparently, what is happening in the Beta-atm. vacuum=20 > cavities in palladium is the bits are speeding up, not=20 > slowing down. No wonder people are reporting fusion.=20 > Probably means that those reports of sono-fusion are=20 > genuine too. Howdy Frank.. And therein becomes a valid clue to the answer to the question.. exactly = what is gravity? We don't know! Can we suspect it can be explained by the Beta-atm ? Yes! How do we verify ? We can't at present. Why not? Because the mathematics required has not yet been discovered. = These advanced theories cannot be adequately described by lab experiment = but only viewed through a radical new mathematical language not yet = discovered. Will we ever be able to verify? Perhaps.=20 Explain. There are advances in computing sciences that may provide a = platform for discovering this new form of mathematics. What does " form " mean? This form may not be mathematics as our present = understanding of the term means. Huh? We do not have a descriptive language just as we had no language = for computers before their discovery. We are mere mortals being accelerated just as a free falling object in a = vacuum. The question becomes not "if" but "when" and will this free fall = in advances in scientific discovery end in a "splat" or a "smile". The = when answers are given in Frank's bible and not in the physics = textbooks. Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C698ED.F93F8AC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Grimer wrote..
 
 
> What happens if hydrogen nuclei are spat out from a
>=20 high-pressure region into a low pressure region, like
> orange = pips at a=20 school dinner table. Would it be
> analogous to a temperature = drop? Would=20 the hydrogen
> nuclei condense?
>=20 -----------------------------------------------------

> = Apparently,=20 what is happening in the Beta-atm. vacuum
> cavities in palladium = is the=20 bits are speeding up, not
> slowing down. No wonder people are = reporting=20 fusion.
> Probably means that those reports of sono-fusion are =
>=20 genuine too.
 
 
Howdy Frank..
And therein becomes a valid clue to the answer to the question.. = exactly=20 what is gravity?
We don't know! Can we suspect it can be explained by the Beta-atm ? = Yes!
How do we verify ? We can't at present.
Why not?   Because the mathematics required has not yet = been=20 discovered. These advanced theories cannot be adequately described by = lab=20 experiment but only viewed through a radical new mathematical language = not yet=20 discovered.
Will we ever be able to verify? Perhaps.
Explain.  There are advances in computing sciences that may = provide a=20 platform for discovering this new form of mathematics.
What does " form " mean? This form may not be mathematics as our = present=20 understanding of the term means.
Huh? We do not have a descriptive language just as we had no = language for=20 computers before their discovery.
We are mere mortals being accelerated just as a free falling object = in a=20 vacuum. The question becomes not "if" but "when" and will this free = fall in=20 advances in scientific discovery end in a "splat" or a "smile". = The  when=20 answers are given in Frank's bible and not in the physics = textbooks.
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0013_01C698ED.F93F8AC0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C698ED.F93F8AC0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001101c69917$e2034340$0100007f@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C698ED.F93F8AC0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 08:19:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QFIlNl011953; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:18:47 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QFIjgd011928; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:18:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:18:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060626151842359.5799D1C000A2@mwinf3011.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060626151842.00bc5c88@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, 26 Jun 2006 16:18:42 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re:[VO]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69340 X-Loop: vortex-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 06:58 am 26/06/2006 -0500, Richard wrote: > We are mere mortals being accelerated just > as a free falling object in a vacuum. > The question becomes not "if" but "when" and > will this free fall in advances in scientific > discovery end in a "splat" or a "smile". > The when answers are given in Frank's bible > and not in the physics textbooks. > > Richard Yeah, well. If you want to know how something works then RTMM (Read the Manufacturer's Manual). I thought I'd better bowdlerise the more familiar acronym, I wouldn't want to finish up like Oza. Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 09:11:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QGAD2S006314; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:10:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QFj5Qm026821; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:45:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:45:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060626113918.03ee8cb0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 11:44:44 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: OT : ethanol biofuel and stupid white men In-Reply-To: <005801c6985c$ec20e5f0$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> References: <005801c6985c$ec20e5f0$0600a8c0@nixlaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_8316468==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69341 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_8316468==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Nick Palmer wrote: >http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/25ethanol.html?th&emc=th For once, this issue of the Times also presented evidence against ethanol, "A Range of Estimates on Ethanol's Benefits." This discusses research by Pimental and Patzek. Even if ethanol advocates are correct, and the numbers they publish are right, they have no case. This article quotes them: " . . . positive output 67 percent greater than the energy inputs. But others who view ethanol favorably are more conservative, with several estimating the net energy benefit at about 20 percent." Oil and ethanol are used only for transportation, mainly automobiles. We can easily achieve this level of improvement with better efficiency, hybrids and plug-in hybrids, and we would not destroy the ecosystem or starve millions of people to death, the way we will with large-scale ethanol production. - Jed --=====================_8316468==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Nick Palmer wrote:

http ://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/25ethanol.html?th&emc=th

For once, this issue of the Times also presented evidence against ethanol, "A Range of Estimates on Ethanol's Benefits." This discusses research by Pimental and Patzek.

Even if ethanol advocates are correct, and the numbers they publish are right, they have no case. This article quotes them: " . . . positive output 67 percent greater than the energy inputs. But others who view ethanol favorably are more conservative, with several estimating the net energy benefit at about 20 percent." Oil and ethanol are used only for transportation, mainly automobiles. We can easily achieve this level of improvement with better efficiency, hybrids and plug-in hybrids, and we would not destroy the ecosystem or starve millions of people to death, the way we will with large-scale ethanol production.

- Jed
--=====================_8316468==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 09:15:38 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QGF7xI009608; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:15:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QGF6bO009587; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:15:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:15:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:15:04 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69342 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: war on curiousity Status: RO X-Status: (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci >From SF Chronicle: JON - Jon Carroll Friday, June 2, 2006 I think several things are coming together. The first is the unannounced, perhaps even unacknowledged, war on curiosity. The second is the equally unacknowledged war on risk. The third is pervasive fear, most often described as a fear of terrorists, but really a fear of anything surprising, exotic or hard to understand. Since science demands both curiosity and risk, and since a lot of science is hard to understand (particularly if you did not try to learn about science because it seemed risky and you were not curious), the prevailing cultural trends have combined to form an unannounced but potent war on science. Signs of that war are everywhere. Because people are afraid of science, they can easily be persuaded to mock scientists or scientific theory. Evolution, global warming, stem cell research -- they've all come under attack because stupid or avaricious people have found it all too easy to use ignorance and fear to advance their own agendas. Sometimes these things can best be seen in microcosm. I direct your attention to an article by Steve Silberman in the June issue of Wired magazine. The opening sentences are arresting: "The first startling thing Joy White saw out of her bedroom window was a man running toward her door with an M16. White's husband, a physicist named Bob Lazar, was already outside, awakened by their barking dogs. Suddenly police officers and men in camouflage swarmed up the path, hoisting a battering ram. 'Come out with your hands up immediately, Miss White!' one of them yelled through a megaphone, while another handcuffed the physicist in his underwear. Recalling that June morning in 2003, Lazar says, 'If they were expecting to find Osama bin Laden, they brought along enough guys.' " So who are Lazar and White? To what secret cabal do they belong? It's the secret society of high school chemistry teachers and backyard science geeks. Lazar and White are the co-proprietors of United Nuclear (remember when you could use irony in naming your company? That was the 20th century, which is over), a mail order chemical supply house. (Go to www.unitednuclear.com and see for yourself.) They had fallen afoul of the Consumer Product Safety Division -- you didn't know it had its own army, did you? -- for selling sulfur, potassium perchlorate and powdered aluminum, all of which can be used in the manufacture of (wait for it) illegal fireworks. Are illegal fireworks a big problem? Well, no -- most fireworks-related injuries come from commercially made and legally sold fireworks. But you can't be too careful. Everything is dangerous. Naturally, these substances have many other uses; they are staples of virtually any well-stocked high school chemistry lab. Of course, there are a declining number of high school chemistry labs, and college chemistry labs, and an even steeper drop in hands-on experimentation by students, because it could be risky and besides it's weird and useless, because knowing stuff just for the sake of knowing stuff is silly. (We might add: Blowing up stuff for the sake of blowing up stuff is even more pointless -- unless you work for the government and intend to kill people. Then it's OK.) Let's consider the importance of home chemistry experiments. As Silberman writes: "After reading a book called 'The Boy Scientist' at age 10, Vint Cerf -- who became one of the architects of the Internet -- spent months blowing up thermite volcanoes and launching backyard rockets. Growing up in Colorado, David Packard -- the late cofounder of Hewlett-Packard -- concocted new recipes for gunpowder. The neurologist Oliver Sacks writes about his adolescent love affair with 'stinks and bangs' in 'Uncle Tungsten: Memories of a Chemical Boyhood.' 'There's no question that stinks and bangs and crystals and colors are what drew kids -- particularly boys -- to science,' says Roald Hoffmann of Cornell University, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1981. "Now the potential for stinks and bangs has been legislated out." There are malign uses for chemicals too: poisons, drugs, weird refrigerator-eating gunky stuff. But then, there are malign uses for automobiles, dish detergent, chicken wings. You can kill someone with a common scarf. A household knife -- deadly. We live with risk all around us, little germs and big bombs and crazy people. It's a wonder that the world's population is increasing. And a lot of what is being banned is available in other ways. A Mr. Coffee machine has three parts -- a filter funnel, a Pyrex beaker and a heating element -- that are listed as known components of drug labs. But keep it to yourself, or coffeemakers might go the way of Erlenmeyer flasks, which are already banned in Texas. The United States is lagging in science education, and bureaucrats are proposing various initiatives and programs and even "targeted attacks" to help correct the problem. But curiosity does not flourish in an atmosphere of fear, and that'll take more than a five-point plan to correct. _____ In which we consider the utility of stinks and bangs, and try to strike a balance between curiosity and criminality. Here comes a stingray, there goes a manta ray, in walked a jelly fish, there goes a dogfish chased by a catfish; in flew a sea robin, watch out for that piranha, there goes a narwhal, here comes jcarroll@sfchronicle.com. Page E - 16 URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/06/02/DDGS0INI811.DTL _____ C2006 San Francisco Chronicle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 14:04:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QKu5K3007880; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:56:06 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QKu342007842; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:56:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:56:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060626165451.03da9918@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060626100358.03f10450@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 16:55:56 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_13417859==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: <6lA0FB.A.O6B.hnEoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69343 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Message sent to R. Park Status: RO X-Status: --=====================_13417859==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [I send Park a message a few times a year just to=20 remind him that we have his number. - JR] Subject: What about the other 3,000 papers? You wrote: >Seventeen years ago Steven Jones imagined that=20 >cold fusion is responsible for Earth's molten=20 >interior. That's what led Fleischmann and Pons=20 >to rush into print with their dumb idea. You write as if only one paper about cold fusion=20 has been published. Approximately 3,000 have been=20 published, including about 1,000 in mainstream,=20 peer-reviewed journals such as the Journal of=20 Electroanalytical Chemistry and the Japanese=20 Journal of Applied Physics (the second most cited=20 journal in the world). They have been published=20 in leading plasma fusion journals, such as this: Li, X.Z., et al., A Chinese View on Summary of=20 Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. J. Fusion Energy, 2004. 23(3): p. 217-221. Li is a contributing editor. Other prominent=20 researchers include former chairman of the Indian=20 Atomic Energy Commission, Distinguished=20 Professors and Fellows at five universities and=20 the U.S. Navy, former presidents of the=20 Electrochemical Society, two other editors of=20 major plasma fusion and physics journals, a=20 retired member of the French Atomic Energy=20 Commission, and many top researchers from U.S.=20 national laboratories. Are you absolutely certain=20 that you know more about this subject than these=20 people? You are certain that every single one of=20 these papers is "dumb" and wrong? How many of these papers have you read? You should not imagine these are marginal=20 results. The authors are unequivocal. See, for example, this paper from= Amoco: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Lautzenhiscoldfusion.pdf QUOTE: "The calorimetry conclusively shows excess energy=20 was produced within the electrolytic cell over=20 the period of the experiment. This amount, 50=20 kilojoules, is such that any chemical reaction=20 would have had to been in near molar amounts to=20 have produced the energy. Chemical analysis shows=20 clearly that no such chemical reactions occurred.=20 The tritium results show that some form of=20 nuclear reactions occurred during the experiment.=20 The tritium produced was not nearly enough to=20 account for the excess energy. The expected=20 nuclear processes would have been on the order of=20 4 Mev per event. 10E17 such reactions would have=20 been required to produce 50 Kjoules of energy.=20 Our measurement of tritium shows an excess of 5 =D7=20 10E8 atoms. In other words, tritium production=20 would only account for about 5 =D7 10E-9 of the=20 observed excess energy. The main point of the=20 tritium in this experiment is then that there are=20 some nuclear processes involved . . ." - Jed --=====================_13417859==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [I send Park a message a few times a year just to remind him that we have his number. - JR]

Subject: What about the other 3,000 papers?

You wrote:

Seventeen years ago Steven Jo= nes imagined that cold fusion is responsible for Earth's molten interior.  That's what led Fleischmann and Pons to rush into print with their dumb idea.

You write as if only one paper about cold fusion has been published. Approximately 3,000 have been published, including about 1,000 in mainstream, peer-reviewed journals such as  the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics (the second most cited journal in the world). They have been published in leading plasma fusion journals, such as this:

Li, X.Z., et al., A Chinese View on Summary of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. J. Fusion Energy, 2004. 23(3): p. 217-221.

Li is a contributing editor. Other prominent researchers include former chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission, Distinguished Professors and Fellows at five universities and the U.S. Navy, former presidents of the Electrochemical Society, two other editors of major plasma fusion and physics journals, a retired member of the French Atomic Energy Commission, and many top researchers from U.S. national laboratories. Are you absolutely certain that you know more about this subject than these people? You are certain that every single one of these papers is "dumb" and wrong?

How many of these papers have you read?

You should not imagine these are marginal results. The authors are unequivocal. See, for example, this paper from Amoco:

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

QUOTE:

"The calorimetry conclusively shows excess energy was produced within the electrolytic cell over the period of the experiment. This amount, 50 kilojoules, is such that any chemical reaction would have had to been in near molar amounts to have produced the energy. Chemical analysis shows clearly that no such chemical reactions occurred. The tritium results show that some form of nuclear reactions occurred during the experiment. The tritium produced was not nearly enough to account for the excess energy. The expected nuclear processes would have been on the order of 4 Mev per event. 10E17 such reactions would have been required to produce 50 Kjoules of energy. Our measurement of tritium shows an excess of 5 =D7 10E8 atoms. In other words, tritium production would only account for about 5 =D7 10E-9 of the observed excess energy. The main point of the tritium in this experiment is then that there are some nuclear processes involved . . ."

- Jed
--=====================_13417859==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 14:49:35 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QLnP7d005661; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 14:49:25 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QLnNjV005645; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 14:49:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 14:49:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060626171828.03d9da00@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:49:15 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell 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/69344 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Wind power O&M Status: O X-Status: RC Macaulay wrote: "A large portion of each windfarm is "out of service for repairs" at any one time." I mentioned that an EPRI study showed just the opposite: wind turbines require less maintenance per KWH than most other generator types. However, a study at a remote location with high winds did reveal significant costs and downtime for operations and maintenance (O&M). The costs were covered by the warrantee. Overall availability for two types of turbine was 92%. The capacity factor for this location was 32%, which means there is a lot of wind for a land site. See: http://pepei.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARTCL&ARTICLE_ID=256006&VERSION_NUM=2&p=6 92% compares favorably to nuclear and combustion generation when you take into account the time required for maintenance and refueling. Other studies in Europe have shown higher availability, especially with the new offshore units. This NREL report from 2000 shows downtime ranging from 43 hours to 127 hours per month (82% to 94% availability). See: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/28620.pdf Note that a lot of O&M downtime can be scheduled for times when the weather report shows little or no wind is expected. An unplanned equipment failure during high winds costs a lot of lost revenue, but maintenance scheduled 3 days ahead of time for a calm period costs nothing more than the labor and parts. O&M costs are roughly 20 to 25% of the cost per KWH, so aggressive steps are being taken to reduce O&M expenses, such as improved computer monitoring of oil and bearing conditions. In other wind news, Denmark is now generating 20% of its overall power from wind. This was formerly thought to be the practical limits, but improvements in the net have already been made, and they have spurred new plans to generate 50% of electricity from wind by 2025. See: http://www.windpower.org/composite-520.htm Overall Scandinavian wind power is expected to reach 17,000 MW (nameplate), much of it offshore, or 6.5 GW actual. This is roughly equivalent to 7.5 average U.S. nukes. The U.S. has about 100 nukes, so this is very substantial generating capacity. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 15:48:02 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5QMlmCD006396; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:47:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5QMlkCo006375; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:47:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:47:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:47:30 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69345 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Status: O X-Status: Hello all, First off, I must say I hate the term "alternative energy." Why? Alternative has a sort of 'its not the greatest but its something to fall back on' kind of attachment to it. I think this stuff is more like "advanced" energy, but thats just my $0.75 (inflation, no longer $0.02) I've heard of the possibilities of running engines on compressed or liquefied methane gas. Quite powerful, low pollution, much easier on the inner works of the engine, valves in particular. I have also read Zubrin's books on exploration schemes for Mars, in particular the bits about in-situ fuel generation, that is, making methane with resources available on the Martian surface. Now my only problem with this, and why I prefer hydrogen over this, is you still get CO2 from burning the methane. Supposedly there is too much CO2 in the air. Well.... can't we just manufacture CH4 fuel from H2O we get from seawater (or whatever logical source) and CO2 from the atmosphere? Granted the atmosphere of Mars is primarily CO2, but it is also at a far far lower pressure. I would think there is plenty of CO2 available in our atmosphere to be used to produce automotive fuel (or gas for heating homes, cooking, etc.) We would then not be adding any CO2 back to the air, simply recycling what we have already there. The energy to do this could be obtained by wind farms or solar collectors. As for the problem of transmitting all the energy from distant facilities to consumers not near the power plants, why can we not use the energy to make some high energy liquid or gas (CH4, LH2, etc.) and literally pipeline our energy to distant points, at no loss? Except of course whatever is involved in conversion/reconversion and moving it from A to B. Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? --Kyle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 21:44:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5R4iM06010296; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 21:44:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5R4iJjA010270; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 21:44:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 21:44:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 00:27:47 -0400 From: Pteranodon Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line In-reply-to: <448DAD3A.7040100@teksavvy.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-to: rockcastle@lakeside1.net Message-id: <200606260027.47377.rockcastle@lakeside1.net> Organization: Rockcastle Associates MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline References: <448DAD3A.7040100@teksavvy.com> User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Resent-Message-ID: <7VgDS.A.agC.jeLoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69347 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 Monday 12 June 2006 14:06, peatbog wrote: > John Steck wrote: > > Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just > > because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As > > soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! > > > > Just my 2 cents. 8^( > > When I first started reading vortex, I put a filter on the To: > header to whitelist anything addressed to vortex-l, and added one to > move the message into the Vortex folder. > > I'm using mozilla thunderbird, but thought even the simplest mail > readers could do that. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] > > Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM > > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > > > > > > Test. Does this work? > > > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 Seems Mr Bill B has changed the way ALL vortexians recieve their web mail to the list. Not only is there a 'vo' tag in front of all the posts to the list, but the headers of the files are lengthened as well as well as re mails of your posts to AOL. All of them. All your posts are now going to a secret box on AOL. I did not subscribe to AO-Hell, and heartily object to all my Vortex mail being sent there. I have a Linux system and know well how to sign off of Vortex. This unrequested mail change has lengthened headers on all my mail with re-mails to Vortex to unsub and resub with every mail. All my Vortex mail goes to a special folder in K-Mail. This is a KDE 3.1 so it yet retains the ability to shred and totally destroy spam. One post from BillB sent later with only the subject line of 'vo' contained a segment of 8 bit characters that I took to be either a virus or a silent re-direct to a viral site. If Bill B could cause this subject change attack to become effective on my computer, then all of your computers are at risk. I will not only unsubscribe, but will have to shred all user files under the this user. This change may have been to Vortex's service provider as it appears under no other list but Vortex. Either way though I will take no chances. I'm supremely gratefull that my linux system can be set to refuse to process HTML in e-mail like. Some newer hyped up e-mail systems for linux like Ximian DO process HTML and refuse to allow the e=mail user to stop this. That is why I refuse to do e-mail on any system but linux, and refuse to use any linux system using kernel 2.6 or newer for any secure e-mail or browsing. I will now unsubscribe from Vortex and sign off this user and shred its files 40 times using Guttmann. That way all the virus will be dead dead dead and will never darken my digital doorway again. Pteranodon From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 06:01:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RD0cPp027093; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:00:38 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RD0Zcd027059; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:00:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:00:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060627071500111.1B4446400096@mwinf3109.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060627071500.00998c48@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, 27 Jun 2006 08:15:00 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: RE: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . Resent-Message-ID: <5NvmCC.A.rmG.yvSoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69348 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 the light of the parallel between the "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . ." and the truly tiny bubbles in sonoluminescence I thought I'd revisit my files and find how the insights gained from those space "Bubbles" might increase understanding of the connection between the two. The most significant recent work is, of course, that by Taleyarkhan. As might be expected, his claim of fusion has caused a similar furore as that of F&P. The distinctive feature of Taleyarkhan's experiments was the use of neutrons to seed the bubbles rather than relying on: "small air bubbles already in the liquid. Using this new method, the team was able to produce stable bubbles that could expand to nearly a millimeter in radius before collapsing. In this way, the researchers stated, they were able to create the conditions necessary to produce very high pressures and temperatures." Now it is significant that the high temperatures claimed (10 megakelvins) and the relatively huge expansion are the same as that claimed for the "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . .". This suggests that from a General Systems viewpoint we are dealing with the same phenomena, a highly rarified gas in an intense Beta-atmosphere vacuum. I believe that the mistake Taleyarkhan and others are making is to focus their attention on the collapse of the bubble. In the first place we are not dealing with bubbles but with their inverse, with not-bubbles. In other words we are dealing with cavities. Bubbles are at a higher internal pressure than the surrounding environment. Cavities are at a lower internal pressure. Therefore, though "Tiny cavities in the sky...." may be less poetic than "Tiny bubbles..." being more suggestive of rotten teeth than a mountain spring, it would be a more accurate title for this thread. The bubbles in the sky aren't bursting but collapsing. The temperature increase in Taleyarkhan's cavities must take place as the cavity expands and the temperature of the low pressure gas inside the cavity increases to that of the sun's interior. Any action that takes place must occur when the cavity is large. As the cavity decreases in size the temperature of the rarified gas within will drop. The same conditions must apply in the case of cold fusion. The temperature of the rarified gas within expanding cavities will increase to levels sufficient for fusion to take place. What causes the expansion of the cavities in palladium. Who knows? Redistribution of the stresses inbuilt during manufacture perhaps giving rise to increase in compressive strains in some places and increase in tensile strains in other. I suppose a more likely cause is the differential tensile strains that arise from the pressure of deuterium nuclei as they saturate the metal. Perhaps a more accurate name for Cold Fusion would be Cavitation Fusion, cos, clearly, that's what it is. 8-) Cheers, Frank Grimer The high temperature inside metal cavities also explains what the researches detected inside the cup and cone cavity that forms just prior to failure in steel. It's a pity I never been able to find that reference again. No doubt someone will turn it up one of these days. 8-) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 07:28:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RES0XP023687; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:28:01 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RERwQp023653; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:27:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:27:57 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qQg/AKBH119yL2m1HHkBy30pxtGqDFRvdGxz+fzVjjbc82h6cWJ0TR09XveQFFRg; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066227142748677@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:27:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402087ab31b3d44f84d8f00100e586a805350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.198 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69351 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Staying within the rules that the three mesons "QuarkTriad" that make up the proton had an original mass of ~548 MeV (two positive and one negative charge) with a manifest mass of 312 MeV each in the bound proton it is possible that nature created mesons of twice this energy and they are bound up as a Heavy Proton (*P+) with a mass Twice that of a regular proton. Thus some deuterons may be (*H ), some (*H )D may be mistaken for He-4 .....and K-40, and especially Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18. :-) The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion reaction that has a cross-section comparable that of D-T gives one pause to ask if all that "He-3 on the Moon" is really what they think? WIMPs in Space even heavier Baryons? Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Staying within the rules that the three mesons "QuarkTriad" that
make up the proton had an original mass of ~548 MeV
(two positive and one  negative charge) with a manifest
mass of 312 MeV each in the bound proton it is possible
that nature created mesons of twice this energy and they
are bound up as a Heavy Proton (*P+) with a mass Twice that
of a regular proton.
Thus some deuterons may be (*H ), some (*H )D may be mistaken
for He-4 .....and K-40, and especially Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18.  :-)
 
The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion reaction that has a cross-section
comparable that of D-T gives one pause to ask if all that "He-3 on
the Moon" is really what they think?
 
WIMPs in Space even heavier Baryons?
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 07:53:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RErJJc010496; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:53:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RErC56010388; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:53:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:53:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003601c699f9$60b244c0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , "List - Vortex" References: Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:52:56 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69352 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Status: RO X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Steck" > "All your posts are now going to a secret box on AOL." > Well, that would explain the recent up-tick in spam lately. > WTF? I second that. Since this 'tag' thing started, the unwanted mail getting through my ISP spam filter has gone up 500%. ... and for whatever reason, it appears to be weighted to spam coming from Asia, as a third of it is in Asian fonts. I have no way to verify it has anything to do with AOL and in truth, I had thought it was related to the recent ATT merger with SBC. Curously, all the mail getting through my ISP spam filter seems to be 'single addressee' rather than bulk mail (many listed addressees) but this could be a relic of being done by some 'bot, which may have infected the AOL box, who knows? ... the spam-mongers probably know by now that single-addressee has a better chance of getting through the type of spam filter used by ATT/Yahoo. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 08:02:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RF27fU017997; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:02:07 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RF25GD017978; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:02:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:02:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004701c699fa$a29475b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: , References: <410-220066227142748677@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:01:56 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0044_01C699BF.F5984C40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <-tAD0D.A.rYE.shUoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69353 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C699BF.F5984C40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Would the putative heavy baryon have twice the charge and collect two = electrons from the start? i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on the sun ;-} Would there be ppm quantities of this putative species in any tank of H2 = gas?=20 If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen through a mass-spec and see if you = can collect any gas which is not ionized at the highest setting.=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Frederick Sparber=20 Staying within the rules that the three mesons "QuarkTriad" that make up the proton had an original mass of ~548 MeV (two positive and one negative charge) with a manifest mass of 312 MeV each in the bound proton it is possible that nature created mesons of twice this energy and they are bound up as a Heavy Proton (*P+) with a mass Twice that of a regular proton. Thus some deuterons may be (*H ), some (*H )D may be mistaken for He-4 .....and K-40, and especially Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18. = :-) The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion reaction that has a cross-section comparable that of D-T gives one pause to ask if all that "He-3 on the Moon" is really what they think? WIMPs in Space even heavier Baryons? Fred ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C699BF.F5984C40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Would the putative heavy baryon have = twice the=20 charge and collect two electrons from the start?
 
i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on = the=20 sun  ;-}
 
Would there be ppm quantities = of this putative=20 species in any tank of H2 gas?
 
If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen = through a=20 mass-spec and see if you can collect any gas which is not ionized at the = highest=20 setting.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Frederick Sparber
 
Staying within the rules = that the three=20 mesons "QuarkTriad" that
make up the proton had an = original mass=20 of ~548 MeV
(two positive and one  = negative=20 charge) with a manifest
mass of 312 MeV each in the = bound=20 proton it is possible
that nature created mesons = of twice=20 this energy and they
are bound up as a Heavy = Proton (*P+)=20 with a mass Twice that
of a regular = proton.
Thus some deuterons may be = (*H ), some=20 (*H )D may be mistaken
for He-4 .....and K-40, and = especially=20 Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18.  :-)
 
The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion = reaction that=20 has a cross-section
comparable that of D-T = gives one pause=20 to ask if all that "He-3 on
the Moon" is really what = they=20 think?
 
WIMPs in Space even heavier = Baryons?
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C699BF.F5984C40-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Jun 26 19:16:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5R2GOUA026488; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:16:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5R2GM8i026470; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:16:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:16:22 -0700 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=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:Message-Id:X-Sender:X-Mailer:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=uKSKX7o/qbtOV0LIlexn+Np6TzaFDmTPGk5OSLIaB6KNuHrVMnVnEPm5JH2XeWgJmrzaSyF8SXeTuDCQNSdENDg3vHY+j5tbRWAt4PAtiVZH0WVNq/1+HSSTMo5dLGAB9Q5ZiNgATYv19w7gzOrFx7l5rJ+/T27oSm1NWGJ3LLs= ; Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.1.20060626220906.01e03508@pop> X-Sender: philip.winestone@pop X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.1.1 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 22:14:03 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Philip Winestone Subject: Re: [Vo]: war on curiousity 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/69346 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com X-Suspected-Spam: billb friends5 Status: RO X-Status: My own experience is that one can't put a fence around curiosity. You can't say that people are allowed to be curious about science, or even about one branch of science, but not about anything else in this universe. My experience is that there are some people who are fundamentally curious about everything they see or feel or hear, etc. These are the really curious people. Some people sniff and call these people names... like "moonbats." P. At 09:15 AM 6/26/2006 -0700, you wrote: >(((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb at amasci com http://amasci.com >EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair >Seattle, WA 425-222-5066 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci > > > From SF Chronicle: > > >JON > >- Jon Carroll > >Friday, June 2, 2006 > >I think several things are coming together. The first is the unannounced, >perhaps even unacknowledged, war on curiosity. The second is the equally >unacknowledged war on risk. The third is pervasive fear, most often >described as a fear of terrorists, but really a fear of anything surprising, >exotic or hard to understand. Since science demands both curiosity and risk, >and since a lot of science is hard to understand (particularly if you did >not try to learn about science because it seemed risky and you were not >curious), the prevailing cultural trends have combined to form an >unannounced but potent war on science. > >Signs of that war are everywhere. Because people are afraid of science, they >can easily be persuaded to mock scientists or scientific theory. Evolution, >global warming, stem cell research -- they've all come under attack because >stupid or avaricious people have found it all too easy to use ignorance and >fear to advance their own agendas. > >Sometimes these things can best be seen in microcosm. I direct your >attention to an article by Steve Silberman in the June issue of Wired >magazine. The opening sentences are arresting: "The first startling thing >Joy White saw out of her bedroom window was a man running toward her door >with an M16. White's husband, a physicist named Bob Lazar, was already >outside, awakened by their barking dogs. Suddenly police officers and men in >camouflage swarmed up the path, hoisting a battering ram. 'Come out with >your hands up immediately, Miss White!' one of them yelled through a >megaphone, while another handcuffed the physicist in his underwear. >Recalling that June morning in 2003, Lazar says, 'If they were expecting to >find Osama bin Laden, they brought along enough guys.' " > >So who are Lazar and White? To what secret cabal do they belong? It's the >secret society of high school chemistry teachers and backyard science geeks. >Lazar and White are the co-proprietors of United Nuclear (remember when you >could use irony in naming your company? That was the 20th century, which is >over), a mail order chemical supply house. (Go to www.unitednuclear.com and >see for yourself.) They had fallen afoul of the Consumer Product Safety >Division -- you didn't know it had its own army, did you? -- for selling >sulfur, potassium perchlorate and powdered aluminum, all of which can be >used in the manufacture of (wait for it) illegal fireworks. > >Are illegal fireworks a big problem? Well, no -- most fireworks-related >injuries come from commercially made and legally sold fireworks. But you >can't be too careful. Everything is dangerous. Naturally, these substances >have many other uses; they are staples of virtually any well-stocked high >school chemistry lab. Of course, there are a declining number of high school >chemistry labs, and college chemistry labs, and an even steeper drop in >hands-on experimentation by students, because it could be risky and besides >it's weird and useless, because knowing stuff just for the sake of knowing >stuff is silly. (We might add: Blowing up stuff for the sake of blowing up >stuff is even more pointless -- unless you work for the government and >intend to kill people. Then it's OK.) > >Let's consider the importance of home chemistry experiments. As Silberman >writes: "After reading a book called 'The Boy Scientist' at age 10, Vint >Cerf -- who became one of the architects of the Internet -- spent months >blowing up thermite volcanoes and launching backyard rockets. Growing up in >Colorado, David Packard -- the late cofounder of Hewlett-Packard -- >concocted new recipes for gunpowder. The neurologist Oliver Sacks writes >about his adolescent love affair with 'stinks and bangs' in 'Uncle Tungsten: >Memories of a Chemical Boyhood.' 'There's no question that stinks and bangs >and crystals and colors are what drew kids -- particularly boys -- to >science,' says Roald Hoffmann of Cornell University, who won the Nobel Prize >for chemistry in 1981. "Now the potential for stinks and bangs has been >legislated out." > >There are malign uses for chemicals too: poisons, drugs, weird >refrigerator-eating gunky stuff. But then, there are malign uses for >automobiles, dish detergent, chicken wings. You can kill someone with a >common scarf. A household knife -- deadly. We live with risk all around us, >little germs and big bombs and crazy people. It's a wonder that the world's >population is increasing. > >And a lot of what is being banned is available in other ways. A Mr. Coffee >machine has three parts -- a filter funnel, a Pyrex beaker and a heating >element -- that are listed as known components of drug labs. But keep it to >yourself, or coffeemakers might go the way of Erlenmeyer flasks, which are >already banned in Texas. > >The United States is lagging in science education, and bureaucrats are >proposing various initiatives and programs and even "targeted attacks" to >help correct the problem. But curiosity does not flourish in an atmosphere >of fear, and that'll take more than a five-point plan to correct. > > _____ > >In which we consider the utility of stinks and bangs, and try to strike a >balance between curiosity and criminality. > >Here comes a stingray, there goes a manta ray, in walked a jelly fish, there >goes a dogfish chased by a catfish; in flew a sea robin, watch out for that >piranha, there goes a narwhal, here comes jcarroll@sfchronicle.com. > >Page E - 16 >URL: >http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/06/02/DDGS0INI811.DTL > > _____ > > C2006 San Francisco >Chronicle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 10:26:10 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RHPpdM024293; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:25:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RHPm8t024246; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:25:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:25:48 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=eCykETicSmvka3FGtPxD8n8/S0bsMs1UmJ74ddb7V5LCeAwqTUJi5DFq3nQfYZNu; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066227172536491@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:25:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9402334234af11b5ef3163c858bfe50ed77350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.175 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69354 X-Loop: vortex-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 >From the pro(Vo)cative confusion and increased Spam in my Email too. :-( Apart from twice the mass of a regular 938 MeV Proton, the Triad of Two Positive Charges, Spin 1/2 CW and One Negative Charge, Spin 1/2 CCW, (odd-man-out 4th particle decays to an electron)net spin 1/2 CW, Nuclear Magnetic Moment 2.81/2 magnetons from pair production from ~ 2 GeV "Big Bang" Photons (n* 1.02E6/alpha) where n = 4 for the regular proton progenitor mesons and n = 8 for the (*P). 1.02E6 is the photon for Electron-Positron pair production the (*P) should weigh in at about 1876 MeV. Reverse the charge lineup in the Triad and you get AntiProtons or Anti(*P)s. with an odd-man-out positron instead of an electron. Judging by 0.04% Oxygen-17, I would say about one in 2,500 more or less in Hydrogen. Nature likes to break photons into a pair of circles in specific quantized diameters/wavelengths. A plus-plus for the elegant String Theory. :-) Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Jones Beene To: fjsparber@earthlink.net;vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/27/2006 9:03:10 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Would the putative heavy baryon have twice the charge and collect two electrons from the start? i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on the sun ;-} Would there be ppm quantities of this putative species in any tank of H2 gas? If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen through a mass-spec and see if you can collect any gas which is not ionized at the highest setting. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber Staying within the rules that the three mesons "QuarkTriad" that make up the proton had an original mass of ~548 MeV (two positive and one negative charge) with a manifest mass of 312 MeV each in the bound proton it is possible that nature created mesons of twice this energy and they are bound up as a Heavy Proton (*P+) with a mass Twice that of a regular proton. Thus some deuterons may be (*H ), some (*H )D may be mistaken for He-4 .....and K-40, and especially Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18. :-) The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion reaction that has a cross-section comparable that of D-T gives one pause to ask if all that "He-3 on the Moon" is really what they think? WIMPs in Space even heavier Baryons? Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
From the pro(Vo)cative confusion and increased Spam in my
Email too. :-(
 
Apart from twice the mass of a regular 938 MeV Proton, the Triad of Two Positive Charges, 
Spin 1/2 CW  and One Negative Charge, Spin 1/2 CCW, (odd-man-out 4th particle decays to
an electron)net spin 1/2 CW, Nuclear Magnetic Moment 2.81/2 magnetons
from pair production from  ~ 2 GeV  "Big Bang" Photons  (n* 1.02E6/alpha)
where n = 4 for the regular proton progenitor mesons and n = 8 for the (*P).
1.02E6 is the photon for Electron-Positron pair production the (*P) should
weigh in at about 1876 MeV.
 
Reverse the charge lineup in the Triad and you get AntiProtons or Anti(*P)s.
with an odd-man-out positron instead of an electron.
 
Judging by 0.04% Oxygen-17, I would say about one in 2,500 more or less
in Hydrogen.  Nature likes to break photons into a pair of circles in specific
quantized diameters/wavelengths. 
A plus-plus for the elegant String Theory. :-)
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/27/2006 9:03:10 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P)

Would the putative heavy baryon have twice the charge and collect two electrons from the start?
 
i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on the sun  ;-}
 
Would there be ppm quantities of this putative species in any tank of H2 gas?
 
If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen through a mass-spec and see if you can collect any gas which is not ionized at the highest setting.
----- Original Message -----
 
Staying within the rules that the three mesons "QuarkTriad" that
make up the proton had an original mass of ~548 MeV
(two positive and one  negative charge) with a manifest
mass of 312 MeV each in the bound proton it is possible
that nature created mesons of twice this energy and they
are bound up as a Heavy Proton (*P+) with a mass Twice that
of a regular proton.
Thus some deuterons may be (*H ), some (*H )D may be mistaken
for He-4 .....and K-40, and especially Jones Beene's Oxygen 17 and 18.  :-)
 
The "easy" D+ He-3 fusion reaction that has a cross-section
comparable that of D-T gives one pause to ask if all that "He-3 on
the Moon" is really what they think?
 
WIMPs in Space even heavier Baryons?
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 10:26:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RHQS2o024736; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:26:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RHQR43024709; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:26:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:26:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <006101c69a0e$cd6e85f0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:26:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69355 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: RO X-Status: Instant Reply-Relay-Replay: Towards a self-powered LENR Cell... (revised) ...based on the reliable experimental work in what may be the most provocative and well-done paper on the entire lenr-canr.org web-site: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf And please - If anyone can voice valid objections about the very-important results of this Mizuno experiment - please do so now (before yours-truly and others - waste any more doggerel on MacNipper ). Now --- taking the next logical step, beyond this experiment - which is assumed to be accurate (and greatly underappreciated by Vo, it would seem) we can investigate the mult-purpose aim of moving towards self-power : 1) to provide safe and sequential explosions of the large excess in hydrogen gas which is created in the cell 2) to provide for the thermoacoustic conversion of that excess kinetic energy and the excess heat energy created by the cell into electricity 3) to use that self-generated electricity to power the cell, so that no external power is used ... The key concept behind this design proposal is the Sylphon bellows. Here is a pic of a ruggedized version of what I am talking about: http://www.wme-inc.com/images/MiscPhotos/ISO63%20Bellows.jpg Imagine this resonant oscillating tube, made in Austenitic stainless steel and with an insulated palladium plated cathode-stud coming through from the bottom-platen, and the top platen pushing a large solenoid coil over a fixed magnet such that the output of the coil is the same 350 volt input used in the Mizuno paper cited above. Ok, we are now set with the proper mental image of what this is to look like - but to backtrack a bit: As mentioned earlier, low level excess-heat is tricky to capitalize-on. If it were easy, every new automobile would have an add-on system attached to the exhaust manifold, since more net energy escapes in the exhaust than is generated by the engine. That is why this proposal is based on the new techniques of thermoacoustics (developed for NASA). If you have ever heard the roar of an piston engine with the exhaust open (or even "lake pipes" you can appreciated the power of the kinetic sound wave - it is deafening). And it can be converted to electricity. Probably the best way to do this type of conversion, pending the advent of the efficient "thermal diode" from ENECO or somewhere else (always just a few years away) - is a thermoacoustic conversion system, often called the 'acoustic Stirling' or "reverse loudspeaker'. This novel sound conversion units can perhaps hit the 25-30% efficiency level using the Carnot spread of LENR heat, especially if excess hydrogen gas can be exploded in sync with the enhance sound output of such a cell. And the best part of this design is that the electricity generated by the cell can be tailored to be recycled in the 350 volt and 2 amp range - and integrated back into the design so that the CF cell becomes self-powered! But obviously - a noticeable loud sound in NOT a characteristic of most prior LENR cells, and no one really seems to have realized that the excess heat can be "encouraged" to also provide high audible sound levels, in addition to hydrogen oxygen explosions. In order to "encourage" the conversion of that kind of heat into sound, one must provide coherent 'periodicity' to a properly redesigned cell at the pre-planned resonant frequency. Because of the large amount of electrical devices which operate at the frequency range of 400-440 hertz, this range will be chosen in advance for this proposal. Aircraft design is a series of compromises, since engineers must make tradeoffs to reduce weight and increase efficiency. The advantage of running an electrical system at 400+ Hz rather than 60 Hz is that the power supplies are smaller and lighter. Coincidentally in music, the most widely accepted convention for syncing of instruments uses the frequency of 440 hertz - which is "A" below middle C as the standard. This is the note you hear when the orchestra is tuning up or on a piano by striking the 40th key from the right (on that baby-grand we all have). Many humans can detect the purity of this note to within 1%, so that is also a factor in choosing this range for the experiment. IOW to provide high audible sound levels, this can be accomplished by the simple expedient of converting the DC power input power to a *pulsed DC* in the frequency range of around 440 hertz, which one has chosen in advance and has used in choosing the tube length and volume and the tube-wall 'springiness' in order to achieve a precise resonance mode. IOW you have designed the cell based on a certain geometry as well as all other relevant electrical considerations, such that the sound level at the particular frequency will be a function of heat content on cycling (not to mention the 'explosiveness' of split hydrogen, when combined with oxygen.). Mount a high-turn coil solenoid of the "free-end" of the tube, connect the output with a 440 Hz resonator and relay, and then the pulse internally should be the same set frequency, using the tube itself as anode, and all based on the acoustics of the bellows in order to oscillate it efficiently against its fixed permanent magnet counterpart, and one is in-business. The pulse output at 350 volts will be sufficient to ignite the gas in the headspace of the cell, and in sync and the tube itself. It can be air-cooled but would benefit from fan-cooling as one does not want excessive internal heat. The excess heat and the excess amount of electrolysis gas being formed, just as in the Mizuno experiment, means that self-power is not only possible in theory but very likely! The bellows will convert the phonon kinetic energy of that heat along with the kinetic energy of the expanding explosion directly from sound into electricity and fairly efficiently - about 5 times more efficiently than with thermoelectric conversion. The expense of heavy water is superfluous as this device works with light water. Nuclear transmutation is seen - but if one has as resource, a large amount of heavy water, then that should add to the efficiency. Of course, one cannot have a delicate system of electrode wire internally, and most likely improvements to provide enhance LENR reactions would be using a colloidal of Pd-black (although nickel or titanium-black could be tried first for cost reasons) and provide a strong central cathode stub, plated with Pd, coming through the fixed end of the bellows. It is clear that the original P&F style cell is contraindicated for this type of thermoacoustic conversion- BUT - that the Mizuno/Ohmori plasma type light water cell is much more fitting to use with thermoacoustics. Here is some detail on that type of cell with data from another source (Naudin): http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfrdatas.htm Figure 14 of the Mizuno paper shows the current efficiency (ε) and the ratio of the oxygen gas to the total generation with hydrogen from the cathode. Here, the (ε)exceeds unity when plasma electrolysis started; the gas generation increased a great deal as input voltage rose. It reached 8000% at 350V of input voltage. The theoretical value of hydrogen generation calculated from the input current was 1144 cc, and the measurement value during plasma electrolysis was 2190 cc. That is, the generation of excess hydrogen during a whole electrolysis run reached 1046 cc. If we consider only hydrogen generated during plasma conditions, the measured value was 1470 cc, the theoretical value is 460, and the excess is 1010 cc. THIS IS SUFFICIENT TO SELF-POWER A THEMOACOUSTIC LENR CELL, folks ! It was a mistake for me to cast the original proposal in terms of a P&F cell operating in the range of few watts. That will not work as Rothwell and Storms were quick to point out. Onward and upward... Hey MacNipper (MacBeth's terrier) - this bellowing-thing may not be all Sound-and-Fury (signifying nothing) after all ! - but instead it is HMV (Mallove? Tesla? Dirac?) calling out from another dimension... Jones And for you nay-sayers out there in Volanda: get thee to a (none)ery! This one will fly! MacNipper guarantees it... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 10:38:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RHcZlr000800; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:38:36 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RHcKCM000651; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:38:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:38:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:57:53 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell 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/69356 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: OFF TOPIC Video of earth destroyed by 100 km-wide asteroid Status: RO X-Status: A See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JHdYBet_4Q&eurl=http://www.sosyalmekan.com/blog/index.php The voiceover is in Japanese, but a rough translation is on the right. This is from NHK, Japanese National Television. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 11:26:47 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RIQOa6004308; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:26:24 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RIQKPk004203; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:26:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:26:20 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:23:12 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . In-reply-to: <2.2.32.20060627071500.00998c48@pop.freeserve.net> 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/69359 X-Loop: vortex-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 analysis. If the cavity is at a lower pressure than the surrounding fluid, does the surface tension of the fluid act like the hull of submarine? Harry Grimer wrote: > In the light of the parallel between the > "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . ." and the truly tiny > bubbles in sonoluminescence I thought I'd revisit > my files and find how the insights gained from those > space "Bubbles" might increase understanding of the > connection between the two. > > The most significant recent work is, of course, that > by Taleyarkhan. As might be expected, his claim of > fusion has caused a similar furore as that of F&P. > > The distinctive feature of Taleyarkhan's experiments > was the use of neutrons to seed the bubbles rather > than relying on: > > "small air bubbles already in the liquid. Using this > new method, the team was able to produce stable > bubbles that could expand to nearly a millimeter in > radius before collapsing. In this way, the researchers > stated, they were able to create the conditions > necessary to produce very high pressures and > temperatures." > > Now it is significant that the high temperatures > claimed (10 megakelvins) and the relatively huge > expansion are the same as that claimed for the > "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . .". This suggests > that from a General Systems viewpoint we are > dealing with the same phenomena, a highly rarified > gas in an intense Beta-atmosphere vacuum. > > I believe that the mistake Taleyarkhan and others > are making is to focus their attention on the > collapse of the bubble. In the first place we are > not dealing with bubbles but with their inverse, > with not-bubbles. In other words we are dealing > with cavities. > > Bubbles are at a higher internal pressure than > the surrounding environment. Cavities are at a > lower internal pressure. Therefore, though > "Tiny cavities in the sky...." may be less poetic > than "Tiny bubbles..." being more suggestive of > rotten teeth than a mountain spring, it would > be a more accurate title for this thread. > The bubbles in the sky aren't bursting but > collapsing. > > The temperature increase in Taleyarkhan's > cavities must take place as the cavity expands > and the temperature of the low pressure gas > inside the cavity increases to that of the sun's > interior. Any action that takes place must occur > when the cavity is large. As the cavity > decreases in size the temperature of the > rarified gas within will drop. > > The same conditions must apply in the case of > cold fusion. The temperature of the rarified > gas within expanding cavities will increase > to levels sufficient for fusion to take place. > > What causes the expansion of the cavities in > palladium. Who knows? Redistribution of the > stresses inbuilt during manufacture perhaps > giving rise to increase in compressive strains > in some places and increase in tensile strains > in other. > > I suppose a more likely cause is the > differential tensile strains that arise from > the pressure of deuterium nuclei as they > saturate the metal. > > Perhaps a more accurate name for Cold Fusion > would be Cavitation Fusion, cos, clearly, > that's what it is. 8-) > > Cheers, > > Frank Grimer > > The high temperature inside metal cavities > also explains what the researches detected > inside the cup and cone cavity that forms > just prior to failure in steel. It's a > pity I never been able to find that reference > again. No doubt someone will turn it up one > of these days. 8-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 12:30:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5REKBm6016760; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:20:43 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RDvXhZ003828; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:57:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:57:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Report: * -4.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] From: "Mark Jordan" Organization: attached To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:52:53 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Message-ID: <44A10E05.24615.4289845@enki.cpovo.net> Priority: normal In-reply-to: <200606260027.47377.rockcastle@lakeside1.net> References: <448DAD3A.7040100@teksavvy.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.31) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body X-Authenticated-Sender: enki@cpovo.net X-MDRemoteIP: 200.203.25.70 X-Return-Path: enki@cpovo.net Old-X-Envelope-From: enki@cpovo.net X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Spam-Processed: teta.cpovo.net, Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:36:18 -0300 X-MDAV-Processed: teta.cpovo.net, Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:36:20 -0300 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69350 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 26 Jun 2006 at 0:27, Pteranodon wrote: > I will take no chances. I'm supremely gratefull that my linux system > can be set to refuse to process HTML in e-mail like. The latest Pegasus Mail version do that too. It's a very useful feature. Mark Jordan From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 12:32:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RIJHir031265; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:19:17 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RIJDQP031209; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:19:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:19:12 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <20060627131833.1wma2dj3r44ccck0@webmail.usfamily.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:18:33 -0500 From: temalloy@usfamily.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.0.2) Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69358 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Acustic anomalies Status: RO X-Status: Acoustic Properties of "megalithic" edifices This from the Sunday Times, Irish Edition, 15th July 2001: NEWGRANGE, [north of Dublin] Ireland's world-renowned neolithic burial chamber, may have been used as a prehistoric "echo chamber" in religious ceremonies, according to two scientists who have discovered that the 5,000-year-old grave has the ability to alter sound. Stone Age Sound, the BBC documentary, will be broadcast on July 24 at 11am. While the burial chamber was not designed for that purpose by our neolithic ancestors, they would have inevitably discovered the amazing acoustic effects in Newgrange and exploited them in religious ceremonies, the scientists say. Aaron Watson, an archeologist, and David Keating, an acoustic expert, carried out up to 10 hours of sound tests at Newgrange last month in conjunction with the BBC. The tests, including humming, bursting balloons, banging drums and playing "standing waves" to the stones, will be broadcast on a Radio 4 documentary next week. The University of Reading scientists have conducted similar tests at Stonehenge and other neolithic sites. "We had a loudspeaker making a humming tone and as you moved towards the sound, it got quieter. It was very unusual," said Keating. "However, if you moved away towards the side chambers, the sound got louder. Even with modern knowledge of acoustics, it is quite an eerie and odd effect." Keating believes neolithic priests or druids may have exploited this phenomenon in ceremonies. "If they were humming in the main chamber, and there was no visible evidence they were making that sound, someone could believe that the noise was coming from the side chambers where the bodies of the dead were buried," he said. "It is inevitable that priests or druids would have found this effect and exploited it, or it is possible they believed that when they made this noise they were bringing the dead to life." Keating believes the acoustic tricks may help explain how Newgrange was constructed by such a primitive society. It was built 500 years before the great pyramid of Giza and a millennium before Stonehenge. It was aligned with the winter solstice; only at dawn on December 21 each year does the sun's light pass through a 25cm opening above the entrance. Watson and Keating found a strange effect from beating drums in the chamber. Inside, the noise is very loud but outside, a listener only hears a distant drum. www.sunday-times.co.uk On the same acoustic theme: see also: http://antiquity.ac.uk/ant/073/Ant0730325.htm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 12:35:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5REKBm8016760; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:20:50 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RDrABF002342; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:53:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 06:53:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: "List - Vortex" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:52:42 -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 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <200606260027.47377.rockcastle@lakeside1.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69349 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: "All your posts are now going to a secret box on AOL." Well, that would explain the recent up-tick in spam lately. WTF? -j -----Original Message----- From: Pteranodon [mailto:rockcastle@lakeside1.net] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 11:28 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line On Monday 12 June 2006 14:06, peatbog wrote: > John Steck wrote: > > Will all due respect Bill, this is a silly thing to waste time on just > > because someone is too lazy to set up a simple filter on the address. As > > soon as you reply a RE: or FW: gets put in front of it... doh! > > > > Just my 2 cents. 8^( > > When I first started reading vortex, I put a filter on the To: > header to whitelist anything addressed to vortex-l, and added one to > move the message into the Vortex folder. > > I'm using mozilla thunderbird, but thought even the simplest mail > readers could do that. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@eskimo.com] > > Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 PM > > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Subject: [Vo]: Put a [Vo] tag in the message Subject line > > > > > > > > Test. Does this work? > > > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > > William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ > > beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer > > billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 > > 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 Seems Mr Bill B has changed the way ALL vortexians recieve their web mail to the list. Not only is there a 'vo' tag in front of all the posts to the list, but the headers of the files are lengthened as well as well as re mails of your posts to AOL. All of them. All your posts are now going to a secret box on AOL. I did not subscribe to AO-Hell, and heartily object to all my Vortex mail being sent there. I have a Linux system and know well how to sign off of Vortex. This unrequested mail change has lengthened headers on all my mail with re-mails to Vortex to unsub and resub with every mail. All my Vortex mail goes to a special folder in K-Mail. This is a KDE 3.1 so it yet retains the ability to shred and totally destroy spam. One post from BillB sent later with only the subject line of 'vo' contained a segment of 8 bit characters that I took to be either a virus or a silent re-direct to a viral site. If Bill B could cause this subject change attack to become effective on my computer, then all of your computers are at risk. I will not only unsubscribe, but will have to shred all user files under the this user. This change may have been to Vortex's service provider as it appears under no other list but Vortex. Either way though I will take no chances. I'm supremely gratefull that my linux system can be set to refuse to process HTML in e-mail like. Some newer hyped up e-mail systems for linux like Ximian DO process HTML and refuse to allow the e=mail user to stop this. That is why I refuse to do e-mail on any system but linux, and refuse to use any linux system using kernel 2.6 or newer for any secure e-mail or browsing. I will now unsubscribe from Vortex and sign off this user and shred its files 40 times using Guttmann. That way all the virus will be dead dead dead and will never darken my digital doorway again. Pteranodon From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 12:38:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RIwkBo023140; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:58:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RIwhHe023087; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:58:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:58:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:55:38 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . In-reply-to: <2.2.32.20060627071500.00998c48@pop.freeserve.net> 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: <1DQG9D.A.goF.h_XoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69360 X-Loop: vortex-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 if you are getting this twice) Nice analysis. If the cavity is at a lower pressure than the surrounding fluid, does the surface tension of the fluid act like the hull of submarine? Harry Grimer wrote: > In the light of the parallel between the > "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . ." and the truly tiny > bubbles in sonoluminescence I thought I'd revisit > my files and find how the insights gained from those > space "Bubbles" might increase understanding of the > connection between the two. > > The most significant recent work is, of course, that > by Taleyarkhan. As might be expected, his claim of > fusion has caused a similar furore as that of F&P. > > The distinctive feature of Taleyarkhan's experiments > was the use of neutrons to seed the bubbles rather > than relying on: > > "small air bubbles already in the liquid. Using this > new method, the team was able to produce stable > bubbles that could expand to nearly a millimeter in > radius before collapsing. In this way, the researchers > stated, they were able to create the conditions > necessary to produce very high pressures and > temperatures." > > Now it is significant that the high temperatures > claimed (10 megakelvins) and the relatively huge > expansion are the same as that claimed for the > "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . .". This suggests > that from a General Systems viewpoint we are > dealing with the same phenomena, a highly rarified > gas in an intense Beta-atmosphere vacuum. > > I believe that the mistake Taleyarkhan and others > are making is to focus their attention on the > collapse of the bubble. In the first place we are > not dealing with bubbles but with their inverse, > with not-bubbles. In other words we are dealing > with cavities. > > Bubbles are at a higher internal pressure than > the surrounding environment. Cavities are at a > lower internal pressure. Therefore, though > "Tiny cavities in the sky...." may be less poetic > than "Tiny bubbles..." being more suggestive of > rotten teeth than a mountain spring, it would > be a more accurate title for this thread. > The bubbles in the sky aren't bursting but > collapsing. > > The temperature increase in Taleyarkhan's > cavities must take place as the cavity expands > and the temperature of the low pressure gas > inside the cavity increases to that of the sun's > interior. Any action that takes place must occur > when the cavity is large. As the cavity > decreases in size the temperature of the > rarified gas within will drop. > > The same conditions must apply in the case of > cold fusion. The temperature of the rarified > gas within expanding cavities will increase > to levels sufficient for fusion to take place. > > What causes the expansion of the cavities in > palladium. Who knows? Redistribution of the > stresses inbuilt during manufacture perhaps > giving rise to increase in compressive strains > in some places and increase in tensile strains > in other. > > I suppose a more likely cause is the > differential tensile strains that arise from > the pressure of deuterium nuclei as they > saturate the metal. > > Perhaps a more accurate name for Cold Fusion > would be Cavitation Fusion, cos, clearly, > that's what it is. 8-) > > Cheers, > > Frank Grimer > > The high temperature inside metal cavities > also explains what the researches detected > inside the cup and cone cavity that forms > just prior to failure in steel. It's a > pity I never been able to find that reference > again. No doubt someone will turn it up one > of these days. 8-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 12:38:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RIEJEr027982; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:14:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RIECtp027931; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:14:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:14:12 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qACvoGFjt0aL2jf4Ij/d/6UgPT6eGBDGzUt8rKE2isxA/ZgonRpDbCYFUPp6wBYO; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006622718154454@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:01:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408d8c58c10a1bcd33badfa26fe16bf370350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.117.252 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69357 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, The measured "billions of tons/second" of Positrons-Electrons spewing out of a Pulsar, implies that the mesons could be formed from the thousands of GeV gammas but decay to electrons-positrons as well as forming protons and (*P). If not, it might take blowup of a Black Hole. ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/27/2006 11:26:40 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) >From the pro(Vo)cative confusion and increased Spam in my Email too. :-( Apart from twice the mass of a regular 938 MeV Proton, the Triad of Two Positive Charges, Spin 1/2 CW and One Negative Charge, Spin 1/2 CCW, (odd-man-out 4th particle decays to an electron)net spin 1/2 CW, Nuclear Magnetic Moment 2.81/2 magnetons from pair production from ~ 2 GeV "Big Bang" Photons (n* 1.02E6/alpha) where n = 4 for the regular proton progenitor mesons and n = 8 for the (*P). 1.02E6 is the photon for Electron-Positron pair production the (*P) should weigh in at about 1876 MeV. Reverse the charge lineup in the Triad and you get AntiProtons or Anti(*P)s. with an odd-man-out positron instead of an electron. Judging by 0.04% Oxygen-17, I would say about one in 2,500 more or less in Hydrogen. Nature likes to break photons into a pair of circles in specific quantized diameters/wavelengths. A plus-plus for the elegant String Theory. :-) Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Jones Beene To: fjsparber@earthlink.net;vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/27/2006 9:03:10 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P) Would the putative heavy baryon have twice the charge and collect two electrons from the start? i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on the sun ;-} Would there be ppm quantities of this putative species in any tank of H2 gas? If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen through a mass-spec and see if you can collect any gas which is not ionized at the highest setting. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, The measured "billions of tons/second" of Positrons-Electrons spewing
out of a Pulsar, implies that the mesons could be formed from the thousands of GeV gammas
but  decay to electrons-positrons as well as forming protons and (*P).
 
If not, it might take blowup of a Black Hole.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/27/2006 11:26:40 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P)

From the pro(Vo)cative confusion and increased Spam in my
Email too. :-(
 
Apart from twice the mass of a regular 938 MeV Proton, the Triad of Two Positive Charges, 
Spin 1/2 CW  and One Negative Charge, Spin 1/2 CCW, (odd-man-out 4th particle decays to
an electron)net spin 1/2 CW, Nuclear Magnetic Moment 2.81/2 magnetons
from pair production from  ~ 2 GeV  "Big Bang" Photons  (n* 1.02E6/alpha)
where n = 4 for the regular proton progenitor mesons and n = 8 for the (*P).
1.02E6 is the photon for Electron-Positron pair production the (*P) should
weigh in at about 1876 MeV.
 
Reverse the charge lineup in the Triad and you get AntiProtons or Anti(*P)s.
with an odd-man-out positron instead of an electron.
 
Judging by 0.04% Oxygen-17, I would say about one in 2,500 more or less
in Hydrogen.  Nature likes to break photons into a pair of circles in specific
quantized diameters/wavelengths. 
A plus-plus for the elegant String Theory. :-)
 
Fred
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/27/2006 9:03:10 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Heavy Baryon (*P)

Would the putative heavy baryon have twice the charge and collect two electrons from the start?
 
i.e. uncharged hydrinohydride, made on the sun  ;-}
 
Would there be ppm quantities of this putative species in any tank of H2 gas?
 
If so, run a whole tank of hydrogen through a mass-spec and see if you can collect any gas which is not ionized at the highest setting.
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 13:03:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RK2fhQ003947; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:02:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RK2WXe003885; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:02:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:02:30 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:02:22 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: Pteranodon In-Reply-To: <200606260027.47377.rockcastle@lakeside1.net> Message-ID: References: <448DAD3A.7040100@teksavvy.com> <200606260027.47377.rockcastle@lakeside1.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/69361 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Vortex-L headers, disinformation stooges Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Pteranodon wrote: > Seems Mr Bill B has changed the way ALL vortexians recieve their > web mail to the list. Not only is there a 'vo' tag in front of all the > posts to the list, but the headers of the files are lengthened as well > as well as re mails of your posts to AOL. All of them. All your posts > are now going to a secret box on AOL. Hmmmmm, a subscriber with a concealed name? Making nasty accusations rather than simply posting the supposedly changed headers? Very suspicous. I wonder why he's doing this? Perhaps it's incompetence... or perhaps it's something MORE. So, "pteranodon," which part of the NSA do you work for? How long have they been paying you to spread distrust amongst the alt-science community? --- Heh. I'm trying to make a point in the above. "Conspiracy accusations" are dishonest and worthless techniques of persuasion used by ignorant people. They can be directed against ANYBODY, no evidence required. Is billb a government stooge? ...or maybe the people who ACCUSE billb of being a government stooge, THEY are the true government stooges. Seriously, in reading this guy's message, it looks like he may have become infected with spyware from one of those recent vortex-L spam messages about "buy medicine" or "woman wants man who is able." I didn't think any warning was necessary, but I guess I there are users here who haven't encountered forged-header spam or spyware infections before. So: If a vortex-L message seems to come from bill beaty, but the subject line is trying to sell you discount vitamins or "enlargement" pills, and the message contents are graphic files and mystery stuff, then you probably should assume that the message is spyware-infected spam, and should avoid clicking on any of the links. I've made a change which should prevent any further spams like those earlier ones. We'll see if it works. Those earlier ones were probably a fluke, since vortex-L gets about a hundred spams per day which are rejected as non-subscriber. Finally one of the forged headers happened to be a subscriber (me.) It could have been any of us, but my email address is all over the internet, so spammers would tend to steal it for forged-header use. > I did not subscribe to AO-Hell, and heartily object to all my Vortex > mail being sent there. Two possiblities: "pteranodon" has detected a genuine spyware infection in his system, and needs to run the Linus equivalent of Spybot-S&D or Spyware Doctor. Or perhaps he's just confused, and his accusations are conspiracy theory delusions. DID I SAY TWO? THREE POSSIBILITYS: he's being paid by Homeland Security to sow confusion, and billb is on the NSA payroll, and is under standing orders to make their competition on the Homeland Security staff look ridiculous in email forums by hacking into their systems and setting their system clocks to 2004! [1] Ahem. Now if anyone actually wanted to trace the problem (or even wanted to make a solid accusation of my own dark and evil nature) they could have just forwarded the "before" and "after" headers. Without them, nobody knows what the hell this whole thing is about. Let's see. Back before mark@cosmicpenguine requested the [Vo]: tag, there's a message from "pteranodon" dated June 3 [1] "Re: Where Protons Go". And there's this current one dated monday june 26. Both headers are 33 lines long. And if I load them into two pages in msWord and perform "blink comparison," I see only some differences in the date, subject, and various message-id lines. [1] Well actually pteranodon's own date is dec 26, 2004. Forgot to set the system clock? > One post from BillB sent later with only the subject line of 'vo' contained > a segment of 8 bit characters that I took to be either a virus or a silent > re-direct to a viral site. Was it from "Jerri?" That was in a cluster of three forged-header spam messages from "Al", "Jerri", and "Noelle". They contained jpegs which I've never examined. (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 13:07:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RK7fwK007302; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:07:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RK7enj007284; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:07:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:07:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:07:39 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: OFF TOPIC Video of earth destroyed by 100 km-wide asteroid In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@mindspring.com> Message-ID: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@mindspring.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/69362 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 Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Jed Rothwell wrote: > See: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JHdYBet_4Q&eurl=http://www.sosyalmekan.com/blog/index.php > > The voiceover is in Japanese, but a rough translation is on the > right. This is from NHK, Japanese National Television. "Large meteor?" Looks more like Ceres, or perhaps Vesta. It wouldn't be too much different if they just used Earth's Moon instead. (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty@chem.washington.edu Research Engineer billb@amasci.com UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 13:41:00 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5RKeJkO028566; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:40:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5RKZEov025561; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:35:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:35:14 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627162342.03dbabf0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:35:08 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: OFF TOPIC Video of earth destroyed by 100 km-wide asteroid In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@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/69363 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: By the way, that should be 300 km wide, not 100 km. I took the 100 km figure from the New Scientist (http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/), but the voiceover says the meteor is "wider than Honshu." Honshu is 280 wide at the widest point. >"Large meteor?" Looks more like Ceres, or perhaps Vesta. It wouldn't >be too much different if they just used Earth's Moon instead. The Moon is 3476 km in diameter. If something as large as the Moon struck Earth at 70,000 km/h, I suppose the two bodies would immediately squish together to form a ball of molten iron. Ceres: 950 km Vesta: 525 km - same range I must say, in the best traditions of Japanese nurses and elevator operators, the voiceover narrator lady makes the whole incident seem somehow enjoyable. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 18:42:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5S1em2U030641; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:42:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5S1Uqhq024786; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:30:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:30:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:30:45 -0400 Message-Id: <8C868699C926BCD-A6C-23C@mblkn-m19.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@mindspring.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060627125625.03f036b0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: OFF TOPIC Video of earth destroyed by 100 km-wide asteroid Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.137 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5S1UohT024760 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69364 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: Jed Rothwell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JHdYBet_4Q&eurl=http://www.sosyalmekan.co m/blog/index.php    The voiceover is in Japanese, but a rough translation is on the right. This is from NHK, Japanese National Television.  <><><><><> Cute fantasy; but, hardly realistic. A large mass would have reached escape velocity and been sent into orbit. After all, this is allegedly how our moon was formed. T From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 19:25:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5S2OYPK029565; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:24:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5S2OXr0029554; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:24:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:24:33 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=JQuhwTmEJwHcO9OCbakLk/FcravpF/HqLCfel1QYQsrw42rj178iESqTZLlPz5X0; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <20844071.1151461471713.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:24:31 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Jed Rothwell Reply-To: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: OFF TOPIC Video of earth destroyed by 100 km-wide asteroid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 25e7688170aa9857b054f8d56408d260416dc04816f3191c3c5f3519ec23ac0af00a9fff1943a014a26b888b88ba812a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.24 Resent-Message-ID: <1Aq1lB.A.oNH.hheoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69365 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net wrote: >Cute fantasy; but, hardly realistic. A large mass would have reached >escape velocity and been sent into orbit. After all, this is allegedly >how our moon was formed. I do not follow. Do you mean the incoming object would have bounced? Or that some of the expelled rock would have reached escape velocity? I think the voiceover said that some of it did. If the incoming object strikes at an angle I suppose it would send a large chunk into orbit. This source says that the body that impacted to form the moon had roughly the mass of Mars, a lot more than a 300 km object. Would a 300 km object coming in at an angle would form a small moon? http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Jun 27 23:29:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5S6Tfwp000768; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 23:29:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5S6TdpH000746; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 23:29:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 23:29:39 -0700 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:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Mor2ay5b8aDRh3Ld1JA6//LL0pyh1tAAVHUZmCLOQ1bwz/0K4zTweT3Ys9oo6361VD3vXmKWW56PTKyyL/s0OMt+hPLn45rz8zHwIIuelVoRY3fjHTTD77zcidpMgJeemSyP8Y4e4sZq9mlJnVo8/VcDFjtGuQfnWCZ3JbNZE5Q= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 02:22:57 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, billb@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <200606242048.k5OKmYYQ032406@ultra5.eskimo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200606242048.k5OKmYYQ032406@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69366 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: vortex-digest Digest V2006 #326 Status: O X-Status: Dear Bill, Can you please help me to remain on the digest, but remove me from the letter-by-letter list of-for vortex? Thanks, JH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 08:17:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SEoLFA006699; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:51:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SEYmp5030637; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:34:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:34:46 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001e01c69abf$08457ac0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:27:47 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <-pVJrB.A.ReH.EOpoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69367 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: In one of the many mysteries of cyberspace, the post below went out with its own subject heading, but ended-up as a reply to another unrelated message with no subject header. Go figure. Anyway, it has been revised again. TOWARDS SELF-POWERED LENR Based on the seemingly reliable experimental work of the following paper- which might well be the most provocative and well-done of the newer papers on the lenr-canr.org web-site: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf The clear possibility of self-powered LENR presents itself ! And please - If anyone can voice valid objections towards the very-important results and findings of this Mizuno experiment - please do so. Without such, and taking the next logical step beyond this important experiment (which is assumed to be accurate until objections are raised) we can investigate the further goal of a specific redesign - for self-power which will: 1) provide a safe for the safe and sequential explosion of the large excess of hydrogen gas which is created in the cell 2) provide for the 'in situ' thermoacoustic conversion of that excess kinetic energy and excess heat into electricity 3) Recirculates that self-generated electricity to power the cell, so that no external power is used following startup... 4) Once-and-for-all -- irrevocably silence the entrenched critics of LENR Only self-power can do that - at least at the highest level of skepticism. It therefore should becomes an important goal for every researcher with the ability to do so, in order to achieve both well-deserved recognition and a massive increase in funding levels, to work towards the goal of self-power - now that a clear pathway is presented. The numbers are there! The key concept behind this particular design proposal is the Sylphon bellows, which is a strong corrugated metal tube, which will oscillate at a resonant frequency. Here is an image of a ruggedized version of what I am talking about: http://www.wme-inc.com/images/MiscPhotos/ISO63%20Bellows.jpg Imagine that this resonant oscillating tube, made in Austenitic stainless steel and fitted with top-and-bottom platens - and an insulated palladium-plated cathode-stud coming through from a bottom-platen, and with a top platen adapted to repetitively cycle a large (many turn) solenoid output coil over the magnetic flux of a fixed magnet (with or without leverage) such that the output electricity of the coil is the same 350 volt which is required as input in the Mizuno paper, cited above. IOW the cell itself operates as a large self-powered "reverse-loudspeaker". Ok, we are now set with the proper simplified mental image of what this device is to look like - but to backtrack a bit: As mentioned earlier, the low level excess-heat of LENR is tricky to capitalize-on. If it were easy, every new automobile would have an add-on system attached to the exhaust manifold, since more net energy escapes in the exhaust than is generated by the engine. That is why this proposal is based on the techniques of thermoacoustics (developed for NASA). If you have ever heard the roar of an piston engine with the exhaust open (or even "lake pipes" you can appreciated the power of the kinetic sound wave - it is deafening). And that sound wave can be converted to electricity as efficiently as with the ICE. Probably the best way to accomplish this type of conversion, pending the advent of the efficient "thermal diode" from ENECO or somewhere else (always just a few years away) - is a modified thermoacoustic conversion system, often called the 'acoustic Stirling' or "reverse loudspeaker'. This novel sound conversion technique can hit the 25-30% efficiency level using the Carnot spread of the LENR heat seen in the Mizuno device, and perhaps higher when the excess hydrogen gas which is generated (3-1 ratio over Faradic) can be exploded in sync, in order to enhance sound output of such a redesigned cell. And the best part of this design is that the electricity generated by the cell can be tailored to be output and recycled in the exact same 350 volt and 1 amp range in which it is created so that there is no need for a large amount of lossy circuitry. Preferably timing is analog - NOT digital for reasons of efficiency. The energy generated is then recycled 'in situ' in the integrated design, so that the CF cell becomes self-powered - requiring external power only for startup. But obviously - a noticeable loud sound in not a characteristic of most prior LENR cells, and few experimenters seem to have realized that heat flow can be "encouraged" to also provide high audible sound level, even without the addition of hydrogen-oxygen explosions. In order to "encourage" the conversion of that kind of heat into sound, one must provide coherent 'periodicity' to a properly redesigned cell at the pre-planned resonant frequency. Because of the large variety of electrical devices operating in the frequency range of 400-440 hertz, this range will be chosen in advance for this proposal. Aircraft design, where 400 Hz is standard, is a series of compromises since engineers must make tradeoffs to reduce weight and increase efficiency. The advantage of running an electrical system at 400+ Hz rather than 60 Hz is that the power supplies are smaller and lighter. Coincidentally in music, the most widely accepted convention for the syncing of instruments employs the frequency of 440 hertz - which is "A" below middle C as the standard. This is the note you hear when the orchestra is tuning up or on a piano by striking the 40th key from the right (on that baby-grand we all have). Many humans can detect the purity of this note to within 1%, so that is also a factor in choosing this range for the experiment. It is a characteristic sound of the Oboe, which IOW if the goal, known from the start, is to provide high audible sound levels, this can be accomplished by the simple expedient of converting the DC power input to a *pulsed DC* at the frequency range of around 440 hertz, which one has chosen in advance along with the proper resonant tube length and volume, and tube-wall 'springiness' in order to achieve a precise resonance mode at this frequency.. IOW you have designed the cell based on a certain geometry as well as all other relevant electrical considerations, such that the sound level at the particular frequency will be a function of heat and kinetic transfer on cycling (not to mention the 'explosiveness' of split hydrogen, when combined with oxygen.). Mount a high-turn coil solenoid of the "free-end" of the tube, connect the output with a 440 Hz resonator and relay to ensure a frequency lock, and then the pulse internally should be the same set frequency, using the tube itself as anode, and all based on the acoustics of the bellows in order to oscillate it efficiently against its fixed permanent magnet, Now, one is in-business. The pulse output at 350 volts if not sufficient to ignite the gas in the headspace of the cell alone, can employ a catalyst in the headspace, like a wire mesh. The tube itself can be force air-cooled and would benefit from fan-cooling, as one does not want excessive internal heat to accumulate. The excess heat and the excess amount of electrolysis gas being formed, just as in the Mizuno experiment, means that self-power is not only possible in theory but likely, if those results hold using pulse power. The bellows will convert the phonon kinetic energy of that heat along with the flash kinetic energy of the expanding explosion, directly from sound into electricity and fairly efficiently - about 5 times more efficiently than with thermoelectric conversion. The expense of heavy water is superfluous as this device works with light water. Nuclear transmutation is seen in the paper - and the e experimenter has as a resource, a large amount of heavy water, then that should only add to the efficiency. Of course, one cannot have a delicate system of electrode wire internally, and most likely improvements to provide enhance LENR reactions would be using a colloidal of Pd-black (although nickel or titanium-black could be tried first for cost reasons) and provide a strong central cathode stub, plated with Pd, coming through the fixed end of the bellows. It is clear that the original P&F style cell is contraindicated for this type of thermoacoustic conversion- BUT - that the Mizuno/Ohmori plasma type light water cell is much more fitting to use with thermoacoustics. Here is some detail on that type of cell with similar replication data from another source (Naudin): http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfrdatas.htm Figure 14 of the Mizuno paper above shows the current-efficiency, and the ratio of O2 gas to the total generation with hydrogen from the cathode. Here, the current exceeds unity when plasma electrolysis started; and the gas generation increased as input voltage rose. It reached 8000% at 350V of input voltage. The theoretical value of hydrogen generation calculated from Faraday current was 1144 cc, but the measurement value during plasma electrolysis was 2190 cc. If we consider only hydrogen generated during established plasma conditions, the measured value was 1470 cc, the theoretical value is 460, and the excess is 1010 cc. This is in addition to the neat of nuclear reactions which is documented. If this result hold under pulsed-power, as envisioned, then it is even now(minimally) SUFFICIENT TO SELF-POWER A THEMOACOUSTIC LENR CELL, folks. No it is not the P&F method. It was a mistake for me to cast the original proposal in terms of a P&F cell operating in the range of few watts. That type of cell will not work, as Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms were quick to point out. But this might be the Eureka Moment - a cell with clear results that appear adaptable to self-power - and a possible methodology for pulling it off ! Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 11:08:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SI8kuA002216; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:08:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SI8hZ1002181; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:08:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:08:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628140655.03fb80a8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:08:24 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <_HXsDD.A.3h.qWsoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69368 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Comments by Pimentel about ethanol Status: O X-Status: I wrote to David Pimentel, congratulating him for getting into the New York Times. I said that as far as I know 67% is an exaggeration. His response: You are correct, the 67% is total exaggeration. The USDA went from reporting 34% return in 2002 to 67% in 2004 without any change in inputs. Currently the U.S. is producing 4.5 billion gallons of ethanol per year (DOE). This represents only 1% of total U.S. petroleum fuel use per year and is using 18% of U.S. corn production. If 100% of U.S. corn were used, it would provide only 6% of current U.S. petroleum fuel use. Will this make the U.S. oil independent? - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 12:15:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SJFUIc006826; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:15:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SJFTDK006808; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:15:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:15:29 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=Bmah1aacRNTTxrcjbXPGw1UKMNiTXoWe8p3fCcMF6hID+nyeqKzlLSwaK/mThAku; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066328191526860@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:15:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d85a38015579b55ba4a867a2ef7ec7198b29ca3e42375bd564350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.83.133 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69369 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Biobutanol, anyone? Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII June 28, 2006 A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed oil from Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) at a time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel (not including shipping) and climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally reported by 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the latest solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from corn and grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our efforts in the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, coming or going. The June 26th article touched upon the news that British Petroleum and DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new generation of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to produce about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. 1-Butanol derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range. 1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also research is continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert varied agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining in the bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. Perhaps even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder. -ak- aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

June 28, 2006
 
A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed  oil from Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) at a time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel  (not including shipping) and climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally reported by 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the latest solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from corn and grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our efforts in the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, coming or going.
 
The June 26th article touched upon the news that British Petroleum and DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new generation of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to produce about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. 1-Butanol derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range.
 
1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also research is continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert varied agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining in the bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. Perhaps even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder.
 
-ak-
aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 12:22:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SJLjEb010315; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SJLha3010295; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:43 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=nyxFqkCvyQ7FoVZK3VawTVR3OGqamqZrXVYRdiJL0F1Ww5m4eBA9Ji+jdW4qrDKu; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066328192140900@ix.netcom.com> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: aki@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.1.47.0 (Windows) From: "" To: "vortex-l" Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d85a38015579b55ba4198fb048eecb5a27189477d7828d6397350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.175.83.133 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69370 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [VO] Biobutanol, anyone? Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: To: vortex-l Sent: 6/28/2006 12:15:26 PM Subject: Biobutanol, anyone? June 28, 2006 A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed oil from Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) at a time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel (not including shipping) and climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally reported by 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the latest solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from corn and grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our efforts in the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, coming or going. The June 26th article touched upon the news that British Petroleum and DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new generation of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to produce about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. 1-Butanol derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range. 1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also research is continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert varied agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining in the bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. Perhaps even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder. -ak- aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
From:
Sent: 6/28/2006 12:15:26 PM
Subject: Biobutanol, anyone?

June 28, 2006
 
A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed  oil from Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) at a time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel  (not including shipping) and climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally reported by 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the latest solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from corn and grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our efforts in the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, coming or going.
 
The June 26th article touched upon the news that British Petroleum and DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new generation of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to produce about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. 1-Butanol derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range.
 
1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also research is continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert varied agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining in the bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. Perhaps even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder.
 
-ak-
aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 12:30:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SJU5Pk015339; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:30:22 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SJLvoS010407; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:21:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:21:39 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C868FF36FD34B3-1118-11938@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.138 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <5dG_2C.A.KiC.QbtoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69371 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Rarification of Aether Status: O X-Status: I posted the following on the Beta-atm group to Frank; but, thought I would get Vorts' thoughts. <><><><><><> (to Grimer) In your Principa in the files Stuff folder, you state: "Unlike many other ductile metals which neck down to a point, mild steel exhibits a curious phenomena as ultimate failure in tension becomes immanent. A lens shaped cavity opens up within the material whilst the external surface is still intact. The existence of this cavity has been demonstrated by x-raying specimens brought almost to the point of failure. Clayton and I spent some time experimenting to see if we could show that the pressure in this cavity was well below atmospheric but our results were inconclusive. Nevertheless we strongly suspect that a more thorough investigation might well show up the presence of a b-atmosphere vacuum. With such a demonstration the claim that materials were held together from the outside and not from the inside would be hard to deny, however unwelcome its implications might be for relativists." If your Beta-atmosphere is really the luciferous ether, then the propagation of x-ray photon should be superluminal through the lens-shaped cavity. This should not be difficult to test. It *would* get you that trip to Stockholm. :-) Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 12:38:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SJcAZt020088; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:38:10 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SJc8U5020059; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:38:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:38:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150051.03fbb9b8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:05:40 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_19697906==.ALT" Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69372 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: --=====================_19697906==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed One aspect of Mizuno's recent results bothers me. In some cases, he reports significant excess hydrogen without anomalous excess heat, or with only a little excess heat. I do not see how this could be, if the hydrogen comes from pyrolysis. It seems to me that if heat is causing pyrolysis, there must be far more heat than normal, so you would expect to see both excess heat and excess hydrogen. Assume there is no anomalous excess heat. In that case, because the excess hydrogen carries off enthalpy, the total heat from the reaction should be considerably less than the amount expected from ordinary electrolysis. Yet the heat balance is usually close to the expected level. How could there be just enough anomalous heat to split the water, carry off enthalpy, and reduce overall measurable heat right back down to the level you see with ordinary electrolysis? Actually, another paper reports similar results: Iizumi, K., et al. Heat Measurement During Plasma Electrolysis. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan. Unfortunately, I do not have permission to upload to this, but anyway, the conclusion is: "The energy balances during plasma electrolyses were 100~102% and a clear excess energy could not be detected in the experiments this time. The current efficiencies during plasma electrolyses were 115~122%. Furthermore, a small amount of CO2 was also detected during plasma electrolyses by means of Gas Chromatograph. . . ." Assuming these observations are correct, I think they preclude the simple model of excess heat causing excess hydrogen. Some other highly energetic reaction must be occurring, and this fractures the water directly. I cannot imagine what it would be. The explosion experienced by Mizuno during the first minutes of electrolysis is also a complete mystery that does not fit any model or expectation. I have a feeling the two are related. - Jed --=====================_19697906==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" One aspect of Mizuno's recent results bothers me. In some cases, he reports significant excess hydrogen without anomalous excess heat, or with only a little excess heat. I do not see how this could be, if the hydrogen comes from pyrolysis. It seems to me that if heat is causing pyrolysis, there must be far more heat than normal, so you would expect to see both excess heat and excess hydrogen.

Assume there is no anomalous excess heat. In that case, because the excess hydrogen carries off enthalpy, the total heat from the reaction should be considerably less than the amount expected from ordinary electrolysis. Yet the heat balance is usually close to the expected level. How could there be just enough anomalous heat to split the water, carry off enthalpy, and reduce overall measurable heat right back down to the level you see with ordinary electrolysis?
 
Actually, another paper reports similar results:
 
Iizumi, K., et al. Heat Measurement During Plasma Electrolysis. in The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. Yokohama, Japan.
 
Unfortunately, I do not have permission to upload to this, but anyway, the conclusion is:
 
“The energy balances during plasma electrolyses were 100~102% and a clear excess energy could not be detected in the experiments this time.  The current efficiencies during plasma electrolyses were 115~122%.  Furthermore, a small amount of CO2 was also detected during plasma electrolyses by means of Gas Chromatograph. . . .”
 
Assuming these observations are correct, I think they preclude the simple model of excess heat causing excess hydrogen. Some other highly energetic reaction must be occurring, and this fractures the water directly. I cannot imagine what it would be. The explosion experienced by Mizuno during the first minutes of electrolysis is also a complete mystery that does not fit any model or expectation. I have a feeling the two are related.
 
- Jed
--=====================_19697906==.ALT-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 13:12:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SKBkiT005935; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:11:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SKBgOk005889; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:11:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:11:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:06:20 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@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/69373 X-Loop: vortex-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: > One aspect of Mizuno's recent results bothers me. In some cases, he > reports significant excess hydrogen without anomalous excess heat, or > with only a little excess heat. I do not see how this could be, if > the hydrogen comes from pyrolysis. It seems to me that if heat is > causing pyrolysis, there must be far more heat than normal, so you > would expect to see both excess heat and excess hydrogen. Just taking your note at face value down to this point, that doesn't seem to follow. If you run a high current through an electrolysis cell such that the electrode gets above the dissociation temperature for water you would surely expect to see "excess hydrogen" evolved, no matter how conventional your assumptions were. Just to emphasize the point, the evolution of excess hydrogen appears at first blush to be due to purely conventional reactions in Mizuno's cells. At this point I also need to ask, how much energy does the evolution of the excess hydrogen actually account for? As a percentage of the total energy in, do you happen to know if it's typically on the order of 1%? 10%? 50%? > Assume there is no anomalous excess heat. In that case, because the > excess hydrogen carries off enthalpy, the total heat from the > reaction should be considerably less than the amount expected from > ordinary electrolysis. Yet the heat balance is usually close to the > expected level. Is he not including the volume of generated gas in the heat equation? I don't see how he could ever get it to balance if he's not doing that. In general, as I understand it, even with low-temperature electrolysis you can't easily tell in advance how much of the hydrogen is going to spontaneously recombine within the cell, so without measuring the volume of gas from the cell you must surely be in the dark about how much energy was carried off by hydrolysis (of one sort or another). If you don't know that, then how can you possibly tell what the net energy balance was? The alternative of using a catalytic recombiner inside the calorimeter avoids the need to measure the gas volume but I don't believe Mizuno does that. (And if he did there'd be no issue of excess hydrogen because it would be recombined inside the cell.) > How could there be just enough anomalous heat to > split the water, carry off enthalpy, and reduce overall measurable > heat right back down to the level you see with ordinary electrolysis? > > > Actually, another paper reports similar results: > > Iizumi, K., et al. /Heat Measurement During Plasma Electrolysis/. in > /The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear > Science/. 2005. Yokohama, Japan. > > Unfortunately, I do not have permission to upload to this, but > anyway, the conclusion is: > > “The energy balances during plasma electrolyses were 100~102% and a > clear excess energy could not be detected in the experiments this > time. The current efficiencies during plasma electrolyses were > 115~122%. Furthermore, a small amount of CO2 was also detected > during plasma electrolyses by means of Gas Chromatograph. . . .” > > Assuming these observations are correct, I think they preclude the > simple model of excess heat causing excess hydrogen. Some other > highly energetic reaction must be occurring, and this fractures the > water directly. I cannot imagine what it would be. The explosion > experienced by Mizuno during the first minutes of electrolysis is > also a complete mystery that does not fit any model or expectation. I > have a feeling the two are related. > > - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 13:21:16 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SKKA7t011429; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:20:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SKE8Qg007176; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:14:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:14:08 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:13:58 -0400 Message-Id: <8C8690685EA4678-19C-58A9@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C868FF36FD34B3-1118-11938@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C868FF36FD34B3-1118-11938@mblkn-m20.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Rarification of Aether Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5SKE1Eh007088 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69374 X-Loop: vortex-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 your Beta-atmosphere is really the luciferous ether, then the propagation of x-ray photon should be superluminal through the lens-shaped cavity. This should not be difficult to test. It *would* get you that trip to Stockholm. :-)  <><><><><><> No, Terry, it would slow light. But it could still prove or disprove the existence of the aether. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 13:27:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SKQtq7015180; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:26:56 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SKQr0l015141; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:26:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:26:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060628202645152.252011C00097@mwinf3103.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060628202644.009cb600@pop.freeserve.net> X-Sender: grimer2.freeserve.co.uk@pop.freeserve.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 21:26:44 +0100 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: [Vo]: Re: Stan Meyer - Autopsy Report Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69375 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: When I was at grammar school and first learnt about water I visualised it as a lot of little molecules of H20, much like individual marbles in a big transparent bag. Later I discovered it was a tad more complicated than that. Some of the marbles had split into H+ and OH-. Mind you, in ordinary water there were very few of these and unless you were interested in chemistry the picture of a bag of marbles was still pretty accurate. Ice was different. Here the shape of the marbles became important and because the molecule was no longer rotating and precessing its motion had been frozen into a giant structure of connected wishbones. A structure which consisted of sheets of crinkly hexagons with connecting struts and ties between the sheets. A structure I visualised as a rather badly behaved graphite. I suppose people looked upon carbon in much the same way. There were two frozen forms, Diamond and graphite. and there was the amorphous form analogous to water only solid rather than liquid, and there were the individual carbon atoms or small amorphous clumps of these atoms which constituted things like soot. So one had an image of water where the liquid was virtually unstructured and the solid was highly structured with no structure in between. It's a bit like a city consisting of enormous skyscrapers and telephone boxes except, of course, that, for water, the differential in structural size is very much greater. It must have come as a delightful surprise for people to discover those intermediate sized structures in Carbon, the buckminterfullerenes to give them their full title. The huge potential of these relatively newly found structures is now slowly being exploited. We now know that, like carbon, liquid water also has a range of intermediate structures between the molecule and the crystal. This can be appreciated by anyone who cares to visit Professor Chaplin's extensive web site. As far as I know there has been little explicit exploitation of these structures. Partly no doubt because they are so dynamic, unlike the fullerenes. One can separate out fullerenes into different sizes and types. One can't do that with water, not physically anyway. One can of course separate them out conceptually in the same way the Jeans separated out molecules of different speed groups when he developed gas dynamics. Now Meyer was implicitly manipulating the high level structures in water. He may have been aware of the energy potential of high level structuring but since he wasn't a scientist or structural research engineer, I rather doubt it. Did he discover how to rip H20 apart? I think he probably did. And if he was outed then it is because others thought so too. [I can't understand why Jones seemed so confident that Meyer wasn't murdered. Whistling to keep his courage up? 8-) ] Normal direct current electrolysis tackles the taking apart of H20 at the most basic level. It's as though on a building site someone comes along and picks up the basic unit wishbones which are going to form the space structure and rips them apart. Simple electrolysis is a brute force and ignorance approach and it's hardly surprising if you are going to have put as much energy in ripping the individual wishbones apart at you get back when they reunite. Simple electrolysis is also the straw man Meyer's purblind critics employed not only to rubbish his discovery but even to get a court judgement against him by a judge who's knowledge of science was clearly inadequate. If one reads up on Meyer it's quite evident that he was NOT employing conventional electrolysis. Meyer's big problem was, he wasn't a scientist and he didn't really understand what he was doing. Consequently, apart from a physical demonstration, he was incapable of persuading ignoramuses and faint hearts (with commendable exceptions) that he had achieved anything. So what was he doing and how did he manage to generate hydrogen and oxygen using less energy than he would have needed using brute force and ignorance electrolysis? Good question. 8-) If you're fabricating a structure using wishbone shaped elements then you necessarily finish up with a collection of struts and ties. By definition the struts are the connections in compression strain (positive strain energy say) and the ties are the elements in tensile strain (negative strain energy say). Without these strains the structure will not hold together. Any large structure contains more energy than the unconnected individual elements from which they were made. Anyone familiar with the statistical technique, Multifactor Analysis of Variance, will recognise the term Interaction AB which is that amount over and above (or below since it can be negative) the sum of A and B. And they will also appreciate that the more factors there are, the more interactions there are. Suppose we have just five factor (or H2O wishbones in our case) Then apart from the sum of: A + B + C + D + E =================================================== we have the sum of the first order interactions: AB + AC + AD + AE + BC + BD + BE + CD + CE + DE plus the sum of the second order interactions: ABC + ABD + ABE + BCD + BCE + CDE plus the sum of the third order interactions: ABCD + ABCE + BCDE plus the fourth order interaction: ABCDE As the interaction order increases the size of the structure it represents increases and the strain energy, both positive and negative increased. The unit components of these structures will have a wide spectrum of stability and in the least stable individual base components, wishbones molecules will be near breaking point. One might say, water is a classic case of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. If one selectively pumps energy into these quasi- explosive components then they can be broken apart with far less energy than that need to break isolated molecules of H2O. Suppose 100 units of energy are required to break an isolated water molecule which is not part of a structure. Imagine that same molecule in a structure where it so constrained by the rest of the structure that it is 90% of the way to breaking apart. Such a component will only need 1/10th of the energy for fracture and will give up 10/10ths of its energy when it recombines as a single molecule. Like water, nitroglycerin is also a liquid. Its in- built strain energy can easily be released by brute force and ignorance and very little brute force at that. When it was first introduced a number of appalling catastrophes led to the liquid being widely banned. The problem was overcome by mixing nitro with inert absorbents such as the kieselguhr, a soft, chalk-like, rock. This made is safer cos a lot more brute force was needed to release the energy albeit only slightly less ignorance. Water may be thought of as a very safe explosive consisting of an explosive fraction and an inert quasi-kieselguhr fraction which makes the liquid safe to handle. Furthermore the explosive parts are locked away in a strong steel safe. Unless you know the combination, unless you know which component is near breaking point, and how to focus trigger energy there to release the strain energy, then it is not going to explode. The heavily strained H2O molecules are not going to crack open for you whereas with a traditional explosive like dynamite or TNT which are locked in wooden desks, all that's needed is a jemmy in the form of a detonator. With nitro, ignorance of internal structure is no bar to releasing the energy, In contrast, with water ignorance is fatal to getting out more energy than you put in. With water knowledge is at a premium and brute force is useless. Brute force will not open the safe containing the explosives. Only knowledge of the combination will do that. So how does one find this combination, this recipe, this formula which will inch the most heavily strained structural components to the tipping point. If we were structural engineers operating at the atomic level and the structures were static and not dynamic then the answer would be easy. In the case of a long series of arches for example all one needs to do is remove the abutment at one end. The arches will the each collapse in turn until the other abutment is reached. This progressive collapse is the macro equivalent of a detonator's shock wave. If you're not lucky enough to know the combination then you do what the drug manufactures do; you do what Edison did; you try everything. You keep putting coins in the fruit machine until you get three bananas. That is what Stan Meyer did. And from all appearances he did find a line of fruit. Now if I can work out why Meyer might have succeeded, and probably did, then a lot of other people could have realised that possibility too. Not everybody is so stupid as to think that water is a collection of independent isolated molecules and that one can only get the work out that one puts in. The energy barons have plenty of scientific advisers in their employ who are just as clever as the members of this discussion group. If one of us can see the solution, then sure as God made little green apples, one of them can too. Which puts Stan's demise in rather a different light. If I were an energy oligarch, unconstrained by any moral considerations, would I run the risk of someone developing something which would seriously impact on my wealth and power without doing anything about it? Would I, hell! I would remove any plausible threat, if only as an insurance. People insure against all kind of remote threats. Meyer was that kind of threat, as indeed is anyone who reads this post [though I can't imagine even the MIB getting away with offing the total Vortex membership. 8-) ] In an oil baron's shoes I would certainly have offed Meyer. Even though I'd know I couldn't hold the tide back indefinitely - long enough to see me out would do. As for global warning, why should I give a damn. As President Reagan put it, "What has posterity ever done for me? Cheers, Frank --------------------------------------------------- qui vero in terra bona seminatus est hic est qui audit verbum et intellegit et fructum adfert et facit aliud quidem centum aliud autem sexaginta porro aliud triginta --------------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:10:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLAR3N006973; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:10:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLAQYB006960; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:10:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:10:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007f01c69af7$41b66570$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:10:16 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69376 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell > One aspect of Mizuno's recent results bothers me. In some cases, > he reports significant excess hydrogen without anomalous excess > heat, or with only a little excess heat. I do not see how this > could be, if the hydrogen comes from pyrolysis. I think that Mizuno must be using there term "pyrolysis" to broadly include both "photolysis" and/or "radiolysis" ... whereas the slight distinction involved in these underlying methodologies could be critical to understanding the anomaly. Espceially if there is a much stronger output in the EUV spectrum than is normal, which seems to be a characteristic of AGD in general. The normal blackbody heat photon/phonon of 2500 C. can cause pyrolysis, if the flux of them is intense enough, but they are in the wavelength of one micron and longer - whereas if anomalous ultraviolet or UV is being created in the plasma, that radiation could be in the 20-50 nm range (orders of magnitude higher in photon energy) and most importantly - this where the situation can become autocatalytic, in the sense of a chain reaction - since the photolysis reaction can yield another UV photon. This small wavelength also puts it firmly into in the range of the **Casimir force,** which is maximized at the Foster radius - which "external" input could enter into the picture in an non-thermodynamic way. > It seems to me that if heat is causing pyrolysis, there must be > far more heat than normal, so you would expect to see both > excess heat and excess hydrogen. That would normally be true for "plain" photolysis - but in the case where the radiation output (much shorter wavelength than expected of combustion) becomes catalytic, causing the water to split in a different way and then release another UV photon. >Assume there is no anomalous excess heat. In that case, because >the excess hydrogen carries off enthalpy, the total heat from the >reaction should be considerably less than the amount expected >from ordinary electrolysis. Yet the heat balance is usually close >to the expected level. How could there be just enough anomalous >heat to split the water, carry off enthalpy, and reduce overall >measurable heat right back down to the level you see with >ordinary electrolysis? Again - this is likely to be partly semantic - because what you are calling 'anomalous heat' is in fact anomalous UV radiation in the Mizuno device - which will be downshift into heat in most circumstances, but if given the chance can and will catalyze a water-splitting reaction much more efficiently that "just" heat. There are just too many experiments in the literature now - showing this anomaly, to ignore. And it is an anomaly related to an anomalous glow. The Casimir force is not at all ruled out as being the force which makes UV light seem to act catalytically in causing chemical reactions at a much faster and more efficient rate would seem possible - when compared to just "heat" which cannot ever utilize the Casimir force - since its wavelength is fifty times too long. Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:19:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLJ7In011453; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:19:08 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLJ5Cf011427; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:19:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:19:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:18:49 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat In-Reply-To: <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.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/69377 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >Just taking your note at face value down to this point, that doesn't >seem to follow. If you run a high current through an electrolysis >cell such that the electrode gets above the dissociation temperature >for water you would surely expect to see "excess hydrogen" evolved, >no matter how conventional your assumptions were. Ah, but you would also see a heat deficit, as enthalpy was carried off by the evolving gasses. This conventional result is shown in Fig. 21, here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgenerationa.pdf Fig. 17 shows no excess heat. Unfortunately excess hydrogen was not measured in this run. My point is, even when it is measured, it does not seem to correlate with excess heat, or -- you might say -- it seem to swallow up every joule of excess heat and convert it to excess hydrogen. That makes no sense. > Just to emphasize the point, the evolution of excess hydrogen > appears at first blush to be due to purely conventional reactions > in Mizuno's cells. No, because you would see a heat deficit in that case, as in Fig. 21. >At this point I also need to ask, how much energy does the evolution >of the excess hydrogen actually account for? As a percentage of the >total energy in, do you happen to know if it's typically on the >order of 1%? 10%? 50%? 8000% for brief periods. (80 times input.) For one overall run, electrolysis alone would have produced 460 cc of hydrogen and 1470 cc of gas was produced instead. There was no corresponding heat deficit, but there was also no large heat excess, which I find very baffling if the excess gas is caused by excess heat. I surmise that some third reaction -- a high energy reaction -- directly causes both the excess hydrogen and the heat. >> ordinary electrolysis. Yet the heat balance is usually close to the >> expected level. > >Is he not including the volume of generated gas in the heat equation? It is actually an enthalpy equation (not just heat), and yes he includes everything. The heat portion seldom greatly exceeds unity. >In general, as I understand it, even with low-temperature >electrolysis you can't easily tell in advance how much of the >hydrogen is going to spontaneously recombine within the cell . . . That is incorrect. That is a myth spread by skeptics. In a properly designed cell there is never any significant recombination. Some cells are closed, with recombiners. This is partly to assuage skeptics, but also because this reduces contamination from the outside and simplifies calorimetry. >The alternative of using a catalytic recombiner inside the >calorimeter avoids the need to measure the gas volume but I don't >believe Mizuno does that. It would not work with glow discharge. For one thing, in the paper referenced above, he separates out oxygen from the anode, with an inverted funnel, so you are bound to get the ordinary amount of expected hydrogen from electrolysis. For another, free hydrogen and oxygen from glow discharge do not readily recombine just above the cathode in the cell. That area is too hot. Although the free hydrogen and oxygen are not recombined, they are measured with the mass spectrometer, so we know how much of both the cathode is producing. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:22:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLMBLj013317; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:22:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLM9Zw013295; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:22:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:22:09 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:19:07 -0500 From: Harry Veeder Subject: Re: [Vo]: Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . . 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: <0OzLYC.A.nPD.BMvoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69378 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: err..i guess the surface of the cavity is in compression instead of tension. so would the fusion occur there? Harry Harry Veeder wrote: > > Nice analysis. > > If the cavity is at a lower pressure than the surrounding > fluid, does the surface tension of the fluid act like the > hull of submarine? > > Harry > > Grimer wrote: > >> In the light of the parallel between the >> "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . ." and the truly tiny >> bubbles in sonoluminescence I thought I'd revisit >> my files and find how the insights gained from those >> space "Bubbles" might increase understanding of the >> connection between the two. >> >> The most significant recent work is, of course, that >> by Taleyarkhan. As might be expected, his claim of >> fusion has caused a similar furore as that of F&P. >> >> The distinctive feature of Taleyarkhan's experiments >> was the use of neutrons to seed the bubbles rather >> than relying on: >> >> "small air bubbles already in the liquid. Using this >> new method, the team was able to produce stable >> bubbles that could expand to nearly a millimeter in >> radius before collapsing. In this way, the researchers >> stated, they were able to create the conditions >> necessary to produce very high pressures and >> temperatures." >> >> Now it is significant that the high temperatures >> claimed (10 megakelvins) and the relatively huge >> expansion are the same as that claimed for the >> "Tiny Bubbles in the Sky . . .". This suggests >> that from a General Systems viewpoint we are >> dealing with the same phenomena, a highly rarified >> gas in an intense Beta-atmosphere vacuum. >> >> I believe that the mistake Taleyarkhan and others >> are making is to focus their attention on the >> collapse of the bubble. In the first place we are >> not dealing with bubbles but with their inverse, >> with not-bubbles. In other words we are dealing >> with cavities. >> >> Bubbles are at a higher internal pressure than >> the surrounding environment. Cavities are at a >> lower internal pressure. Therefore, though >> "Tiny cavities in the sky...." may be less poetic >> than "Tiny bubbles..." being more suggestive of >> rotten teeth than a mountain spring, it would >> be a more accurate title for this thread. >> The bubbles in the sky aren't bursting but >> collapsing. >> >> The temperature increase in Taleyarkhan's >> cavities must take place as the cavity expands >> and the temperature of the low pressure gas >> inside the cavity increases to that of the sun's >> interior. Any action that takes place must occur >> when the cavity is large. As the cavity >> decreases in size the temperature of the >> rarified gas within will drop. >> >> The same conditions must apply in the case of >> cold fusion. The temperature of the rarified >> gas within expanding cavities will increase >> to levels sufficient for fusion to take place. >> >> What causes the expansion of the cavities in >> palladium. Who knows? Redistribution of the >> stresses inbuilt during manufacture perhaps >> giving rise to increase in compressive strains >> in some places and increase in tensile strains >> in other. >> >> I suppose a more likely cause is the >> differential tensile strains that arise from >> the pressure of deuterium nuclei as they >> saturate the metal. >> >> Perhaps a more accurate name for Cold Fusion >> would be Cavitation Fusion, cos, clearly, >> that's what it is. 8-) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Frank Grimer >> >> The high temperature inside metal cavities >> also explains what the researches detected >> inside the cup and cone cavity that forms >> just prior to failure in steel. It's a >> pity I never been able to find that reference >> again. No doubt someone will turn it up one >> of these days. 8-) >> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:28:29 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLSJaJ016643; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLSI6Q016632; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628171951.0402f000@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:27:54 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat In-Reply-To: <007f01c69af7$41b66570$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <007f01c69af7$41b66570$6401a8c0@NuDell> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <58OaLD.A.zDE.xRvoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69379 X-Loop: vortex-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 normal blackbody heat photon/phonon of 2500 C. can cause >pyrolysis, if the flux of them is intense enough, but they are in >the wavelength of one micron and longer - whereas if anomalous >ultraviolet or UV is being created in the plasma, that radiation >could be in the 20-50 nm range (orders of magnitude higher in photon >energy) and most importantly - this where the situation can become >autocatalytic, in the sense of a chain reaction . . . This is what I had in mind: a high energy reaction that causes direct splitting. But wouldn't this also cause significant heat? Some of the photons would go nowhere and convert to heat, it seems to me. And if the energy from this is not anomalous, but merely a byproduct of ordinary reactions, should it not produce a large heat deficit? >Again - this is likely to be partly semantic - because what you are >calling 'anomalous heat' is in fact anomalous UV radiation in the >Mizuno device - which will be downshift into heat in most >circumstances, but if given the chance can and will catalyze a >water-splitting reaction much more efficiently that "just" heat. I suppose some of it must always downshift into heat. It is hard to believe that the reaction works perfectly, splitting water and never "missing the target." But that seems to be what is doing, especially if we take Iizumi at face value. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:29:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLSqde016900; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLSoG4016882; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:28:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-ME-UUID: 20060628211621555.877981C000AE@mwinf3106.me.freeserve.com Message-Id: <2.2.32.20060628211621.00c9f8f0@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, 28 Jun 2006 22:16:21 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer Subject: Re: [Vo]: Rarification of Aether Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5SLSmx4016848 Resent-Message-ID: <2KoXLB.A.uHE.SSvoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69380 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:13 pm 28/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > If your Beta-atmosphere is really the luciferous > ether, then the propagation of x-ray photon should > be superluminal through the lens-shaped cavity. > This should not be difficult to test. It *would* > get you that trip to Stockholm. :-)  > ><><><><><><> > > No, Terry, it would slow light. But it could still > prove or disprove the existence of the aether. > > Terry Faster or slower I'm sure the relativists will come up with an explanation. To use a topical metaphor - they are past masters at the art of moving goal posts. You can't destroy a religious faith with a single piece of evidence. As far as Stockholm is concerned I feel the same contempt for that bauble as More did for Wales. -------------------------------------------------- "Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to lose his soul for the whole world... but for Wales??" -------------------------------------------------- Frank I think X-rays may well be the way those the researchers used who did investigate the cavity (and whose paper I have never managed to re-discover. Maybe Nigel will find it one day when he has a clear out). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 14:56:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SLuJZ8001267; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:56:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SLuHdg001239; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:56:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:56:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <00a001c69afd$a98077d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <007f01c69af7$41b66570$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628171951.0402f000@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:56:08 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69381 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" >>Again - this is likely to be partly semantic - because what you >>are calling 'anomalous heat' is in fact anomalous UV radiation >>in the Mizuno device - which will be downshift into heat in most >>circumstances, but if given the chance can and will catalyze a >>water-splitting reaction much more efficiently that "just" heat. > I suppose some of it must always downshift into heat. It is hard > to believe that the reaction works perfectly, splitting water > and never "missing the target." But that seems to be what is > doing, especially if we take Iizumi at face value. Yes much of it is shifted into heat - but - you shouldn't be backtracking from you initial and correct insight- which recognizes that the enthalpy of H2 itself - being removed rapidly by diffusion from the cell - this will actually *lower* the cell temperature itself very effectively. Even if much excess heat has being created, unrelated to the water-splitting ====> (i.e. there are LENRs as well as bulls-eyes ) <====== this heat is being removed equally fast by the hydrogen evolution - so the cell can remain relatively cool (it does heat up a little) while at the same time shedding much more heat than if it had to shed head by blackbody radiation. IOW the relative coolness itself is standard physics - and it is the expected result of the extraordinary ability of H2 to remove heat rapidly. Even if the appearance of all that H2 goes beyond standard physics... Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 16:30:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SNU3qJ007887; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:30:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SNQk1c005630; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:26:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:26:44 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20060628162807.02c32d50@mail.newenergytimes.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:32:00 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit 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/69382 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: 1989 UofU Press Conference Status: O X-Status: Audio recordings of the 1989 U of Utah Press Conference. >http://newenergytimes.com/Audio/1989UtahPC1.mp3 >http://newenergytimes.com/Audio/1989UtahPC2.mp3 >http://newenergytimes.com/Audio/1989UtahPC3.mp3 The first section contains the "prepared" remarks. Parts 2 and 3 are Q&A. Please note that the content of 2 and 3 are not entirely contiguous or complete, I am continuing to search for more complete audio archives. I am seeking for volunteers to help transcribe. Thanks, Steve From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 16:42:37 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5SNgK4g015957; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:42:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5SNgI1F015928; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:42:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:42:18 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=bgWzRKkYFl2PrQFkwCL3rlt6ISJHjcsosPhX/+vI03HTTsm4Du3MTncVwOeN1wctI0XwPXNtYjvxCsl8CGykT5OlY9HwDvI+RyYbjkD8re+vZYN4G6DT28qCcotwLEoeaAonAxU7l3D2srY49kvXL2Hjj+jrD1bwor5QRGZ6xGA= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:41:59 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <4Ozur.A.b4D.ZPxoEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69383 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: As an interesting turn of phrase Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo, I often come across the following turn of phrase, or some variation thereof: "xxxxx cannot happen by any means I know of" The critical element: ".... that I know of...." Is it possible empirical evidence will show all of those willing there may be some mechanism that we do NOT know of??? This is the great interest and fun of experimentalism. Opinion. JH On 6/28/06, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > One aspect of Mizuno's recent results bothers me. In some cases, he reports > significant excess hydrogen without anomalous excess heat, or with only a > little excess heat. I do not see how this could be, if the hydrogen comes > from pyrolysis. It seems to me that if heat is causing pyrolysis, there must > be far more heat than normal, so you would expect to see both excess heat > and excess hydrogen. > > Assume there is no anomalous excess heat. In that case, because the excess > hydrogen carries off enthalpy, the total heat from the reaction should be > considerably less than the amount expected from ordinary electrolysis. Yet > the heat balance is usually close to the expected level. How could there be > just enough anomalous heat to split the water, carry off enthalpy, and > reduce overall measurable heat right back down to the level you see with > ordinary electrolysis? > > Actually, another paper reports similar results: > > Iizumi, K., et al. Heat Measurement During Plasma Electrolysis. in The 12th > International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2005. > Yokohama, Japan. > > Unfortunately, I do not have permission to upload to this, but anyway, the > conclusion is: > > "The energy balances during plasma electrolyses were 100~102% and a clear > excess energy could not be detected in the experiments this time. The > current efficiencies during plasma electrolyses were 115~122%. Furthermore, > a small amount of CO2 was also detected during plasma electrolyses by means > of Gas Chromatograph. . . ." > > Assuming these observations are correct, I think they preclude the simple > model of excess heat causing excess hydrogen. Some other highly energetic > reaction must be occurring, and this fractures the water directly. I cannot > imagine what it would be. The explosion experienced by Mizuno during the > first minutes of electrolysis is also a complete mystery that does not fit > any model or expectation. I have a feeling the two are related. > > - Jed > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Jun 28 18:45:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5T1jQQS020616; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:45:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5T1jN8l020583; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:45:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:45:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:40:12 -0400 From: "Walter Faxon" To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID: X-Mailer: WorldClient 8.1.3 X-Authenticated-Sender: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-Return-Path: wfaxon@newebmail.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: vortex-L@eskimo.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) X-Spam-Report: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:40:17 -0400 X-MDAV-Processed: newebmail.com, Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:40:17 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69384 X-Loop: vortex-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 for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is Mizuno also detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? You wrote: "Furthermore, a small amount of CO2 was also detected during plasma electrolyses by means of Gas Chromatograph. . . ." (Mention Haldane's Law or some variant here.) -Walter From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 04:56:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TBtgPC016532; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 04:55:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TBtbbn016475; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 04:55:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 04:55:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <001701c69b72$ea268d90$57037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: [VO]: Balance vs. Bias Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:54:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C69B48.E9B37280" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69385 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C69B48.E9B37280 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0014_01C69B48.E9B37280" ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C69B48.E9B37280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankHowdy Vorts, The herd mentality requires everyone hold the same view regardless. = Vorts are a strange mix that seem to believe there should be at least = three biased views plus a correct balanced view......theirs!! The joy = of Vorts is the ability of it's members to "cut each other some slack" = to permit a healthy discourse. Therein lies the clue to the problem facing Universities today. Bias is = suppressed. Bias does not destroy and divide. Bias promotes a healthy = discourse. Without the tides the estuaries would putrify. Putrification = has risen to a new level in Universities and may now be irrevocable. Its = name is politically correct science. Carefully read the science comments contained in the link = http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13559838/ which describes how weather causes the earth to wobble.The article is = written as a absolute fact because it makes senses and we must not = disturb the ignorant masses with imagination. There will be no other = views permitted because we are the great a terrible wizard of Oz.=20 Now consider the biased view that the earth may cause the weather to = bobble. No! Never! Silence! You would dare to question the great a = terrible Wizard of Oz? You peons! You ... err.. what are they called?? = Vorts? ,, You Vorts !! Silence, I will hear no more of this "cold = Fusion". Silence ! Richard ------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C69B48.E9B37280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Howdy Vorts,
 
The herd mentality requires everyone hold the same view regardless. = Vorts=20 are a strange mix that seem to believe there should be at least three = biased=20 views plus a correct balanced view......theirs!!  The joy of = Vorts is=20 the ability of it's members to "cut each other some slack" to permit a = healthy=20 discourse.
 
Therein lies the clue to the  problem facing Universities = today. Bias=20 is suppressed. Bias does not destroy and divide. Bias promotes a healthy = discourse. Without the tides the estuaries would putrify. Putrification = has=20 risen to a new level in Universities and may now be irrevocable. Its = name is=20 politically correct science.
 
Carefully read the science comments contained in the link http://msnbc.msn.com/id/135598= 38/
which=20 describes how weather causes the earth to wobble.The article is written = as a=20 absolute fact because it makes senses and we must not disturb = the ignorant=20 masses with imagination. There will be no other views = permitted=20 because we are the great a terrible wizard of Oz.
 
Now consider the biased view that the earth may cause the weather = to=20 bobble. No! Never! Silence! You would dare to question the great a = terrible=20 Wizard of Oz?   You peons! You ... err.. what are they=20 called??   Vorts? ,, You Vorts !! Silence, I will hear no more = of this=20 "cold Fusion". Silence !
 
Richard

 

------=_NextPart_001_0014_01C69B48.E9B37280-- ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C69B48.E9B37280 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <001201c69b72$d284e6a0$57037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C69B48.E9B37280-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 06:04:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TD3wKL023898; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:03:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TD3vCp023875; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:03:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:03:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:03:47 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5TD3sAl023853 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69386 X-Loop: vortex-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: >>At this point I also need to ask, how much energy does the evolution >>of the excess hydrogen actually account for? As a percentage of the >>total energy in, do you happen to know if it's typically on the >>order of 1%? 10%? 50%? > > 8000% for brief periods. (80 times input.) For one overall run, > electrolysis alone would have produced 460 cc of hydrogen and 1470 cc > of gas was produced instead. No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are different things. Input power is voltage times current, but only exactly 1.48V out of the ~300V GDPE voltage is devoted to electrolysis (1.48V= dissociation energy of one H2O molecule divided by twice the electron charge), so electrolytic dissociation energy is only 1.48/300 ~ 0.5% of the input power. Therefore 80 times faradaic efficiency for brief periods means that 80*0.5%=40% of the input energy goes into H2O dissociation energy, not 8000%! And 3 times overfaradaicity for one overall run means that only 3*0.5%=1.5% of input energy is going into dissociation, that's why dissociation energy is usually ignored in the GDPE energy balance (1.5% << 30%). Do let me know if any of the above didn't make sense. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 06:46:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TDkSA5017312; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:46:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TDkNVD017234; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:46:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:46:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:46:13 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat In-Reply-To: <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> 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/69387 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michel Jullian wrote: >No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are >different things. Yup. I mixed them up. Walter Faxon wrote: >Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is Mizuno also >detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in detail. It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the O2 from electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the inverted funnel. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 06:56:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TDtaJT024155; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:55:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TDtSL0024061; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:55:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 06:55:25 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=XB0xHMCgMTz9LRomrxG8jrVQ0peGwdUtwBIbxkb84alGRDO+1k0Lz7vViFwR5fuC; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006642913553293@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:55:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9407fb38484cf71758f9c0b61d2eb7e90e3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.240 Resent-Message-ID: <_RJRLC.A.Q3F.Mv9oEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69388 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re; Nature's Particle Factories Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII A presumptuous thought? Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy is close to the mass-energy of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV). IOW, 1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV. Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down) "Quarks" in the proton. OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and a different radius IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that end up making Baryons. Perhaps a garden variety of stable "WIMPs" too. Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than the high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers". The Proton-Proton to Helium burning on the Sun could be working with the heavier baryons (*P) and donating them to the Solar Wind as heavy (*H-) "hydrino hydride" or a low energy stripping (*D) species. In a mass spectrometer *D containing a (*P) could look like mass 3 HD, He-3, or Tritium. Or with two (*P) it could look like D2 or He-4. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
A presumptuous thought?
 
Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their
combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy  is close to the mass-energy
of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV).
IOW,  1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV.
Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound
mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV
"+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy
given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down)
"Quarks" in the proton.
OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could
be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up
with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which
would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same
charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and
a different radius
 
IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons
(Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that
 end up making Baryons.
Perhaps a garden variety of  stable "WIMPs" too.
 
Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons
every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than  the 
high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers".
 
The Proton-Proton to Helium burning  on the Sun could be working
with the heavier baryons (*P)  and donating them to the
Solar Wind as heavy (*H-) "hydrino hydride" or a low energy stripping (*D)
species. In a mass spectrometer *D containing a (*P) could look like mass 3
HD, He-3, or Tritium. Or with two (*P) it could look like D2 or He-4.  :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 08:11:34 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TFAwdj014090; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:10:59 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TFAss1014031; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:10:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:10:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002201c69b8e$329402e0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:10:44 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69389 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" > Michel Jullian wrote: >>No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are >>different things. > Yup. I mixed them up. >> And 3 times overfaradaicity for one overall run means that only >> 3*0.5%=1.5% of input energy is going into dissociation, that's >> why dissociation energy is usually ignored in the GDPE energy >> balance (1.5% << 30%). I disagree with the full implication of this conclusion - as not being indicative of what the paper clearly states. Mizuno says: "The power efficiency graphs show almost 100% ..." (during plasma dissociation run- not the whole run) OK it is confusing, as written, but here Mizuno has switched back to total power, and not current-efficiency, and the resultant power efficiency of the hydrogen produced at that stage is 100% - but actual P-out could be considerably in excess of 100% when you account for the heat recovery of oxygen evolution - which was not measured ! Consequently Michel's analysis could only be correct if the 1.5% of input energy which is going into dissociation, utilizes that more than the 80-times current efficiency boost to give the 100% power efficient (and the 98.5% of input is itself excess high grade heat not accounted for relative to total energy) such that the bottom line when stochiometric oxygen is accounted for is results in a COP near 2 - just for the electrolysis, and does not include the other heating which brings the net COP up to about 3 (best case) At least that is the most optimistic reading, and falls in line with the Naudin and some other experiments - but perhaps it is time for submitting direct questions to Mizuno to clear this up. So, we can only conclude that partial power efficiency was close to 100% relative to just the hydrogen evolution, and that there was much input power in the system over this. Is it enough to self-power using thermoacoustics ? Not clear. > Walter Faxon wrote: >>Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is >>Mizuno also detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? > JR As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in > detail. It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the > O2 from electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the > inverted funnel. If it is not stochiometric then we can conclude that peroxides are being created in addition to the hydrogen evolved. This is potential chemical energy which could enter the picture later and it may relate to why the reaction takes so long (1000s of seconds) to get going. It also totally screws many of the prior assumptions. Plus on the negative side: Here is a site which can add something to the original question of why a plasma discharge in water will not heat the water as much as it should, based on the net energy input. In short, more water is "atomized" without phase change (and the necessity of the high heat of vaporization). Sounds plausible. http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm The author believes that there are two mechanisms related to the "atomization" of water, and that their combined effect leads to the sample being atomized without the need to actually bring the sample to its boiling point [vaporized]. Now... does all this mean that the Mizuno et al findings of COP near 3 cannot lead to a self-powered device? Before we can even attempt to answer that we must determine what happens to the thermodynamics in a *closed cell* if and when the excess (over Faradaic) hydrogen which is generated is exploded in situ, and that energy returned at that stage --- is there some additional synergy there? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 08:20:30 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TFK4cM020700; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:20:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TFK2KS020640; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:20:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:20:01 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=V+Hv9qLokPrxy82P/moI656OUS3LmyVzn/dyxCG3eHQ4xxdAXEFGLhjVdkpUsahE; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066429151951562@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:19:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94001bb45ede888c66f9e9d8c18b5397a41350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.127 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69390 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nature's Particle Factories Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like a length-less solenoid. Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width. Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space". How wide is a photon, or for that matter any EM wave? :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 6/29/2006 7:56:19 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re; Nature's Particle Factories A presumptuous thought? Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy is close to the mass-energy of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV). IOW, 1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV. Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down) "Quarks" in the proton. OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV which could be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and a different radius IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that end up making Baryons. Perhaps a garden variety of stable "WIMPs" too. Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than the high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers". The Proton-Proton to Helium burning on the Sun could be working with the heavier baryons (*P) and donating them to the Solar Wind as heavy (*H-) "hydrino hydride" or a low energy stripping (*D) species. In a mass spectrometer *D containing a (*P) could look like mass 3 HD, He-3, or Tritium. Or with two (*P) it could look like D2 or He-4. :-) Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons
and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference
or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like
a length-less solenoid.
Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width.
 
Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space".
 
How wide is a photon, or for that matter any EM wave?  :-)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/29/2006 7:56:19 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re; Nature's Particle Factories

A presumptuous thought?
 
Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their
combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy  is close to the mass-energy
of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV).
IOW,  1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV.
Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound
mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV
"+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy
given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down)
"Quarks" in the proton.
OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV which could
be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up
with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which
would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same
charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and
a different radius
 
IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons
(Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that
 end up making Baryons.
Perhaps a garden variety of  stable "WIMPs" too.
 
Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons
every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than  the 
high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers".
 
The Proton-Proton to Helium burning  on the Sun could be working
with the heavier baryons (*P)  and donating them to the
Solar Wind as heavy (*H-) "hydrino hydride" or a low energy stripping (*D)
species. In a mass spectrometer *D containing a (*P) could look like mass 3
HD, He-3, or Tritium. Or with two (*P) it could look like D2 or He-4.  :-)
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 08:32:42 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TFWK3W029755; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:32:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TFWIrn029737; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:32:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:32:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-24.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060629112330.03ea8f38@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:27:08 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat In-Reply-To: <002201c69b8e$329402e0$6401a8c0@NuDell> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> <002201c69b8e$329402e0$6401a8c0@NuDell> 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/69391 X-Loop: vortex-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: >>JR As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in detail. >>It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the O2 from >>electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the inverted funnel. > >If it is not stochiometric then we can conclude that peroxides are >being created in addition to the hydrogen evolved. No, I mean it is not stochiometric because the oxygen from the anode is diverted out of the cell via another tube. During ordinary electrolysis, only hydrogen is captured. During pyrolysis a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen evolves from the cathode, under the funnel, and this is all captured. But if you ignite this effluent gas there will be some left-over hydrogen. (Mizuno does not ignite it or recombine it.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 08:33:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TFXMNI030393; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:33:23 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TFXKTE030362; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:33:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:33:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <39be01c69b91$54f2a870$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> <002201c69b8e$329402e0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:33:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5TFXEpA030304 Resent-Message-ID: <75oCKC.A.NaH._K_oEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69392 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: No sorry Jones, my analysis is correct I am afraid, and COP is only 1.3 at best, not 2 or 3, cf Mizuno's conclusion in http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgenerationa.pdf ---------- 5. Conclusions We have reached several conclusions: 1. Current efficiency for the plasma electrolysis reaches 8000% to the input current. 2. Power efficiency[should be excess] for the plasma electrolysis reaches 30% to the input voltage.[should be power] ------- I guess Jed didn't do the translation for this paper, the English is very bad. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" To: Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 5:10 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jed Rothwell" > >> Michel Jullian wrote: > >>>No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are >>>different things. > >> Yup. I mixed them up. > >>> And 3 times overfaradaicity for one overall run means that only >>> 3*0.5%=1.5% of input energy is going into dissociation, that's >>> why dissociation energy is usually ignored in the GDPE energy >>> balance (1.5% << 30%). > > I disagree with the full implication of this conclusion - as not > being indicative of what the paper clearly states. Mizuno says: > "The power efficiency graphs show almost 100% ..." (during plasma > dissociation run- not the whole run) > > OK it is confusing, as written, but here Mizuno has switched back > to total power, and not current-efficiency, and the resultant > power efficiency of the hydrogen produced at that stage is 100% - > but actual P-out could be considerably in excess of 100% when you > account for the heat recovery of oxygen evolution - which was not > measured ! > > Consequently Michel's analysis could only be correct if the 1.5% > of input energy which is going into dissociation, utilizes that > more than the 80-times current efficiency boost to give the 100% > power efficient (and the 98.5% of input is itself excess high > grade heat not accounted for relative to total energy) such that > the bottom line when stochiometric oxygen is accounted for is > results in a COP near 2 - just for the electrolysis, and does not > include the other heating which brings the net COP up to about 3 > (best case) > > At least that is the most optimistic reading, and falls in line > with the Naudin and some other experiments - but perhaps it is > time for submitting direct questions to Mizuno to clear this up. > > So, we can only conclude that partial power efficiency was close > to 100% relative to just the hydrogen evolution, and that there > was much input power in the system over this. Is it enough to > self-power using thermoacoustics ? > > Not clear. > > > Walter Faxon wrote: > >>>Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is >>>Mizuno also detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? > >> JR As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in >> detail. It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the >> O2 from electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the >> inverted funnel. > > If it is not stochiometric then we can conclude that peroxides are > being created in addition to the hydrogen evolved. This is > potential chemical energy which could enter the picture later and > it may relate to why the reaction takes so long (1000s of seconds) > to get going. It also totally screws many of the prior > assumptions. > > Plus on the negative side: Here is a site which can add something > to the original question of why a plasma discharge in water will > not heat the water as much as it should, based on the net energy > input. In short, more water is "atomized" without phase change > (and the necessity of the high heat of vaporization). Sounds > plausible. > > http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm > > The author believes that there are two mechanisms related to the > "atomization" of water, and that their combined effect leads to > the sample being atomized without the need to actually bring the > sample to its boiling point [vaporized]. > > Now... does all this mean that the Mizuno et al findings of COP > near 3 cannot lead to a self-powered device? > > Before we can even attempt to answer that we must determine what > happens to the thermodynamics in a *closed cell* if and when the > excess (over Faradaic) hydrogen which is generated is exploded in > situ, and that energy returned at that stage --- is there some > additional synergy there? > > Jones > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 08:44:51 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TFiVFR005928; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:44:32 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TFiTHB005881; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:44:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:44:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <39ba01c69b8f$b85cdcc0$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:21:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5TFiCBv005686 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69393 X-Loop: vortex-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: >>No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are >>different things. > > Yup. I mixed them up. Then you will agree that recovering the energy of the escaping H2 and O2 (recombining them one way or another) wouldn't help much because that's at most 1.5% of the full run's input energy. > Walter Faxon wrote: > >>Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is Mizuno also >>detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? > > As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in detail. It > is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the O2 from > electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the inverted funnel. Indeed, if you add up what goes into the funnel it should be stoichiometric. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 09:24:57 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TGOTMW001283; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:24:29 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TGOR27001255; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:24:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:24:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <003101c69b98$7ac8c4b0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> <002201c69b8e$329402e0$6401a8c0@NuDell> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629112330.03ea8f38@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:24:21 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69394 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" > No, I mean it is not stochiometric because the oxygen from the > anode is diverted out of the cell via another tube. During > ordinary electrolysis, only hydrogen is captured. During > pyrolysis a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen evolves from the > cathode, under the funnel, and this is all captured. But if you > ignite this effluent gas there will be some left-over hydrogen. > (Mizuno does not ignite it or recombine it.) Yes, but there is also evidence that plasma electrolysis specifically (and "high current efficiency" in general - as in radiolysis) --- that in these supra-Faradaic processes, the modalities are so different in detail that the radiation itself is removing a single proton preferentially. ... in effect allowing the remaining hydroxyl radicals (say from two adjacent 'proton-depleted' water molecules) to bond to form peroxide or hydroxyl-hydrates immediately, with free electrons picked up by the protons in picoseconds - and not necessarily happening on the anode itself. ... all of which could be a very advantageous situation (for finding OU) - but that particular situation can be dangerous - IF too much HO-OH should be allow to accumulate in the cell... ....which is another explanation for the well-known explosion in Mizuno's lab ! At around 45% concentration (or less), peroxide becomes very unstable. ... but when nature presents you with lemons ... you make lemonade, no? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 11:31:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TIUY6d018422; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:30:35 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TIUNwJ018291; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:30:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:30:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007b01c69baa$10e422d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:30:12 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69395 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: Michel, This is most inconvenient, as I still do not get the email from you via vortex, so I am having to go back and forth to the archive site, in order to see your posts. Thankfully we have cut-and-paste. In another paper on the lenr site, perhaps a bit more clearly stated: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTconfirmatib.pdf Mizuno clearly says- quote: "The power efficiency graphs (Figure 4B) show almost 100%. However, in the experiment, heat recovery for oxygen evolution was not measured. So, we can only conclude that partial power efficiency was close to 100%. " That was "power efficiency" P-in net ompared to P-out(H2) = ~100% - and not related to "current efficiency" If - as you state - only about 1.5% of the power input equivalent is being utilized for dissociation, then to this efficiency of "nearly 100%" which is already accounted for by Mizuno - in order to get the true COP we must add the 98.5% of the input power not being used for dissociation, plus the heat recovery from the oxygen evolution - which is not stated, but can be estimated - so when all of this is included, we are back up to a COP= ~3 . Which is in keeping with the Naudin results. BTW - pehaps ... in deference to you inquisitive countryman, J.L. Naudin (who I personally admire for his perserverance, despite occassional lapses in power measurement) - you have not raised any objection to his work yet but one must presume you have found some of what you consider to be the same problem there ? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 12:16:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TJ0eCY006889; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:00:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TJ0c4T006850; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:00:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:00:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <004001c69bae$465813f0$640fa8c0@MIKEBY3NR533HT> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <001701c69b72$ea268d90$57037841@xptower> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:59:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69396 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Balance vs. Bias Status: O X-Status: Blank ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay Subject: [VO]: Balance vs. Bias MC: Richard wrote, . Carefully read the science comments contained in the link http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13559838/ which describes how weather causes the earth to wobble.The article is written as a absolute fact because it makes senses and we must not disturb the ignorant masses with imagination. There will be no other views permitted because we are the great a terrible wizard of Oz. Now consider the biased view that the earth may cause the weather to bobble. No! Never! Silence! You would dare to question the great a terrible Wizard of Oz? You peons! You ... err.. what are they called?? Vorts? ,, You Vorts !! Silence, I will hear no more of this "cold Fusion". Silence ! MC: I'm not sure how carefully Richard read the article he is ridiculing. The stated perturbations are in the range of centimeters, determined by GPS technology, taken by an institute devoted to measuring the polar position, in a period when larger known perturbations canceled each other out. The weather systems and tides are massive and contain lots of energy, ultimately driven by the Sun and Moon. The earth is oblate, not spherical. Were there no fluid systems interacting with the rough surface of the planet, it is unlikely that any perturbations of that short time scale would be seen at all. MC: Without seeing the cited journal paper, one can't conclude how the investigators assigned causation, or merely noted that correlation exsists and it was the science writer who chose the punchier headline. Mike Carrell Richard ________________________________________________________________________ This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 14:48:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TLmKRB001594; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:48:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TLmHQs001566; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:48:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:48:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <001801c69bc5$b7902e60$cb97163f@DFBGQZ91> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: References: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:48:09 -0400 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: <7v3OvC.A.WY.hqEpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69397 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 6:47 PM Subject: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Not a single reply. This seems common with anything I post. --Kyle From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 15:26:26 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TMPqHd025811; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:25:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TMPoWr025781; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:25:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:25:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:20:34 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69398 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Bell, Bang and Entangle Status: O X-Status: Gnorts, Vorts! Let us suppose that my guess is wrong and permanent magnets are not ZPE pumps. Of course, it is undisputed that the primary source of the PM field is electron spin with secondary and tertiary contributions from orbital rotation and nuclear spin. Shall we explore another possibility? Tests of Bell's theorem have pretty much proven the concept of entanglement and put to rest EPR's local realism. If, at the moment of the big bang, all electrons had positron mates then would they not remain entangled? "But whence the missing antimatter," you might ask. That one will have to wait because I have not finished Susskind's book. :-) Let us suppose the positrons reside in Oz. Indeed, it might be that there is an "entanglement space" that looks like a ball of yarn after my new Maine Coon kitty has played with it. This space would be composed of all the umbilical cords which tie the entangled particles. Here's my point (with many dancing angels): electron spin could move energy between Kansas and Oz. More if this congeals. Terry A recent Bell-based attack on SR: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906036 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 16:07:09 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TN6sS5016509; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:06:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TN6r0S016496; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:06:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:06:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:06:46 -0400 Message-Id: <8C869E7D41B8C63-1C38-8E41@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5TN6pBf016476 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69399 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Bell, Bang and Entangle Status: O X-Status: A recent Bell-based attack on SR:    http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906036  <><><><><> BTW, Brian Greene's book has replaced Alice and Bob with Scully and Mulder, as in the referenced paper. More apropos considering "spooky action at a distance", n'est-ce pas? Terry   From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 16:12:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5TNCJqr019277; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:12:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5TNCHL0019251; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:12:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:12:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:12:12 -0400 Message-Id: <8C869E896B89A79-1C38-8E68@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.134 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69400 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Bell, Bang and Entangle Status: O X-Status: One side note: For those Vorts who might not get the subject title: http://imdb.com/title/tt0051406/ My lusty heart rejects that I was only 4 when Kim Novak made this movie. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 18:28:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U1S5GN027119; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:28:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U1S27P027076; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:28:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:28:02 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44A47E17.5060405@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:27:51 -0400 From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? References: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> In-Reply-To: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> 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/69401 X-Loop: vortex-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 R. Mcallister wrote: > Hello all, > > First off, I must say I hate the term "alternative energy." Why? > Alternative has a sort of 'its not the greatest but its something to > fall back on' kind of attachment to it. I think this stuff is more > like "advanced" energy, but thats just my $0.75 (inflation, no longer > $0.02) > > I've heard of the possibilities of running engines on compressed or > liquefied methane gas. Quite powerful, low pollution, much easier on > the inner works of the engine, valves in particular. I have also read > Zubrin's books on exploration schemes for Mars, in particular the > bits about in-situ fuel generation, that is, making methane with > resources available on the Martian surface. > > Now my only problem with this, and why I prefer hydrogen over this, > is you still get CO2 from burning the methane. Supposedly there is > too much CO2 in the air. Well.... can't we just manufacture CH4 fuel > from H2O we get from seawater (or whatever logical source) and CO2 > from the atmosphere? Granted the atmosphere of Mars is primarily CO2, > but it is also at a far far lower pressure. I would think there is > plenty of CO2 available in our atmosphere to be used to produce > automotive fuel (or gas for heating homes, cooking, etc.) But, is there an efficient mechanism which can be used to push the reaction 2*H2O + CO2 <-> CH4 + 2*O2 backwards up the energy hill? Plants do something like this, of course, but they end up with sugar rather than methane. I haven't heard of an industrial process which does it (aside from the industrial process called "farming"). If this were practical it might be a sensible alternative to Jones's notion of making liquid air using floating windmills. Surely the energy density of LNG is higher than LAIR. For an application like that, of course, you'd most likely rather make propane or butane rather than methane, since either one liquifies a lot more easily than methane ... but I kind of suspect that all three are difficult to make just using air, water, and electricity. > We would > then not be adding any CO2 back to the air, simply recycling what we > have already there. The energy to do this could be obtained by wind > farms or solar collectors. > > As for the problem of transmitting all the energy from distant > facilities to consumers not near the power plants, why can we not use > the energy to make some high energy liquid or gas (CH4, LH2, etc.) > and literally pipeline our energy to distant points, at no loss? > Except of course whatever is involved in conversion/reconversion and > moving it from A to B. > > Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really > harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? Last I heard the offshore wind available around the US was enormous. Kansas would be too far from the ocean to profit from it, of course, but I hear rumors of some fairly reliable breezes out there in flatland, too (tornadoes aside). > > --Kyle > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 18:42:04 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U1feBm001880; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:41:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U1fb28001831; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:41:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:41:36 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=n8f/72mIYVsodXxDdzjtM9YRWmdzbX8bwNzIhhU8pVo/5y/nq1cedOPKgeL48QjS; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006653013734972@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:37:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b5a58c44036edbc1d2264db530f20c43350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.90 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69402 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII While Terry the Elder is untangling string while mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green. Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron with a circumference or wavelength = hbar/mc into the nucleus where it's spin stays at mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus has share energy from it's own subunits to donate to the electron in order shrink it down to fit. IOW, in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi) m= E/c^2 satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing to keep spin equal to hbar/2(pi) [E* r = hbar/2(pi)] The nucleon subunits (strings disks or loops) go through the same sharing exercise in reverse to conserve energy and spin. About the same as interacting flywheels work. The formation on a deuteron from two protons, an electron and the concurrent production of a neutrino pair is a good example: P-e-P -----> D + internal antineutrino + the ejected neutrino Or P + P ----> D + e+ and the neutrino meaning the collision has to be energetic enough to create the electron-positron pair. > > BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons > and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference > or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like > a length-less solenoid. > Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width. > Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space". > > Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their > combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy is close to the mass-energy > of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV). > IOW, 1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV. > Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound > mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV > "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy > > given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down) > "Quarks" in the proton. > OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could > be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up > with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which > would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same > charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and > a different radius > > IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons > (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that > end up making Baryons. > Perhaps a garden variety of stable "WIMPs" too. > > Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons > every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than the > high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers". > Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
While Terry the Elder is untangling string while
mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green.
 
Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from
radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron
with a circumference or wavelength  = hbar/mc
into the nucleus where it's spin stays at
mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus
has share energy from it's own subunits to donate
to the electron in order shrink it down to fit.
 
IOW,  in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi)  m= E/c^2
 
satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing
to keep spin equal  to hbar/2(pi)  [E* r  = hbar/2(pi)]
 
The nucleon subunits (strings disks or loops) go through
the same sharing exercise in reverse to conserve energy and spin.
About the same as interacting flywheels work.
 
The formation on a deuteron from two protons, an electron
and the concurrent production of a neutrino pair is a good
example:
 
P-e-P -----> D + internal antineutrino + the ejected neutrino
 
Or
 
P + P ----> D + e+ and the neutrino meaning the collision
has to be energetic enough to create the electron-positron
pair.
 
 
>
> BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons
> and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference
> or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like
> a length-less solenoid.
> Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width.
> Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space".
>
> Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their
> combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy  is close to the mass-energy
> of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV).
> IOW,  1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV.
> Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound
> mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV
> "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy
> > given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down)
> "Quarks" in the proton.
> OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could
> be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up
> with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which
> would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same
> charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and
> a different radius
>
> IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons
> (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that
>  end up making Baryons.
> Perhaps a garden variety of  stable "WIMPs" too.
>
> Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons
> every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than  the 
> high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers".
>
 
Fred
 
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 18:50:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U1oFkL006725; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:50:16 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U1o9sx006660; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:50:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:50:08 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=ArAMhSF7bcFw/UDhQpS3i1lgHrbKMC0mYq6xwj4W7X7djODa928g0TR1wqbODqr7; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006653014959542@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:49:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940e56a3b28e25afc83d060b6d609efb375350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.90 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69403 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Darn (Vo) nuisance. :-( ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/29/2006 7:43:12 PM Subject: [Vo]: While Terry the Elder is untangling string while mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green. Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron with a circumference or wavelength = hbar/mc into the nucleus where it's spin stays at mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus has share energy from it's own subunits to donate to the electron in order shrink it down to fit. IOW, in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi) m= E/c^2 satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing to keep spin equal to hbar/2(pi) [E* r = hbar/2(pi)] The nucleon subunits (strings disks or loops) go through the same sharing exercise in reverse to conserve energy and spin. About the same as interacting flywheels work. The formation on a deuteron from two protons, an electron and the concurrent production of a neutrino pair is a good example: P-e-P -----> D + internal antineutrino + the ejected neutrino Or P + P ----> D + e+ and the neutrino meaning the collision has to be energetic enough to create the electron-positron pair. > > BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons > and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference > or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like > a length-less solenoid. > Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width. > Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space". > > Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their > combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy is close to the mass-energy > of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV). > IOW, 1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV. > Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound > mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV > "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy > > given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down) > "Quarks" in the proton. > OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could > be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up > with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which > would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same > charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and > a different radius > > IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons > (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that > end up making Baryons. > Perhaps a garden variety of stable "WIMPs" too. > > Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons > every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than the > high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers". > Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Darn (Vo) nuisance. :-(
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/29/2006 7:43:12 PM
Subject: [Vo]:

While Terry the Elder is untangling string while
mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green.
 
Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from
radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron
with a circumference or wavelength  = hbar/mc
into the nucleus where it's spin stays at
mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus
has share energy from it's own subunits to donate
to the electron in order shrink it down to fit.
 
IOW,  in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi)  m= E/c^2
 
satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing
to keep spin equal  to hbar/2(pi)  [E* r  = hbar/2(pi)]
 
The nucleon subunits (strings disks or loops) go through
the same sharing exercise in reverse to conserve energy and spin.
About the same as interacting flywheels work.
 
The formation on a deuteron from two protons, an electron
and the concurrent production of a neutrino pair is a good
example:
 
P-e-P -----> D + internal antineutrino + the ejected neutrino
 
Or
 
P + P ----> D + e+ and the neutrino meaning the collision
has to be energetic enough to create the electron-positron
pair.
 
 
>
> BTW, for those not initiated in String Theory, the positrons
> and Electrons are "Length Only" Loops or Disks with circumference
> or Wavelength [2(Pi)R)] that can stack side-by-side and act like
> a length-less solenoid.
> Hence a nucleon has a radius but no width.
> Something to do with "folding in ten dimensional space".
>
> Electrons and positrons (Leptons) making up a group 137 times their
> combined 1.02 MeV mass-energy  is close to the mass-energy
> of the Pi Meson (134.97 MeV).
> IOW,  1.02E6 * 137 = 139.77 MeV.
> Then, 1.02E6 * 4 * 137 = 559 MeV which is the unbound
> mass-energy of a meson required to end up with a 312 MeV
> "+/- Quark" in the proton(Baryon). (559 - 312 MeV) is the energy
> > given off as the binding energy of the two (+ or up ) and one (- or down)
> "Quarks" in the proton.
> OTOH, 1.02E6 * 8* 137 = 1.118 GeV w3hich could
> be the unbound mass-energy of a meson required to end up
> with a 624 MeV (+/- Quark) in a heavy baryon "proton" (*P) which
> would make it 2 times the energy-mass of a proton with same
> charge and spin, but ~1/2 the nuclear magnetic moment,and
> a different radius
>
> IOW, there are groups consisting of 137 positrons and electrons
> (Pi Mesons) making up heavier-stranger mesons that
>  end up making Baryons.
> Perhaps a garden variety of  stable "WIMPs" too.
>
> Pulsars that are known to spew out megatons of Positrons and Electrons
> every second can make the Leptons-Mesons-Baryons better than  the 
> high energy physics laboratory "atom smashers".
>
 
Fred
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 19:14:22 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U2E2l6018321; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:14:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U2DwS4018264; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:13:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:13:57 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=RFc9ztcnLYYnPOQMyebU+eV//UJzevz7Xx4IeByyJFOOhQQkxBm0h8nvt5v1o+uK; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-22006653021355197@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:13:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c7ad1f65ae5dfe234aa4430c319b73e5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.159.90 Resent-Message-ID: <2KlfEB.A.MdE.ljIpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69404 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane from Atmospheric CO2 Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Watch the oxygen bubbles coming off a livestock tank as the Algae turns greenhouse CO2 into Anerobic bacteria fermentable feedstock when air is excluded with a cover. Kept a water dish for a stray cat that picked up algae. More O2 bubbles than from a 2 amp electrolysis cell anode. Floating Algae Ponds in the tropics? Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Watch the oxygen bubbles coming off a livestock
tank as the Algae turns greenhouse CO2 into
Anerobic bacteria fermentable feedstock
when air is excluded with a cover.
Kept a water dish for a stray cat
that picked up algae. More O2 bubbles
than from a 2 amp electrolysis cell anode.
 
Floating Algae Ponds in the tropics?
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 20:26:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U3QJrS023576; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:26:19 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U3QHb9023560; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:26:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:26:17 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Sd3rM/AlfnaxMXXwxEcmiFuLp9l1+elEvfUQV+yRi81BV3GLbAuWu1CaIHIXG6lX; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665303262569@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:26:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da94031ae44357b363df303380ccbfc373a8a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.137 Resent-Message-ID: <7Wdfp.A.AwF.ZnJpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69405 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Nature's Particle Factories Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Oops,to do the algebra right and put all of the constants where they belong: E* r = hbar*c As energy (E ) increases, radius ( r ) has to decrease and vice versa. This will satisfy mcr = hbar for conservation of momentum (spin) and energy. Fred > > Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from > radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron > with a circumference or wavelength = hbar/mc > into the nucleus where it's spin stays at > mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus > has share energy from it's own subunits to donate >to the electron in order shrink it down to fit. > > IOW, in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi) m= E/c^2 > > satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing > to keep spin equal to hbar/2(pi) [E* r = hbar/2(pi)] ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Oops,to do the algebra right and put all of the constants
where they belong:
 
E* r  = hbar*c
 
As energy (E ) increases, radius ( r ) has to decrease
and vice versa.
 
This will satisfy mcr = hbar for conservation of
momentum (spin) and energy.
 
Fred
>
> Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from
> radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron
> with a circumference or wavelength  = hbar/mc
> into the nucleus where it's spin stays at
> mcr = hbar/2(pi) indicating that the nucleus
> has share energy from it's own subunits to donate
>to the electron in order shrink it down to fit.
>
> IOW,  in order for mcr = hbar/2(pi)  m= E/c^2
>
> satisfies this simply by the product of E* r changing
> to keep spin equal  to hbar/2(pi)  [E* r  = hbar/2(pi)]
 ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 20:48:06 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U3lfTc002489; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:47:42 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U3lcuw002448; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:47:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:47:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Reply-To: From: "John Steck" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: [VO] Biobutanol, anyone? Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:47:35 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C69BCE.03FBF510" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <410-220066328192140900@ix.netcom.com> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69406 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C69BCE.03FBF510 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Isn't the biggest issue with butanol the fact that it is quite toxic? Explosive and poisonous is a deadly combination... maybe I am confusing it with something else.... -john To: vortex-l Sent: 6/28/2006 12:15:26 PM Subject: Biobutanol, anyone? June 28, 2006 A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed oil from Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) at a time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel (not including shipping) and climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally reported by 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the latest solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from corn and grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our efforts in the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, coming or going. The June 26th article touched upon the news that British Petroleum and DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new generation of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to produce about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. 1-Butanol derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range. 1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also research is continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert varied agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining in the bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. Perhaps even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder. -ak- aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C69BCE.03FBF510 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Isn't the = biggest issue=20 with butanol the fact that it is quite toxic?  Explosive = and=20 poisonous is a deadly combination...  maybe I am confusing it with=20 something else....
 
-john
 
 To: vortex-l
Sent: 6/28/2006 12:15:26 PM =
Subject: Biobutanol, = anyone?

June 28, 2006
 
A short article appeared in the June 26th issue of Chemical & = Engineering news. You know, its the same weekly that revealed  = oil from=20 Canadian tar sands could be scooped up for $9.00 (nine dollars a bbl) = at a=20 time when pumped oil was at $35,00 a barrel  (not including = shipping) and=20 climbing. Needless to say the tar sands oil boom was just finally = reported by=20 60 Minutes last Sunday. Then there is the coal digging boom, and the = latest=20 solution to the fuel energy crisis: Ethanol production from = corn and=20 grass fields in mid America. Very little has been noted about our = efforts in=20 the cold fusion field. It is still a hydrocarbon based civilization, = coming or=20 going.
 
The June 26th article touched upon the news that British = Petroleum and=20 DuPont are: "joining forces to develop, produce, and market a new = generation=20 of bio fuels for the renewable fuels sector". Initially the expect to = produce=20 about 9 million gallons per year of butanol in United Kingdom. = 1-Butanol=20 derived from the fermentation process can be competitive without=20 subsidies when oil prices are in the $30 to $40 range.
 
1-Butanol has several chemical advantages over Ethanol. Also = research is=20 continuing to develop a genetic engineered microbe that can convert = varied=20 agricultural feedstock bio catalytically into fuel. Chevron is joining = in the=20 bio fuel butanol game. Ethanol production can be converted to butanol. = Perhaps=20 even coal and oil can become converted to butanol. I wonder.
 
-ak-
aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira=20 Kawasaki)
 

------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C69BCE.03FBF510-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 20:50:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U3nxHv004314; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:50:00 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U3nwbR004295; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:49:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:49:58 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=Dqckvt4y+BDi8nib748Py36PvEJu9S4rqetuO25UHgB/XC75BH6nPa+pOdy4/I44/yQOC1HEIQUFVTRqPH6+GxK5hNGqFADwyuhueESeXUSu0qopXo0Of5b1C55fwxV/FLS3N1BkQzobLY55HTnU8v4AM4HfMF9UbwFQ1aPzB6Y= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:49:56 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69407 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: CARBON -------- then solid carbonates ---CO2? Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo, Pre suppose one intends to burn H and O ... and use some of the atmosphere as well.... (A) The exhaust can be passed through calcium hydroxide in an aqueous solution..... then we have trapped the gaseous to use on the crops... or our own garden. (B) Nitrogen - oxygen gases can also be trapped to use for crops. Hmmm........... As an exercise: Permit ALL Vos to think of a method or methods whereby our know how and theory and hands on can be used to "be part of an energy chain" .... The Task? To show positive thinking as opposed to " cannot help, cannot work, cannot be had" ...and ... Ask ourselves to look toward ALL we know or can search out to suggest what can be a benefit... It seems to this partial lurker "bitching" and "can NOT" is easier to do ... or post.... than the NOT .... Uh...... Gee folks, .... how about a NEW game? A NEW idea or endeavor .... bet it will be more funnn... but it MAY to too hard for some to embrace .... Suggestion: From this DAY ONE: ( you pick it, as I do not know what side of the date line you are on) Try to suggest, point out or convey what DOES, HAS or COULD work to help..... Uhhhhh This is a challenge..... I fully believe some parties CANNOT or... worse WILL not contribute........ how some Ever... you are permitted to ask others how to try... and maybe even change a way of bandwidth use ......... Opinion...... --------- NB This post, above, conveys no onus to any earlier post of any type.... sort of tossing out a new chip on the table On 6/29/06, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > First off, I must say I hate the term "alternative energy." Why? > > Alternative has a sort of 'its not the greatest but its something to > > fall back on' kind of attachment to it. I think this stuff is more > > like "advanced" energy, but thats just my $0.75 (inflation, no longer > > $0.02) > > > > I've heard of the possibilities of running engines on compressed or > > liquefied methane gas. Quite powerful, low pollution, much easier on > > the inner works of the engine, valves in particular. I have also read > > Zubrin's books on exploration schemes for Mars, in particular the > > bits about in-situ fuel generation, that is, making methane with > > resources available on the Martian surface. > > > > Now my only problem with this, and why I prefer hydrogen over this, > > is you still get CO2 from burning the methane. Supposedly there is > > too much CO2 in the air. Well.... can't we just manufacture CH4 fuel > > from H2O we get from seawater (or whatever logical source) and CO2 > > from the atmosphere? Granted the atmosphere of Mars is primarily CO2, > > but it is also at a far far lower pressure. I would think there is > > plenty of CO2 available in our atmosphere to be used to produce > > automotive fuel (or gas for heating homes, cooking, etc.) > > But, is there an efficient mechanism which can be used to push the reaction > > 2*H2O + CO2 <-> CH4 + 2*O2 > > backwards up the energy hill? > > Plants do something like this, of course, but they end up with sugar > rather than methane. I haven't heard of an industrial process which > does it (aside from the industrial process called "farming"). > > If this were practical it might be a sensible alternative to Jones's > notion of making liquid air using floating windmills. Surely the energy > density of LNG is higher than LAIR. For an application like that, of > course, you'd most likely rather make propane or butane rather than > methane, since either one liquifies a lot more easily than methane ... > but I kind of suspect that all three are difficult to make just using > air, water, and electricity. > > > > We would > > then not be adding any CO2 back to the air, simply recycling what we > > have already there. The energy to do this could be obtained by wind > > farms or solar collectors. > > > > As for the problem of transmitting all the energy from distant > > facilities to consumers not near the power plants, why can we not use > > the energy to make some high energy liquid or gas (CH4, LH2, etc.) > > and literally pipeline our energy to distant points, at no loss? > > Except of course whatever is involved in conversion/reconversion and > > moving it from A to B. > > > > Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really > > harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? > > Last I heard the offshore wind available around the US was enormous. > > Kansas would be too far from the ocean to profit from it, of course, but > I hear rumors of some fairly reliable breezes out there in flatland, too > (tornadoes aside). > > > > > --Kyle > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 20:58:03 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U3vmB1009481; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:57:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U3vk2w009460; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:57:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:57:46 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=EJ69nRvjUtJti2QunpVmhYUhFkJw0nYwXqN0qObifH2QBiGS3OA617j7NwUZt3WX1oShwaIgUX05EhBlusR4O4JC7QgWIDvR6h0S7xwRliAfwgn0g+h20qNNSrjxmpi8izARmVviWhk1e/n3wsWfoMmsb6Oz9ZRTm5T7bF/WiG8= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:57:44 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69409 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: hydrogen oxygen Status: O X-Status: Tangent VO ----------> If one examines cold fusion one seems to see electric current passing through various aqueous solutions with various types of electrodes. Can ANY vo let us know the amount of Hydrogen and Oxygen created by these varied experiments? Can we know the volume of H and O and the electric current and at what voltage? Is there ANY record of the amount of H and O and how much energy it MIGHT represent if burned or conveyed to fuel cell? Hmmm? What part may this play if one attempts to calculate efficacy? Any figures? NOT THEORY..... figures... please On 6/29/06, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" > To: > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 6:47 PM > Subject: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? > > Not a single reply. This seems common with anything I post. > > --Kyle > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 21:42:33 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U4gKBl030355; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:42:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U4gIWm030338; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:42:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:42:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <68A34DFE87D0BE46AF898FFCC65CCF8438F43A@caraupermb02.carrier-apac.com.au> From: John.Rudiger@carrier.utc.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:41:06 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69410 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: FW: [Vo]: [OT] Nature Solves Own Problems Status: O X-Status: Hi all, This is the second publication from a "scientist" I have seen today trying to completely debunk Cold Fusion as "relegated to the dust bin of history", I wonder who is paying for this "misinformation" to be fed to the uninitiated and unschooled general public! John Rudiger -----Original Message----- From: DonW [mailto:dwiegel@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, 30 June 2006 11:42 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [OT] Nature Solves Own Problems An article from the Asbury Park Press: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060628/OPINION/606280538/103 2 TOPIC OF THE DAY Global warming Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/28/06 Nature solves own problems As a retired scientist I marvel at the progress made in science during the last 50 to 60 years in spite of efforts to subvert that progress by such bogus notions as cold fusion, the ozone "hole" and global warming. The first of these has properly been relegated to the dust bin of history. The second still survives annihilation because of the need of NASA scientists to protect their sinecure, being dependent on an easily spun Congress to provide budget money for whatever project can be spun as important. Ozone is easily degraded during the Antarctic winter (with or without the assistance of chlorofluorocarbons) when there is no sunlight, and is quickly restored by sunlight when it returns in the Antarctic spring. These facts have escaped the notice of our non-scientific lawmakers. The third is being kept alive by proactive environmentalists with an obvious agenda: the destruction of America's capitalist system. Global temperature variation is controlled mainly by the variable energy output of the sun. Even if global warming were caused by anthropogenic activity, so what? Fear mongers demagogue that glaciers will melt and the seas will rise and flood our coastline. I dispute this: The winter temperatures in Greenland vary from 20 below to 20 above zero, and the summer temperatures from 40 to 60 degrees. The difference between the average temperatures is far greater than any prediction of global warming, yet we see no sea level rise in summer in the northern hemisphere because it is balanced by freezing in the southern hemisphere, and vice-versa. This is not to say we should ignore conservation. On the contrary, the planet has a fixed amount of oil and, in the absence of substitutes, it will one day run out. I am confident substitutes will be developed in the meantime, but we should slow down consumption. Nature was designed with such care, using checks and balances, that man can have little, if any, direct influences to change any of its aspects. A.J. Petro BERKELEY From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 23:39:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U6cvj2024463; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:38:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U6ctNj024439; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:38:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:38:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44A4C6DD.1010300@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:38:21 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: [Vo]: [OT] Nature Solves Own Problems References: <68A34DFE87D0BE46AF898FFCC65CCF8438F43A@caraupermb02.carrier-apac.com.au> In-Reply-To: <68A34DFE87D0BE46AF898FFCC65CCF8438F43A@caraupermb02.carrier-apac.com.au> 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/69411 X-Loop: vortex-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.Rudiger@carrier.utc.com wrote: >Hi all, > >This is the second publication from a "scientist" I have seen today trying >to completely debunk Cold Fusion as "relegated to the dust bin of history", >I wonder who is paying for this "misinformation" to be fed to the >uninitiated and unschooled general public! > > It wouldn't surprise me if he actually believes what he says. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 00:08:41 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U78P0e006735; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:08:26 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U78NwM006711; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:08:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:08:22 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <44A4CDD3.2070501@usfamily.net> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 02:08:03 -0500 From: thomas malloy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <_QbXzD.A.poB.m3MpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69412 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Cudos to Jed Rothwell Status: O X-Status: I just wanted to take time to compliment Jed Rothwell on his letter to Parksie. Jed, you the man. It just tickles me when someone tells the old devil off. Your post on the increasing instability of C F cells with increasing power was a necessary, but not too pleasant reality check on any irrational exuberance resulting from advances in the field. While I'm on a roll. The Japanese researcher, Muzano? who had the flask explode, is a subject of continuing interest to me. Judging from the damage done to the container, which was of stout glass, I estimate 1/8 inch, there was a substantial release energy. The bottom of the container was cracked in a manner, it looked like someone took a chisel and struck it in the center. This says detonation from a small space to me. As I recall, there was a funnel in the container, this might have acted to focus the shock wave on the bottom. Now the problem is figuring out what caused the event, and how to control it. The instability Jed mentioned occurs with just 4 W of energy. I envisioned one 1000 times that size. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 01:01:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U814rG032082; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:01:04 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U8133W032071; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:01:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:01:02 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=nsgr2yB0m+DV5QZPoRyQJ0GFknZMgeib7pFXx2AoCCf7KDiAFa/hF3obehgaaE/FMquVdUOlbCwrCOIsm4DUnTIT09ieIgN2YX6mfW2e/t5cJNj+kuF2l3vmS9wPbx6CLPsGdGB0+9GwM2hAJ39HtdqzrZqs4sLL7Gy/jxroI+g= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:01:01 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <3Xn45B.A.-0H.-oNpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69413 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Have you measured O and H? Asking for decades... Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., I STILL have not read ANY measure of O and H released from "cold fusion"..... Anyone can answer??? This is YEARS of asking the question. On 6/29/06, Jones Beene wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jed Rothwell" > > > Michel Jullian wrote: > > >>No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are > >>different things. > > > Yup. I mixed them up. > > >> And 3 times overfaradaicity for one overall run means that only > >> 3*0.5%=1.5% of input energy is going into dissociation, that's > >> why dissociation energy is usually ignored in the GDPE energy > >> balance (1.5% << 30%). > > I disagree with the full implication of this conclusion - as not > being indicative of what the paper clearly states. Mizuno says: > "The power efficiency graphs show almost 100% ..." (during plasma > dissociation run- not the whole run) > > OK it is confusing, as written, but here Mizuno has switched back > to total power, and not current-efficiency, and the resultant > power efficiency of the hydrogen produced at that stage is 100% - > but actual P-out could be considerably in excess of 100% when you > account for the heat recovery of oxygen evolution - which was not > measured ! > > Consequently Michel's analysis could only be correct if the 1.5% > of input energy which is going into dissociation, utilizes that > more than the 80-times current efficiency boost to give the 100% > power efficient (and the 98.5% of input is itself excess high > grade heat not accounted for relative to total energy) such that > the bottom line when stochiometric oxygen is accounted for is > results in a COP near 2 - just for the electrolysis, and does not > include the other heating which brings the net COP up to about 3 > (best case) > > At least that is the most optimistic reading, and falls in line > with the Naudin and some other experiments - but perhaps it is > time for submitting direct questions to Mizuno to clear this up. > > So, we can only conclude that partial power efficiency was close > to 100% relative to just the hydrogen evolution, and that there > was much input power in the system over this. Is it enough to > self-power using thermoacoustics ? > > Not clear. > > > Walter Faxon wrote: > > >>Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is > >>Mizuno also detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen? > > > JR As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in > > detail. It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the > > O2 from electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the > > inverted funnel. > > If it is not stochiometric then we can conclude that peroxides are > being created in addition to the hydrogen evolved. This is > potential chemical energy which could enter the picture later and > it may relate to why the reaction takes so long (1000s of seconds) > to get going. It also totally screws many of the prior > assumptions. > > Plus on the negative side: Here is a site which can add something > to the original question of why a plasma discharge in water will > not heat the water as much as it should, based on the net energy > input. In short, more water is "atomized" without phase change > (and the necessity of the high heat of vaporization). Sounds > plausible. > > http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm > > The author believes that there are two mechanisms related to the > "atomization" of water, and that their combined effect leads to > the sample being atomized without the need to actually bring the > sample to its boiling point [vaporized]. > > Now... does all this mean that the Mizuno et al findings of COP > near 3 cannot lead to a self-powered device? > > Before we can even attempt to answer that we must determine what > happens to the thermodynamics in a *closed cell* if and when the > excess (over Faradaic) hydrogen which is generated is exploded in > situ, and that energy returned at that stage --- is there some > additional synergy there? > > Jones > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 04:20:36 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UBKCgH009088; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:20:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UB3Pe7031322; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:03:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:03:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <3ac001c69c34$cb13e930$3800a8c0@zothan> From: "Michel Jullian" To: , "Jones Beene" References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> <397901c69b7c$791de490$3800a8c0@zothan> <7.0.1.0.2.20060629094316.03d3c470@mindspring.com> <007b01c69baa$10e422d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:03:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5UB3KNK031273 Resent-Message-ID: <0go_zB.A.HpH.7TQpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69414 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: Hi Jones, my comments inserted below. Thanks in the name of all the non-native English speakers here for keeping your posts concise like the one I am responding to. > Michel, > > This is most inconvenient, as I still do not get the email from > you via vortex, so I am having to go back and forth to the archive > site, in order to see your posts. Thankfully we have > cut-and-paste. > > In another paper on the lenr site, perhaps a bit more clearly > stated: > http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTconfirmatib.pdf > > > Mizuno clearly says- quote: "The power efficiency graphs (Figure > 4B) show almost 100%. However, in the experiment, heat recovery > for oxygen evolution was not measured. So, we can only conclude > that partial power efficiency was close to 100%. " > > That was "power efficiency" P-in net ompared to P-out(H2) = > ~100% - and not related to "current efficiency" > > If - as you state - only about 1.5% of the power input equivalent > is being utilized for dissociation, then to this efficiency of > "nearly 100%" which is already accounted for by Mizuno - in order > to get the true COP we must add the 98.5% of the input power not > being used for dissociation, plus the heat recovery from the > oxygen evolution - which is not stated, but can be estimated - so > when all of this is included, we are back up to a COP= ~3 . No, no, we can only add up percents of the _same thing_, input energy here. Output energy is 1.5% (dissociated gas, which could release this much energy if recombined) + 98.5% (ohmic heat) + 30% at most (excess heat). See what I mean now? If not, please go back to my first post in this thread and tell me what you don't understand or disagree with, it would be nice to solve this controversy. > Which > is in keeping with the Naudin results. > > BTW - pehaps ... in deference to you inquisitive countryman, J.L. > Naudin (who I personally admire for his perserverance, despite > occassional lapses in power measurement) - you have not raised any > objection to his work yet I have actually raised many objections to JLN's methods and conclusions regarding COPs, you probably didn't get my posts as you explained above. Trying to CC you on this, see if you get the CC any better than the Vo rebroadcasting. > but one must presume you have found > some of what you consider to be the same problem there ? I never said there was a problem in Mizuno's conclusions (I wouldn't know), I said there was a problem in what you inferred from them. Michel From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 04:46:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UBkEbr027369; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:46:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UBkCro027346; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:46:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 04:46:10 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Fp+cX57/DA8xMFfTDQrlSty123/9ZEO7wl1eNlHHN79n5dBAU8N/5jPG5KVSj0Wa; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-2200665301146311@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 05:46:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c7a2e5d08331a6d9578669182fa6f2cf350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.75.31 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69415 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Riemann Closed Circles and Strings Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Everyone should have a stack of these around somewhere. Close to the one version of String Theory "Disks or Energy Loops" model of the Positron and Electron and how they can form stacks to build Mesons and Baryons. http://www.indiana.edu/~minimal/maze/riemann.html ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Everyone should have a stack of these around somewhere.
 
Close to the one version of String Theory "Disks or Energy Loops"
model of the Positron  and Electron and how they can form stacks
to build Mesons and Baryons.
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 07:12:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UEBvHZ020433; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:11:58 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UEBn62020375; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:11:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:11:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060630095812.0408ecf8@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:11:35 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? In-Reply-To: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> References: <001a01c69972$82be2a20$00d1163f@DFBGQZ91> 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/69416 X-Loop: vortex-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 R. Mcallister feels frustrated that no one responded to this message. I sympathize; no doubt he put a lot of effort into it, but I suppose people do not feel qualified to discuss the issue. I certainly cannot judge the chemistry, but I can address the last sentence: >Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really >harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? Probably, but that depends upon efficiency. If you can convert ~25% of the solar or wind energy into liquid fuel, I think this would be viable but it would cost a terrific amount of money and take up a great deal of space for the collectors. If it is only 0.1% efficient, like photosynthesis, it would take up most of the North American land area. If you can convert with 50% efficiency then not only would this be viable, it would be profitable, and probably superior to today's fossil fuel extraction, especially when you look at the big picture, political issues and so on. At 70% (roughly the efficiency of electrolysis) my guess is that it would be obscenely profitable. Given our existing infrastructure, I think that producing liquid fuel is probably the best method of tapping solar or wind energy on a large-scale. I am assuming you can ship the fuel over existing gas and oil pipelines from the southwest (perhaps after retrofitting them with new equipment). The problem is that most intense sources of solar and wind energy are far from population centers, and you cannot ship electricity over such long distances. The most recent issue of the Scientific American had a big article about using high temperature superconducting power lines cooled by liquid hydrogen, where both electricity and the hydrogen would be used as a source of energy. This would be an ambitious undertaking! Shipping liquid fuel seems more practical to me. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 07:15:54 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UEFYXU023130; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:15:34 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UEFUq9023055; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:15:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:15:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <002701c69c4e$b27e6d90$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex-l" References: <410-2200665301146311@earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 07:08:43 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69417 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Riemann Closed Circles and Strings Status: O X-Status: No doubt you noticed that the image to the right - the so-called "degenerate" example - is where one can see **two helicoids developing** Ahem... Proto-DNA ??? ....or ... for a proper title, "from the de-generate comes the gene-erator" It stands to reason that - as a way of creating maximum "information" storage; and subsequent semi-permanent info-transfer, "nature" herself would have chosen the "minimal surface" config - as the best way of being able to deliver the highest possible information density. Fascinating. ----- Original Message ----- From: TP Sparber Subject: [Vo]: Re: Riemann Closed Circles and Strings Everyone should have a stack of these around somewhere. Close to the one version of String Theory "Disks or Energy Loops" model of the Positron and Electron and how they can form stacks to build Mesons and Baryons. http://www.indiana.edu/~minimal/maze/riemann.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 08:21:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UFLfkB006131; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:21:41 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UFLTF4006019; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:21:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:21:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:21:20 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C86A6FF93A0859-120C-D849@mblkn-m15.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.133 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69418 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Another Meyer? Status: O X-Status: United States Patent 7,041,203 Sullivan May 9, 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Apparatus and method for generating and using multi-direction DC and AC electrical currents Abstract Multi-directional currents are generated in a medium by cyclically reversing the direction of a conventional current applied to at least one of at least two electrodes so that an electromotive force (EMF) pulse travels from side of the electrode to the other, changing the direction of current in the medium. The multi-directional currents may be used to accelerate electrolytic processes such as generation of hydrogen by water electrolysis, to sterilize water for drinking, to supply charging current to a battery or capacitor, including a capacitive thrust module, in a way that extends the life and/or improves the performance of the battery or capacitor, to increase the range of an electromagnetic projectile launcher, and to increase the light output of a cold cathode light tube, to name just a few of the potential applications for the multi-directional currents. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 08:27:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UFQrkP009968; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:26:54 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UFQoPC009937; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:26:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:26:50 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=nYdk9D4dy/UIZHhrB+mlABYUnGUArrHERMH6hlI0W7rGgltY0b2smG4jOr6hr9At; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530152643755@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: tpsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "TP Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:26:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 4850d265c1c6f21f71639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b1c3190167ee7c36ef13664722464339350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.162.129 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69419 X-Loop: vortex-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, > > Kyle R. Mcallister feels frustrated that no one responded to this > message. I sympathize; no doubt he put a lot of effort into it, but I > suppose people do not feel qualified to discuss the issue. I > certainly cannot judge the chemistry, but I can address the last sentence: > > >Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really > >harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? > According to this Biodiesel from Algae Farms report, yes. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html "The Office of Fuels Development, a division of the Department of Energy, funded a program from 1978 through 1996 under the National Renewable Energy Laboratory known as the "Aquatic Species Program". The focus of this program was to investigate high-oil algaes that could be grown specifically for the purpose of wide scale biodiesel production1. The research began as a project looking into using quick-growing algae to sequester carbon in CO2 emissions from coal power plants. Noticing that some algae have very high oil content, the project shifted its focus to growing algae for another purpose - producing biodiesel. Some species of algae are ideally suited to biodiesel production due to their high oil content (some well over 50% oil), and extremely fast growth rates. From the results of the Aquatic Species Program2, algae farms would let us supply enough biodiesel to completely replace petroleum as a transportation fuel in the US (as well as its other main use - home heating oil) - but we first have to solve a few of the problems they encountered along the way." "NREL's research showed that one quad (7.5 billion gallons) of biodiesel could be produced from 200,000 hectares of desert land (200,000 hectares is equivalent to 780 square miles, roughly 500,000 acres), if the remaining challenges are solved (as they will be, with several research groups and companies working towards it, including ours at UNH). In the previous section, we found that to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles. To put that into perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US comprises 120,000 square miles.Enough biodiesel to replace all petroleum transportation fuels could be grown in 15,000 square miles, or roughly 12.5 percent of the area of the Sonora desert (note for clarification - I am not advocating putting 15,000 square miles of algae ponds in the Sonora desert. This hypothetical example is used strictly for the purpose of showing the scale of land required). That 15,000 square miles works out to roughly 9.5 million acres - far less than the 450 million acres currently used for crop farming in the US, and the over 500 million acres used as grazing land for farm animals." > > > There was an algae farm experiment near Roswell, NM when nearby oil was really cheap, Aliens contaminated it. :-) Fred > > >Jed > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 08:59:49 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UFxVVB000693; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:59:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UFxTDP000672; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:59:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:59:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:59:23 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86A754A5A8A29-19C-B734@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <410-220066530152643755@earthlink.net> <8C86A72DAD65293-19C-B65B@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <8C86A72DAD65293-19C-B65B@mblkn-m14.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.132 X-Spam-Flag: NO Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5UFxQtf000617 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69420 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Status: O X-Status: From: Sparber    There was an algae farm experiment near Roswell, NM when nearby oil was  really cheap, Aliens  contaminated it. :-)    <><><><><><>    That explains how Big Oil has has successfully blocked alternative energy sources: extraterrestrial assistance!    Terry  From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:11:31 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGBH50010107; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:11:18 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGBGvK010086; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:11:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:11:15 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009101c69c5f$cd37f320$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060628150533.04056590@mindspring.com> <44A2E13C.8090104@pobox.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060628165502.03ed3d60@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:11:09 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69421 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Excess hydrogen without much excess heat Status: O X-Status: Michel, I am still not getting your vortex postings nor your direct cc mail - but from your recent message in the archives - all I can say in response is that I understand your point-of-view on this, but do not agree with it. Obviously, more work with better detail needs to be performed before anyone can suggest that OU has been demonstrated in a robust way. But I see a strong suggestion of this happening - and you do not. Since we are free to disagree, it is my further contention that this line of experimentation, using the Mizuno technique, or variations on it - should be of highest priority to anyone with the necessary resources to build something similar (but improved!), because: 1) there is evidence of nuclear transmutation and without expensive materials. 2) there is evidence of slight overunity-heat and substantial excess hydrogen over Faradaic - perhaps 80 times more. 3) if the excess hydrogen could be made to react explosively within the confines of a specially-designed oscillating reactor, then there is an expectation that the series of sequential explosions might be both synergetic - in the creation of even more of the same anomaly - and also allow for energy conversion of heat into electricity at the same time. 4) there is a possibility - however faint it may appear to some of us - that an overall device can be built which will either *self-power,* or if not self-power, then it will effectively reduce the electrical input necessary, at any given level of output, so that the net heat relative to net electrical P-in becomes most extraordinary, instead of letting the skeptics claim "experimental error." In regard to the last point - for the sake of argument, lets say that in the Mizuno experiment, once it reaches the optimum glow discharge regime and the plasma electrolysis sets-in, and assuming that this level can be maintained for longer than Mizuno has chosen to do so, that he is inputting 700 watts of electricity (350 volts and 2 amp) and that he is seeing 800 watts of heat from the level of weight loss of water, and that he is seeing the equivalent of 700 watts of potential hydrogen heat - but he has chosen not to burn it (it is exhausted unburned). This is all in keeping with the published results. OK. In the alternative situation which I am proposing, where a *bellows-type* reactor is constructed to be pulsed with the same 700 watts BUT of pulsed DC and at a frequency of 440 Hertz; and the reactor is designed in a reverse-loudspeaker configuration, but with many more turns or wire in the coil than normal, so that electricity can be removed at the same potential of 350 volts - and recycled... OK hope you are with me so far, as this is not that easy to verbalize. At the very least, this should give 800+700=1500 watts of heat in the reactor (less the weight of the hydrogen which is double counted by Mizuno) so a net of about 1440 watts is available - even if there is zero synergy. If that heat and kinetic energy of explosion can be converted into electricity at 30% efficiency, then about 480 watts which can be recycled. Not enough to self-power. However, then subtracts from the 800 watts of input normally required to power the device, so that the net input beomces 800-480= ~320 watts of input - yet the heat rejected is two-thirds of the net, and the additional input ends up as heat as well so that instead of a COP of less than two which can be written-off by the skeptics as measurement error, we have a COP of 1440/320 or well over 4, which can no longer be ignored by skeptics and especially since it is a *commercially useful* level of excess heating which will allow for electrically-produced heat to compete with (and surpass) both natural gas and the heat-pump, as the prime source of space heating. ... in my dreams? Jones From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:13:24 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGD2gf011261; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:13:03 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGCxk4011207; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:12:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:12:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=BVRcaDB/D6H1cBjF9lr/syjaCrOnXO9MyqiLOe8Apf2Z18PtglFokGAqRHLLeZHT; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530161248783@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:12:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da9408674c51a754a5829d851d28f1ee5ec64350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.39 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69422 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII BTW, Jed. The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced by Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than enough nutrients too. I've seen lagoons where the algae were so thick you could almost walk on the water. The heavier manures work great for Fat Worm Farming, so you can use them for fish oil farming, or just squeeze the fat out of them for biodiesel too. Beats the repugnant practice of feeding manures to food-chain animals. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
BTW, Jed.
 
The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious
amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced
by Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than
enough nutrients too.
 
I've seen lagoons where the algae were so thick you could
almost walk on the water.
 
The heavier manures work great for Fat Worm Farming, so you
can use them for fish oil farming, or just squeeze the fat out of
them for biodiesel too.
Beats the repugnant practice of feeding manures to food-chain animals.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:20:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGK8aZ018249; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:20:13 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGK5cA018203; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:20:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:20:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <009501c69c60$174243d0$6401a8c0@NuDell> From: "Jones Beene" To: "vortex" Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:13:13 -0700 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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69423 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Rooting for Wind... Status: O X-Status: or should that homonymous pun be: "routing for wind" http://dai.investor.reuters.com/Article.aspx?docid=9752&target=companyoftheday&src=DAI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:35:14 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGYpxF030953; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:34:51 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGYn2T030922; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:34:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:34:49 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=j9+1Xu9RcVf4DLzXsHPYdIUiaWJ82xwT2JDkTpDbJSaThf3y0rWftd7fEFYdBx7Q; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530163446447@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:34:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940b8fe846bd6c60dec16283e00ae4dcdc7350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.39 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69426 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote, > > > From: Sparber  >   > There was an algae farm experiment near Roswell, NM when nearby oil was  > really cheap, Aliens  > contaminated it. :-)  >   > <><><><><><>  >   > That explains how Big Oil has successfully blocked alternative > energy sources: extraterrestrial assistance!  > >From my experience gained by doing biomass projects around Roswell in the 1980s the bigotry of the locals wouldn't allow any Aliens to linger for very long anyhow. :-) Fred >  > Terry  > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:35:28 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGMjGC020064; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:46 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGMc0f019958; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,197,1149480000"; d="scan'208"; a="536669935:sNHT708682108" Message-ID: <2996887.1151684530528.JavaMail.root@fepweb04> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 9:22:10 -0700 From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sensitivity: Normal Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69424 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > TP Sparber wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote, > > > > Kyle R. Mcallister feels frustrated that no one responded to this > > message. I sympathize; no doubt he put a lot of effort into it, but I > > suppose people do not feel qualified to discuss the issue. I > > certainly cannot judge the chemistry, but I can address the last sentence: > > > > >Is there actually enough useable (as in, we can actually really > > >harness it) wind around the US to power all this? Solar? > > > According to this Biodiesel from Algae Farms report, yes. > > http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html > > "The Office of Fuels Development, a division of the Department of Energy, > funded a program from 1978 through 1996 under the National Renewable Energy > Laboratory known as the "Aquatic Species Program". The focus of this > program was to investigate high-oil algaes that could be grown specifically > for the purpose of wide scale biodiesel production1. The research began as > a project looking into using quick-growing algae to sequester carbon in CO2 > emissions from coal power plants. Noticing that some algae have very high > oil content, the project shifted its focus to growing algae for another > purpose - producing biodiesel. Some species of algae are ideally suited to > biodiesel production due to their high oil content (some well over 50% > oil), and extremely fast growth rates. From the results of the Aquatic > Species Program2, algae farms would let us supply enough biodiesel to > completely replace petroleum as a transportation fuel in the US (as well as > its other main use - home heating oil) - but we first have to solve a few > of the problems they encountered along the way." > > "NREL's research showed that one quad (7.5 billion gallons) of biodiesel > could be produced from 200,000 hectares of desert land (200,000 hectares is > equivalent to 780 square miles, roughly 500,000 acres), if the remaining > challenges are solved (as they will be, with several research groups and > companies working towards it, including ours at UNH). In the previous > section, we found that to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we > would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one > quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount > would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles. To put that into > perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US > comprises 120,000 square miles.Enough biodiesel to replace all petroleum > transportation fuels could be grown in 15,000 square miles, or roughly 12.5 > percent of the area of the Sonora desert (note for clarification - I am not > advocating putting 15,000 square miles of algae ponds in the Sonora desert. > This hypothetical example is used strictly for the purpose of showing the > scale of land required). That 15,000 square miles works out to roughly 9.5 > million acres - far less than the 450 million acres currently used for crop > farming in the US, and the over 500 million acres used as grazing land for > farm animals." > > > There was an algae farm experiment near Roswell, NM when nearby oil was > really cheap, Aliens contaminated it. :-) > > Fred Sigh... those pesky aliens. I wonder about the expenses involved in supplying nutrients and other raw materials that would be needed to feed the algae? The report claims: "The operating costs (including power consumption, labor, chemicals, and fixed capital costs (taxes, maintenance, insurance, depreciation, and return on investment) worked out to $12,000 per hectare. That would equate to $46.2 billion per year for all the algae farms, to yield all the oil feedstock necessary for the entire country. Compare that to the $100-150 billion the US spends each year just on purchasing crude oil from foreign countries, with all of that money leaving the US economy. " On the surface, sounds encouraging. OTOH, looking at this from a different and more cynical perspective: While producing ethanol is presumably not the same as generating oil feedstock there have been protracted debates within this discussion group, particularly from Jed, about how utterly inefficient it is (presumably under current economic/technological circumstances), to produce ethanol from corn due to the horrendous amount of fossil fuel consumed to produce the fertilizer as well as to run all the farm equipment. I wonder if there might still be huge hidden costs not mentioned in the above oil feedstock report. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.comn/orionworks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:38:23 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGcFLE001288; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:38:15 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGcDQb001261; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:38:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:38:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060630122112.040c5ec0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:30:31 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? In-Reply-To: <410-220066530161248783@earthlink.net> References: <410-220066530161248783@earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69427 X-Loop: vortex-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 wrote: >BTW, Jed. > >The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious >amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced by >Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than enough >nutrients too. Yup. When I said "if it is only 0.1% efficient, like photosynthesis . . ." I meant dry land plant photosynthesis on average in North America. Aquatic plants are a whole different story. Actually, naturally occurring aquatic plants in North America in swamps and wetlands to not produce all that much more biomass than dry land plants. They are limited by nutrients and sunlight, whereas dry land plants are of limited by water supplies. However, algae that is fertilized artificially by people would be limited only by the plant physiology, and it is not clear what the upper limits are. (Not clear to me, anyway. I read two books and asked several experts about this, and they do not appear to know either.) I estimated that the lettuce grown in the Japanese food factory converts roughly 15% of the light into biomass. It grows under optimum conditions, in aqueous solution. See chapter 16 of my book. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 09:40:48 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UGe4xe002681; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:40:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UGMw30020172; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:58 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=iOe19xwbe5OReQBb3EI5IkTD11rxx1SFs3oGswzWk+e8+kFgkTza7C+a4PwfW3aT; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530162243488@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-l" Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:22:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940c3a1fd3a67c1ceb251a2a44f51aac25f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.39 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69425 X-Loop: vortex-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 sewage from Los Angeles could be pumped by pipeline up to that "Solar Tower site between Victorville and Barstow to cost effective algae biodiesel production, but you want to be sure it has a check valve properly installed. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l Sent: 6/30/2006 10:13:49 AM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? BTW, Jed. The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced by Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than enough nutrients too. I've seen lagoons where the algae were so thick you could almost walk on the water. The heavier manures work great for Fat Worm Farming, so you can use them for fish oil farming, or just squeeze the fat out of them for biodiesel too. Beats the repugnant practice of feeding manures to food-chain animals. Fred ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
The sewage from Los Angeles could be pumped by
pipeline up to that "Solar Tower site between Victorville
and Barstow to cost effective algae biodiesel production,
but you want to be sure it has a check valve properly
installed. 
 
Fred
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 6/30/2006 10:13:49 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2?

BTW, Jed.
 
The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious
amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced
by Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than
enough nutrients too.
 
I've seen lagoons where the algae were so thick you could
almost walk on the water.
 
The heavier manures work great for Fat Worm Farming, so you
can use them for fish oil farming, or just squeeze the fat out of
them for biodiesel too.
Beats the repugnant practice of feeding manures to food-chain animals.
 
Fred
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Jun 29 20:56:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5U3ui6N008828; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:56:45 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5U3uhpl008812; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:56:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:56:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Message-ID: <007301c69bf7$1add0e80$0302a8c0@DONWDESKTOP> Reply-To: "DonW" From: "DonW" To: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:41:38 -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 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69408 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: [OT] Nature Solves Own Problems X-Suspected-Spam: billb friends3 Status: O X-Status: An article from the Asbury Park Press: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060628/OPINION/606280538/1032 TOPIC OF THE DAY Global warming Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/28/06 Nature solves own problems As a retired scientist I marvel at the progress made in science during the last 50 to 60 years in spite of efforts to subvert that progress by such bogus notions as cold fusion, the ozone "hole" and global warming. The first of these has properly been relegated to the dust bin of history. The second still survives annihilation because of the need of NASA scientists to protect their sinecure, being dependent on an easily spun Congress to provide budget money for whatever project can be spun as important. Ozone is easily degraded during the Antarctic winter (with or without the assistance of chlorofluorocarbons) when there is no sunlight, and is quickly restored by sunlight when it returns in the Antarctic spring. These facts have escaped the notice of our non-scientific lawmakers. The third is being kept alive by proactive environmentalists with an obvious agenda: the destruction of America's capitalist system. Global temperature variation is controlled mainly by the variable energy output of the sun. Even if global warming were caused by anthropogenic activity, so what? Fear mongers demagogue that glaciers will melt and the seas will rise and flood our coastline. I dispute this: The winter temperatures in Greenland vary from 20 below to 20 above zero, and the summer temperatures from 40 to 60 degrees. The difference between the average temperatures is far greater than any prediction of global warming, yet we see no sea level rise in summer in the northern hemisphere because it is balanced by freezing in the southern hemisphere, and vice-versa. This is not to say we should ignore conservation. On the contrary, the planet has a fixed amount of oil and, in the absence of substitutes, it will one day run out. I am confident substitutes will be developed in the meantime, but we should slow down consumption. Nature was designed with such care, using checks and balances, that man can have little, if any, direct influences to change any of its aspects. A.J. Petro BERKELEY From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 10:34:17 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UHKYNB029208; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:21:11 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UH0G1N016701; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:00:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:00:16 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qOh3Zw86Bdd86J0/MmM7ShKHRVjYalLvszGERmwD3cVr0YxSlKxTHySHTg+2voTl; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530165914619@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:59:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940fd03ff17bece150d3a26e2f3f4add98e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.39 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69428 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OrionWorks wrote, > > > I wonder about the expenses involved in supplying nutrients and other raw materials that would be needed to feed the algae? The report claims: > The wastes from livestock-dairy production, distillers grains from ethanol production (a travesty) and human food processing, service-preparation is probably an adequate supply for the algae farming. > "The operating costs (including power consumption, labor, chemicals, and fixed capital costs (taxes, maintenance, insurance, depreciation, and return on investment) worked out to $12,000 per hectare. That would equate to $46.2 billion per year for all the algae farms, to yield all the oil feedstock necessary for the entire country. Compare that to the $100-150 billion the US spends each year just on purchasing crude oil from foreign countries, with all of that money leaving the US economy. " > > On the surface, sounds encouraging. > Algae Ponds floated the surface of lakes using hectares of plastic film would be relative inexpensive per square mile. The Great Salt Lake comes to mind. :-) > > OTOH, looking at this from a different and more cynical perspective: While producing ethanol is presumably not the same as generating oil feedstock there have been protracted debates within this discussion group, particularly from Jed, about how utterly inefficient it is (presumably under current economic/technological circumstances), to produce ethanol from corn due to the horrendous amount of fossil fuel consumed to produce the fertilizer as well as to run all the farm equipment. I wonder if there might still be huge hidden costs not mentioned in the above oil feedstock report. > I agree with Jed. Ethanol production-use on a local scale to support food production-agriculture should be the limit on it's use as a motor fuel. That was the intent when it started, but graft and greed took over. Fred > > Regards, > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.Zazzle.comn/orionworks > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 10:40:44 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UHe3xU009813; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:40:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UHUx0B004417; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:30:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:30:59 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=cXT5NzRgFlcNPP98uyn49lg/kX5EvkYTQTu65NnAoZm8WmnC2Qj79u6GvkF/adOK; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <410-220066530173040250@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: fjsparber@earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 2005.2.15.0 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:30:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ELNK-Trace: 0b1c9d71006e06a171639b933de7ae6f7e972de0d01da940be64330f500e9f6aedd1021f7a6f73a3350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 4.240.165.39 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69429 X-Loop: vortex-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. > > Frederick Sparber wrote: > > >BTW, Jed. > > > >The lagoons required around livestock operations produce copious > >amounts of algae year around without any odor. The CO2 produced by > >Anerobic bacteria synergises it the manures produce more than enough > >nutrients too. > > Yup. When I said "if it is only 0.1% efficient, like photosynthesis . > . ." I meant dry land plant photosynthesis on average in North > America. Aquatic plants are a whole different story. > Efficiency doesn't matter, if the cost of a barrel of fuel and environmental protection is reasonable. > > Actually, naturally occurring aquatic plants in North America in > swamps and wetlands to not produce all that much more biomass than > dry land plants. They are limited by nutrients and sunlight, whereas > dry land plants are of limited by water supplies. However, algae that > is fertilized artificially by people would be limited only by the > plant physiology, and it is not clear what the upper limits are. (Not > clear to me, anyway. I read two books and asked several experts about > this, and they do not appear to know either.) > Judging by the deposits of Oil Shale in Utah-Colorado, I would say algae can do quite well in the right environment. > > I estimated that the lettuce grown in the Japanese food factory > converts roughly 15% of the light into biomass. It grows under > optimum conditions, in aqueous solution. See chapter 16 of my book. > Hydroponics gardening works that way. Fred > > - Jed > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 14:21:56 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5ULLeuY024099; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:21:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5ULLbVZ024067; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:21:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:21:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:21:33 -0400 From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net Message-Id: <8C86AA24BC31C5E-120C-E897@mblkn-m15.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.133 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69430 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Is Spacetime a Superfluid? Status: O X-Status: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00012DEF-46AA-1F04-BA6A80A8418 9EEDF&sc=I100322 http://tinyurl.com/o52nj "What makes this approach so interesting is that the behavior of condensed matter is collective. The details of individual molecules hardly matter; the system's properties emerge from the act of aggregation. When water freezes, the molecules do not change, but the collective behavior does, and the laws that apply to liquids no longer do. Under the right conditions, a fluid can turn into a superfluid, governed by quantum mechanics even on macroscopic scales. Chapline, along with physicists Evan Hohlfeld, Robert B. Laughlin and David I. Santiago of Stanford University, has proposed that a similar process happens at event horizons. The equations of relativity fail, and new laws emerge. "If one thinks of spacetime as a superfluid, then it is very natural that in fact something physical does happen at the event horizon--that is, the classical event horizon is replaced by a quantum phase transition," Chapline says. " Don't those bubbles in the sky prove the point? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 15:19:11 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UMIdo3022910; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:18:40 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UMIbvJ022881; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:18:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:18:36 -0700 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=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=P+JPzXZtYZBrLVaogX2Wtsuf5sxqCHtjeQWF7PdQ5vhkA1/ZUYWjZCSmJUBrJoIW; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Message-ID: <23713010.1151705915143.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:18:34 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: Akira Kawasaki Reply-To: Akira Kawasaki To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: c4cc7f5f697e8746f66dc3a06d5924d883d0ae1738000158a3b5149f835372421a036a86675380a6350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.44 Resent-Message-ID: <0me_F.A.YlF.8MapEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69431 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Fw: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 30, 2006 Status: RO X-Status: -----Forwarded Message----- >From: What's New >Sent: Jun 30, 2006 1:19 PM >To: BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU >Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 30, 2006 > >WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday 30 Jun 06 Washington, DC > >1. NASA: DISCOVERY SET FOR LAUNCH TOMORROW, BUT JUST IN CASE... >The mission is to see if the modified shuttle works. Everybody >watches their fuel tanks these days, but NASA watches closer. >The plan is for the crew to take refuge on the ISS if they find >any damage when they get there. But what about the shuttle? It >cost a few billion bucks, never mind what's it's worth. No >problem! They rigged a 28-foot cable so flight controllers on >the ground can throw the switches. I called Ann Thropojinic, a >veteran astronaut we have relied on in the past, to explain these >things. "Does this mean the only function of the crew is to >throw a few switches?" I asked. "Not at all," she replied, "the >crew is there to do weightless tricks for the cameras." > >2. CERVICAL CANCER: FEDERAL ADVISORY PANEL RECOMMENDS VACCINE. >Human papillomavirus (HPV)is the most common sexually transmitted >disease. By protecting against four strains, Gardisil prevents >most cervical cancer. The vaccine is expensive, however, and >the disease is most prevalent among the poor. Still, vaccinating >girls from 11-18 would cost less than the flight of Discovery. >The recommendation was unanimous, but the vote to make Plan B >available over the counter was also overwhelming. Why would >anyone object? "Because," a spokesperson for Focus on the Family >snarled, "You don't catch it, you have to go out and get it." > >3. SENATE: IT WAS ANOTHER WEEK DEVOTED TO SAVING OUR DEMOCRACY. >The Iraq War continues unabated, the deficit soars, the ice caps >melt, and the Senate voted on whether a constitutional amendment >to ban flag burning should go to the States for ratification. It >was the fourth time the Senate has rejected such an initiative >since the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag burning is >protected free speech. It failed by one vote. As a threat to >the nation, flag burning may be as dangerous as gay marriage. An >amendment to ban gay marriage had failed earlier. > >4. HOUSE: BILL IS PASSED TO END MORATORIUM ON OFFSHORE DRILLING. >The moratorium has been in effect for 25 years to protect shore >areas; this is apparently how long it takes for people to forget >the environmental cost of the 1969 leaks off Santa Barbara. >Compared to imports, the amount of oil involved is trivial. > >5. NONEVENT: IT'S MY LAST DAY AS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INFORMATION. >The only title I have ever aspired to is Professor of Physics. >That title has not changed, nor will What's New, nor anything >else I can think of. As you know, What's New is now supported by >the University of Maryland Department of Physics, which has made >it my major teaching assignment; the APS allows me use the office >in the National Press Building as a base to write it with help >from a wonderful staff; and I continue to get up every morning to >battle the Philistines, secure in the knowledge that when I get >it wrong, WN readers will straighten me out. > >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.bobpark.org >What's New is moving to a different listserver and our >subscription process has changed. To change your subscription >status please visit this link: >http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnew&A=1 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 15:30:12 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UMTrwi029028; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:29:53 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UMTp84029014; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:29:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:29:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-Orig: 64-247-224-27.wan.networktel.net [64.247.224.24] (may be forged) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060630182852.040b47c0@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:29:42 -0400 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell 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/69432 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Purdue clears Taleyarkhan Status: O X-Status: Brian Josephson reported: Folks: I have learnt that Purdue's review panel found no evidence of scientific wrong doing on Taleyarkhan's part, and are expected to issue an appropriate announcement in due course. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 16:10:45 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UNABo7018368; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:10:31 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UN6h7x016522; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:06:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:06:43 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f X-CVTV-Spamfilter: Scanned X-Virus-Scanned: by Clam Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net X-Virus-Scanned: by McAfee Antivirus on mail.cvtv.net Message-ID: <000e01c69c99$d38ab4d0$47037841@xptower> From: "RC Macaulay" To: Subject: [VO]:Re: Is Spacetime a Superfluid Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:06:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C69C6F.E9A315C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69433 X-Loop: vortex-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_01C69C6F.E9A315C0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000B_01C69C6F.E9A315C0" ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C69C6F.E9A315C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BlankTerry quoted.. "What makes this approach so interesting is that the behavior of=20 condensed matter is collective. The details of individual molecules=20 hardly matter; the system's properties emerge from the act of=20 aggregation. When water freezes, the molecules do not change, but the=20 collective behavior does, and the laws that apply to liquids no longer=20 do. Under the right conditions, a fluid can turn into a superfluid,=20 governed by quantum mechanics even on macroscopic scales. Chapline,=20 along with physicists Evan Hohlfeld, Robert B. Laughlin and David I.=20 Santiago of Stanford University, has proposed that a similar process=20 happens at event horizons. The equations of relativity fail, and new=20 laws emerge. "If one thinks of spacetime as a superfluid, then it is=20 very natural that in fact something physical does happen at the event=20 horizon--that is, the classical event horizon is replaced by a quantum=20 phase transition," Chapline says. " Howdy Terry, Chapline is technically correct as far as he projects the thought = however he fails to describe the complete process. There is a beauty and = an ugly with a balance in the physical. Describing the function of the "balance" is where Chapline remains = silent. The physical in which we exist is actually " ordered chaos". It = is neither total chaos or perfection. What appears to be a " balance" is = a force that inculcates a type of proportional and reset action to the = physical. Identify this force and you have a clue as to what we may = describe as cold fusion. This glimpse may be quite shocking as Mizumo = learned. As close as I have ever been able to fathom the mystery is a = subtle passage in the bible where the wording states... "everything is = held together by the power of His word".=20 Richard ------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C69C6F.E9A315C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blank
Terry quoted..

"What makes this approach so interesting is that the behavior of=20
condensed matter is collective. The details of individual molecules=20
hardly matter; the system's properties emerge from the act of=20
aggregation. When water freezes, the molecules do not change, but = the=20
collective behavior does, and the laws that apply to liquids no = longer=20
do. Under the right conditions, a fluid can turn into a superfluid,=20
governed by quantum mechanics even on macroscopic scales. Chapline,=20
along with physicists Evan Hohlfeld, Robert B. Laughlin and David I. =
Santiago of Stanford University, has proposed that a similar process =
happens at event horizons. The equations of relativity fail, and new =
laws emerge. "If one thinks of spacetime as a superfluid, then it is =
very natural that in fact something physical does happen at the = event=20
horizon--that is, the classical event horizon is replaced by a = quantum=20
phase transition," Chapline says. "

Howdy Terry,

Chapline is technically correct as far as he projects the thought = however he=20 fails to describe the complete process. There is a beauty and an = ugly with=20 a balance in the physical.

 Describing the function of the "balance" is where Chapline = remains=20 silent. The physical in which we exist is actually " ordered chaos". It = is=20 neither total chaos or perfection. What appears to be a " balance" is=20 a force that inculcates a type of proportional and reset action to = the=20 physical.   Identify this force and you have a clue as = to =20 what we may describe as cold fusion. This glimpse may be quite shocking = as=20 Mizumo learned. As close as I have ever been able to fathom the mystery = is a=20 subtle passage in the bible where the wording states... "everything is = held=20 together by the power of His word".

Richard

------=_NextPart_001_000B_01C69C6F.E9A315C0-- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C69C6F.E9A315C0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="Blank Bkgrd.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <000901c69c99$d25c1fe0$47037841@xptower> R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2 7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C69C6F.E9A315C0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 16:48:55 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UNmie0005458; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:48:44 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UNmgd5005435; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:48:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:48:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:48:35 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86AB6D646EA08-1FC4-C00B@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <000e01c69c99$d38ab4d0$47037841@xptower> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <000e01c69c99$d38ab4d0$47037841@xptower> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69434 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Is Spacetime a Superfluid Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: RC Macaulay As close as I have ever been able to fathom the mystery is a subtle passage in the bible where the wording states... "everything is held together by the power of His word". <><><><><> Yes. And, although I have never heard him say it, I think Grimer believes that his atmosphere hierarchy is the physical manifestation. The universe allegedly originated from the Big Bang. The singularity which existed at the moment of the BB was the lowest entrophy state of the universe. Disorder and time are the initiation of the Bang. The idea of spacetime being a BEC fits well here, IMO. But noone has yet figured it all out. When that happens, I suspect the sky will roll up like a scroll. ;-) But it is our destiny to seek the Truth. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 16:56:05 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5UNtq09009354; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:55:52 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k5UNtock009327; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:55:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:55:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Is Spacetime a Superfluid Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 09:55:44 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <000e01c69c99$d38ab4d0$47037841@xptower> <8C86AB6D646EA08-1FC4-C00B@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C86AB6D646EA08-1FC4-C00B@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.100] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:55:44 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k5UNtiHg009263 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69435 X-Loop: vortex-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 hohlrauml6d@netscape.net's message of Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:48:35 -0400: Hi, [snip] >yet figured it all out. When that happens, I suspect the sky will roll >up like a scroll. ;-) [snip] I think that's what the universe looks like as one gets swallowed up by a black hole, or more accurately I think the whole sky appears to narrow to a single point of light. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 17:11:32 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k610AEjq016130; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:11:20 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k6105a8i013993; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:05:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:05:36 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: [Vo]: [OT] Nature Solves Own Problems Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:05:15 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <68A34DFE87D0BE46AF898FFCC65CCF8438F43A@caraupermb02.carrier-apac.com.au> In-Reply-To: <68A34DFE87D0BE46AF898FFCC65CCF8438F43A@caraupermb02.carrier-apac.com.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta03ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.100] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 1 Jul 2006 00:05:15 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k6105MPB013903 Resent-Message-ID: <7Sp7fC.A.haD.PxbpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69436 X-Loop: vortex-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 John.Rudiger@carrier.utc.com's message of Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:41:06 +0800: Hi, [snip] > >Hi all, > >This is the second publication from a "scientist" I have seen today trying >to completely debunk Cold Fusion as "relegated to the dust bin of history", >I wonder who is paying for this "misinformation" to be fed to the >uninitiated and unschooled general public! > >John Rudiger I think you need to take a close look at his name. >A.J. Petro Short for "Pe-troll-eum"? ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 17:19:18 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k610J4Df020380; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:19:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k610J1u4020346; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:19:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:19:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:18:56 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86ABB13AE11A1-1FC4-C10F@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <000e01c69c99$d38ab4d0$47037841@xptower> <8C86AB6D646EA08-1FC4-C00B@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <1qasZ.A.y9E.19bpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69437 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Is Spacetime a Superfluid Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk I think that's what the universe looks like as one gets swallowed up by a black hole, or more accurately I think the whole sky appears to narrow to a single point of light. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. <><><><><> You are exactly right if special relativity is correct. From the perspective of the particle crossing the event horizon, the universe rotates by 45 degrees. And SR would apply if the Beta-atm is a BEC. All, IMO. No citations. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 17:27:46 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k610RXO6025231; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:27:37 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k610RTsd025193; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:27:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:27:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:27:16 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86ABC3D6276CF-1FC4-C138@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <23713010.1151705915143.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <23713010.1151705915143.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bob@bobpark.org X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: <6NiKGC.A.XJG.wFcpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69438 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday June 30, 2006 Status: RO X-Status: >5. NONEVENT: IT'S MY LAST DAY AS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INFORMATION. >The only title I have ever aspired to is Professor of Physics. >That title has not changed, nor will What's New, nor anything >else I can think of. As you know, What's New is now supported by >the University of Maryland Department of Physics, which has made >it my major teaching assignment; the APS allows me use the office >in the National Press Building as a base to write it with help >from a wonderful staff; and I continue to get up every morning to >battle the Philistines, secure in the knowledge that when I get >it wrong, WN readers will straighten me out. <><><><><> Yeah, but when was the last time you *admitted* you were wrong, Yaltabaoth? Terry PS read LENR.org in your free time and save your condemnation in history. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 17:40:43 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k610eDcL032275; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:40:14 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k610eBDC032246; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:40:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:40:11 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Bell, Bang and Entangle Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:40:02 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.100] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 1 Jul 2006 00:40:01 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k610e1Ul032043 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69439 X-Loop: vortex-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 hohlrauml6d@netscape.net's message of Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:20:34 -0400: Hi, [snip] >Here's my point (with many dancing angels): electron spin could move >energy between Kansas and Oz. More if this congeals. Not that I have really read much on entanglement, but I was under the impression that no energy was transferred. A "classic" case of information transfer without energy transfer? :) Actually I don't even believe that information is transferred, let alone energy. I adhere to the notion that during the correlation phase a state is imposed on the participants, which they retain. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 17:45:40 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k610jSHG002591; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:45:28 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k610jQf7002573; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:45:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:45:26 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2? Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:45:19 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <410-220066530173040250@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <410-220066530173040250@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta04sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.100] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 1 Jul 2006 00:45:20 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k610jK23002484 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69440 X-Loop: vortex-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 Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:30:40 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Hydroponics gardening works that way. [snip] I suspect that such a scheme would require lots of water. Is there a variety of salt water algae that could be used so that sea water could be used "as is"? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 18:21:39 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k611LReE026848; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:21:27 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k611LLwa026803; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:21:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:21:21 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:16:15 -0400 Message-Id: <8C86AC3151DDE2B-1FC4-C2A3@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> From: hohlrauml6d@netscape.net References: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Netscape WebMail 18261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.130 X-Spam-Flag: NO Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69441 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: Re: Bell, Bang and Entangle Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Robin van Spaandonk Actually I don't even believe that information is transferred, let alone energy. <><><><><> That is the claim of the "standard quantum physics" proponent. Let's try this: Creation of an particle anti-particle pair results in a dual vortex in the BCE which is separated by distance by propagation . . . sort of an hour glass with the top part going right to Scully and left to Mulder with opposite rotations in the BEC. However, since the spin is anti-evident, the direction of the (opposing) vortices are not defined until someone with a timecone (worldline) observes them. Filters them, wrt to the present universe. However (again), the spin vortices of the BEC remain indeterminate until the observer's timecone intersects with particle timecone (observation). This could result in a non-local flip which correlates Mulder and Scully's observations. :-) Because the timecones of the particles are interconnected in 'yarn space', the spin, once observed, determines the rotation of the particle vortex. Because all possible universes exist (based on observer's descisions - and this requires explanation), but the observer is traveling a single path, his timecone defines the spin polarization in his spacetime. (assuming Susskinds 10^500 + universes) Seems trivial, n'est-ce pas? Terry (not even wrong, I'm sure) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 22:29:15 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k615T5jE014151; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:29:05 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k615T388014139; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:29:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:29:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra5.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-request@eskimo.com using -f From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Bell, Bang and Entangle Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 15:28:59 +1000 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <8C869E15FF247BB-1C38-8CC2@mblkn-m16.sysops.aol.com> <8C86AC3151DDE2B-1FC4-C2A3@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8C86AC3151DDE2B-1FC4-C2A3@mblkn-m12.sysops.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.55.100] using ID rvanspaa@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 1 Jul 2006 05:28:58 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ultra5.eskimo.com id k615SxnI014078 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69442 X-Loop: vortex-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 hohlrauml6d@netscape.net's message of Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:16:15 -0400: Hi, [snip] >-----Original Message----- >From: Robin van Spaandonk > >Actually I don't even believe that information is transferred, let >alone energy. Perhaps I should have said "I don't even believe that information is transferred external to the particles themselves". IOW I don't believe there is any independent link between the particles at all. > ><><><><><> > >That is the claim of the "standard quantum physics" proponent. ...so not quite this I think ;). > >Let's try this: > >Creation of an particle anti-particle pair results in a dual vortex in >the BCE which is separated by distance by propagation . . . sort of an >hour glass with the top part going right to Scully and left to Mulder >with opposite rotations in the BEC. > >However, since the spin is anti-evident, the direction of the >(opposing) vortices are not defined until someone with a timecone >(worldline) observes them. Filters them, wrt to the present universe. > >However (again), the spin vortices of the BEC remain indeterminate >until the observer's timecone intersects with particle timecone >(observation). IOW no one knows what it is until someone looks. Well now that's a surprise. >This could result in a non-local flip which correlates >Mulder and Scully's observations. :-) Not necessary. Mulder and Scully have always been correlated since the particles were created, irrespective of whether or not any one looks. It's just that without looking no one knows which has which spin. No magic, no spooky action at a distance required. Once the spin of one is determined, the spin of the other is known by *inference*. Imagine I have a box full of those plastic balls used in chemistry classes to represent atoms. All the balls in the box are connected in pairs, one blue ball connected to one red ball. We both turn our backs while I a third party takes a pair of balls out of the box, and breaks it into two separate balls. You get one and I get the other. You look at the ball in your hand and see that it is blue. What color ball have I been given? According to modern QM, the moment you observed that your ball was blue, quantum entanglement turned my ball into a red one! :> Perhaps now you can understand why my faith in modern physics is on somewhat shaky ground. (Perhaps utter contempt would be a more accurate description ). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 22:36:25 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k615aBcY017960; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:36:12 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k615aA62017939; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:36:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 22:36:10 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=izwucRZCdIJcnAa9vbb6YKQ9SfCdzPoO1yuirMVpeOjP7TrXUh7UaxSfofVD27nqrkXF8qmX/mNYtBGAPDEcp79zRoUJUrBrQZ61C6F2Xi9/64XZTt0cy3lMj8gR0hKSyxYksnnTcm4q8Gao/6rca3h9AMt5uw5JTL2rrnWWGRg= Message-ID: Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 01:36:08 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69443 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: WHO? Taleyarkhan Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo, Can anyone please offer a simple lay person.... On 6/30/06, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Brian Josephson reported: > > Folks: I have learnt that Purdue's review panel found no evidence of > scientific wrong doing on Taleyarkhan's part, and are expected to > issue an appropriate announcement in due course. > > > - Jed > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Jun 30 23:24:59 2006 Received: from ultra5.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k616OliK006617; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:24:48 -0700 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by ultra5.eskimo.com (8.13.6/8.12.10/Submit) id k616Oi5J006583; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:24:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:24:44 -0700 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:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=gwAqyEr9qt39CCKWNrxW0QzYKUQ0gLwudD3sHlLIhwnm0gxBbgDQEwnulV0sewaRsM5OeXlni3SvYFJMGkRtmkIc8Qpo1HJPopXeam4czXsbE8zbYtX5jy3aYSWyQy13CHk0BeW6oVMo7vJoruVTS25iQ0746Rx4BRE3ntgtVZ4= Message-ID: Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 02:24:42 -0400 From: "john herman" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <-sWKPB.A.qmB.sUhpEB@ultra5.eskimo.com> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/69444 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: PLEASE ....Taleyarkhan Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., Who is "Taleyarkhan" and what is-are the work related to the person. Can anyone provide a simple lay person note on the topic? Further: Can anyone provide a BBGB of the basic work or theory? AND: Can ANY Vo provide a general BBGB for reports of work from the best of the modicum of the last 1 to 5 years of real world work ANYONE has reported that may indicate a useful energy conversion method or methodolgies? Hmmm.... ? Is this ..uh... to difficult a question? On 7/1/06, john herman wrote: > Dear Vo, > > Can anyone please offer a simple lay person.... > > > On 6/30/06, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Brian Josephson reported: > > > > Folks: I have learnt that Purdue's review panel found no evidence of > > scientific wrong doing on Taleyarkhan's part, and are expected to > > issue an appropriate announcement in due course. > > > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > >